Faith Community
It's interesting reading pundits who think they're so smart talking about Obama's win in Iowa and what it means for New Hampshire. Interesting because they don't mention (and probably are not even aware of) one critical ingredient of Obama's past and future success: Iowa and New Hampshire are chock-a-block full of UCC congregations — and that would just happen to be Obama's own denomination. Though not exactly animatronic the UCC does support its own. Moreover, though I couldn't quantify it, UCC members tend to be smarter, better educated, more affluent, and generally more successful in life: what you'd call natural community leaders. No doubt this tradition helps energize turnout. So when perusing news and blog items about New Hampshire see if you can spot any mention of the UCC. Real news, overlooked.
Posted by George Kenney on January 5, 2008 5:21 AM 
« Server Glitch | Main | Watch This Show »
Comments
Speaking of denominations, preachy rhetoric lacking in substance drives me crazy. And what does being a 'healer' or'uniter' mean? That the status quo continues? That the powers that be can breath easy? I can't believe people keep falling for this inspirational thing, and empty words like 'change'. I want rhetoric with substance, and I want a fighter. You're right that Edwards seems like the best bet, though Ron Paul is far and away the most sincere antiwar candidate. (By the way, if I am leaving too many comments, that will stop if all the very intelligent people reading this very high quality site were to chime in.)
Posted by: benjamin777
|
January 5, 2008 11:10 AM
Good point about his UCC connections — Obama was a keynote at July's UCC convention, where his speech went down a storm among the already converted. Obama's rhythm and poise as a speaker is a rare gift, but there seems little substance behind the fine words. He's not the agent for change he likes to say he is — look where his funding's coming from. I find myself supporting EP's qualified endorsement of Edwards, best of a mediocre bunch of front-runners.
Posted by: Richard
|
January 5, 2008 12:55 PM
My preferred candidate has been John Edwards as well. However, I've been reading a bit more about Obama's record in the Illinois legislature, and it appears he sponsored some progressive bills and was then able to get them passed using his "charming" personality. He also is apparently very, very smart (as in IQ), since he was editor of the Harvard Law Review. Could we be mistaken about the significance (or non-significance) of his vapid speeches (I agree, they are vapid)? Certainly he is drawing huge crowds. I guess I am hoping that if he gets does get the nomination and wins the election, that he will prove to be more than he appears to be on the surface.
Posted by: jtruett.pip.verisignlabs.com
|
January 5, 2008 4:34 PM
Thanks for that great comment, Judy. Perhaps you're talking about the recent column in the Post by Charlie Peters? Charlie, nobody's fool, makes some excellent points about Obama's very real accomplishments in the Illinois State Legislature. And I could see why Obama wouldn't want to talk too much about them: for most people being a State Legislator is akin to being a City Council member or some even less exalted office.
And one other point about his UCC roots: looking back at history, the UCC polity has been way ahead of the curve on most issues of social justice and equal rights.
So there are, indeed, substantive reasons to think Obama has potential.
(For a more skeptical appraisal, which I can't fault, see Johann Hari's commentary in Monday's Telegraph.)
Posted by: George Kenney
|
January 7, 2008 6:23 AM