On to New Hampshire...
The results are in, and Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama have pulled off their upsets... They went about it in completely different ways, but they got there. Huckabee got through with the help of evangelical Christians - of which I am one, but I don't necessarily vote that way. It worked there, and it likely will work in South Carolina, but nationally, he may scare more secular states with his message. Like we and many people have said , this is a wide open race - maybe Rudy isn't finished yet........
Obama got the young voters motivated and to the polls - 56% were first time caucusers. Among voters 18-24, Obama won 5 to 1. Clinton had an easier time with the Mercury Grand Marquis crowd (65+), winning 2 to1, but it shows the graying of the Old School Democrats, and possibly the emergence of the New Democratic Party - one that doesn't bode well for the GOP in the future.. John Edwards finished in virtual tie with Clinton, but he is almost finished. He will not come close in New Hampshire, he will lose in South Carolina, then he should get out.
The Obama win does allow me to make a challenge..... Jim Clyburn, the man you really want to win now has a victory. He will likely be leading in your home state now, and I don't think your ego will allow you to stay away from endorsing him.... What do you do now???
.
3 comments:
“This campaign is not just about people who have religious fervor,” Huckabee said as he made the rounds of morning talk shows this morning (Friday). Unfortunately, it is largely about people who have religious fervor. A country governed by religious zealots is disastrous.
If theocracy in Iran and the dominance of religion in the governments of other states is to be abhorred, American voters should also guard against the dangerous corruption of democracy by religion. America’s seeming insistence on Christian leadership not only threatens the constitutional separation of church and state but smacks of theocracy.
The current field of Republican party presidential candidates woos voters in primary contests based largely on who is the most Christian, rather than who will best get the U.S. out of Iraq with honor, who will best repair damage to the country’s broken economy and domestic infrastructure and who will best restore its foreign relationships. One of the candidates has to assure voters that his religion, Mormonism, is Christian.
On the Democratic side, the presidential candidates actively present their Christian bona fides to voters. One of the candidates, whose name sounds Middle Eastern and who spent part of his childhood in an Islamic country, has to convince voters that he is not a Muslim but is a Christian.
The U.S. is straying from the wise counsel of its founding fathers. Too many voters demand that politicians be, or at least profess to be, Christians. Would a majority of voters not also elect men and women to office who are, or who profess to be, atheists, agnostics or deists? Would the U.S. not elect Thomas Jefferson to office today?
Americans seem to believe that the more Christian their president, senators and representatives, the more divinely inspired their governance will be. When the policy directions and the missteps of the current Christian-based administration are considered, even the most ardent Christian would not admit to seeing the hand of Jesus or inspiration by the Holy Trinity.
Presidents and politicians may pray for divine inspiration, intervention and special blessing, but voters shouldn’t insist that they do so. Too much time spent in prayer might take time away from the rational consideration of the issues that confront the nation.
When voting for a change in course of the ship of state, the electorate should minimize, if not eliminate from its calculations, the importance of a politician’s religion.
thanks for the post , Bill. It is very intriguing, and I'm going to do a bit of a tightrope act on this one.
While I like to have a candidate believe in God, and for him/her to think that his hand has a part in most things , I agree that there should be limits to it. We are spending a lot of time and money and live in Iraq trying to avoid the government there from being ruled by religious fanatics. I would not like to see out country go the same way, while still giving him credit for doing it.
It's a little pie in the sky, and not based solely on rational thought, but that's how i view it.
america will never be ruled by religious zealots not unless the muslims take over
Post a Comment