Obama to expand Bush's faith-based programs

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, AP

CHICAGO (AP) -- Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans that would expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and - in a move sure to cause controversy - support their ability to hire and fire based on faith.

Obama was unveiling his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday at Eastside Community Ministry in Zanesville, Ohio. The arm of Central Presbyterian Church operates a food bank, provides clothes, has a youth ministry and provides other services in its impoverished community.

"The challenges we face today, from putting people back to work to improving our schools, from saving our planet to combating HIV/AIDS to ending genocide, are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama was to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks obtained by The Associated Press. "We need all hands on deck."




Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA_FAITH?SITE...

---

This man is making it more and more difficult for me to be able to trust him with my vote.
Sadly, he's still the lesser of two evils.

DU will be a bloodbath today.

This is nuts. Where is the money going to come from? There are already existing ways to help that should get that funding first.

triangulation talk. If we are going to win this time, we have to deprive the repukes of motivated voters. Get it?

We win and he changes his mind? Doubtful.

Not saying my eye is better than yours... Just saying.

Where politics and religion try to go hand-in-hand I doubt I'll ever see the "other" side of that argument.

now, it is what it is and we get to use it to our advantage. The wingnut SCOTUS won't vote it down until there is a Democrat in office, so let's get Obama elected and then we can take care of getting this program canned.

I refuse to help him get elected. After all the things he's done in the past few months I'm no longer sure I can even vote for him.

I realize that the rules of DU state we must support the candidate. If Skinner wants he can remove me from DU. I've been here for a lot of years and have always supported the candidate, but I'm not sure I can support him anymore. This is a message that I left on his website. Yes, I'm wearing flame-proof underwear so have at it.

You may have lost my vote today.

By expanding the Bush "faith-based-initiatives program" you've moved farther to the right and become nothing more than Bush-Lite in my opinion.

I was angry when you said that you believed marriage should be between a man and a woman, enforcing discrimination against gay men and women.

I was incredulous when you had Donnie McClurkin spouting anti-gay invectives from stage while you merely said you didn't agree with his stand.

I was saddened when you said that gay marriage should be left up to the states. I could not believe that you, the man who wants to be president, would say that the rights of a minority should be given at the behest of the majority.

But this? This sir is wrong on so many different levels and I find I cannot vote for you in the 2008 Presidential elections. For the first time in my adult life I cannot vote for the Democratic candidate and this is one of the hardest things I've ever had to do.

to your beliefs and you are not a troll. So we agree to disagree.

And thanks for the hug.

The backlash against Obama is strong. Hopefully he will take it as the giant slap he needs to stop this crap and reverse.

If he does not and you indeed find yourself unable to ethically vote for him then may I suggest you do a write in for the candidate this cycle who you feel had the best plans, strength to not pull an Obama, etc?? Please vote whatever you do!

the left has no where else to go, so a very big move to the right is in order; those are the votes he needs. He can take the lefties for granted. By the way I don't understand the furor here, he has used religion and churches as a big part of his political base for his entire career. This should not be any kind of surprise to all of you "high information" types. This move is in no way a flip.

As of today, he is STILL my choice.

Like, did anyone really believe he was going to take 'under god' out of the pledge, or 'in god we trust' off the fucking money? I'll be happy if he simply puts religious charities on equal footing with secular charities, and visa versa - with no favoritism to any. And THAT, I think he is capable of.

let him do the dirty part of this work of getting elected, hopefully without losing his whole soul and towards the end, come back and I think you'll see something more to your liking. He's pandering right now, it's what he's supposed to do right now and those of us who can't watch had best sit it out a while. No, he isn't going to be the second coming of the messiah, but right now he's going to look a lot like Judas. Ignore it. He isn't talking to you right now and if you demand it of him and he chooses to listen to you, he will lose. He needs more than just our votes so he's pandering. Close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears for the next few months - this isn't the time to take him to task. He knows he can count on us to block some of his stupider ideas but he needs to be able to trust that we will wait for him to be elected before we pounce. While he has integrity, he's also a Chicago politico - he knows what he needs to do right now. If you can't wait, then don't watch, not right now and not until the convention. He's grooming people you don't like to vote for him and I guarantee you aren't going to like how he does it. It's ugly. It was ugly when Kennedy did it and it was ugly when Clinton did it and it was necessary in both situations and it's necessary now.

Basically, what I'm telling you is that he knows this is indefensible and not doable. He also knows that Ma and Pa don't know that and that they really want him to say this so they can feel good about voting "values". He's gladhanding for their votes and gosh, it'll be too bad when he isn't able to do those things but thats politics.

This isn't the time to take him to task.

So let him lie, cheat, and steal to get elected because in the end it will make stuff all better?

So the hope and change he promises is pretty much just more of the same-old same-old?

"...he knows this is indefensible and not doable. He also knows that Ma and Pa don't know that and that they really want him to say this so they can feel good about voting 'values'. He's gladhanding for their votes and gosh, it'll be too bad when he isn't able to do those things but thats politics."

So you are saying he is intentionally misleading the people, and sees them in the patronizing and condescending way you just described?

This is very much "doable" - it is already happening and it is a huge gravy train and massive heist of public funds for ambitious hustlers on the religious right.

Ride that gravy train. You don't need a church to qualify. If this goes through I will preach Atheism and get some of that money they are so eager to give away to cults. And maybe we can get internet faiths for those who can't get away from their computer. Bloggers for faith. Just might be a pot of gold at the end of this rainbow.

The Republicans will bring a bill, and Obama will have to sign it because he pledged he was for this. All the right-wing stuff will get passed because Republicans in Congress will support them, and Democratic measures will be filibustered. No. Obama is no Democrat. I am a Democrat. Obama is not.

Here is how he felt about separation of Church and State.


On Sept. 12, 1960, presidential candidate John F. Kennedy gave a major speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, a group of Protestant ministers, on the issue of his religion. At the time, many Protestants questioned whether Kennedy's Roman Catholic faith would allow him to make important national decisions as president independent of the church. Kennedy addressed those concerns before a skeptical audience of Protestant clergy. The following is a transcript of Kennedy's speech:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16...

Those are fundamental Democratic principles. These are the bedrock of the Constitution. I am horrified by Obama's proposal. I am a solid Democrat. I walk precincts. I do everything. I table. I make phone calls. I work to get Democrats elected. And I do it because Democrats have been the most likely to protect my personal rights of any party and because Democrats support the rights of ordinary Americans, ordinary working Americans and the poor.

Obama is attacking Democratic ideals. This makes me sick. I feel that I have nowhere to turn.

The courts are full of Republicans. And now Obama is taking the Democratic Party to which I have devoted a lot of myself in a direction that is just sick. I am so disappointed. \

I strongly supported Edwards. Sorry guys. But I'm questioning whether I can support Obama.

I am a Unitarian. I believe in tolerance. And I also believe that separation of church and state guarantees that at least a modicum of tolerance is the norm in our society.

the conviction that he is pandering now, and has been pandering his entire life, except from January-May of this year. that was the truth, everything else is a lie.

you keep saying that to yourself.

I'm an Obama volunteer and I have been from the start. His recent pandering to the right is very disheartening. I don't know what to do--I know that I'll vote for him, because the alternative is just too horrible to imagine. I'm still a supporter and a volunteer, but I'm not as enthusiastic as I once was.

Obama's actions in the past few weeks have been especially disheartening. We do not want someone in the White House who doesn't carry forth Democratic ideals. Just a "D" behind a name isn't good enough. At this point, Obama is the "presumptive" nominee. His supporters especially need to send a strong message that they want the same candidate they signed on for, not "Democrat lite".

There is still a convention coming up.

He's lost me for sure with this bullshit. I knew this would happen, but people refused to listen; they thought he was the second coming. I knew he would just be a huge disappointed and NO friend to progressive.

Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.

Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.
Fuck this "faith-based" bullshit.

AMEN!

I will vote for Obama, even though my vote is pointless, living in a rock red state. But the biggest lie promoted by the shallow minded advocates of Obama is that Hillary would "say or do anything to get elected". The truth was the other way around. From healthcare, social security, speed of Iraq withdrawal, FISA, expansion in Afghanistan, and now expansion of Bush's faith based funding of programs with my tax payer dollars, Hillary would have been the better more liberal candidate. It was no surprise the older and wiser voters supported Hillary Clinton in this election and the younger, impressionable voters drank the Obama koolaid right down while they hurled insults and untruths about the Clintons faster than a swiftboater attacking Kerry.

I was not pleased with either candidate.

I preferred Mr. Kucinich or Mr. Edwards.

Oh please, Hillary would have been far worse.

My favorite from day one has been Kucinich, but he has never been electable on a national stage. Elections are about choosing the least disagreeable candidate, they always have been, and they always will be. Show me someone who isn't disappointed in someway with their leader and I'll show you a mindless sycophant.

Obama is losing my vote. I disagree with his stance regarding Gen. Wesley Clark's incisive remarks about McCain's war record, and POW record, not qualifying him for president. Obama should have supported these remarks, as they are correct. Instead, he's treating McCain as if he has some holy status and is untouchable. Bullshit to that. And now this move towards faith-based shenanigans.
Oh no. Not for me, thank you. I guess this means I just don't vote, but I hate to throw my vote away. I frankly don't know what to do. I suppose there's always Nader, but that might lead to a McCain victory, which is absolutely totally unacceptable.

I would have chosen Clark any day over Obama.

The Republicans wanted to neutralize the military credibility Clark would bring to the Obama campaign and the Obama campaign fell for it hook, line and sinker.

although I am emotionally OFF the hook
as far as donations and volunteerism go.

I will vote for the Dem.

It's about US, an entire NATION.

Just because Obama doesn't march to the same exact drummer as you do on issues that are important to you doesn't mean he's not the best candidate. Fuck, he's our ONLY candidate. What don't people like you UNDERSTAND about that???

I'm gay, too, and have some reservations about how he has handled some of the gay issues. But, I also know that he was the first to commit to Logo's program to interview the presidential candidates on their stances on gay policies, etc.. I watched that and was impressed with his candor and his responses.

I'm rabidly against the infiltration of religion into our government as well, and am not thrilled over the news of this faith-based plan.

BUT...I'm not about to throw away the chance for us to seize power from a corrupt cabal of criminals just because I don't agree with EVERYTHING Obama says or does or thinks.

If you're waiting around for a candidate that fits what you believe to be the perfect mold, then you're going to be waiting an awfully long time. Meanwhile, we have a friggin' democracy to reclaim, or at least what's LEFT of it.

So, go ahead...throw away your vote in November. But if we lose, it is people with your mindset who have thoughtlessly and selfishly withheld or wasted their votes that I will excoriate!

You're mistaken.

I understand only too well.

You say this election is not about me. Why? Why do I have to put the needs of everyone ahead of my own AGAIN? Why do I have to worry about their problems when they're obviously unconcerned with mine AGAIN? When do *I* get to matter? When does my FAMILY get to matter to someone other than me?

Yes, I'm a selfish, uncaring, insensitive bastard.

At what point would you say enough? When do you refuse to take a back seat to everyone else?

Ms. Rosa Parks had the courage to stand up and demand equal treatment.
Mr. King had the courage to say the time is now.

I don't have a lot of years left. When do I finally ask "can it be my turn now?"

nt

Fine...when you're eating cat food because a)you can't afford anything more than that and b) your teeth have all fallen out of your head because you can't afford dental insurance, let alone health insurance, because the Republicans remained in power because you and those of your ilk were foolish enough to throw your vote into the dustbin, I don't want to hear you complaining.

You do a good impression of a victim. NEWSFLASH: We're ALL victims of this administration and it is going to take each and every one of us to kick them the hell out of Washington.

I've been a victim of EVERY administration. I've been given lip service and that is all. Be a good gay boy. Vote for me and then sit back, shut up, and leave the driving to me. Oh, and by the way, send me your money.

I'm disappointed and less enthusiastic. But honestly, it came down to him vs. Hillary and Hillary would have been worse.

The way these programs are being administered now, the federal government is funding church operations. If Obama and steer it to proper NGO service administration, that would be fine. If you elect McCain, he'll keep the same people on board who are abusing the system and fleecing taxpayers to build mega-churches.

We don't have another electable choice. It sucks. I have had to drastically lower my expectations about Obama. And yet, I'll have to vote for him.

that can win anyway. If you think it doesn't matter (think stupidity of the green party in 00) then go for it. I however think there's still a big difference between mcsame and obama, just as I still feel there's a big difference between gore and bush. And I still think the greens threw their votes away and helped get bush elected while doing it.

I like Obama as a human being. I don't like that he keeps doing what Hillary did to lose me.

I also don't like the appologist for him on this site. He needs to keep his mouth shut if he doesn't intend to do things. As it stands, I believe he'll try to do what he says. And I constantly don't agree with what he's saying. It's like he's a moderate republican.

Promise to expand it then can it? How will that enhance his credibility or for that matter our party's credibility?

What the hell happened to a new kind of politics?


I found the program to be evil and repellent when Bush belched it forth from his evil bowels. I certainly didn't expect Obama to walk over to this particular steaming pile of never a good idea and not only put it in his pocket, but try to serve it to me on a dinner plate.



edit typo

He's a liar who will do or say anything to get elected? Is that what you mean? Big change.

They've had no problems with it before . . . have they?

Scalia would turn down money for the Catholic Church?

too much.

And he'll just let it slide. He's playing the game. It's called election, it's ugly and disgusting and requires much dissembling and great parsing and a huge amount of bullshit. This is the GE, he's playing to a bigger crowd than just the Democrats and he's telling them what they want to hear.

Yes he tells THEM what THEY want to hear, but he would never tell YOU what You want to hear

The truth is as the head of the federal government, he can administrate these programs however he pleases. What we really object to is the way conservatives do things. So we want the laws written in ways that stays their hand.

If Obama starts excercising FISA and Faith Based in a liberal way, it will be the conservatives screaming for their repeal. Then all he has to do is concede to their wishes and it's all done.

At least I HOPE this is what is going on. Just like I hope that the Senate is going to offer an amendment to the FISA bills that strips immunity after it goes to the floor. They're keeping Obama out of the line of fire.

I, for one, am soul sick at "the game."

The name of the game should be honesty, integrity, clarity, and openess in the interest of keeping this country as close to the ideals of the founders as possible. In the interest of making the country what we were taught it was in elementary school.

But then, honesty, integrity, clairty, and openess in politics are all filthy dirty words.

Bush made it work. It is in the now. Already. Obama wants to make it bigger and more able to discriminate based on faith, and of course faith is often more than that. Many churches are ethnic, meaning of course they won't have to hire 'those people' ie those like Obama, those like me, those unlike themselves. It is wrong.
And what you are saying is he is activley telling lies to them to grab votes. That is even worse. Just how is it that you yourself can detect when he is dissenbling for advantage and when he is being true? Tell us how you do that.

The program, as is, is almost 100% christian evangelical. Jews, muslims, catholics, buddhists, hindu, pagans NEED NOT APPLY.

If he expands it, it could only mean to treat all applicants equally, and putting in controls to keep the faith-based programs on an equal footing with secular programs.

I'm not happy about faith-based programs myself, but if they've been judged to be constitutional, then they should at least be administered fairly. As it is now, the church program gets the goodies and the mosque and ashram are left out.

They were created by executive FIAT.

And so far, no one has been allowed
standing to challenge them.

No difference.
Might as well stay home or vote for Nader.

Seems that the herring was provided by the right-wing AP.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080701/pl_politico/1

he was lying? How are we to know when he is being truthful? Yes he is our only choice but my glimmer of hope that he would be different has been extinguished.

As I said above, here is the future: There will be slightly more Democrats than Republicans in the Senate, but not enough to make 60 votes on issues that the Republicans love. Obama's Democratic measures will not get through the Senate. The measures that appeal to Republicans will.

Take the faith-based measure that allows discrimination based on religion in hiring (which in the Mormon religion basically also equals racial discrimination). That measure will be introduced by Republicans with Democrats signing on. Who will vote against it? Since Obama has said he supports it, what Democrat will buck the leader and vote against it? After all, it's a great way to pander to evangelicals. And Republicans will all support it.

I expect Obama to say he believes in choice but that hospitals run by religions that don't agree with birth control should not have to fill prescriptions or give advice about it. Pander, pander, pander. That is not needed. Not this year. This is who Obama is. This is what he hid to get the nomination. What else has he hidden? And we thought Bush was secretive.

It is hard to admit you've been had. But a lot of DUers have just been had.

I was a staunch Edwards supporter. I regret having switched to support Obama. This stance goes against everything that is American. Read Madison on the separation of church and state -- and remember that Madison drafted the Bill of Rights. He knew better than anyone what was intended.

self delete

... So, we'll destroy those freedoms and they will no longer hate us.

Funny how when Obama talks like a Republican and walks like a Republican and votes like a Republican, he is just "pandering to the right."

If McCain had made a similar announcement, we'd be ripping him a new one, and rightly so.

This is not good.