There's a new poll today by the Barna Group, a Christian polling firm, that shows Obama leading in 17 out of 18 so-called "faith groups." These include Atheists, Catholics, Protestants, and...born again Christians (43%-31%, when separated from their evangelical brethren). Respondents did not self-identify, but were asked a series of objective questions that were then used to separate them into distinct belief groups.
Obama fell short only among evangelicals, and if current trends hold, this will be the first time in more than two decades that a Democrat carries this many people of faith. It's a long way to November, but Mr. Obama's use of the language of faith as a vehicle to express his ideals seems to be paying fine dividends.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Ah, thank goodness, you have your polls to help you sort through the non-dissenting choices provided for you. Were it not for the guiding lights of your polls, the capital controlled media that serves you them, and the reliable intellectual indolence of the American populace, the constitutional democracy envisioned for you by your founders might actually prove to create a viable alternative to the corporate fascism that you've been laboring under for the last forty years. Senator Obama's current elevated status merely confirms that his ambitions have succeeded in transforming him into a product of a corrupt system that has been approved for consumption. The winds of change, Erich, are not borne on the incremental hopes of lesser evilism, but on an honest and angry resistance to ALL evil.
Let us then imagine the perfect "honest and angry" candidate, a man truly willing to do what it takes to bring America out from underneath the yoke of fascism. Let us imagine that somehow, his message reached Americans, convincing all kinds to support him. It would be impossible to recognize him, for his lead in the polls would be proof of his duplicity, his election proof of his inner evilism. Thus, the only effective "resistance" lies not within the political arena, but by climbing a clock-tower with a high-powered rifle and picking off the Pigs until they get you. If violent resistance, at the cost of families, livelihoods, and hundreds of thousands of lives, is the ONLY way to change anything in America, then I think I'd rather have my petty polls and media scandals. Keeping the wool over my eyes, as it were, is preferable to getting up every morning knowing I will one day have to kill men with families and dreams in order to save their children.
Yikes! I'm a life long Gandhian pacifist. How did my little plea for some reasoned consideration of candidates working without the promotion and largesse of corporate sponsorship manage to conjure up such violent imagery? The content of your site belies a capacity for intellectual rigor and curiosity that would lead one to believe that you are well aware of these marginalized candidates and are familiar with the progessive platforms they're attempting to introduce into the American political arena. Do polls and media coverage reflect the marginal appeal these candidates have for the typical voter, or are they the tools being utilized to assure their dissenting views continue to wither outside the walls of the clubhouse? The one thing that is for certain is that the best minds of both the McCain and Obama campaigns remain in complete synch regarding the need to aggressively prevent a participation in the debates of these outsider candidates that would be certain to reveal that the differences between the approved candidates are more cosmetic than substantive.
Your website indicates that you're a man of progressive ideas and desires. The anger and honesty I seek and hope to see emerge are not to be found in any candidate, but in voices like your own.
Ok, fair enough. I failed to see a solution presented in your comment, and chose instead to fill in this perceived gap with a echo of my frustration on precisely this point. I consider myself chastened. I still believe, however, that Senator Obama presents an opportunity rarely seen on the American scene. Even if his statements are but revised and more eloquently written distillations of everything both parties have been throwing out in place of ideas for the last thirty years, I feel as though HE is different. I see him as more intellectual, less prone to corruption, both a gifted politician and a gifted man. If he can raise the level of dialog in this nation, even if only by a minuscule amount, than this progress must be worth something. In short, I don't believe he is less evil. Flawed as both he and his campaign may be, I believe the man himself is more good.
Intelligent, articulate, even-tempered, forthright, honest, and flexible enough to adjust his stance when reason and evidence demand; all fine qualities to have in a statesman, and I won't deny that Senator Obama possesses them all, especially relative to his mainstream opponent. I'd submit, however, that these personal strengths will be less than adequate when brought to bear in an attempt to effect change, from within, in a system as powerfully corrupt, antagonistic to populist concerns, and deeply entrenched as the American corporate plutocracy.
Change and reform, when it comes, will be the result of the efforts of men and women who recognize the Beast for what it is, men and women who understand and accept that they will lose every battle they wage against this system for at least the next quarter century. Some members of your generation will still be waging these losing battles long after my generation has been buried. But if resistance is not allowed to die, it will grow, and it will be those who reject and resist the system who will, finally, prove to be the agents of change, and not those who believe that they can play the system, only to be played by it in the end.
The one essential quality that your Senator lacks is the courage to lose.
Post a Comment