The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

John McCain

Poll: McCain Trounces Obama Among White Evangelicals

By Perry Bacon Jr.
Despite the lack of enthusiasm for his candidacy among some Christian conservative activists, Sen. John McCain so far is performing well among rank and file evangelical voters.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll released this week found McCain collecting about 68 percent of the white evangelical vote, compared to Barack Obama's 22 percent. That number is very similar to level of support President Bush received in June 2004, when he led then Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry 65 to 30 among white evangelicals. And it's essentially unchanged from polls in March, despite the Arizona senator's distancing of himself from evangelical pastors Rod Parsley and John Hagee last month.

In November 2004, Bush won 78 percent of evangelical voters and inspired a strong turnout among them in key states like Ohio, suggesting that McCain can still grow his level of support among this key GOP voting block.

At least one prominent social conservative activist says McCain needs to work harder to woo Christian voters. In a message to his group's e-mail list titled "Values Void," Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, lamented what he called the "GOP's near-silence on its core issues" and blasted McCain for not touting moral values issues like abortion more on his campaign website.

"On one nominee's site, visitors can select from featured articles called, 'When Faith Is Front and Center,' 'Reconciling Faith and Politics,' and 'Strengthening Families,'" Perkins writes. "In another section, they can scroll through the priority issues of 'ethics,' 'faith,' and 'family' and read excerpts from speeches, watch video clips, and peruse editorials devoted entirely to this senator's religious conviction. If you attributed that content to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), guess again. The site belongs to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), whose party is vying for the 'values void' created by the GOP's near-silence on its core issues."

Perkins continues: "Unlike Obama's site, McCain's homepage is dedicated to 'energy security,' 'global competitiveness,' and 'Iraq.' Nowhere is faith or family referenced. With the exception of a blurb on human dignity, found on the bottom half of his issues menu, McCain's commitment to and record on social values are glaringly absent."

Posted at 12:34 PM ET on Jun 18, 2008  | Category:  John McCain
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Giuliani Chimes In, Bashing Obama on Sept. 11 | Next: Michelle Obama's Campaign View


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Hillary Clinton Supporters For John McCain
http://www.hcsfjm.com

Posted by: Fred | June 19, 2008 10:46 PM

1972~2008

Posted by: fact | June 19, 2008 10:28 PM

Its a wonder how anybody would support Mccain after all the flip flops he has done in the past months. its hard to know what he believes or stands for. I don't ever hear Mccain talking about church or attending church so I find it hard for evangelicals to support a man who doesn't share their beliefs or keeps his word. Mccain wouldn't get my vote in a million years.

Posted by: Carol | June 19, 2008 3:20 PM

But wait!!
Obama trounces McCain among black racists!

Posted by: Phillip | June 19, 2008 4:00 AM
__________________________________________
Give it a rest. Blacks typically vote 90-95% democratic when its a caucasian candidate.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 2:25 PM

Of course John McCain will get the vote of white evangelists. Republicans always get the majority of those voters, ever since the Republican Party went after southern Democrats disaffected by the civil rights movement in the mid-60's.

And they've had them ever since. Soon, it will be their only dependable demographic.

It enough to make Abe Lincoln cry.

Posted by: Dennis Berry | June 19, 2008 10:26 AM

I can't believe the "straw man" arguments on this thread...publishing laughable innuendo about Obama by mentally ill individuals does not make it true...but good try.

As for McCain's "family values" what a hoot. What kind of family values is it to return from Vietnam to find that your wife (an ex-model and the mother of your 3 children) has been disfigured by a horrible car accident that almost killed her, start running around on her almost immediately, and finally dump her for 24 year old heiress Cindy at the age of 42. What happened to McCain's vow before God that he took his first wife "in sickness" as well as in health?

As for Obama's "far left" beliefs, yes he is a social Liberal who values ALL humans not just the straight white ones. Democrats are NOT "pro abortion" (terminating a pregnancy is tragic), however, we are pro the living, fully formed human-being...the mother, whose life is more valuable to us then a collection of cells.

I find it extremely ironic that most of the pro-lifers are also vehemently anti-Welfare...how can you insist that every baby be born and then deny the mother a social safety net to raise the child? Please note that young, poor women should not be baby makers for affluent white women.

And tell me "pro-life" folks, how can you be pro-life and support the Death Penalty?

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | June 19, 2008 10:14 AM

Just like Hillary said, Obama can't win the GE. I am a Evangical Georgia Democrat voting for McCain.

Posted by: He can't win | June 19, 2008 10:07 AM

"McCain Trounces Obama Among White Evangelicals"

Pretty poor advert for Christianity.

Posted by: strum | June 19, 2008 9:03 AM

I'm still waiting for McCain's churchly supporters to extol his family values, as attested by his treatment of his wives.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 8:37 AM

A person who claims to be baptist yet has never been immersed in water in the Baptist tradition never gets called on it? A person who has been an ardant foe of evangelicals yet gets the supports of evangelicals? I don't get it. Noone has ever heard John McCain say that he is in fact a born again believer. He says he's a Christian, but attending a church does not make you a Christian. Maybe these so-called evangelicals are just "relgious"people like John McCain in name only and not true born again believers either.

Posted by: I DONT GET IT | June 19, 2008 8:21 AM

But wait!!
Obama trounces McCain among black racists!

Posted by: Phillip | June 19, 2008 4:00 AM

Anyone puzzled by this support should realize that, while President Bush did lose some support with his Immigration proposal, he has always remained strong on core values issues. Remember he signed into law the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban and refused federal funding for stem-cell research beyond those that had already been set aside. Evangelicals, as well as many others in this right-of-center country support those positions. That McCain also is anti-abortion helps him tremendously.

Posted by: Bryan | June 19, 2008 2:31 AM

Look there is a demographic group dumb enough to vote for McSame.

Posted by: Julian | June 19, 2008 2:11 AM

Are people really surprised, I mean this demographic is completely laughable!
evangelicals would have to make up some of the most ignorant,stupid and socially retarded inbred morons in the entire world let alone the nation.
they voted for bush in droves, need I say more.

Posted by: kempy76 | June 19, 2008 2:07 AM

The Larry Sinclair Saga

By Larry JohnsongravatarcloseAuthor: Larry Johnson Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering. Mr. Johnson works with US military commands in scripting terrorism exercises, briefs on terrorist trends, and conducts undercover investigations on counterfeiting, smuggling and money laundering. Mr. Johnson, who worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management. Mr. Johnson has analyzed terrorist incidents for a variety of media including the Jim Lehrer News Hour, National Public Radio, ABC's Nightline, NBC's Today Show, the New York Times, CNN, Fox News, and the BBC. Mr. Johnson has authored several articles for publications, including Security Management Magazine, the New York Times, and The Los Angeles Times. He has lectured on terrorism and aviation security around the world, including the Center for Research and Strategic Studies at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, France. He represented the U.S. Government at the July 1996 OSCE Terrorism Conference in Vienna, Austria. From 1989 until October 1993, Larry Johnson served as a Deputy Director in the U.S. State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism. He managed crisis response operations for terrorist incidents throughout the world and he helped organize and direct the US Government's debriefing of US citizens held in Kuwait and Iraq, which provided vital intelligence on Iraqi operations following the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. Mr. Johnson also participated in the investigation of the terrorist bombing of Pan Am 103. Under Mr. Johnson's leadership the U.S. airlines and pilots agreed to match the US Government's two million-dollar reward. From 1985 through September 1989 Mr. Johnson worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. During his distinguished career, he received training in paramilitary operations, worked in the Directorate of Operations, served in the CIA's Operation's Center, and established himself as a prolific analyst in the Directorate of Intelligence. In his final year with the CIA he received two Exceptional Performance Awards. Mr. Johnson is a member of the American Society for Industrial Security. He taught at The American University's School of International Service (1979-1983) while working on a Ph.D. in political science. He has a M.S. degree in Community Development from the University of Missouri (1978), where he also received his B.S. degree in Sociology, graduating Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa in 1976.See Authors Posts (667) on June 18, 2008 at 10:13 PM in Current Affairs

Up to this point we have stayed away from the Larry Sinclair story. Larry alleges he did drugs and had consensual sex with Barack Obama. The Obama folks have gone crazy over the Sinclair allegations. Larry had a press conference today at the National Press Club. It was well attended. Shortly after the press conference ended, Larry was arrested. (I am sure this will encourage other folks to come forward and speak out (snark).) Here is Larry's statement. Decide for yourself.

Good afternoon, my name is Larry Sinclair and I am a former recreational drug user and trafficker, a convicted felon for crimes of forgery, bad checks and theft by check. I am also an American who loves this country and I cannot stay silent regarding Barack Obama knowing what I know.

Today I will discharge my obligation as a citizen to witness this knowledge to you and raise questions for others to investigate and consider. I am going to briefly describe my background, my experience with Senator Obama in 1999, what appears to me to be a coordinated effort to discredit me and finally a list of questions. After this brief statement, I will take and try to answer any reasonable questions.

Background

I am 46 years old and I currently reside in Duluth, MN. I am a US Citizen, and I have made mistakes in my lifetime. I have been convicted and served prison sentences for writing bad checks, forging checks, using stolen credit card numbers in Arizona, Florida and Colorado. These event's occurred over twenty (20) years ago between 1980 thru 1986. After going public on the internet with these claims against Senator Obama earlier this year, I became aware of a warrant out of Florida from 1986 which I have resolved and it has now been dismissed. I also have an active "Colorado Only" warrant for alleged "Theft and Forgery". I am not ignoring this warrant but am addressing it with the Court in Colorado as well as with the DA's office. I have a pending motion to dismiss this warrant which I am waiting to have calendared by the Colorado Court.

I have lived and worked under three different names. My birth name is Lawrence W. Sinclair. Later on, I had my name legally changed first to La-Rye A. Silvas, and then La-Rye Vizcarra Avila. The last two were legal name changes granted by the court in Penal County Superior Court, Florence Arizona. I legally returned to my birth name in the Fremont County District court, Canon City, Colorado in 1997. Obama Incident

I flew out of Colorado Springs, Colorado to Chicago on November 2, 1999, arriving in O'Hare early in the morning of November 3, 1999. I went to the Chicago area to attend the graduation of my god son (my best friend's son) from basic training from the Great Lakes Navy Training Center. I made reservations at the Comfort Inn and Suites in Gurnee, IL based on location to the Navy Training center. On November 5, 1999, I hired the services of Five Star Limo. I had hired them for both November 5 and November 6. On November 6, 1999, I asked the limo driver - whose name I now reveal for the first time - Paramjit Multani, if he knew anyone who would like to socialize and show me Chicago. Paramjit Multani understood that I was not looking for someone who knew Chicago and would enjoy socializing. Paramjit Multani said he knew someone who was a friend of his.

On November 6, 1999 after picking me up at the Hotel in Gurnee- and this is significant - Paramjit Multani used his cellphone to make a call. That call was made to then-Illinois State Senator Barack Obama to set up an introduction between me and Senator Obama. Upon arriving at the bar and exiting the Limo, Senator Obama was standing next to Paramjit Multani and I was introduced to Senator Obama. Later that evening at a bar which I believe was called Alibis, I mention I could use a line or two to wake up. Senator Obama asked me if I was referring to "coke" and after stating I was, Obama stated he could purchase cocaine for me and then made a telephone call - and this too is significant -- from his cellphone to a presently unknown individual during which Senator Obama arranged the cocaine purchase.

Senator Obama and I then departed the bar in my limousine and proceeded to an unknown location where Senator Obama exited the limousine with two hundred fifty dollars ($250) I had given him and returned a short while later with an "eightball" of cocaine which he gave to me. I did ingest a couple of lines of cocaine, and shortly thereafter Senator Obama produced a glass cylinder pipe and packet of crack cocaine from his pants pocket and Obama smoked the crack cocaine. I performed fellatio on Senator Obama in the limousine during the time Senator Obama was smoking crack cocaine, after which I had the driver take me to the my hotel, The Comfort Suits, Gurnee, Illinois.

The following day, November 7, 1999, Senator Obama appeared at my hotel room where we again ingested cocaine and I again performed fellatio on Senator Obama. Significantly, both the driver's telephone call to Senator Obama and his call to the drug dealer should appear on the driver's and Senator Obama's cellphone billing statements. Fall 2007

In September 2007 I contacted the Presidential Campaign of Barack H. Obama, to request solely that Senator Obama publicly correct his stated drug use record to reflect his use of crack cocaine with me in November 1999. When I made that first contact I left with the Presidential Campaign of Senator Barack H. Obama a telephone number for the campaign to return my call. The first number I provided was a Texas cell phone number. From the period of Labor day weekend 2007 through November 18, 2007 I did rovide a total of four (4) different call back numbers to the Obama campaign, as I had moved and had changed the numbers to reflect locally my place of residence at the time. In late September to early October 2007, I received a call from a male who identified himself as a "Mr. Young" stating he was calling in regards to calls I had made to the Obama campaign. This first call was in fact an attempt by "Mr. Young" to obtained from me the identities of anyone I had contacted concerning my 1999 allegations against Senator Obama. This first called shocked me in that this "Mr. Young" asked me why I had not asked Senator Obama to disclose the sexual encounters I had with Mr. Obama in 1999. I was shocked as I had never mentioned to the campaign or anyone working for the campaign any sexual encounters as my call was prompted by drug allegations only. The call ended with "Mr. Young" stating I would hear from someone in a few days.

In mid to late October 2007, I received a second call from this "Mr. Young" at which time I clearly became aware that this individual was personally involved with Senator Obama rather than just an employee of his campaign. The tone of the conversation had a sexual nature. "Mr. Young" did not once advise me how he obtained my phone number which by this time had now changed to a Delaware number.

In late October 2007, I received a text message from the gentleman identified as "Mr. Young" in which he stated he was intimately involved with Senator Obama and that Obama was discussing with him and his pastor how to publicly acknowledge Senator Obama's drug use in 1999 and that Obama wanted to be sure I had not discussed the sexual encounters or drug incidents with any media at that time.

In mid to late November 2007, in another text message from "Mr. Young" , he advised me that Senator Obama will publicly correct his statement as to he last time he used drugs and I did not need to concern myself with publicly disclosing it myself. The last contact I had with "Mr. Young" was in early December 2007 when he made it clear to me that Senator Obama had no intentions of publicly acknowledging his 1999 use of crack cocaine and that "Mr. Young" was in fact doing nothing more than milking information from me for Senator Obama's use.

I later learned that a Donald Young was the choir director of Reverend Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ - Obama's now-former church -- and was openly a homosexual. I also learned that he was murdered on December 23, 2007. I have cooperated with the Chicago Police Department in this matter by providing them the telephone numbers I was using during the fall of 2007 and I release them now publically in the hope that someone may be able to connect the dots between these telephone numbers and Mr. Young. Those numbers are: 954-758-1105; 956-758-1885; 956-758-8002; 302-685-7175; 612-466-1043. 2008

In what I now realize was a naive and un-counseled decision, I posted in January 2008 a video on YouTube.com where I related the above information regarding my liaisons with Senator Obama in 1999. The response was overwhelming and I quickly became the recipient of what in hindsight appears to have been a coordinated attack on my character with ever increasing falsehoods circulating on the internet.

In response I agreed to take a polygraph test from Whitehouse.com. The results of that test have been partially revealed to the end of labeling me a liar and taken as gospel by all. I would like to make the following comments about that polygraph test. First, I have been subsequently advised that Whitehouse.com was a website dedicated to anti-Clinton pornography until earlier this year. Second, I have now come to understand that lie detectors are junk science at best which is why courts of law refuse to use them. Third, a review of the results by George W. Maschke, Ph.D. of AntiPolygraph.org raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the examination. Indeed, overlooked by almost everyone is that hitehouse.com's own examiner, Dr. Gordon Barland, observed that on the drug question regarding Senator Obama that the computerized score found that there was less than a 1% probability of deception by me. That's about as high a passing score as one can possibly attain.

Finally, in February 2008 I was told anonymously that Dan Parisi of Whitehouse.com received $750,000 from the Obama campaign through AKR Media to organize an effort to publically discredit me. When I confronted Dan Parisi with this allegation, he did not deny it but instead withdrew the second exonerating polygraph report of Dr. Gordon Barland, failed to post the video of my polygraph as he and Whitehouse.com promised they would do, and even removed posts from their web site altogether, claiming that they had "had enough of the attacks by Sinclair's supporters and Sinclair himself."

The polygraph results - as misrepresented - were immediately seized upon by the blogger community and I became the subject of vicious lies about me. I was forced to file a lawsuit in an attempt to stop those lies about me that have been circulating. That lawsuit sought to obtain the proof of what I was saying about my contact with Senator Obama through subpoenas for the identities of the anonymous bloggers so they could be linked to the Obama campaign and relevant records of the cellphone companies to prove the truth of my allegations. To date, though the lawsuit is now over ninety days old, Judge Kennedy has refused to permit the suit to move forward so this evidence may be obtained. Conclusion

In sum, you can discredit my story and then make your decision on who should be the next President of the United States. The burden is now off me as I have told my story without the distortions that have been intentionally heaped on me in what my lawyer tells me is an ad hominem attack - shoot the messenger so you don't have to hear the message he is bringing. I am now done. It is for others to find the corroborating evidence of my story by locating the limousine driver - Paramjit Multani - and the telephone numbers related to Donald Young and/or Senator Obama. I leave you with these questions that I have asked of Senator Obama but which he - who wants to be the next President of the United States - has refused to answer:

1. Why won't Senator Obama provide his cellphone numbers and telephone records for all his personal and official cell phones held by him for the time period of November 3, 1999 thru November 8, 1999, when we met?

2. Why won't Senator Obama provide his cellphone numbers and telephone records for all his personal and official cell phones held by Senator Obama or September 2007 - December 23, 2008, the murder of Donald Young?

3. Why won't Senator Obama provide all email communication both personal and campaign related to and/or from AKP Message & Media from January 18, 2008 through February 29, 2008 for Senator Obama, David Axelrod and David Plouffe?

4. Why won't Senator Obama provide proof of all payments made from AKP Message & Media, Obama for America, David Axelrod, David Plouffe, and Senator Obama's accounts for the period of January 18, 2008 through February 29, 2008?

On my website - larrysinclair.org - you will find the documents that I have referred to in this statement. A copy of the home page for that website is attached. Thank you for your time and attention this afternoon and I will now take any questions.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 1:05 AM

"A September 10th mentality"? We need a "Common Sense mentality" not a propaganda heat wave. Encourage your representatives to impeach Bush.

"This (9/11) was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder."

-Bob Dole's Former Chief of Staff, Stanley Hilton

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=9056

Posted by: Brian Randall | June 19, 2008 12:43 AM

These results show that McCain doesn't have to worry about the religious right, because he has them in his back pocket. That way he can play down his anti-abortion voting record. If many more people realize he's anti-abortion he'll sink further behind Obama because most people in this country are in favor of abortion rights.

Posted by: johnp | June 19, 2008 12:31 AM

I get such a kick out of these dummies saying McCain's going to win. You couldn't be more wrong. Not only is Obama going to win, he's going to win by a comfortable margin. It's going to be very sweet shoving it in your punk faces all you Bush voters that have done nothing but ruin my country.

Posted by: dem in chicago | June 19, 2008 12:26 AM

Face it. The only reason that Obama is where he is is because he is black (well ...half black).

If you take a white man with the same credentials, abilities and associations he would have received about half the votes that Dodd got. Thats less than one percent.
Obama is nothing more than a socialist, empty suit, backbencher(and former crack head) with no achievements that can give a good speech if the teleptompter is working.
McCain, with all his faults, will thump this guy seriously in November.

Posted by: DC | June 18, 2008 11:34 PM

I do not understand how anyone who considers herself or himself to be a devout follower of Jesus, as his teachings are presented in the Bible, can vote for most Republicans, such as Bush and McCain. Jesus was a peacemaker, not a warmonger. Jesus believed in helping the poor and needy, not the rich.
============================

It's ironic that democrats preach peace, not war because killing another human is bad, but let unborn babies have their skulls smashed. Your beliefs are moronic and sick

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 18, 2008 11:10 PM

I thank all the Obamabots for their words in this thread, I needed a good laugh. Anyone who considers themselves a christian won't be voting for Obama and his far-leftist views, that's the bottom line. I just hope that when the Messiah loses in November to McCain, you all don't jump off of bridges.

Posted by: Publius | June 18, 2008 11:06 PM

The black panthers, NAACP,Farrokan, and 95 % blacks support support obama, so why shouldn't whites support mccain. The left's intolerence for those that don't support their boy shows their prejudice views of the world. These are close to the same numbers that supported bush against kerry, so claims of racism are against the facts. But once again Obama supporters want to play the race card in hopes of bullying American voters. Sorry, it will not work this time.

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 18, 2008 11:03 PM

It's funny. I didn't realized that being an open-minded, free-thinking Liberal was the same as being hypocrite.

If you think that opposing gay marriage automatically means hating gays, you are very narrow minded.

If you automatically assume that a Conservstive Christian is less intelligent than you, then you are a bigot.

If you insist that Conservative Christians shouldn't be allowed to state their opinion in a public forum, then you are intolerent.

If you believe that Evangelicals oppress their women, then you are just plan ignorant.

In short, you are everything that you insist that you aren't.


Posted by: Nathan Ealy | June 18, 2008 10:53 PM

The only qualities that make McCain appealing to white evangelicals are the color of his skin and his gender.

The downfall of this nation correlates closely with the rise of white evangelicals. Without them, an illiterate alcoholic in the White House would have been inconceivable. The result of their rise is all around for the world to see: The steady slide of the greatest power in history into Third World status.

Imagine what this nation would look like if white evangelicals really took over: Hell on Earth, a nightmare beyond the ability of reasonable people to imagine.

Posted by: Domingo Tavella | June 18, 2008 10:46 PM

Good, McCain has got the Evangelical vote. Now to garner the formerly Hillary voters and the libertarian types (Bob Barr), simply add Alaska Gov Sarah Palin into the mix as McCain's VP.

Will create a media frenzy because of Palin's great bio and coupled with her energy/oil drilling positions, ethics in govt stances and cost-cutting agenda, is the perfect pick for McCain.

Posted by: Ted | June 18, 2008 10:43 PM

I'll keep it simple:

Republicans want to kill convicted murderers (via the death penalty) and Islamic fanatics (via the War on Terror).

Democrats don't want to kill convicted murderers or Islamic fanatics, but have no problem with late-term abortions (go check out the brilliant Barbara Boxer's declaration that it's not a baby until you take it home).

If I've gotta choose, I'm going with the Republicans on this one.

I'm big on killing child-raping murderers (see Richard Allen Davis). I'm also pretty down with killing anti-Western, honor-killing, car-bombing Muslim fanatics. The death of any of these lunatics make me happy. Unnaturally happy, you might say.

On the other hand, I'm not big on sucking an eight-month old baby out of the womb with a vacuum tube and sticking a giant medal needle into his brain in order to stop his screams. That really disturbs me.

Call me crazy. I'm pro-dead baby-rapists, pro-dead Muslim fanatics, and anti-dead newborn babies.

Call me a right wing fanatic. Just don't call me late for a lethal injection ceremony...

Posted by: stickety | June 18, 2008 10:36 PM

To my mind, the Evangelicals are the correct ones theologically. Anyone who reads the Bible has to conclude god is a true psycopath who has little to no regard for his creations. The Fundys fit right in. I especially enjoyed watching them roar with approval during the primary season's debates as each candidate tried to one-up each other on who would torture more people. (Ironically, McCain was the lone hold-out.)

Jesus is allegedly God of Love, but he's right there with the Big Guy eternally stir-frying the ones unfortunate to retain the religion their parents wrongly taught them.

Posted by: Cletus | June 18, 2008 9:40 PM

I do not understand how anyone who considers herself or himself to be a devout follower of Jesus, as his teachings are presented in the Bible, can vote for most Republicans, such as Bush and McCain. Jesus was a peacemaker, not a warmonger. Jesus believed in helping the poor and needy, not the rich.

Bush. McCain, and most Republicans care more about continuing their wars in the Middle East than in helping needy Americans, other than the rich and corporations. Here is a quote from a "Washington Post" article about an agreement between Bush administration and certain "leaders" of Congress from both parties, whereby Bush and McCain get their $165 billion for wars, but, " The agreement would require that the Senate would agree to drop most of the more than $10 billion it added last month for programs such as heating subsidies for the poor, wildfire fighting, road and bridge repair and help for the Gulf Coast." Also Democratic leaders gave up their effort to pay for generous GI educational benefits with a .5%, that is half a percent, tax increase on very wealthy taxpayers because this was "unacceptable" to Republicans. I would like to know how anyone who sincerely believes in the teachings of Jesus can support such policies.

Posted by: Independent | June 18, 2008 7:42 PM

David Mark:

The US Senate voted unanimously voted for the Born alive bill.

The Illinois Senate "born alive" bill was defeated in Obama's Health and Human Serivces commitee despite having language that mirrored the federal bill protecting Roe v Wade.

Jill Stanek, a nurse in the Illinois, testified that babies who were born alive were routinely wrapped in a blaknet and placed on a shelf for the hours it would take them to die.

Her testimony to the legislators including Obama included this story

"One night, a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down's Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have time to hold him. I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived."

I know that this election will revolve around the economy and Iraq, and abortion is in the background.

My personal belief is that McCain does not highlight his pro-life record because it might hurt him among independents who don't know his record.

But my point is that there is a large contingent in the "white evangelical" voting bloc for whom abortion is the defining issue.

McCain is no saint, and doesn't really pretend to be. And sure Iraq is messy and the economy is in the tank, but I'll vote McCain this time around.

If Obama was the pro-life guy, and McCain was pro-choice, I'd vote Obama. That may be too simplistic, but there you have it.

150 years ago there was a big group of people that thought slavery should be outlawed. I'm sure they heard some of the same arguments

"If you don't like slavery, don't own slaves"

"The government should not be making laws regarding my property"

"They aren't persons with rights"

But now I'm off on a tangent...

Posted by: Grant | June 18, 2008 7:39 PM

McCain would get more votes by blowing off the evangelicals than by courting them. The entire country is tired of them. I'm voting for McCain because I can't stomach Obama's callow narcissism and cloaked leftist dogma, but if McCain had the courage to condemn these religious hucksters I might actually contribute to his campaign.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | June 18, 2008 7:36 PM

After this administration repeatedly mocked and ignored the evangelicals that put them in office...twice? Now they want a repeat performance from McBush? What are they, a bunch of masochists?

Posted by: Mondo | June 18, 2008 7:03 PM

DMW, I feel your comment deserves a thoughtful response. Christian ethics thinks very differently about death and murder.

Death is universal and inevitable. Everyone will die. Murder, on the other hand is moral evil. It is evil in a way that supercedes other types of evil. It's consequences are far reaching both for the victims and the perpetrators and their families.

When someone dies in the honorable and heroic service of the armed forces, we don't consider it murder. It is sad, tragic, and a desperate loss, but it does have a maligning and corrupting effect on the moral character of everyone associated.

We are much more concerned with, when someone kills. Whether anyone likes it or not. Killing another human tranforms us. It takes something away that we can't get back. Anyone who has killed knows how grave killing is. This doesn't mean it
isn't justified.

Many Christians adhere to the concept of "Just War". The essence of this doctrine is that it morally reprehensible to wage war in order to expand your empire, capture booty, overthrow your own government, steal women, etc. The Crusades and the American Revolution are wars that fit neatly in the unjust war category.

Wars that are acceptible (but never with levity), are wars waged to protect your national and economic interests. Fighting the Germans in WWI and II was in our national and economic interest despite the fact that we weren't under any direct threat. Prohibiting Saddam Hussein from occupying Kuwait and controlling the Oil supply routes was in our economic interest.
Prohibiting Saddam Hussein from repeatedly kicking out U.N. weapon inspectors while he bribed U.N. security council members (France and Russia) and the U.N Secretary-General by stealing foreign aid money while 500,000 Iraqis died every year under the harsh economic sanctions imposed by the same corrupt organization being bought with bribes? I guess the latest Iraq War is more of an all out charitable war, protecting the Iraqi people from a corrupt U.N., and marginally serving our national interest by elminating a haven for terrorists and stabilizing a region important for the smooth functioning of the global economy.

Posted by: Dunderhey | June 18, 2008 7:02 PM

"Apparently "white evangelicals" believe that unborn American babies are worthy of life but living and breathing Iraqis are not."

Just a suggestion, talk to the parents of a man or woman serving in Iraq and ask them if their child cares if Iraqis live or die.

Then go visit a neo-natal intensive care unit and ask the mother of a pre-term child (younger than those approved for partial birth abortions) if her child was alive the moment before the emergency c-section.

"Never mind your candidate's pro death agenda (bomb Iran, anyone?)"

If Iran continues to make nuclear weapons it will not be the U.S. but Isreal that will hit them in a preemptive strike for what they would tell you is self preservation. After hearing for years that they will wipe Isreal off the face of the earth the first chance they get, do you understand their concern? If not, go to Isreal and ask the people if they would support their government for such a strike.

"despicable lack of character in his personal life"

After the antics of the last Democratic President, especially after he was re-elected when the case for personal morals being overlooked was stongly made, takes any high ground away on this topic.

Posted by: a parent | June 18, 2008 6:42 PM

"John McCain was right when he answered in the primary debates that the founding fathers wrote in the constitution that America is a Christian nation!"

Huh? What kind of wispy, fabricated fantasy is that? Even if you buy the notion that our nation was founded in the 1950s, when all this infusion of Christianity cloaked in references to God was annealed into our public vernacular (and the notion that the United States /was/ founded in the 50s is only slightly more delusional than this fantasy that the founding fathers were fanatical Christians), where on EARTH could you possibly twist any words in the Constitution to support the idea that they intend to brand the United States as Christian?

Your first task is to try to reconcile how Deists and rational Theists would abandon their beliefs, based on reason and evidence through nature of a Creator, to suit your particular beliefs about their intentions, despite them being entirely unsubstantiated. Good luck with that. Or you can just go bury your head back in the sand and believe whatever you want along with McCain.

Posted by: Mark in VA | June 18, 2008 6:39 PM

We need to take our country back from the lunatic fringe of the right- these 'value voters' who, en-masse, voted for and gave the good old USA 8 years of Bush.

The fact that these same loonies are overwhelmingly supporting McCain makes me even more confident that voting against McCain is the right thing to do.

Posted by: VirginiaIndependent | June 18, 2008 6:34 PM

Today, Obama is currently ahead of McCain the polls in regards to:

1. Pennsylvania

2. Ohio

3. Florida

Good news!

Posted by: Obama2008 | June 18, 2008 6:31 PM

It is utterly false that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation. The Christians at the time of the revolution were called "Torries" and they were persecuted until they fled to Canada, because they were obedient to scripture and refused to revolt against the British crown (Scripture commands us to remain obedient even to maniacs like Nero). However, revolutionaries had no problem co-opting the calvinist language of the first great awakening to describe their enemies. "Freedom from the tyranny of sin" became "Freedom from the tyranny of George".
The founding fathers, mostly deists who rejected Christ, were devoted to a Judeo-Christian system of ethics.
Monroe (the only Christian), modeled the system of checks and balances after the Presbyterian Church and its Calvinist understanding of human nature, Total Depravity.
Others like Jefferson and Adams openly hated Christians.
At the time of the revolution, less than 10% of the U.S. population considered itself Christian.
It was not until 2nd great awakening when the pelagian heretic Charles Finney spread his false gospel (which rejects the substitionary atonement of Christ) to the masses that the U.S. began to see itself as a Christian nation, at which time history books attempted to Chrisitanize the heroes of the revolution, by omitting details like the fact that Washington was accompanied by two conscripted battalions of prostitutes to relieve himself and his men at Valley Forge, or that John Adams thought missionaries should be damned for spreading the repulsive "myth of Christ" to other nations, and translating its lies to other languages.

But at least our founding fathers inherited a good ethical system from their forebearers. As we move into this post-Judeo-Christian moral system, we can expect that when the new ethics start to become the law of the land that we will start to feel the effects within a few decades.
Already, we are set to nominate a candidate who voted to legalize retroactive abortions (aka the legal infanticide of born babies).
This is merely a return to the pagan value system that existed before Christian ethics infected the west. When it was the right of every Roman father to slay his defective children, and other unwanted children were set in the refuse piles along the street to die of exposure, occasionally rescued to be raised as slaves.

While McCain is no great moral example, having abandoned his wife and child, at least he doesn't advocate murdering children.(Not a cause for celebration, but most preferrable to his mellifluous Hitlerian counterpart. I wonder how "Change we can believe in" sounds in German?)

Posted by: Dunderhey | June 18, 2008 6:21 PM

The evangelicals sure do value the rights of the unborn. Too bad the don't feel the same way about the living, like the over 4100 Americans who have died in Iraq.

I guess you have to be unborn to matter.

Learn some interesting facts:
http://www.stopthinkvote.com

Posted by: DMW | June 18, 2008 6:15 PM

"But even if Obama stands before glowing crosses in Kentucky, and changes one of the theological virtues to Change, few evangelicals will be fooled by a man whose god is Jeremiah Wright, who voted to allow newborn babies who survive abortion attempts to be killed."
-----------------------------
Good thing you wise ol' evangelicals can see through all the B.S.

Let's get real. You were bamboozled by one of the most transparent hacks of all time (our current president). Now our country is plagued by a horrible economy, thousands are dead from a needless war, and our middle class has been marginalized more in 8 years than the entire previous century. The world hates us. Our Constitution has been used as toilet paper.
But hey, the homos can't get married! Woo-hoo! Great priorities.

And you wonder why your voice is muted in this election. So, keep focusing on irrelevant crap like Wright. God is a Republican, and he works in mysterious ways. Keep the faith...pretty soon, that's going to be all you have left.

Posted by: nic | June 18, 2008 6:10 PM

I'm really shocked that conservative religious evangelicals are flocking to the conservative old white guy. Say it ain't so!

Posted by: Chris | June 18, 2008 6:06 PM

Wow, no surprise here. Apparently "white evangelicals" believe that unborn American babies are worthy of life but living and breathing Iraqis are not. Never mind your candidate's pro death agenda (bomb Iran, anyone?) or his despicable lack of character in his personal life. Please, if you want the more moral candidate, don't vote for the guy who abandoned his ailing wife to go out and play the field....

Posted by: Leo | June 18, 2008 6:01 PM

This is just a stupid post! So you guys post the ONE thing McCain is doing well and plaster it as a headline. How is McCain doing with people above 100K? How is he doing with Women voters? How is he doing with latino voters? How is he doing with black voters? How is he doing PERIOD?

But REMEMBER: OBAMA is not doing well with WHITE evangelicals ONLY WHITE. Because other race evangelicals don't matter.

Posted by: ANOTHER RACE BAITING HEADLINE | June 18, 2008 5:55 PM

Does McCain go to any body Church? Because he should does not know the Bible.

Posted by: nelly | June 18, 2008 5:53 PM

McCain does need to get something on his website about his pro-life record and his desire to appoint strict-constructionist judges to the Supreme Court.

But even if Obama stands before glowing crosses in Kentucky, and changes one of the theological virtues to Change, few evangelicals will be fooled by a man whose god is Jeremiah Wright, who voted to allow newborn babies who survive abortion attempts to be killed.

According to Saint James, faith without works is dead. Obama, like Pilate, still wonders "what is truth?" and has no answer.

Posted by: Steve Z | June 18, 2008 5:48 PM

To ryewyck - I am confused. Are all saying all judges are bad? What are you proposing that would replace the judicial system? Aren't you also kind of agreeing with me that judges should stick to the power granted them by the Constitution and not try to grab even more?

I don't think anyone would agree that an over zealous prosecutor, for example Mike Nifong (a liberal Democrat by the way), is the will of the people. As a matter of fact it was the will of the people that brought justice to the Duke lacrosse players when Nifong tried to play the locals for the purpose of getting re-elected. Political pressure was brought by the will of the people to prevent a miscarriage of justice.

Honestly, I don't think people even follow most trials nowdays so this lynchmob mentality you are portraying does fit in with the Old West and not the present. It seems that you my friend are out of date.

I guess those are rhetorical questions because I will not be around for your answer. Have a good evening.

Posted by: Jairis | June 18, 2008 5:36 PM

Jairis:

Actually, your post wasn't strong enough to stand on it's own. It is both contradictory and naive. Your "will of the people" argument is semantical garbage, and should be referred to as such. It's the same noun-tinkering tactics that the religous right uses when they talk about "creationism." Fess up, the only will you care about is that of your ilk. But unlike your church, people on this forum have vastly opposed viewpoints to those of yours. Furthermore, I don't apologize for insulting you ... your viewpoints are insulting to all of humanity.

Posted by: nic | June 18, 2008 5:35 PM

Evangelicals(white and black) I hope you are praying and seeking God's wisdom and praying for both McCain and Obama. God alone is the PERFECT judge and may God guide all of us in our votes.

Evangicals who preach the "good news" of Jesus who made a sacrifice to save sinners like us ought foremost to seek his will for the highest office.

I challenge that if you are not any part of the above you are NOT evangical but just a name or may I say hypocrite.

Posted by: pana | June 18, 2008 5:33 PM

>> they told us that the law was supposed to be interpreted based on the Constitution and not the current political mood or the desire of a judge to see something that didn't exist in the Constitution

With respect and agreement with the fundamental principle you're articulating, the interpretation of the Constitution or any document necessarily changes over time and with popular sentiment.

Supreme Court majorities in the 1930's upheld the Constitutionality of New Deal social programs that judges 50 years earlier would have scoffed at. A few years later the Court determined that separating schoolchildren by race did not meet the standards of equality enshrined in the Constitution, again, a decision that earlier courts would have condemned.

The point is that judicial activism is as old as the judiciary itself. What we can do is try to make sure that we elect men and women of sound mind who will appoint and confirm fair-minded judges, but I assure you that even if you get exactly the judges you want you will disagree with their rulings from time to time.

Posted by: Brendan | June 18, 2008 5:30 PM

Interpretation,

Thank you for making a point much more eloquently than I ever could.

Posted by: nic | June 18, 2008 5:28 PM

>>>>>

In 2003 ... The bill never got to a senate vote because it was voted down 6-4 )along party lines) by the Health and Human services commitee which was chaired by Sen Obama.

>>

Sen. Obama wasn't in the Senate in 2003, and the GOP controlled the Senate at that time.

Posted by: david r. mark | June 18, 2008 5:27 PM

Jairis,

That's just it, different interpretations lead to different results. To you, it seems that judges are "creating" laws because their interpretation of the constitution differs from yours. I'm sure that people on the other side of the fence feel that conservative justices are creating law because their interpretation differs...in reality, there is no provision in place for any of the judges to "create" law, only to respond to the constitutionality of laws that have been created by the legislative branch or the actions of the executive branch.

Posted by: Interpretation | June 18, 2008 5:26 PM

we shouldn't let these tards vote.

Posted by: Tom | June 18, 2008 5:23 PM

To nic -

I still haven't gotten the hang of this responding to people's posts. Is it required that you insult someone with your comment? That seems to be the case with each reply. Are people's points not strong enough on their own merit or is this considered sport?

Gosh, in my civics class they taught us that there are 3 branches of government and that the law is to be written by the legislative branch (representatives of the people) and interpreted by the judiciary.

The word they used was "interpreted" not created.

The funny thing is that they told us that the law was supposed to be interpreted based on the Constitution and not the current political mood or the desire of a judge to see something that didn't exist in the Constitution, bypassing the people's right to change the Constitution with a process we call making an Amendment, but instead bend it to his/her own will.
When did that process change? I mean legally.

Posted by: Jairis | June 18, 2008 5:12 PM

God love the likes of Jairis. Isn't it great that judges allowed the will of people to incarcerate innocent victims of the law only to be later found innocent of hyped-up charges. This rightwing attitude borders on the old TV show but should be renamed "have rope, will travel!" Go get em Jairis!

Posted by: ryewyck | June 18, 2008 5:07 PM

I see the Obama Haters are out in full force today......Dukes of Hazzard must be off.......

Posted by: The Oracle | June 18, 2008 5:06 PM

I just wanted to mention to the folks that think polls are indicative of anything but the soup de jour, Sunday, the same polling gave Obama 40% of the Evangelicas.

Posted by: RoBoTech | June 18, 2008 4:59 PM

"oregon4obama"

I will not browbeat your for your opinions or beliefs.
All I can do is hope that you do some research on Black Liberation Theology.
Obama is a disciple of BLT. He was a member of a church for 20 years that teaches BLT, has the same tenet as BLT, and has a community creed that follows the provisions in BLT. He does not deny that. And leaving the church 3 weeks ago doesn't change that.
Don't let the word "christian" that Obama talks fool you.
People didn't know what hatred and venom was taught in that church even though there had been reports of it for over a year. It took a FORCIBLE education, in the actual videos released by the Church itself, to get people to understand. For weeks, Obama supporters were in denial of what Obama and Family were being taught, but when Rev Wright finally came out at the National Press Club and proved the videos were NOT "sound bites", that was when Obama had to forsake his pastor. And it took the racial rantings of Pfleger (another "spiritual adviser of 19 years) to make him leave the church, although he never denounced it.
So, my point is, at least do some research on BLT and see if it ACTUALLY does promote the love of Jesus that you feel is appropriate.
I am a Southern Baptist, and to me, BLT is at least as foreign as the Morman beliefs. In my eyes, it's near a cult, not a religion.
Make up your own mind, but at least make an educated decision.
peace be with you.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 18, 2008 4:53 PM

The ONLY reason I could never vote for McCain is that he has pandered to far right Christians too much already. If the GOP doesn't wake up and move into the 21st century they are going to be in the minority for a loooong time.

Posted by: Cal | June 18, 2008 4:50 PM

John McCain was right when he answered in the primary debates that the founding fathers wrote in the constitution that America is a Christian nation! Go McCain!

http://www.womenforjohnmccain.com/

Posted by: Christina West | June 18, 2008 4:49 PM

Jairis --
Maybe you should have listened a bit during your civics classes. The judiciary's responsibility is solely to the law. If the judiciary had "listened to the will of the people," our society would still be segregated, the first amendment would be in tatters, and our kids would be have an absurd fairy tale of how our universe came into creation crammed down their throats.

Then again, all that would probably be okay with you. However, YOUR beliefs aren't mine, so leave OUR courts alone.

Posted by: nic | June 18, 2008 4:42 PM

grant...you make me proud.

Posted by: jesus h. christ | June 18, 2008 4:39 PM

Alex,

It would be great if what is written on his website were true.

In 2003 (the third attempt) the language from the federal bill was added verbatim "Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive, as defined in this Section"

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=000500700K1.36

The bill never got to a senate vote because it was voted down 6-4 )along party lines) by the Health and Human services commitee which was chaired by Sen Obama.

Posted by: Grant | June 18, 2008 4:33 PM

The "moral majority" has bought the brand of GOP as "party of Jesus Christ and the Gospels". It's really that simple.

i warned them long ago...about the GOP and the like...

for we wrestle not aginst flesh and blood,(general world pop) but against principalities...(corrupt governments and administrations)

beware of wolves disguised as sheep....you have been mislead by the wolves that i warned you about....

now they fleece you unmercifully.

Posted by: jesus h. christ | June 18, 2008 4:31 PM

SO WHERE IS HUCKABEE, AL GORE, WHOEVER?

Christopher London:
"Ross Perot, one of McCain's early benefactors, who pays McCain's first wife's medical bills considers McCain ..
a fraud "

Obama's past reeks with associating with shady characters and a terrorist supporter. Also his "wright baggage" didn't hit the news until after the first 11 primaries, otherwise Clinton's would likely have won the primary.

Posted by: Billw | June 18, 2008 4:24 PM

it is written...

study to show yourself approved so that no man may deceive you...

this means, don't just take anyone's word for anything...question everything.

ALL doctrine/propaganda/rhetoric/science must be held to the light and checked for authenticity and factuality.

to many evangelicals or religious followers of every doctrine, philosophy, scientific belief and ideaology (sheep) never question thier leaders (shepherds)... be as gentle as lambs but, shrewd as serpents...

this is why my people suffer...they refuse to ask the questions needed to increase their knowing...

faith is not an excuse to ignore the responsibilty of intellect and blindly follow...

faith is the spark that provides the energy and drive that is needed for our God given minds to seek the truth.

Posted by: jesus h. christ | June 18, 2008 4:18 PM

"Poll: McCain Trounces Obama Among White Evangelicals"

Wow. I'm shocked.

Posted by: DanQ | June 18, 2008 4:18 PM

To C. "A quick lesson in basic civics for you - that's not what judges are supposed to do." (I left out the rest of your post as it demeans you.)

From a conference at Harvard University Law School on the role of the judge...

"the people are the ultimate arbiters of the functions of government, including the judicial function"

The people have said repeatedly that the function of a judge is to interpret the law not invent it. But what do the people and at least one judge speaking at Harvard University Law School know about what a judge is supposed to do right?

Posted by: Jairis | June 18, 2008 4:11 PM

The "moral majority" has bought the brand of GOP as "party of Jesus Christ and the Gospels". It's really that simple.

It's impossible to imagine any Democrat attracting even 40% of this group, except maybe Zell Miller.

Take these /same two men/, and flip the "R" and the "D" after their names, and the allegiance of the "moral majority" flips right with it, except for the relatively small proportion who allow their bigotry to overcome their faith in the GOP.

Posted by: Mark in VA | June 18, 2008 3:54 PM

Render unto McCain what is McCain's
Render unto O'Bama what is O'Bama's

Render unto God what is God's

Separation of Church and State ... The wisdom of the writers of the Constituion one of the best documents ever written outside of the spoken word of God.

Posted by: OkThen | June 18, 2008 3:52 PM

Given everything that's gone wrong with our country in the last 7 years under the current administration, the GOP and their evangelicals supporters really owe the country a deep and sincere apology.

If the GOP and the evangelicals have any sense of dignity, they should withdraw from this election.


Posted by: Alex | June 18, 2008 3:38 PM

Grant: This is from Obama's website:

Obama Said He Would Have Supported Federal Born-Alive Legislation. The Chicago Tribune reported, "Obama said that had he been in the US Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even though he voted against a state version of the proposal. The federal version was approved; the state version was not. Both measures required that if a fetus survived an abortion procedure, it must be considered a person. Backers argued it was necessary to protect a fetus if it showed signs of life after being separated from its mother...the difference between the state and federal versions, Obama explained, was that the state measure lacked the federal language clarifying that the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade." [Chicago Tribune, 10/4/04]
===========================================

Simply put, the Illinois version was an attempt by pro-life groups to undermine Roe v. Wade at the state level, using the bill as a wedge issue so the GOP and people like you can claim pro-choice legislators like Obama are baby killers.


Posted by: get the facts | June 18, 2008 3:37 PM

Tim said:
"You either don't like him because of his pastor's ideas, or you dont like him because he left his church. "

How about if he said he wouldn't disavow Wright. Has he flip-flopped? If so, is it christian-like to throw your pastor under the bus?

Posted by: Billw | June 18, 2008 3:36 PM

Before this race is over we will no longer have to question John McCain's manhood, values or character because it will be clear to all that the "Fiction" of McCain's legacy is a greater illusion than his testicular fortitude. The selling of the "Maverick John McCain" is a fiction perpetuated by his handlers and friends in the media. WAR HEROES do not run around telling anyone and everyone that they can find how how damn heroic that they are. Do they? Ever listen to Bruce Springsteen's Song Glory Days? Heroes do not live to tell tall tales. Myths do. Heroes die. Liars never tell you how they graduated 4th from the bottom of their class at the Naval Academy, how their legacy admission is the only reason they were not expelled, they were never promoted to Admiral because said individual was of low intellect, had no intellectual curiousity, was a horrible pilot who crashed and destroyed many plans and spent most of his time in a drunken stupor skirt chasing rich women. McCain is as fictional as McHale's Navy, the 1960's TV show. Ask the wife he left behind or the current one who supports him and who he cheats on about his character. Ross Perot, one of McCain's early benefactors, who pays McCain's first wife's medical bills considers McCain a soulles opportunitistic fraud who seeks the limelight and glory.

Posted by: Christopher London | June 18, 2008 3:34 PM

To Jairis, who wrote: "I agree. Please tell judges to back the will of the people instead of creating their own law."

A quick lesson in basic civics for you - that's not what judges are supposed to do. I'm guessing you're one of those people who didn't agree with Brown v. Board of Education?

Posted by: C. | June 18, 2008 3:34 PM

I am a Christian.....let me re-phrase that....A Follower of Jesus....(there are good and bad christians, but to be safe, I follow jesus, not people)

Anyways, I also support Obama....I dont agree with his abortion policies but that is the only thing I dissagree with him on...

Obama wants the states to decide what to do about abortion and same sex marriage and wont overturn the supreme courts decisions.....

weather Christians want to admit it or not, our founding christian forefathers founded this land on a freedom of religion and a separation of church and state so that human rights will be extended to those who dont have any faith

Obama has been promoting Jesus' word more than McCain by the need for all of us to support one another, lift up the poor and gave an awesome Fathers Day speech on a Fathers role and good family values.....

But here's another thing, its not Jesus' word he speaks, but that of a person who truly believes that all people are created equal and should be given certain inalienable rights.....

A man of Honor, wisdom and vision
Obama 08

Posted by: oregon4obama | June 18, 2008 3:34 PM

the term christian is used far too loosely to describe some evangelicals.

the term christain should mean christ-like. i see very few who follow his examples. most so-called christians have completely missed the point of the message.. his message and the examples he set.

they have eyes yet do not see...ears, yet do not hear.

true christians are known for the way they live thier lives.

the true christian's lifestyle and habits should be tempered with the fruits of the spirit and disciplined by the golden rule.

the golden rule is the sum of the 10 commandments.

all of the commandments begin with love for your fellow man, regardless of difference.

to practice christ's example of love is to embrace those commandments and relentlessly resist breaking those commandments.

your efforts are the measure of your character and abililty to show the unconditional love and grace that you hope that the father will show you.

the true test of unconditional love is to graciously extend it to those that you deem unworthy....

be ye perfect in love as the father is...he causes the sun to shine on the sinner as well as the redeemed.

i ..he was sent for the redemtion and healing of the sick in body, mind and soul..the very ones that are condemed by the self riteous judgement of the "religious".

the good deeds of true christians are not done for for piety or adhearence to law. they are done for the love that fuels hope for the salvation of all.

be a blessing if you want to be christ-like.

Posted by: jesus h. christ | June 18, 2008 3:28 PM

One of the most under-reported issues in this campaign, is the opposition of Barrack Obama to the "Born Alive" bills. Basically it says that if an abortion attempt fails, and you are left with a living, breathing, infant completely separated from its mother, a doctor should be required to at least call another doctor to come care for it.

The federal law was such a no-brainer that the Senate passed it unanimously 98-0. The Illinois version was amended to be nearly identical to the federal bill including language that said it would not interfere with Roe v. Wade. Obama either voted "no" or "present" every time it came up for a vote.

His thinking is that the abortion must be allowed to continue to protect abortion rights, even if it means allowing a living, breathing, baby to be killed or allowing it to die from neglect.

Its position so extreme that its indefensible to the vast majority of Americans and should be indefensible to anyone who calls themselves a Christian (evangelical or not).

Posted by: Grant | June 18, 2008 3:09 PM

"I'm sick of the fact that our country is run by people who force their beliefs... on the rest of the country"

I agree. Please tell judges to back the will of the people instead of creating their own law.

Posted by: Jairis | June 18, 2008 3:00 PM

I can fit both God and Evolution in my heart and head.

Big Heart - Big Head.

Posted by: PulSamsara | June 18, 2008 2:54 PM

Bush could have wanted to invade Canada and he would have 'found' the evidence against the evil Canucks... the Christian right would have swayed the parish from their pulpit eagerly "I know those Canadian's look like us... but good Christians follow the leader's that God prescribes.... and those people speak with 'A's at the end of their sentences !"

Posted by: PulSamsara | June 18, 2008 2:52 PM

Evolution = Proven
God = still a theory

The world is cold, sad, and unfair. If you have to make up a man in the sky to make you sleep better at night, its your right, go for it. But when you press your beliefs on people that do not believe it, you become a problem.

I'm sick of the fact that our country is run by people who force their beliefs (anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-jew, anti-freedom) on the rest of this country.

Seperation of church and state. Read the constitution, its written by people just like the bible was. The difference is its a bit updated.

Posted by: Satan's secratary, the easter bunny. | June 18, 2008 2:48 PM

Oh Benjamin, there goes your lack of tolerance again for opposing view points. Obviously, you aren't aware that many evangelicals were against the war while revisionist history Democrats want us to ignore their votes in Congress, a matter of public record. I know, I know, Bush lied and he also somehow got into the intelligence departments of countries around the world, including those who are not our allies, and changed their reports to say that Iraq had WMDs. Whoa, that Bush is a much more clever guy than I gave him credit for!
I will pray for you that you will do some research into the long list of well established, highly degreed and honored scientists from prestigious colleges who believe in "intelligent design" and simply want schools to acknowledge that evolution is a THEORY.
Hey, Benjamin, I have a question for you? We know that there were no WMDs because after a couple of years we didn't find any there, right? You will acknowledge that it is possible they could have been moved out of the country, not saying that did happen but it is possible right? Darwin said that if his theory, by the way he called it a theory, was correct we would find thousands of species in transition from one animal form to another. Well, in all the museums in the world, will you please tell me where I can find one example of a vertical evolution, not horizontal, but vertical...no beak stuff, same species? If WMDs did not exist because we didn't find them, where are the millions of fossils that prove Darwin's theory. We have been looking for them for over a hundred years and buried under the ground, they don't get a chance to move.

Posted by: Jairis | June 18, 2008 2:47 PM

Why not a poll asking all denominations of christians this stuff? Why ask evangelicals only? They are the nutties of Christianity. I call these kinds of evangelicals the christian death cult... they believe that pieces of many hodge-podged books written thousands of years ago by cave dwellers have more truth than what they can see themselves (even superscede the words by their "christ" - hint, Jesus doesnt hate ANYBODY!!)... they see signs and demons in everything... life is a constant battle with unseen forces... and yet they claim to be about peace. Its so far from any teaching of peace its sad. I am a true christian, I follow the words and meaning of the Christ himself. I can see how the modern pharisees (robertson) and saducees (hagel)always paint the peaceful and tolerant as some sort of aberration. There are many true christians like myself who are never counted in these things. Dont let the media edge our voice out! We're christians and many of us are voting for Obama and against further destruction of our beloved country by McCain and his backers, previously known as Bush & backers.

Posted by: tai hunter | June 18, 2008 2:46 PM

I just prayed very hard and was indeed able to confirm - directly from the source - Barack Obama is indeed a good Christian - And a Bonus - He's a good person too !

Posted by: PulSamsara | June 18, 2008 2:44 PM

"As least Obama IS a good Christian? Um? Can you prove that?

He threw Write under the Bus! He threw his Church Under the Bus! He threw 20 year church relationships under the Bus! for the sake of what? an election? for sure it had nothing to do with conviction.

"As least Obama IS a good Christian" Prove it!

And yes I am a Democrat. 10yrs now."


Wow, so he stands by his pastor until the media paints Wright as such a bigot that Obama is forced to break from his church. Now the fact that he breaks from his church is a good enough reason to think badly of Obama?

Pick a side. You either don't like him because of his pastor's ideas, or you dont like him because he left his church.

If its both reasons, which cancel each other out, then you just don't like Obama and you have no valid reason.

Posted by: Tim | June 18, 2008 2:41 PM

In Related News:
Earth not Flat ! Scientists worldwide concur - Earth not saucer shaped as previously thought !

Posted by: PulSamsara | June 18, 2008 2:38 PM

"I am offended for the white evangilicals the way they are being attacked. If the remaider of the country had there values this would be a much better place to live in. It is my experience to find them the most kind and understanding people I know. "

LOL i mean LLLLLOOOOLLL. I guess they are understanding if you are another evangilical christian. BUT if you are black, gay, jewish, muslim, female you dont count. In fact, if you are anything that isn't white and evangelical your opinion doesn't matter either because you are going to hell and/or you are working for the devil.

Posted by: Tim | June 18, 2008 2:36 PM

"The Christians that you describe are mostly the media created version by people who obviously have not spent much time in a real church."

Right, so the media has manufactured the large group of christian's who are against evolution, gay rights, etc...

Yeah, you can point to other countries and show even worse people, but that doesn't justify the stupidity in this country being advanced by religious people, especially evangelicals.

There are two things that large segments of the christian(especially evangelicals) are guilty of in this country... 1) you clowns did not even question the government on WMD claims in Iraq. You just let yourselves be good little tools. 2) You want us to dumb down our education and NOT teach the scientific fact of evolution in favor of your sky god fantasy and you want us all to pretend that the two ideas are equal and equally backed up by evidence.

Poor evangelicals, poor poor put upon evangelicals. It's intolerance when we won't give their absurd fantasies equal standing with scientific theory and it's intolerance when we complain about their intolerance. All aboard the GOP victim train!

Posted by: Benjamin | June 18, 2008 2:22 PM

White evangelical Christians favored Bush over Gore, too, in 2000, yet Gore won the popular vote nationwide. It's ironic that evangelicals worship a savior known as the "Prince of Peace," yet will vote for a man to lead our country who, if he hadn't been shot down while on a killing mission in an unjust war, would probably have never been able to succeed in politics in the first place
Sterling Greenwood
Aspen Free Press

Posted by: Sterling Greenwood | June 18, 2008 2:20 PM

Perry Bacon Jr is a tool.

What's the sample size of white evangelicals you are quoting?

Posted by: yiannis | June 18, 2008 2:16 PM

Agreed, Pawn to Megabam! Just look how angry all these people are getting!! Just like the sermons they listen to.....angry all the time....no matter who wins. Thank you for your humorfull and true post!!

Posted by: Steve | June 18, 2008 2:16 PM

Benjamin:

Loved your post to MegaBam.

ROTFLMAO!

Posted by: VirginiaIndependent | June 18, 2008 2:14 PM

Of course the lunatic right wingers will support McInsane. How do you think we got stuck with Bushie jr. for the last seven years. Hello? Unfortunately for them, this time they will not matter in comparison to the massive amount of new voters that will reject them and send those loonies back where they belong.

Democrats 08!

Posted by: Steve | June 18, 2008 2:14 PM

No S Sherlock. It's either McCain or an empty suit, no-experience, Chicago politico who thinks rural white folks cling to their guns. Why run from the town-hall format Barry Hussein? Are you afraid when the slick talking points don't pop up on the telepromter. Better smoke another cigarette. Lets talk issues!

Posted by: flyoverbhead | June 18, 2008 2:12 PM

What makes this country great is what? Eliminating any reference to the Judeo-Christian heritage of those who founded this country by sandblasting any mention of God from the public square. Our country's new motto should be "Tolerance for all BUT people of faith", right?
"The most narrow-minded,... bigoted,...etc. etc." Is that really the how you demonstrate your tolerance of opposing points of view? Did someone say something about hypocrisy?
The Christians that you describe are mostly the media created version by people who obviously have not spent much time in a real church. But if it makes you feel superior to write us off as nutcases go right ahead. Your ego obviously needs the boost. Just out of curiosity, would you like to have secular humanists portrayed by Joseph Stalin or even the modern day junta in Myanmar? Those savage representatives are in your camp. They certainly aren't Christians. Ask them their views on women why don't you? Most Evangelical Christians are God fearing people with a heart for people even the ones that portray them as mercilessly as the responders here. God Bless.

Posted by: Jairis | June 18, 2008 2:11 PM

As least Obama IS a good Christian? Um? Can you prove that?

He threw Write under the Bus! He threw his Church Under the Bus! He threw 20 year church relationships under the Bus! for the sake of what? an election? for sure it had nothing to do with conviction.

"As least Obama IS a good Christian" Prove it!

And yes I am a Democrat. 10yrs now.

Posted by: Karl | June 18, 2008 2:11 PM

Hmm..must be a slow news day....

Posted by: Gavin | June 18, 2008 2:08 PM

Blah blah blah....

More cursoruy reviews of "so-called" polls.
You could have a poll say ANYTHING you want, and the media need Obama and McCain to look even so "the dark drama" can continue.

Prepare for the media to "dwelled darkly" on all Obama's numbers from her on out.

"Yet the myth of Democratic disarray is so pervasive that when "NBC Nightly News" and The Wall Street Journal presented their new poll results last week (Obama, 47 percent; McCain, 41 percent) they ignored their own survey's findings to stick to the clichéd script. Both news organizations (and NBC's sibling, MSNBC) dwelled darkly on Mr. Obama's "problems with two key groups" (as NBC put it): white men, where he is behind 20 percentage points to Mr. McCain, and white suburban women, where he is behind 6 points."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/opinion/15rich.html?em&ex=1213934400&en=8f9114df8a0d3060&ei=5087%0A

Posted by: ApostasyUSA | June 18, 2008 2:06 PM

"MegaBam (Obama = MegaTron, reference the movie TRANSFOMERS) wants to start a Civil War against whites!"

Oh please, oh please, oh pretty please, go around the net and speak your mind on this using your transformers imagery. Make your voice heard far and wide. People need to hear this man. Please, don't stop talking. Show the world what kind of people support McCain. Smart, intelligent, insightful people like you. You will win so many over with this, don't ever stop.

Posted by: Benjamin | June 18, 2008 2:06 PM

Most of the idiots that support McCain live in the Southern United States, they areknown as the Religious Right.
The Northern States are more in the middle with a left leaning tendency. Now, go and find out who has a higher standard of living, higher graduation rate,lower crime rate, cleaner enviroment. So don't be surprised by the sheer stupidity of the right wing fruit cakes. The obvious means nothing to them.

Posted by: Stefan | June 18, 2008 2:05 PM

No one should be surprised McCain doesn't talk about faith and values, he figures(rightly apparently) that the core who care about those things are in his back pocket by default, simply by him being a republican. Let's be honest here, when was the last time evangelicals were accused of over thinking(or even just thinking)? For most of them, the logic on who to support probably goes something like this:

"Jesus will be back soon, probably tomorrow since I see all the signs of anti-christ everywhere, so who I vote for really isn't a big deal and whether or not they think there will be a future and make policies to safeguard that future is pointless since it's all going to end soon.
SO - Obama sounds too Muslim and I think Jesus would be mad at me for voting for someone with a middle eastern sounding name and the republican party is the party of GW Bush, that great man of God who has ruled through fear, uncertainty, and doubt, and he backs McCain, so I'll vote for him."

Posted by: Benjamin | June 18, 2008 2:02 PM

Hey "Not a Pawn to Megabam (Obama) and the Obamacons (Decepticons)",

Your thoughts reflect your IQ....none...

Its crazies like you that vote for McCain. People that think like you are often classified as mentally challenged and should be left to waste away. BTW, You can turn off the TV and start reading and or being active in your community. Maybe then, you'll understand what normal adults are going through.

Moron!

Posted by: Prime | June 18, 2008 2:02 PM

In a word: Whatever. Black Evangelicals support Obama, so the poll in meaningless. Moreover, McCain hasn't had a good record with evangelicals in general. As least Obama IS a good christian.

Posted by: Gerald Shields | June 18, 2008 1:58 PM

As old as McLames followers are, the polls need to take into account that a good 5% of them will be dead by the time the election rolls around. I know I've lost 3 members in my family who were voting for him. The religious fanatics in this country amaze me. They are all for God as long as its their concept of God that you embrace. Oh and make sure you are white, and protestant if you want to be their friends

Posted by: Perry | June 18, 2008 1:58 PM

@Not a pawn

I guess your little Transformers play-on-words doesn't work when you got to explain it every single time you use it! Golf clap for the weak effort though.

Posted by: You're silly! | June 18, 2008 1:57 PM

About 400 white Evangelical voters said there preference for president was McCain?

Why? What family and faith values has McCain epoused over the last 18 months running for president?!?!

Hillary and Obama were involved in a CNN Faith Iniative Conversation a few months ago and McCain failed to show up. So again I ask why are white evangelicals preferring McCain?

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | June 18, 2008 1:53 PM

Whats the point of this article? I bet 99% of black christians blindly support Obama.

There is no point to this poll.

Posted by: Marko | June 18, 2008 1:53 PM

The white evangelicals who blindly support the GOP are like little kids who, despite all the evidence around them, continue to cover their ears and shout, "I can't hear you, I can't hear you."

Posted by: godblessusa | June 18, 2008 1:49 PM

Of course white evangelical "christians" favor McCain over Obama. Most of them are bigoted and racist to the core. Fortunately, they will have much less influence this time. Decent Americans are fed up with the religious bigotry of the evangelical movement.

Posted by: David S. Robins | June 18, 2008 1:48 PM

One of the most important reasons we 1,600,000 people and growing have donated money and worked for Obama's campaign is that we want to take the country away from the death grip evangelical Christians have on its politics.

They don't care for or about us (or the rest of the world, neither white nor evangelical) and we don't care for them.

We'll see who wins in November.

Posted by: shrink2 | June 18, 2008 1:47 PM

I am shocked so many narrow minded people think that only people with conservative values are GOP lovers. I am offended for the white evangilicals the way they are being attacked. If the remaider of the country had there values this would be a much better place to live in. It is my experience to find them the most kind and understanding people I know. If you think only southern whites have conservative values you should read Conservative Outcomes by Freiman. Conservative values should be all Americans way of thinking no matter what color we are. I am pretty sure God does not judge us by our color but by our merits as Dr. King preached.

Posted by: Malik | June 18, 2008 1:47 PM


I wonder why more religious people want McCain?!?!?

Answer: Jeremiah Wright.

Megabam (Obama) did NOT leave the church after his 20 year (20 years x 52 Sundays = 1,040 Sermons) relationship with that Black Nazi Church in Chicago.

Whites invented Aids?!?!? But we forgot to invent a cure and we didn't make it racially targeted?!?!?

MegaBam (Obama = MegaTron, reference the movie TRANSFOMERS) wants to start a Civil War against whites! He's an Actor, us Yankees are already calling America's 2nd Civil War, "THE WAR OF THE FREE".

MegaBam is a P.O.S. American and he's a Black Supremist.

The only "Change" I've heard in this election is the Change from Hillary's and John's mouth. MegaBam (Obama) simply "changes the wording" and claims it has his own.

He's a retard. Look at his new National Security Council! All Black... He is trying to start a race war...

McCain 08, because there is no other solution.

Posted by: Not a Pawn to Megabam (Obama) and the Obamacons (Decepticons) | June 18, 2008 1:45 PM


Well, so much for evangelicals' strong beliefs in "family values."

What hypocrites if they support John "One of my wives is a cvnt" McCain.

Obama has REAL family values, which do not revolve around oppressing gay people as a core belief.

Posted by: Shawn | June 18, 2008 1:35 PM

The white southern christian evangelicals...now there's a good group to have on your side during an election. The most narrow-minded, jingoistic, bigoted, anti-evolution, anti-women's rights voting block we've got. Come on John...hold your nose and embrace them. They're responsible for the disaster named Bush who has destroyed America..keep it up, another Bush term is just what they want. Have another glass of Kool-Aid!!

Posted by: thebob.bob | June 18, 2008 1:27 PM

Mccain is ahead among people who believe there are invisible people in the sky. Is our society nuts or what. We are still so primitive.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 18, 2008 1:24 PM

Great news! The braindead congregants who follow the religious teachings of pastors like Hagee, Parlsey, Falwell, and Robertson are voting for McCrazy!

Now, more than ever: Obama '08

Posted by: Anonymous | June 18, 2008 1:13 PM

Oh thank God, the WAPO can pull out some good news to write for McSame in a poll, 'cause Faux News is not working hard enough...

Posted by: 2008 | June 18, 2008 1:00 PM

We need to take our country back from the lunatic fringe of the right- these 'value voters' who, en-masse, voted for and gave the good old USA 8 years of Bush.

The fact that these same loonies are overwhelmingly supporting McCain makes me even more confident that voting against McCain is the right thing to do.

Posted by: VirginiaIndependent | June 18, 2008 12:55 PM

I'm sure skinheads love him as well.

Patriots should not vote for this terrorist.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 18, 2008 12:52 PM

And the point is that white evangelicals are white and evangelical?

Posted by: jeffp | June 18, 2008 12:47 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company