I’m starting a new series. I’m not really sure how long this series will last since I have this penchant for forgetting all about it. So, we’ll see how far this goes.
I’ll post a question and then my response. You respond either at your own spot or here in the comments. If you respond on your home turf, please leave a linkback so I know you’re doing it.
Are Hillary Clinton’s comments about her spiritual beliefs campaign rhetoric or sincere faith?
Candidates on both sides of the aisle bandy about the word “faith†as if it’s a magic wand that will somehow hypnotize the average American into supporting their campaign. They throw the word around as if it’s the Pied Piper’s instrument leading rats to the river. The current crop of Presidential candidates assumes that the American public is somehow out of touch with reality, uninformed, and will eat any amount of garbage fed to them.
The Democratic candidates see that the Christian Right has mobilized the Republican right wing base and work feverishly to find that kind of strength in numbers. Senator Clinton is no different in this regard. She sees an opportunity to come ahead in the polls and snatches it like a fish to a lure. She forgets her own history, or tries to negate it, as it suits her. She has mastered rhetoric and her use of faith during her campaign is part of that. She has time and again shown that she holds no real stance on any of the political issues important to Americans, and will use whatever language she deems will gain her votes. For instance, in 2005 she voted NO in cutting $40 billion in overall federal spending, and yet voted “Yes†to fund the war in Iraq. She says now, in 2007, that she wants our troops home. She has lambasted corporate elites for treating “working-class America as invisible†in 2007*, but she served on the Wal-Mart board of directors until 1992. Those are just two examples of how Hillary Clinton twists with the wind.
While Senator Clinton may be sincerely faithful, her speaking on faith during this campaign is obviously rhetoric used to garner her favor with voters. Were the majority of Americans atheists I have no doubt that she would disavow her religious upbringing and throw her own church under the bus.
Your turn.
Popularity: 14% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
Site Tags: election-2008, Hillary-Clinton, religion-in-politics
Technorati Tags: election-2008, Hillary-Clinton, religion-in-politics
Powered by FireStats
10 Comments
Well. Whenever anyone expresses a statement of faith I feel they’re being fake because I don’t know how anyone can believe ANY OF THAT SHIT! Sorry. I know people do. Smart people. It’s a failing of mine. I can’t judge. I tend to tune out all that and focus on the other stuff. If there is any. Why do you think Hillary is less sincere than other politicians who yap about God, etc.? I assume that anything any of the 2008 Prez candidates say now is campaign rhetoric.
I don’t trust anything that comes out of Hillary’s mouth. She’s always pandering. I saw her in that debate last night and about puked. Out of all of them I like Gov. Richardson the best. But I wanted to smack Hillary and Barack both. Ugh.
Most of them make me nauseated when they speak, especially Edwards. You know what’s funny though? For all that the conservatives hate Hillary, she did a very traditional thing and stayed with a husband who cheated on her repeatedly and humiliated her publicly. I personally don’t care about these people’s (legal) sex lives, but that thought amuses me.
Paula has a good point. No, I don’t think Hillary’s all that sincere about it, but look at the actions of the right-wingers who have been getting away with it for years. Has Bush done anything that is even remotely Jesus-like? What about the author of the book “Godless”? It’s all a bunch of bullshit, regardless of who it is. No one can get elected without the pandering, because the majority of Americans understand the pandering and don’t understand the issues, and think that running Jesus’ name up the flagpole proves that you’re “moral”.
You mean why do I focus on Hillary? Actually, this was part of an article I was planning on writing, but didn’t finish. In a nutshell, I can’t stand her.
Also, I don’t care much about the Republican candidates because no matter what they say I don’t hear them. I don’t pay attention, I don’t support them, I’m not looking at their ranks for a suitable candidate for me.
I’m looking toward the Democratic candidates for change. I want something different than what we already have. I want courage and compassion and a strong, firm back bone. Right now it looks like Hillary might sew up that nomination and she is just more of what’s already in the White House.
How is she going to be different? We don’t know because she can’t tell us straight. She couldn’t answer straight forward questions in the YouTube debate, because she was so afraid of losing votes. I don’t give a flying monkey’s ass what any of them are going to do when they get elected. I want to see some results now. Hillary can’t give those results even though she’s a member of the Senate majority because she’s so damned focused on 2008. That pisses me off. Obama’s the same way. Show me now how you’re going to heal this country. Or shut the fuck up. You know? Too many damned sheeple are so busy being star struck that they don’t think to demand the same thing.
It’s infuriating.
Miz UV,
You’re right. I don’t think it was for moral reasons though. She had her eye on the New York Senate seat and if she’d have divorced him she would never have gotten elected.
The most infuriating thing is that we are even discussing this 18, 17,
16 months from November 2008. I don’t see how you’re wrong on Hilly,
but B.O. stinks even worse with his multi-tier answers and the five
dollar words. And the Audacity of Hope? BARF! Kucinich is the
frontrunner in terms of who has got the courage of conviction not to
mention some good, concrete ideas. But the poor dude’s barely a blip
(and true to form for the past several elections, he will be getting
my vote in the primary regardless of whether he gets on the ballot in
my redneck of the woods).
You say, “The current crop of Presidential candidates assumes that the
American public is somehow out of touch with reality, uninformed, and
will eat any amount of garbage fed to them,” like it’s not true.
Campaigns seem to have become in large part a race to see who can best
strike a chord with uneducated, unsophisticated voters. GWB’s re-
appointment in 2004 proves that the majority of this country’s
electorate has degenerated into an embarrassing crop of mass-think,
knee-jerk xenophobes who have been agitated by non-issues like stem
cell research, gay marriage and how often one goes to church.
So seeing the frontrunners, especially the Democrats, posing as all
tingly with god is surely depressing. That’s more of the same indeed,
which is to say a leader that will polarize this country even more
than it is now, if you can believe that’s even possible.
[cross-posted at bickerfest.com]
O’Tim,
You said “B.O” and I immediately thought about body odor. Oops.
I have no love for him either. I think that he’s just as bad as Hillary. They both stink like the current establishment. Neither one of them voted against Bush’s money for war until after they knew there was no way their votes made any difference. If they had any kind of conviction they would have voted “No” before anyone else. But they didn’t want to do that. They want this war. If either of them gets elected there is no way those troops are coming home. Clinton and Obama see how powerful Bush has become and want that more than anything. They don’t give a damned about The American people or peace or anything else but the POWER. Both of them will take the damage Bush has wrought and run with it, most happily.
I like Kucinich. Of course, he’s from Ohio, so I’m a little biased. But the poor guy is getting trashed left and right for being crazy and “out there”. Even the so-called “lefties” don’t give him any credit because he’s not “electable”. That fucking term, by the way, infuriates me- electable. Fuck that. But not the point. He has ideas that are different and so everyone must point and laugh at him instead of sitting down and thinking long and hard on what he’s saying. He’s like our side’s Ron Paul, but Ron Paul gets more respect from our side. It’s bullshit. I enjoyed seeing Kucinich on t.v. the other night, because he didn’t follow the party line and he actually answered the questions posed to him. Clinton and Obama didn’t even pretend to hear the questions, much less answer them.
I also liked what Gov. Richardson was saying. I was very interested in that. But who was that crazy dude all the way to the left? He just kept screaming “FOLLOW THE MONEY!”
I’ll not get into how cynical I’ve become of politics of late and stick to the issue at hand. I like Hillary, but am disappointed with her. She’s my Senator here and having a high profile Senator can be good for the state. However, I’m unimpressed with her as a candidate. I personally like John Edwards better, but he’s not getting any air time.
On the question of faith, I hate all the candidates positions, of both parties. When Republicans say “faith”, what they really mean is they’re anti-abortion and anti-gay rights. They’ve reduced Christianity (cause that’s REALLY what we’re talking about when we talk about faith) to two issues.
The Democrats can’t take a real faith-based stand because they’re on the other side of the fence on those two issues. So what should they do? CHANGE THE DEBATE! I’m sorry, but there’s so much more to being Christian. What about social justice? What about fairness for the poor and underprivileged? What about helping those in need? Very solid Christian values, for which the Democrats can take the moral high ground. While Republicans try to say that the private sector should deal with these issues, Democrats have a track record of fighting for the rights of the common working man and the underpriviledged. Talk about that instead! Show you have faith by following in Jesus’ footsteps and caring for those less fortunate than you! Show your faith by your works. Now THAT would be a candidate to listen to.
Exactly! If they’re going to debate faith (and I agree that “faith= Christian” here) then they should point out the hypocrisy of the other side for failing to follow the example set for them. It’s all meaningless drivel otherwise.