Will WE Win?: A Reply to Frank Schaeffer's 'Obama Will Win'

[Why Syzygy]

Guest editorial by David Swanson

I've appreciated much of Frank Schaeffer's commentary at The BRAD BLOG but his column here this week on Obama winning was an exception. Schaeffer labels himself an "Obama supporter" and explains that Obama supporters are "sticking with our President." The language Schaeffer uses, after identifying himself as a "former religious Rightwing agitator", is helpful in illuminating a troubling pattern of thought that is widespread in our society:

"We faithful Obama supporters still trust our initial impression of him as a great, good and uniquely qualified man to lead us."

Here is faith, or at least faithfulness, explicitly entering politics through the advocacy of a recovering religious advocate. As everyone knows who has tried to recover from a pattern of thought, it is far easier to reject or reverse the specifics than it is to step outside the framework. But it is the framework that I find disturbing. I disagree with the point of view above just as much as I disagree with rightwing religious agitation, and for the same reasons. I don't want to be a faithful, trusting supporter of a uniquely great and good being...

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7601

[Larkspur]

1. I'm a Democrat; not an Obama cultist

Obama has lived up to my cynicism of him. He's a Corporcrat Democrat.

[Why Syzygy]

4. Very appropriate point, I thought.

The Obama group here froths with religious fervor. And I know some of those people despise/fear that type of emotional devotion in the Right Wing Religious.

[ThomCat]

8. Very astute point.

Far too many of Obama's most vocal fans have that religious fervor. The support for him, and the excuses for him no matter what bad decisions he makes are definite examples of religious thinking.
They start with their conclusion and then cherry-pick information to fit their conclusions, regardless of what he really does.

[chill_wind]

2. K & R.

Good line by line rebuttal by David Swanson.

As just ONE example, and repeatedly parroted right here at DU --

" * Banned torture of American prisoners "



Torture was already illegal. By forbidding the prosecution of torturers but pretending to "ban" torture, Obama has turned a crime into a policy choice.

Yes.

[Why Syzygy]

3. David has great insight.

He will friend you at Facebook, if you're into that.

http://www.facebook.com/#/davidcnswanson?ref=nf

[Larkspur]

5. Yet Don Siegelman remains a political prisoner and is still being persecuted by

Bush DOJ officials. However, the corrupt Ted Stevens got his case dismissed and is now free.

[ThomCat]

7. It makes no sense at all for the Obama DoJ to keep stonewalling

Siegelman. We might as well be still under Bush for all the partisan justice we are getting in this regard. x(

And that includes having the current DoJ use homophobic language to defend homophobic laws too. When is this Democratic Administration going to start acting like they value equal justice for everyone?

[ThomCat]

6. Yet despite allowing torture as a policy decision

and many other horrible decisions Obama has made, too many people here still argue and insist that Obama is a progressive for some reason. :(

[chill_wind]

9. kicking for visibility.

[Why Syzygy]

10. Lol . it went from 8 votes

when I was last here to zero. Nothing like good old time religion. Truth hurts.