Street Prophets

Religion and Politics News Roundup

Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:47:01 PM PDT

[editor's note, by PoliSigh]No worries Shelby!  Thanks.


Hi friends, sorry this is late today!

Today's topics: Jeers for presidential debate moderators, why not everyone on the Religious Left is happy with the Compassion Forum, New Farm Bill needed to alleviate hunger in America, and other stories...

I haven't watched last night's debate yet, and Tom Shales at the Washington Post isn't exactly whetting my appetite. He calls the debate:

another step downward for network news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances.

Was it that bad?!

  • ::

David Neiwert at FireDogLake seems to think so:

This trivialization of American political discourse reached a real nadir last night with ABC's handling of the Democratic presidential debate. The gossipy, absurd nature of the questions in the first hour were so obvious that the audience reacted loudly -- not to the candidates themselves, but to the questioners.

That booing you heard last night, ABC? It was for you.


Welton Gaddy Critiques Compassion Forum

At Talk to Action, Fred Clarkson reprints excerpts of a recent e-mail from Interfaith Alliance president Welton Gaddy. Here's a snippet:

Article VI of the Constitution promises that, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." So why did the Compassion Forum's moderators ask about Senator Clinton's belief in the Trinity, and what Senator Obama would tell his children about creationism?

Americans would be much better served by hearing Senators Clinton and Obama talk about how they will respect their constituents' religious diversity and how they plan to balance their private faith with their public oath to uphold the Constitution and the separation of religion and government.

Another thought-provoking assessment of the Compassion Forum comes from Omri Elisha at the Revealer. I'm still processing the implications of Elisha's article (and trying to decide whether or not I agree); it's worth a read.

We Need an Expanded Farm Bill NOW!

Reuters reports that Congress is requesting a one-week extension of the current Farm Bill, in hopes of soon hammering out a new Farm Bill.

The current Farm Bill (which funds Food Stamps) is inadequate to meet the needs of hungry Americans as food prices rise and food banks are under stress.

America's Second Harvest president and CEO Vicki Escarra reports of the growing strain on food banks:

...The recent spike in food and gasoline prices has only made a terrible situation worse.

At the same time, donations of food from the USDA bonus commodity program have fallen by more than 75 percent in the past four years, forcing our food banks to spend more and more money buying food to meet demand. Last year alone, our food banks spent more than $127 million on food purchases..

RESULTS has more general information about the stronger Farm Bill.

Pope's Visit

In its close reading of a recent Baltimore Sun article about the Pope's visit, GetReligion asserts that:

The question, for the pope, is how he can reconcile ancient Christian teachings with a strong commitment to religious liberty and tolerance. I predict we will hear more about that at the United Nations this week.

Has anyone not made an endorsement yet?

Springsteen endorses Obama (read all the meaty political commentary at Reuters).


Tags: religion, politics, news, Shelby Meyerhoff (all tags)

Permalink | 13 comments

  • With regard to the debate (8+ / 0-)

    see also Glenn Greenwald's comments.  Here is a snippet:

    Last night was a perfect microcosm of how our political process works. The Right creates stupid, petty personality-based attacks to ensure that our elections aren't decided on issues (where they have a decisive disadvantage). Media stars -- some due to sloth, some due to ideology, some due to an eagerness to please the Right and convince them how Good and Fair they are -- eat up the shallow trash they're fed and then spew it out relentlessly, ensuring that our political discourse is overwhelmed by it, our elections dictated by it. That happens over and over. It's how our media and our elections function. Last night was just an unusually transparent and particularly ugly expression of it.

  • Was the debate that bad? No! (8+ / 0-)

    It was much, much worse.

    Here's a sampling from around the web, not taking time for proper attribution.  My favorite is the faux questions from Cheers & Jeers over at the Orange Satan.

    The result of the debate was as dull as it was pointless, with a discussion that tells us nothing about the candidates, their visions, or their ability to govern. E&P’s Greg Mitchell called it “perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years.” The Washington Post’s Tom Shales called it “step downward for network news,” and noted that the moderators delivered “shoddy, despicable performances.” Will Bunch noted, “Quickly, a word to any and all of my fellow journalists who happen to read this open letter. This. Must . Stop.” Salon’s Walter Shapiro added:
    Broadcast to a prime-time network audience on ABC and devoid of a single policy question during its opening 50 minutes, the debate easily could have convinced the uninitiated that American politics has all the substance of a Beavis and Butt-Head marathon.
    So, who won? I haven’t the foggiest idea, but I’m quite certain we all lost.

    How is it that Charlie Gibson was challenging the candidates with reference to a constitutional provision that was overridden by Amendment XII over 200 years ago? I've seen a lot of dumb TV news stunts over the years, but that really takes the cake.

    While it would've been impossible for either candidate to look good while Charlie and George were gang raping democracy, I don't think Obama came off particularly badly. In the first half, which was supposed to be tough on him, I thought Clinton looked pretty uncomfortable with where her campaign had taken us. She was probably better in the second half. And while the bulk of the bullsh*t was thrown at him, I was just annoyed at the bullsh*t. There are genuine nonpersonality differences between these candidates which moderators who had any idea what they were talking about could have elicited. But when Charlie Gibson is a Laffer loving wingnut whose heart bleeds for the capital gains earnings of $200,000+ earners, and Snuffleupagus is a Sean Hannity sock puppet, that's not the debate we're going to get.

    Cheers & Jeers gem:
    Here were the questions, in order.   Please keep in mind that co-moderator George Steponyournutsabit said himself that "the number one issue on Americans' minds" was "the economy."

    1. Would you pick your opponent as vice president?

    [Commercial Break]

    1. Barack, you made a comment that polls show was non-controversial.  Let's rehash it for 20 minutes and try to spin something controversial out of it.

    Sean Hannity couldn’t be here tonight, but he wanted me to ask you, Barack: How long would you be president before you let the Weather Underground people sleep in the Lincoln bedroom?

    [Commercial Break]

    1. How should America punish Reverend Jeremiah Wright for forcing the media to keep playing that tightly-edited 10 second 'damn America' clip over and over?  Charlie here thinks we should drop him out of an airplane...I'm leaning toward the wood chipper.

    [Commercial Break]

    1.  Barack, you refuse to wear an American-flag lapel pin.  Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin, Hitler and Osama bin laden also refused to wear such a pin.  Ya see where we're goin' with this, Comrade Uberfuhrer Obama bin Laden?

    [George high-fives Charlie]

    [Commercial Break]

    1. Quickly now, let's spend 60 seconds on the most disastrous foreign policy blunder in American history.  How much do you love General Petraeus?  Would you give him tongue on a first date?  Because, like, we totally would.

    [Commercial Break]

    1. Let's talk about the economy.  Nah, it's too early.  Let's go to a commercial for a right-wing front group claiming it cares about the environment.

    [Commercial Break]

    1.  Mmmm...love it when the wife packs zucchini sandwiches!  So which of you is more traitorous than the other?
    1. American hero Ronald Reagan saved America with his stance on the capital gains tax.  Why do you want to destroy America with your stance on the capital gains tax?  Answer wrong and we bring out the lions.
    1. How quickly do you think we could have Ronald Reagan's face and entire body carved into Mount Rushmore?

    [Commercial Break]

    1. This debate is now more than half-way over.  Let's spend 3 minutes on the economy.  Better yet, let's just pretend the economy is great and move right along to the cancer-curing portion of this debate.
    1. OK, you each have 90 seconds to cure cancer.  Go!
    1. Now it's time for you to suck this raw egg through a straw.  Great idea, Hannity!

    14.
    Can you do armpit farts?  We loves armpit farts.

    1. Please give your closing remarks.  But you have to do them together and you both have to talk like Yoda.

    Thank for coming.  We'll close this evening's broadcast with a live audio feed of Sean Hannity laughing his ass off.  Hi, Sean!  We love yeeeeew!

    If you'd like a refund of your two lost hours, please contact ABC's customer care department at 212-456-7777 or 818-460-7477.  Be polite.  It'll confound 'em.

  • Here's a (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    vgranucci, Kassandra, john2luke

    small tidbit

    NEW YORK - A passenger who left his seat to pray in the back of a plane before it took off, ignoring flight attendants' orders to return, was removed by an airport security guard, a witness and the airline said.

    The Orthodox Jewish man, who wore a full beard, a black hat and a long black coat, stood near the lavatories and began saying his prayers while the United Airlines jet was being boarded at John F. Kennedy International Airport on Wednesday night, fellow passenger Ori Brafman said.

    When flight attendants urged the man, who was carrying a religious book, to take his seat, he ignored them, Brafman said. Two friends, who were seated, tried to tell the attendants that the man couldn't stop until his prayers were over in about 2 minutes, he said.

    • Re: Here's a... (0 / 0)

      This is interesting; I wonder how Jewish groups and groups promoting freedom of religion will respond.

      It seems like there are valid points to be made on both sides.

      On the one hand, I could imagine a flight attendant being freaked out when the man would not follow reasonable instructions.

      On the other hand, the article reports that once he had completely prayer:

      "...he explained that he couldn't interrupt his religious ritual and wasn't trying to be rude. But the attendants summoned a guard to remove him, said Brafman, a writer who had been visiting New York to talk to publishers."

      It seems that by the time they removed him, he had already stopped his prayer and was no longer causing a problem.

      • Sorry for late reply (0 / 0)

        I think the problems were (1) you can't set a precedent of passengers not following orders and moving by their own clock because of (2) the "dance" of the runway is well timed by FAA and flight deck...the safety of all is at risk when planes don't do as their told and (3) $$$is lost when planes and schedules have to be reworked for one plane.

  • link to dkos article on Pelosi at the Papal Mass (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    vgranucci

    I was one of the people who thought the position of the RCC in the US had become that RC politicians who supported keeping abortion legal were to be denied Communion. This article explains that's not true, and why.

    Pelosi, at Papal Mass, Demonstrates Pro-Choice Politicians Not Prohibited From Receiving Communion

    "A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort." -- Herm Albright

    by Jose Cheung on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:45:14 PM PDT

  • I missed it, too. (0 / 0)

    from the furor today I guess I didn't miss much... or I missed a lot. I have certainly seen and heard reaction from our friends over on DK, on MSNBC on blogs and even on other news. Unbelievable! Apparently, ABC News lets tabloid reporting and fatuous questioning dictate debate questions now. Wow. Just... wow.

    Forget not that the earth delights to feel your bare feet and the winds long to play with your hair. ~~ Kahlil Gibran

    by Kassandra on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:17:06 PM PDT

    • Re: I missed it, too (0 / 0)

      As a fellow misser, I'm wondering why here and now is the media focus on trivial issues and faux scandals too much for even other members of the media? Guess I'll have to read the transcript/watch the debate and find out.

Permalink | 13 comments