Clinging to Christianity

[demwing]

All this hubbubb about clinging. I wonder why, when Christians themselves use the word often (see the details below, these are just a FEW examples). I guess it's allright to cling to your religion, if your pastor says so, or your bible. But if a young, Democratic senator, running for POTUS, mentions the word, he's bringing down all the wrath of the Old Testament God, right?

Hey GOP, Hillary, and everyone else who is causing a stink?

CLING TO THIS!

The Old Rugged Cross
By: George Bennard, 1913

On a hill far away, stood an old rugged Cross
The emblem of suff’ring and shame
And I love that old Cross where the dearest and best
For a world of lost sinners was slain

So I’ll cherish the old rugged Cross
Till my trophies at last I lay down
I will cling to the old rugged Cross
And exchange it some day for a crown...

and...

Cling to the Bible
Words: M. J. Smith, in Sac­red Songs and So­los, 888 Piec­es, by Ira D. Sankey (Lon­don: Mor­gan and Scott Ld., late 19th Cen­tu­ry).

Cling to the Bible, though all else be taken;
Lose not its precepts, so precious and pure;
Souls that are sleeping its tidings awaken;
Life from the dead in its promises sure.

Refrain

Cling to the Bible!
Cling to the Bible!
Cling to the Bible—
Our Lamp and our Guide!

Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.
Romans 12: 9

My soul clings to you; your right hand upholds me
Psalm 63: 8

Cling to your faith in Christ, and keep your conscience clear. For some people have deliberately violated their consciences; as a result, their faith has been shipwrecked.
1 Timothy 1:19

[leftofcool]

1. Are these political statements

[demwing]

4. Clinging is a common word amongst Christians

It appears in their hymns, in their scriptures, and in their rhetoric. As much as Christianity has been co-opted by the Fundamentalist Right, and coveted by the Neo-Con Repulicans, the lingo associated has become politicized.

It's for this reason that I think many people are pissed off - they can't stand a successful Democratic candidate trying to bring the middle of America, with its religion, culture, and concerns, back into the Democratic Party.

"How DARE we talk to people about what is important in their lives," they think, but don't say. That's GOP territory. Obama is an upstart!

"How DARE he?"

[roguevalley]

37. the old rugged cross was played at my grandma's funeral. it makes

me remember her when I hear it.

[2rth2pwr]

2. A for effort.

[demwing]

6. Thanks, but wasn't it you?

That claimed Obama implied people are using religion as a crutch?

He wasn't. He was using language familiar to them. The same language that Christians use, and why not? Obama is a Christian!

You can twist it and you can spin it, but you cannot avoid the truth.

[2rth2pwr]

7. Well, I do go a-churchin’ every Sunday with a bunch of bitter folks who complain about how

the government is evil and screws them over, and we yell an’ whoop it up

when the preacher rails against them Italians and Jews, an’ then we …

Oops, wait a minute, that’s not me, that’s Barack Obama.

[demwing]

8. Well, you have more class than I gave you credit for

but thats not saying much

[cliffordu]

10. Unfortunate.

unfortunate your candidate is unelectable.

Troothtoopower indeed...


:rofl:

[CreekDog]

3. Hillary said people don't "cling" but that they "cherish"

Cherish: to hold dear

Cling: to have a strong emotional attachment or dependence

i feel tricked now.

[ellacott]

5. There was a report shortly after 9/11

The report stated that church attedance increased significantly, across the nation, after 9/11.

I know many people who recommitted their lives or became more regular in their church attendance after adversity.

I've also seen people who have lost their job who volunteer at their church because they have the free time.

[spoony]

9. Your analysis misses by a mile

The problematic part of Obama's statement was not the word "clinging" but rather saying they are doing it because they're bitter. The references you have pasted here are about clinging to God/religion because it is a beacon and salvation, not because you're a ferrinur-hatin' gun-totin' unemployed hick. In any case he has said he misspoke, so why are you still labouring so hard to justify something he's backed off from?

I'm afraid I cannot give you any grade for effort as another poster has. I'll have to give you an I for incomplete.

[datopbanana]

11. He said they vote on guns and religion. He did not say they like guns and religion because theyre

bitter. Quit buying the spin.

[spoony]

12. Yes, he did, that's why he backed off from it

The way he said it clearly established a link between bitterness and things that, in reality, have nothing to do with bitterness. The only spin around here is a bunch of people still trying to rationalise something the speaker himself admits was not put well.

[FrenchieCat]

15. So fucking boring......amazing as to what people will cling to

during hard times, including failing campaigns.

Do you know how many soldiers died in IRaq today.....or do you even care?

[spoony]

17. ...you make an 'ass' out of 'u'...

I'm not a Hillary supporter. I like Obama do not think he believes that bitterness is at the core of people's cultures, do you?

Do you commonly change the topic to soldiers dying to randomly attack people?

Also, do you know how many kids died of hunger today? Do you care?

[datopbanana]

16. he said he stands by what he said and the meaning. he regrets wording so that it can be twisted

by people like you.

[spoony]

18. He regrets the wording because it incorrectly conveyed his feelings.

No twisting is needed. "People like me" are simply amused by rabid nutholes who cannot ever admit a mistake by Obama lest the entire universe collapse in upon itself.

[datopbanana]

20. He regrets his wording but it did not convey what you're saying

"now i am the first to admit that some of the words i chose i chose badly because as my wife reminds me im not perfect... the words i chose i chose badly they were subject to misinterpretation they were subject to be twisted and i regret that, i regret that deeply... but... when people suggest that somehow i was demeaning religion when i know that im a man of deep faith."

He regrets his wording. I regret that their are people like you who will twist them.

[spoony]

21. Your problem, like so many here, is that you take this so

fucking personally. Like I just stepped on your kitten for saying he misspoke. Again, the man himself says he chose his words poorly. Like I told another of your fanatic guild in this thread, I LIKE the dude. I don't think he meant to demean rural people or religion. But his words DID. One's words and what is MEANT by them are NOT THE SAME when one chooses their words poorly. Of course he isn't going to say "Boy did I say something dumb," as if any candidate does that, especially when being attacked by their opponent for it. What you quoted is as good as saying "oops" whilst still defending himself from Hillary and McCain. Everyone still running around acting like he didn't mess up here is a tool who's just prolonging this issue.

And speaking of poor word choice, it's "there" not "their" in your last line.

[datopbanana]

22. You still don't get it.

His words were bad cause they could be twisted not because they conveyed the wrong message.

Everyone at the fund raiser knew what he was talking about. Read the context and maybe you will too.


But as long as you're not arguing that he actually does hate rural people like other whack jobs are, im fine with disagreeing.

[spoony]

23. I know perfectly well Obama's position

What I "don't get," and probably don't want to, is the thought process involved in so belabouring the matter--in a decidedly three-monkey-esque fog of devotion--that people start threads deliberately missing every point contrary to their fervour.

[demwing]

27. I'm not missing my point at all

You just haven't grasped my point, and I just don't agree with yours.

My point is that the act of "clinging" is not an inherently negative act. Christianity embraces the word, at times.

So if it is not the bitterness (as Obama detractors have so often stated), and not the clinging, then logically it is either:

1. The items to which people turn that offends you
2. The notion that the ONLY reason people turn to guns, or religion, or antipathy, etc, is because they are bitter, which offends you
3. The very process of turning away from government for ANY reason which offends you
4. That you have no reason to be offended at all, and are simply looking for a fight.

As for #1, the list of alternatives that Obama explores contains things good, bad, and neutral. Nothing offensive about that.

Regarding #2, Obama NEVER says that the ONLY reason people turn toward these things is because they are bitter, but that there can be a cause and effect relationship. If you challenge that, then show evidence that people do NOT turn in these directions when they are bitter. Prove your assertion.

Or, perhaps you cling to #3, and you believe that the only recourse to your woes is through government action. If that's the case, I disagree with you, but your entitled to your opinion. Just don't feign indignation and claim offenses when sane people disagree with you.

But my guess it that it is none of these to which you cling. My guess is that there is NO real offensiveness behind what Obama said, and you understand that in your heart.

It is my conclusion that the offenses are manufactured by Obama's detractors, who know DAMN well what they do, and hope that if they repeat the same BULLSHIT lies over and over ad nauseam, then those lies will work their way into the background noise of this campaign, where they will sit and wait for the opportunity to be used as weapons, with no weight behind them, just constant repetition posing as factuality.

That's what Obama has apologized for - that he spoke in such a way that he allowed his words to be twisted by the likes of those who cling not to truth, but to lies and negative rhetoric.

That's my point, and I get it just fine.

[spoony]

31. Is the water in GDP polluted with heavy metals or something?

I never said you missed your OWN bloody point. What kind of idiotic notion would that be?

Your OP is nothing more than an exercise to show words having different meanings when isolated and taken per se. No shit. There's really nothing not to understand there. Perhaps your next post will inform everyone that ties can be either striped or solid. As I said in my first reply, the uses of the word you cite are not even in the same ballpark as what Obama said. The cited references are all in the context of a positive relationship to God/religion, and you just acknowledged that his use references both good and bad things "clung to."

I find your dismissal of #2 problematic. Yeah, I'm sure in the history of Pennsylvania you can find people who have turned to one or more of those things out of bitterness. It is not a big enough correlation, by any means, to justify Obama saying it. Obama himself seems to recognise this when he says, "I didn’t say it as well as I should have because you know the truth is is that these traditions that are passed on from generation to generation those are important."

He misspoke. Obama, I, and the sane world have acknowledged that and are happy to move on. The only people still arguing about it are his most rabid opponents--who would have him hating his own religion, a ridiculous idea--and his most rabid followers--who will never admit he misspoke. Both extremes are far more deserving of your accusation of looking for a fight than I.

[demwing]

33. This is not about "devotion" to Obama or to any religion

What I "don't get," and probably don't want to, is the thought process involved in so belabouring the matter--in a decidedly three-monkey-esque fog of devotion--that people start threads deliberately missing every point contrary to their fervour.

I agree that you don't want to get it. You think I started the thread in a deliberate attempt to ignore your issues. You're wrong. I just don't see why each post refuting this so called "flap" has to address all points, over and over again, even after they've been dealt with in separate threads.

And if your able to see that words have different meanings when used differently, good on ya. Not everyone seems to be able to make that distinction.

I'm for taking this table down leg at a time. First it was the "Bitter" leg. Then it was the "clinging" leg. Eventually, the table will have no legs on which to stand. If we have to parse this conversation down, word by word, until we're actually left discussing the issues, and without letting those issues be used superficially as wedges to divide and distract voters and falsely tarnish candidates, then that's what we'll have to do. This is not about some devotion to Obama, at least not for me. This is about honesty and integrity-and the lack of the same-in a debate over who we select as our presidential candidate, and how we frame our positions and core beliefs now, and into the future.

[crankychatter]

13. let it go - this is like a carpet comet

clinging to a shoe

[Warren DeMontague]

14. Yes, but "static cling" is something to be avoided at all costs.

[Apollo11]

19. Obama included religion in a list with guns and racism.

I don't think he was saying "here is a list of cool stuff that folks can cling to".

But nice try to defend his mis-spoken stereotyping of small-town Americans.

[demwing]

24. "there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so"

Hamlet, Act 2, scene 2.

The items that Obama listed, those things people cling to, were not meant to be a list of good, or a list of bad. Merely a list of things to which people cling, when they find themselves failed by their government and bitter over the position in which they are left.

The fact that some people are claiming that his comments were offensive means that they, personally, are either offended by the list, or are offended by the act of clinging to anything other than government.

So which is it for YOU?

Your offense here is a mirror of your ambitions.

[FrenchieCat]

26. No, you are wrong.

There are a lot of wedge issues voters out there....which is what Obama was talking about.

There are the Religious fundamentalists - who cling to their beliefs that they can overturn Roe - They vote GOP....

There are the folks who love their guns, many who belong to the NRA - Who believe that the 2nd amendment means more than anything else in the constitution - they also vote GOP.

There are the Immigration wedge issue voters - Who do feel that immigrants are taking away their jobs, and instead of latching out against those who hire them, they choose to want to kick those immigrants out of the country; 12 million of them. These folks also tend to vote for the GOP.

There are those folks who have a fear of Gays. These are the folks who will come out on a storm filled day and stand in line, and vote against Gay Marriage. They also vote for the GOP.

These are not stereotypes. These people exist. The problem for Hillary is that these are the same people that can't stand her....so although she may think that it was to her advantage (but not really) to have attempted to make it appear that Obama was saying this about all rural voters.
These are all different, although there is overlap, and most vote Republican.

So bottomline is that Wedge issue voters will oftentime vote for GOP politicians, who are self described free traders, corporation backing, lax on regulations that protect the weak, neocon loving assholes, never meaning to actually do anything meaningful to help these folks in their daily lives......but instead to use these folks for their own political enrichment by throwing them some red meat with conservative judges, lax gun loop holes that are dangerous for some, anti Gay initiatives, and immigration policies that don't make sense for anyone.

To even deny the truth in what Obama was saying is ridiculous. He's already stated that he didn't say it in a very artful way, but those who want to lose the meaning of his point are ridiculous or opportunists. Take your pick.

OBama was really saying that he understood these folks' plight and wants to offer them, as he does to all voters, some belief that he can actually make their lives easier financially (like Health Care--and these voters is why mandates would be so difficult to pass, because the GOP would use that as another wedge issue). The folks would then have a chance to weight the good and bad in all of what they were being offered instead....meaning that they "might" could vote for a Democrat, if they could believe that it could actually bring change in their lives. Thus far, both Dems and GOP offer a lot, but at the end of the day, there really has been little done for these folks since Trickle Down Economics was introduced into our Lexicon. That's one of the reason Dems lose elections in certain areas of the country; because of the Dems platform and how it tends to clash with Guns, God and Gays.

OBama may have said this in one paragraph and should have broken it out more....but what he was saying is absolutely true.

For Democrats on this board, and Hillary in particular to feign understanding of what he was saying, which is exactly what the book, "what's the matter with Kansas" is about is ill serving Democrats. It sets us back, because instead of being able to bargain with these GOP voters, now a Dem is gonna have to kiss their ass instead. That's counterproductive. Because you see, Hillary can go hunting all she wants, these folks are not going to vote for her....because she doesn't appeal to anyone as a politician who is different from any of the rest.....they know this.

I'll let this Pennsylvanian made the case in this article about who's bitter and why from Salon; cause this couple expresses the whole point that Obama was making better my point by point:

"Believe it or not, I voted for Bush. See where that got me?" But when you get right down to it, Erfman -- like many of his neighbors -- doesn't see much chance of any politician really doing a lot to help the dwindling middle class in northeastern Pennsylvania. "It doesn't make a difference who I go vote for, whoever gets in is going to see fit to try to make it go their way," Erfman said. His wife, Heidi, felt the same way. "Can I vote for Mickey Mouse?" she asked."
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/04/16/bitter

[Two Americas]

25. interesting

We have Obama supporters defending his remarks for a variety of oppositional and contradictory reasons.

We had the "bitter" debunking, and then when it was pointed out that it wasn't the "bitter" part of the remark that bothered people but rather the "clinging," now we have the "clinging" debunking.

Didn't he say that people were bitter and that was why they cling to religion? He connected the clinging to people's political decisions and to their lack of trust in the government. That is what was taken by some as condescending and demeaning. Endless debates about whether or not people are bitter or are clinging miss the mark completely.

We need "why" debunked next.

Implicit in all of this, though, from all sides is that we are and should be talking about and analyzing "those people." That is the problem.

[FrenchieCat]

28. You are incorrect.....it is not about analyzing these GOP voters that is the problem.....

it is the fact that somehow we are told that we cannot discuss voters and why they vote on wedge issues instead of voting for what will be economically benificial to them. Yet, we are told that Brown people won't vote for Black people. In fact, pundits and politicians talk about who votes for who all of the time. They talk about "these" people and "those" people to no end. Why was it wrong for Senator Obama to have done that in your opinion? Was he really doing something that others haven't done before? Please explain yourself, because I don't understand your feelings that the conversation should be limited from leaving certain voters out of the conversation.


Why would a person vote for a GOP free Trader, if they work in a steel mill?
Why should a pro life fundamentalist Christian vote for a pro choice candidate?

Why is this taboo for Obama to talk about what is as obvious as the nose on your face? :shrug:

[Two Americas]

34. of course

I agree with you completely. I hope that what you are saying is what Obama meant. Many Obama supporters are hearing something quite different in what he said. "Too bad if people don't like it, those people are a bunch of idiots! It is time we told the truth!"

But this is a very good discussion, FrenchieCat, and very important.

The problem with what Obama said, from a practical political standpoint, is that it sounded too much like "do-gooder" "city slicker" talk, and it is that image - accurate or not, fair or not - that rural people are voting against more so than they are voting for Republicans or clinging to guns and religion.

It is not that we shouldn't talk about groups of people, it is how we group them and how we talk about them that is the issue.

We can easily see the "dog whistle" politics on the subject of race from the right wingers - how that offends us and throws red meat to the "base" for them. Cannot we see the same danger among our own? That is to say, that liberalism and the Democratic party has come to be dominated by a certain demographic - educated, suburban, well-off - and that liberal and party leaders play dog whistle politics about "fundies, rednecks, gun lovers, knuckle draggers" and that this plays to our base, or a certain segment of it, and is deeply resented by millions of people?

In the reddest of red rural areas, still 40-45% of the people vote Democratic, and those are some strong Democrats. In parts of the country there are many African American farmers - a completely overlooked and abused group of farmers. Rural people have firearms - it is not as though Republican voting households do, and Democratic voting households don't. Church is important in rural areas, just as it is in urban AA communities. We also have upscale suburban transplants galore in rural areas now, so we should not be surprised when we see people say "I live in a rural area" and think that they are really rural people. We have many suburban transplants living in the country, and we have many people from rural backgrounds transplanted into the cities. Farming is the definition of rural, not where an individual happens to live.

Farming, hunting, and going to the local church is something people have been doing for hundreds of years. It is not a "lifestyle choice" and there is no reason why people in those communities would not vote Democratic. Look at the FDR coalition in the 30's. Of course, he certainly did not make guns or religion an issue, nor make a certain position on guns and religion be a consideration when determining who was and who was not on our team. Can there ne any doubt in the world that there are many modern liberals who do use guns and religion as a litmus test for who is on our side and who is not?

Where I find the most virulent supporters of the right wing cultural issues is in the suburbs - a parallel to the whole "all hat no cattle" wannabe white power movement - and we should call it for what it is - a last ditch stand for white male privilege, and also a reflection of the loss that people feel from their families leaving the farm and becoming urbanized. And suburbanization is driven and always has been by white flight, and has been supported and encouraged by corporate interests and corrupted governments, since suburbanization is the best thing that ever happened for corporations and for the greedy and anti-social in the business community. Suburban people spouting rabid religious ideas and ranting about guns is more of a political posture than it is anything about religion or firearms, and shouldn't be conflated with rural people.

I think Obama is an elite - of course he is. That is not necessarily a bad thing. But we all as Democrats should be trying to break that image. Not so much of being elites, since RFK and FDR were elites and yet fought for the working class, but rather of looking like know it all do-gooder city slickers, and stereotyping rural people.

But again this is a great discussion, a much needed and powerful discussion. I am not a Clinton supporter and what I am saying should not be taken as anti-Obama.

[demwing]

29. Not exactly...

Didn't he say that people were bitter and that was why they cling to religion?

Not exactly. Say it as you say it, and it sounds as if Obama has said that this is the ONLY reason people cling to religion and go to church. But as Obama has pointed out, HE goes to church as well, so obviously your interpretation misses the mark.

And if every single word in every single false charge has to be debunked, then so be it. If we need to go to the WHY behind this, then let's go there.

Eventually, it will be shown that this issue never had a leg to stand on.

Or, we can discuss things that really matter to the Democratic party, to this campaign, and to this country. I'm not one to let false charges sit unchallenged, but that doesn't mean there aren't better uses of everyones time. Clearly.

[Two Americas]

35. we are getting closer

...it sounds as if Obama has said that this is the ONLY reason people cling to religion and go to church.

It open to interpretation what he meant. We see people here quite frequently portray guns and religion as though they were silly and bad things indulged in by people who are stupid or otherwise substandard or inferior. I don't think we can deny that a certain stereotyping, hostility, and condescension is rampant in the liberal activist community. I don't know if that is that is what Obama meant, but certainly many of his supporters thought that was what he said.

But as Obama has pointed out, HE goes to church as well, so obviously your interpretation misses the mark.

The one does not refute the other. A woman can express sexist or even misogynist ideas. It is not true, for example, to say that I am a woman, therefore nothing I say could ever be negative toward women as a group.

I think the best thing is to stop working up a defense of Obama, and acknowledge that there is something worth dicsussing here, because this issue is too important. My remarks are not an attempt at destroying him. It would surprise me if he did not harbor some condescending feelings toward some groups of people - it comes with the territory to some extent in our model of success, especially for intellectuals in academia. It is rampant, and he is far from alone. It is a problem for the party because the appearance of elitism is a negative with a large segment of the population, and we gain nothing over defending that and have everything to gain by looking at it. We ran professor Gore, then professor Kerry, and now professor Obama. We love our professors - they speak to us, we admire them, we can relate to them, they represent our notion of success - and they are brilliant and talented men. But the *appearance* of elitism, arrogance, and the whole rest of the city slicker intellectual image is a handicap.

This isn't changed by Kerry going on a photo op duck hunt, nor by Obama and other Dems jumping on the "we have faith too!" bandwagon in a misguided attempt at countering what they imagine to be the religious sentiments that the Republicans pander to. Those things make it worse.

Obama is an elite, he is an intellectual and that is just the way it is. That need not be a handicap, but let's not do what we did with Kerry and try to pretend he is something that he is not to market him to "those stupid people" out there. The people don't necessarily reject a leader because they are from the elite - look at RFK and FDR. But they will reject a certain attitude, an attitude that is widespread among the most vocal and dominant liberal and party activists, an attitude that just thrills us when we hear Kerry or Gore or Obama express it - "oh yes! He is one of us! We are the superior people!"

[Bluebear]

30. 'Cling to the Bible, though all else be taken' - sorry, not interested in this in a Prez

I've had 8 years of a "Biblical" Presidency already.

[demwing]

32. If Obama was preaching that, I'd be with you

but he isn't, you know it, and your post is just negative spin.

[Bluebear]

36. Don't lecture me or tell me "what I know". Thank you.