Her affiliation with the Pentecostal Assemblies of God definitely boosts her stature in my book. Just think - when she attends a state funeral, she'll be able to speak in whatever the language is of the host nation.

Posted by: Sister Marie | September 4, 2008 1:26 PM

I guess that you had to give the type of speech she did, when she has no record herself to run on- hardly a testimony to faith she espouses.

"Her affiliation with the Pentecostal Assemblies of God definitely boosts her stature in my book. Just think - when she attends a state funeral, she'll be able to speak in whatever the language is of the host nation." Posted by: Sister Marie

Another feather in her cap to bolster her foreign policy experience, as if monitoring those dangerous Russian and Canadian borders weren't enough.

Posted by: JamesM | September 4, 2008 1:36 PM

It was a good speech, and had its intended result--it mobilized and energized the GOP base, which is what they needed. McCain chose the right person to do exactly that.

However, her experience is seriously in question. McCain chose her for a boost to his campaign, but not, importantly, to have a leader in place who can take over if he is incapacitated in some way. He said his choice would be someone who could be president right now. She is emphatically not that candidate.

So, the message I get from him is that his political goals and aspirations are more important than providing the best leadership for this country. That is dangerous.

Any shred of vote I had left to give him disappeared with his pick for the VP. The choice was reactionary and bowed to the wishes of the party. I miss McCain 2000, who had my vote without reservation. What happened to the person who, for the first time in my adult life, got me excited about politics?

Posted by: squeaky | September 4, 2008 1:48 PM

They're all rude and condescending...

Well, Obama certainly was not rude and condescending last Thursday night. He commended John McCain's service to the country and spoke highly of him personally. I didn't hear anything like that from Palin last night. Instead, she was insulting to Obama regarding his community service.

D

Posted by: Don | September 4, 2008 1:53 PM

Actually, I don't think it's sexist to ask whether the parent of a special needs child and a pregnant teen should be running for vice president. No, Palin should not face special scrutiny on this question because she's a woman. She should face scrutiny on this question because she is a parent, and I believe that scrutiny should be equal opportunity. It applies to fathers too. Neither fathers nor mothers should get a free pass on subjecting their families to public scrutiny at a vulnerable time in order to further their own political ends.

Posted by: Vickie | September 4, 2008 2:00 PM

D --
He was rude and condescending about McCain's houses. The man's wife is an heiress -- why would he know how many houses she bought?

His ads of late have been very disappointing to me.

Posted by: frankie | September 4, 2008 2:03 PM

I watched Palin's speech last night with interest and came away saddened that I will not be able to vote for McCain. I fear we will have four more years of rule by the religious right, and, frankly, they've done nothing for this country for the last 8 years except turn more people away from God. As a Catholic, Palin's pentacostal background concerns me. I have been visited by members of my local Assembly of God church and have been told that I am not a Christian because I am Catholic.

Posted by: Maydell | September 4, 2008 2:22 PM

Sometimes I'm amazed! First I was shocked that Jim didn't outright bash Sarah Palin -- he was actually pretty fair to her. I will say, however, that asking if she's "qualified" isn't really fair when he's never (that I recall) asked that question about Obama -- who is CLEARLY less qualified than Governor Palin!

But wow -- how in the world do any of you see her speech as "just plain rude and condescending" and "insulting". She just plain stated the FACTs and did it brilliantly -- and most pundits, Left or Right, agree. It's NOT "insulting" to point out that Barack's experience as a community organizer doesn't even come close to being a qualification for the White House. That's just reality.

The guy who gave an "insulting" speech was Barack H Obama! Remember when he suggested that war hero John McCain wouldn't pursue Osama Bin Laden "to the cave he lives in"? Also, how many times did I hear Barack say "John McCain doesn't get it"? The dude's arrogance knows no bounds!

Christians unite and stand up for Sarah Palin, no matter what your political stance. She's one of US -- a real, genuine born-again Christian! She's downright refreshing!

Posted by: Al N | September 4, 2008 2:28 PM

He was rude and condescending about McCain's houses. The man's wife is an heiress -- why would he know how many houses she bought?

Well, I think I would know, if it were me.

Nevertheless, Obama did praise McCain's service and spoke honorably about his character--something that Palin certainly did not do in return.

Posted by: Don | September 4, 2008 2:30 PM

Al N,
Even the comment about the Greek pillars was rude and not needed. People in Denver worked hard to put that stadium together and frankly, it didn't even look Greek to me! Why the Republicans made fun of that is beyond me.

Posted by: frankie | September 4, 2008 2:35 PM

I would never go on record as saying "a woman's place is in the home" or anything like that. Nor do I agree with the blatant double standard that has been foisted on women candidates. But who has been responsible in recent years for all this "foisting?" Now, all of a sudden the right- wing is crying "foul" at something they have been doing for decades.
I am old enough to remember when the right-wing "social conservatives" lambasted Hillary Clinton because of her "sorry I didn't stay home and bake cookies" comment. I also remember Dan Quayle and his negative comments about the TV character Murphy Brown and her (heaven help us!) unwed mother status. I recall Pat Robertson addressing mothers on his TV program, saying that mothers were so important that they shouldn't work outside the home: they should "sell Mary Kay..."
Admit it: we all know that if the tables were turned and a Democrat had picked a woman with the same family dynamics as Sarah Palin's, the right-wing "social conservatives" would be on it like a duck on a June bug! My head spins just thinking of all the negative comments that would be hurled, and they would be hurled by the same people who are admiring Sarah Palin's hockey mom toughness right now. It appears that the right-wing is a tad hypocritical.
PS to "squeaky:" I agree with you.

Posted by: Laura J | September 4, 2008 2:37 PM

I gotta ask what's happened to our criterion for great speaking when I keep hearing praise for 1st Obama- who I admitted was overrated- and now Palin, who's definitely worse. She wore a painted smile and smacked her chops several times during her scripted speech. Come on, a middle schooler could have done better!

Is it because she's a woman that we're too afraid to stand up and say her speech stunk?

Posted by: Kevin Wayne | September 4, 2008 2:42 PM

"Christians unite and stand up for Sarah Palin, no matter what your political stance. She's one of US -- a real, genuine born-again Christian! She's downright refreshing!"

Let's see. Palin supports the war in Iraq, which doesn't even come close to meeting just war criteria, let alone the Sermon on the Mount.

Palin's a hypocrite. "The Daily Show" last nite featured a tape of her at a forum, held last spring, at which she criticized female politicians who whine about sexist media treatment. Now she and the GOP are resorting to the same kind of "whining."

Supposedly, Palin supports "Bible-based family values," yet I detect no regret that her unwed teenage daughter is pregnant. Indeed, Bill O'Reilley and other Repubs. argue that the pregnancy simply means that Palin's family is like "the rest of us." Can you imagine the reaction of one of Obama's daughters was a teen and pregnant?

Palin's cheap shots at Obama's community organizing wer disgusting. Here was a young man who could have made a fortune for a high-powered law firm. Instead, he tried to help empower a down-trodden community.

Palin IS a good speaker, and obviously a quick study. Her looks are an asset (as are Obama's to him). She may very well end up being the first female president. Her self-comparison to Harry Truman is unconvincing; Truman was a longtime political activist and politician.

Posted by: carl copas | September 4, 2008 2:54 PM

McCain's writers wrote the speech for Palin, we all know that. MSM told us that they were up all night doing it.

I was also a McCain Democrat in 2000 but when Bush pushed him out with negative politics, I returned to vote for Al Gore. I still regret that Gore lost to the Supreme Court, the voice of the people was lost. But now that McCain has morphed into King George III, he could have the reincarnation of Gandi as a V.P. and I would not vote for him.

Posted by: Paul | September 4, 2008 2:56 PM

Roger- it's not a matter of comparing her to Obama, it's a point that we seemed to be too easily impressed. Whatever you think of Hillary, her speech blew both Palin's and Obama's away. Jesse Jackson would blow Obama away. That's just good criticial thinking.

Some critical thinking as well needs to be applied to claims by and about Palin. She really wasn't opposed to the Bridge to Nowhere and I think examination of her supposedly taking on "the Big Oil Companies" I think will wilter under examination too.

Posted by: Kevin Wayne | September 4, 2008 3:03 PM

In my opinion, Palin is the perfect choice to produce maximum drama and fire up emotions in order to cloud the real issues. Appears to be like goodold repub spin doctoring. Haven't we seen enough of that? Hopefully, none of the campaigns will focus on her and whatever "issues" she's put out there too long. It's not worth it.

Posted by: Peter | September 4, 2008 3:13 PM

All predictable responses. If she does not "affirm" all of Wallis' edicts and take out a two-year subscription to Sojourners she is not "compassionate enough". Regardless, she is not The Obamassiah so will get no support from Jim.

Posted by: Peter S. | September 4, 2008 3:15 PM

Al N

I'm still laughing about your post. Was that satire?

A few questions, if you were serious...

How does Palin have more experience than Obama?

What else did Obama do in addition to being a "community organizer?" Is that really all he has done in his career?

How do you feel about the title "President Palin"? Do you really think she is prepared to be president? If so, explain why. How will she do on the national level? On the international level? What credentials and experiences does she have to support your idea that she would be able to do well as president?

Posted by: squeaky | September 4, 2008 3:17 PM

governor Palin's status as a mother has been questioned NOT by the Democrats but by the conservative Christian community. It's important to know that. I find it odd that anyone thinks she has more experience than Obama who has been a national senator dealing with major legislation. We now know that Governors do not necessarily carry with them wisdom and good judgment. Administrative experience may just be placeholding. Her addition to the ranks of ultra-Dominionist Christian conservatism is very worrisome. Iraq is hardly called by God but by Mammon and Thor. She is not just a "hockey mom" as she SELF describes. She is an extremist on all levls and will continue to do harm to our diverse nation and our national polity.

Posted by: Elizabeth Sholes | September 4, 2008 3:19 PM

I notice so many defenders of Palin bemoaning that "they" say she can't be a mother and run for VP. I haven't heard anyone say that...just all the talk about how "they" are saying it and it is sexist. I do question, however, the jugdement of any parent, mom or dad, no matter what their career plans who knowingly exposes a downs syndrome infant (or any infant really) to so much stress and stimulation. She can run for office...just get a sitter and let that kid off the convention floor.

Posted by: stephanie | September 4, 2008 3:25 PM

Sarah and George Bush hve the same mindset.

from the anchorage daily news:
Iraq war, gas line God's will, Palin said
MINISTRY STUDENTS: Governor asked them to pray for troops, pipeline.

By GENE JOHNSON
The Associated Press

(09/04/08 01:50:16)

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told ministry students at her former church that the United States sent troops to fight in the Iraq war on a "task that is from God."

In an address last June, the Republican vice presidential candidate also urged ministry students to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it "God's will."

Palin asked the students to pray for the troops in Iraq and noted that her eldest son, Track, was expected to be deployed there.

"Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God," she said. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan."

A video of the speech was posted at the Wasilla Assembly of God's Web site before finding its way on to other sites on the Internet.

Palin told graduating students of the church's School of Ministry, "What I need to do is strike a deal with you guys." As they preached the love of Jesus throughout Alaska, she said, she'd work to implement God's will from the governor's office, including creating jobs by building a pipeline to bring North Slope natural gas to North American markets.

"God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

"I can do my job there in developing our natural resources and doing things like getting the roads paved and making sure our troopers have their cop cars and their uniforms and their guns, and making sure our public schools are funded," she added. "But really all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."

Palin attended the evangelical church from the time she was a teenager until 2002, the church said in a statement posted on its Web site. She has continued to attend special conferences and meetings there. Religious conservatives have welcomed her selection as John McCain's running mate.

Rob Boston, a spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, lamented Palin's comments.

"I miss the days when pastors delivered sermons and politicians delivered political speeches," he said. "The United States is increasingly diverse religiously. The job of a president is to unify all those different people and bring them together around policy goals, not to act as a kind of national pastor and bring people to God."

The section of the church's Web site where videos of past sermons were posted was shut down Wednesday, and a message was posted saying that the site "was never intended to handle the traffic it has received in the last few days."

Posted by: Joyce | September 4, 2008 3:31 PM

I don't care whether or not Governor Palin's daughter is pregnant. I DO care that she "supports" her daughter's pregnancy but slashed money for pregnant teenagers in the Alaska budget. Is there evidence that her policies support poor pregnant teens and their children? Show me.

Posted by: Jane R | September 4, 2008 3:33 PM

The Republican s have been depressed for years now . . Mr. Bush has brought such shame through the war & embarrasment due to scandal, deceit, lying. It is a serious situation. Our nation is in peril and I believe 'ego' is at the heart of the downfall of Washington.

Well, Sarah Palin has what seems to be a huge ego and I believe that is contradictory to the message of Jesus.

What surprised me most though, was the delight the women of the Republican convention got from her rude and condescending remarks about others. Gone instantly was that image of 'well mannered, stand aside, be respectful ladies'. All this time, it was thought that Democratic women were the loud, raucous and tough minded women.

I believe it signals a new awakening for Republican women who have been relegated to the background in the past.

It will also be interesting to see if core gospel values, like respect, humulity,generosity, and care for those with less than ourselves comes to the surface.

It was surely not even a tiny part of Sarah Palin's speech last night.

Posted by: JEAN | September 4, 2008 3:35 PM

I'm sorry, I do not look to Sojourners for this kind of article. I'm disappointed. Aside from all of the pros and cons regarding her family life, do ya really see this woman as president? Wow!

Posted by: Cynthia Mariano | September 4, 2008 3:36 PM

I disagree with the assertion that Palin's decision to run for office with 5 children, including a special needs infant, should be beyond scrutiny. Raising children is not just about quality time, quantity matters. You can't raise a child via cell phone. I do think eyebrows would be raised with respect to this issue if a similarly situated man were running for President or Vice President. If you want to devote that amount of time to your career, more power to you. However, should you bring a child into this world if you don't have time to raise it? Maybe she and her husband do, but it is a fair question. With respect to school age children, I think a potential candidate must balance the fact that they will necessarily be away from their children more with the advantages a child would receive by growing up in such a situation. Family values is part of Palin's campaign, and while you may disagree with my position, I think it is a fair issue to discuss.

Posted by: jen | September 4, 2008 3:38 PM

To Al N - Christians unite and stand up for Sarah Palin, no matter what your political stance. She's one of US -- a real, genuine born-again Christian!

It's people like you with the collective mind-think that will bring this country down. I know some pretty nasty, self-righteous, look-down-your-nose at others Christians. Being a Christian (which I am) does not make you a perfect person who knows everything! Look what the last 7 years have brought us! Mccain/Palin will bring us more of the same, and further down the road to ruin than we already are. Aren't you sick of the pandering?

Posted by: Irene | September 4, 2008 3:39 PM

All she did was just state the FACTS?

An ABC wire service story today shredded many of her anti-Obama and her resume-building statements to threads as half-truths and exaggerations. We all criticized the media after the run-up to the Iraq War that they did not do their job. Now they are supposed to be the bad guys for investigating a complete unknown for the second most powerful job in the world when McCain would be the oldest President EVER to take office? Yes, family matters and responsibilities should be off-limits, but the mainstream press only picked up on this pregnancy thing after the RNC made it public. (I do not count tabloids and blogs as the press because they cater to such a small "belonging group.") Besides, Obama himself made it perfectly clear that the matter should be off-limits. BTW, some polls are out: Palin came across as likable to many, sarcastic to others, but still the majority would not vote for her because of her experience; time will tell if she can change that. Frankly the more I listen to Obama reaching out reducing abortions, recognizing basic human rights of GLBT persons, common sense control of guns, making health care and education more available and more affordable, and the lifting up of those in poverty with a tax code that tries to implement a "living wage" for so many of the working poor, the more he sounds like Rev. Jim Wallis in God's Politics. I guess that's why I'm voting for him.
Peace!

Posted by: Dan V. | September 4, 2008 3:41 PM

In this election as in elections past, I continue to be baffled by the fact that in order to qualify for our nation's highest offices, you have to wake up on a brisk fall morning and feel that the day is best honored by killing some of God's creatures.

When John Kerry suited up and went out to hunt Canada Geese, I just about choked. "They mate for life, John!" I shouted at the TV.

Okay, so not everybody questions why killing should be a sport. Not even the pro-life party. But even if you want to say that it's fine if some take pleasure in killing things, I fail to see why such pleasure is a qualification for national office. Are moose such a threat to our national security? Will serving up camel burgers bring about peace in the Middle East? Will skill in moose dressing bring job security? Can you trade the hides to the mortgage company to keep your house? I don't get it.

Posted by: Anne | September 4, 2008 3:41 PM

'...people who are honestly wondering if she has the experience, depth and temperament to step into the Oval Office.'

She has more experience than Obama. She has run a city and state. I love it that the main line - big four are compairing the Rep's second in command to their 1st - Hello - is anyone thinking?

No - Obama will not say anything publically - but what will he say and support privately? We (some of us) know what took place to get him to the Senate from IL. We know what he believes about middle / rural America about guns and religion.

This election will be historical no matter who the American people put in the White House. I will stack Palin's resume against either of the Dem's canidates and McCain - that will be cool to see what he has to say tonight.

Harry - you 'can't stand' McCain - right back at you buddy!

Blessings to all!
.

Posted by: big guy | September 4, 2008 3:41 PM

I fault Palin's judgment. She knew about her teenage daughter's pregnancy and yet subjected her to media scrutiny of her sinful past. A mother protects her children; she does not expose them to ridicule. I also fault her judgment in delivering a speech in TX, taking an 8 hour flight to Alaska followed by over an hour's drive to a hospital to deliver her child AFTER her water broke. A mother protects the about to born child; she does not risk its life by making its imminent birth subject to political considerations. Very strange.

Posted by: Anne | September 4, 2008 3:41 PM

I have read that Sarah Palin believes that the war in Iraq is God's will and that the natural gas pipeline she has encouraged through Alaska is also God's will. God works in mysterious ways, his wonders to behold. I wonder how she can be "pro-life" and send her oldest child to war to potentially cause death to come to others (including the "pre-born") and himself. She and McCain and many others are "anti-abortion" not "pro-life."

Posted by: Gary | September 4, 2008 3:43 PM

what was missing on the governor's speech was a temperament of tolerance and compassion. what i mean is if she is a follower of christ as she claims to be why is the bulk of her message an attack on a fellow follower? the tone of our political landscape is harsh, mean spirited and without biblical witness. we are called to use our words to encourage and build each other up no matter our political bent, love your enemies and all that. i may sound idealistic but what i am still looking for is a leader who expresses the compassion and humility that any follower of christ should have, so i will remain on the watch for the person who has the courage and the faith to step into the political arena and not attack their opponent's character and life but to inspire me with what they see as the vision they have for this country.

Posted by: john wallis | September 4, 2008 3:43 PM

I thought Palin's speech was funny and inspiring. I think that after a week of her being attacked for ridiculous things that she pretty much had to come out in a "fighting mode". I thought the fact that she did it in a humorous way was great. I do not agree with her politics in all areas, and I do agree that there seem to be some exaggerations of her record as a tax cutter. (of course, I am sure none of the other candidates have any exaggerations of their records). Obama is a nice man who has referred in fairly condescending ways to Palin's tenure as mayor of Wasilly (he continued to "misprounounce" the name of the town on several occasions...coincidence? ). Joe Biden's first act as vice-president was to start attacking McCain and it has been openly talked about in the media and on some liberal blogs that that is one of the reasons he was chosen. So....for people to complain about what I thought were relatively minor comments on Palin's part is interesting. She tweaked Obama for appearing to be a little overly impressed with himself. I don't think that was bad at all. However, I hope that she moves rapidly to a stance of looking at the issues and staying off the other things. As far as her being a Pentecostal....she attends a non-Pentecostal church most of the time but reportedly attends an Assembly of God Church when she is in Juneau? I think criticism of that is out of line and comments like, "I guess she can speak the language of any country as a result" are mean spirited. Tell me which one of us attends a church that cannot be mocked in some way?

Posted by: Bill | September 4, 2008 3:45 PM

Condescending to whom? Rude to whom? The only reason this is read as condescending is because it has been framed (not incorrectly) as a rebuttal to the rude and condescending arguments from the left. She put them to bed.

But yes, like any good convention speech, it irritated that folks who have made up their mind to vote for the other guy. Within minutes of her nomination, his campaign made light of her mayoral experience, and its suddenly out of bounds to make light of Obama's role as a community organizer?

Whether or not you think the criticisms from each side were valid has everything to do with how you already felt about each side. I didn't think it was polite or fair for Obama to suggest that McCain stood by and watched people drown in New Orleans. The left loved that line. That's politics.

"Any shred of vote I had left to give him disappeared with his pick for the VP."

This pick wasn't about picking up the shreds. It was about appealing to those voters who at least reasonably likely to vote for him in the first place. John McCain isn't going to win over liberal or middle-left voters.

A middling, congenial speech in the face of pronounced criticism from the left would have demonstrated weakness. To do so in an effort to maybe reach out to someone who is 99.9% sure they are going to vote for Obama anyway would hurt the campaign immensely.

"He said his choice would be someone who could be president right now. She is emphatically not that candidate."

I disagree. But, by this logic, I could argue Democrats elevated politics above country by picking a guy on the top of the ticket who hasn't really done or accomplished anything. If Obama is elected, there won't even be a heartbeat between him and the presidency.

Posted by: kevin s. | September 4, 2008 3:47 PM

Thanks, Jim for bringing up yet again...it is the issues that need to be spotlighted. Each of us must make a list of the issues that we are passionate about, prioritize them and do the research to see where each candidate stands. Do not believe the media...get as close to the source as possible. It takes some work to be informed...and it is work well worth the time. Also, we need to realize that there is and will never be a perfect candidate (of human caliber)that is why the priority list is so important!

Posted by: Kim | September 4, 2008 3:48 PM

I disagree with the statement that a male candidate would not have received the criticisms involving family situations and the choice to run for high office. If you remember, John Edwards was criticized for running while his wife had cancer. These are similar, though not identical.

Posted by: C. G. Walden | September 4, 2008 3:49 PM

#1 Today, 09:05 AM
SherriMunnerlyn
Level 9
Level 8 Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,935

I sat and listened to the Republican pick for Vice President speak last night, and was appalled and horrified. I see the Jesus I know being converted into a warmongerer, with attempt after attempt made to link God and guns and war and God. It made me sick to my stomach, it was disgusting. Further, comments were made reflecting a complete disdain for human rights of prisoners in the war on terror. How can a person say they care about human life, that they have any respect for the value of human life, and support torture and war after war.

I then found a sermon of a preacher at the Vice Presidential candidate's former church, calling the members to enlist in wars, that God was calling them to go kill in wars. I cannot even begin to find adequate words to express my feelings about this, except to conclude they do not worship the God I worship and they do not know the Jesus I know. I do not know the God she follows. Jesus does not tell people to go kill, to go take human life, and that there is personal sacrifice for Christ in taking the human life of others in wars.

Here are the comments of a so-called Christian preacher calling his congregation to go fight in war for Christ, the preacher at the church the Vice Presidential candidate was raised in :

"What you see in a terrorist -- that's called the invisible enemy. There has always been an invisible enemy. What you see in Iraq, basically, is a manifestation of what's going on in this unseen world called the spirit world. ... We need to think like Jesus thinks. We are in a time and a season of war, and we need to think like that. We need to develop that instinct. We need to develop as believers the instinct that we are at war, and that war is contending for your faith. ... Jesus called us to die. You're worried about getting hurt? He's called us to die. Listen, you know we can't even follow him unless you are willing to give up your life. ... I believe that Jesus himself operated from that position of war mode. Everyone say "war mode." Now you say, wait a minute Ed, he's like the good shepherd, he's loving all the time and he's kind all the time. Oh yes he is -- but I also believe that he had a part of his thoughts that knew that he was in a war."

There is also supposed to be a speech she made at her former church, about God calling for the war in Iraq.

This was a prayer she made:

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan"

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...2/1327574.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_123205.html

I have a problem in seeing any of the wars we are in as wars God is calling us to engage in, as wars God is calling Christians to go fight and take human life in. I am disgusted by this smearing and making a mockery of Jesus Christ, the way this so-called Christian Vice presidential candidate is doing.

This Republican melding together of their government and God is a match made in Hell, not Heaven. The goals of Satan are being sought, not the goals of Christ.

Sherri

Posted by: Sherri Munnerlyn | September 4, 2008 3:50 PM

For one who dismisses sex ed and promotes abstinence she is a prime example of Christian Right arrogance. Her high school daughter is about to get married and get into real parental and marriage respobsibilities at an age when most kids her age are looking forward to freedom and "getting out".

Posted by: Warren Dodge | September 4, 2008 3:51 PM

All day today, Rush Limbaugh has been screeching about Democrats and "libs" running scared after Palin's speech, fearing for their political lives, etc. etc. laugh chuckle ... Judging from this blog so far, that wouldn't - uh - quite seem to be the case.

Another point: As Christians, we can "prevail" on the issues alone if we stick to them and serve prophetically to focus people's attention on the important things. The religious finger-pointing and mockery on this blog is disturbing and puts us all in a bad light.

Posted by: Jeff | September 4, 2008 3:53 PM

"Sojourners" often gives me hope. McCain's VP pick does not. How could someone with such extremist views (and, yes, advocating for creationism in public schools, and ruling out all abortions even in cases of rape, incest and threat to the mother's life qualify as "extremist" in that they differ wildly from mainstream American views) be trusted to lead a secular democracy? Seriously. How could that sort of extremism accommodate freedom of religion, or separation of church and state? I, too, miss the McCain of '00 and cannot vote for the McCain of '08.

As for the alleged sexism of questioning her parenting, I'm a working mother and have faced tough choices, but I would never make the choice to expose a pregnant unwed teenager to international scrutiny, and Palin had to know that would happen. I hope it was not a calculated move on anyone's part, and I hope that girl and her child and its father get through this with more grace than Palin has shown.

Posted by: Leigh | September 4, 2008 3:54 PM

The value of a leader is in direct proportion to a leader's values. This election matters, not only because because of some hard realities like global warming, the economy, the Middle East, nuclear proliferation, civil liberties and poverty here and around the world, just to name just a few, but also because we are making a choice between two clearly distinct worldviews and sets of values. Sarah Palin has done us all a service by clearly showing the distinction between the world views and values. We need to get off personalities and focus on the world view and values of the candidates and each respective party as it relates to these hard realities. Campaigns are won and lost by how candidates relate to realities, through the worldview and values as they are seen in the voter's mind. Sarah Palin suceeded in connecting to a widly held worldview and set of values, a culture if you will. A worldview, that widly held, that is antithetical to our democracy. This election is about values!

Posted by: David Frenchak | September 4, 2008 3:55 PM

I wonder when this "hockey mom" actually had enough time to attend one of her child's hockey games....

Posted by: Mary | September 4, 2008 3:57 PM

Re comments by Elizabeth Mattingly

Last night's convention was filled beginning to end with attack and aggression, violence-tinged talk (against Democrats, against Islam, against the environment, you name it). Palin fits right in with her new crowd.

Posted by: Jeff | September 4, 2008 3:59 PM

I listened to Mrs. Palin's speech last night and thought of John McCain's many appearances and wondered - does anyone know if he has been assessed for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? He has a notorious temper which some have described as more like temper tantrums. Combine him with Sarah Barracuda and I''m not so sure I feel comfortable having either of them so near the "red" button. I believe in Jesus' message of peace, our call to be peacemakers, and here are two people: one, a card carrying member of the NRA and the other always referring to going after 'them' if it takes 100 years. That's not a 'double standard.' That's a concern that we are not headed for peacemaking but into more war. I was hoping for Hillary Clinton but when she didn't make it, I immediately supported Barack Obama. I don't want another four years of Bush clone McCain. I don't think he thought it through very well when he chose Mrs. Palin. I heard her speech and wondered "who wrote it?" That's why she disappeared for two days. She was practicing the speech! I wondered, if that had been Chelsea Clinton who turned up pregnant at 17, how would the country, how would the Republicans have reacted? Would they have been so forgiving, so accepting? There's a double standard, all right. I'm pro-life but I'm not a single issue voter. I'm also not a sheep. I hope others think it through better than what I've seen at the convention. That's so sad.

Posted by: Martha E. Lujan | September 4, 2008 4:02 PM

re: big guy | September 4, 2008 3:58 PM

BG I agree.

Posted by: Peter S. | September 4, 2008 4:03 PM

It seems to me contridictory to claim Christian identity and support cuts to the weakest memebers of our society--special needs children and so forth.

In reality it seem ideologically contridictory to claim Christian and a consumer capitalist.

Posted by: Ross | September 4, 2008 4:04 PM

When Potentiality is not Achieved.
Last night was another example of the shallowness of God talk. Self centred pharisaism was used passionately to attack and denigrate the attempts of community workers to work with the marginalized,forgotten and forsaken. Power and influence strategies permeated this pragmatic preaching. If it works it must be right. Bowing to the Great God ARWOD (American Republican Way of Death) the real God (Jahweh)was relegated to a place in the corner..not mentioned at all..and not included as the author of truth,justice and liberty. Prosperity Gospel proponents must have felt very superior with the continous reference: God wants you to to prosper with a strong bullying flavor mixed in. I had thought Mrs Palin's temporay insanity in forsaking the welfare of her daughter for the lust of power was temporary,but the public display of the smiling teenagers was an aphrodaisiac to the Evangelicals who couldn't get enough of the kool aid. Rationalization by the Christian Rock Stars (tv evangelists) has become epidemic and now everyone wants in on the "cheap grace". The reason that Barack Obama will win this November is that God has had enough of these self centred indulgent "sophists" who rent prophets for gain and despise any one who would offer a "cup of water in Jesus' Name". No reaching for feet washing towels by this crowd they have mastered the tossing of Sunday minutes at Jesus feet in their politically correct Churches.. God Have Mercy On Our Souls.

Posted by: Maurice | September 4, 2008 4:04 PM

Sarah Palin exercised a line item veto in the Alaska Legislature to cut funds for unwed teen mothers. Good thing her own daughter has a place to sleep.

Posted by: cynthia | September 4, 2008 4:05 PM

I have to disagree with Jim about the double standard for men and women, when he says,

"the suggestion that running for vice president with a 5-month-old special-needs child and a pregnant 17-year-old daughter should make her suspect as a mother is a blatant double standard that would not be applied to a male candidate."

I think I would question a man on this same issue. Men have also had to refuse promotions or jobs that took them out of town due to family circumstances. This is not a gender issue, but a question of priorities.
Of course such decisions are between the spouses and their God, but, as a voter, I have reservations about dividing time between a needy family and the second-most-consuming job in the country.

I was both impressed and outraged by Sarah Palin's Acceptance Speech. As oratory, it was effective, but it was more sarcastic and filled with innunendo than I can respect, even in a partisan speech. Truth can be subjective, but when it is ruthlessly twisted for political gain, I question the ethics of the speaker.

Posted by: Bill Tucker | September 4, 2008 4:06 PM

I somewhat disagree that we shouldn't focus on Palin's responsibilities or judgment as a parent. Or McCain's judgment for choosing her in the first place. For someone who is reportedly so focused on Family Values (in a Dobsonian way I presume), she should have had the wisdom to "just say no" to the offer. She has 5 children, one of which has Down's syndrome, and another who will be a new mama. If supporting her pregnant daughter doesn't take enough of her time, caring for a Down's child certainly will. My nephew has Down's syndrome. He is 12 with the mentality of a 3-year old. It's like raising 2 and sometimes 3 children for his parents.
I guess narcissism and ego trump family values any day.

Posted by: farmerpat | September 4, 2008 4:07 PM

Her speech was vitriolic, short on substance, smart alec, and very un-christian if you ask me. The media was fawning all over her because they have to. What about what Peggy Noonan said when she thought the microphones were off-that it was over when McCain picked her. Palin is an extremist plain and simple. My sister is a hardcore liberal that stays home with her children. Palin is fair game in regards to her children and her not being with them, maybe the husband is home with the kids, if that is true then it is not as bad, but if neither one of them is home with them and her other kids are watching her children--that is wrong. If your going to have five children you should be home with them when they are in middle school and under, period.

Posted by: shawn olson | September 4, 2008 4:08 PM

As a Christian and as a human being who believes in the sanctity of all human life and that it is time to beat the weapons of war created out of our inability to love one another and to understand what God means, as concerns justice, I tremble at the idea of someone who believes that war is blessed by God. Those who attack us also think that their cause is ordained by God. Peace is ordained by the Jesus I know. I am starting, regrettably, to think of people who agree with Sarah Palin on this point as anti Christian and modern day heretics. I cannot imagine wanting to possibly put Palin's finger on the "N" button.

Posted by: Rev. Robert Evans II | September 4, 2008 4:08 PM

Jim, are you aware of the more troubling aspects of the AOG; doctrines and affiliations? If we are to assume Palin is sincere in her Dominionist faith, then she will be perjuring herself (and worse) if she swears to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Here's some impressive foundations for that assertion.

Posted by: | September 4, 2008 4:10 PM

Obama has no executive experience, no leadership experience at all, and he has added Biden because he has no foreign affairs experience.

Joe Biden is six years younger than McCain, and he has had two brain hemhorages.

So, ask yourselves: What will happen to America if we are embroiled in a desperate foreign affairs mess or a terrorist attack, and (God forbid) Joe Biden is incapacitated through illness or death.

Ya'll are so worried about McCain, with no regard for the inexperienced Obama and his fairly old choice to be there in case America has a foreign affairs crisis (which we all know, we will have, eventually).

I think Americans need to get beyond party and rhetoric and honestly look at the most liberal, most inexperienced candidate in American history and his old VP choice.

Posted by: | September 4, 2008 4:11 PM

If your going to have five children you should be home with them when they are in middle school and under, period.
Posted by: shawn olson | September 4, 2008 4:08 PM
-----------
Thanks for the edict. I'm glad no one with similar views is on the ticket on either side. Why do liberals insist on legislating personal behavior and choices in this manner?

Posted by: Peter S. | September 4, 2008 4:13 PM

You don't need to be snarky to me Peter S. But you could try answering the questions I posed about Palin. Come on, give it a shot.

Posted by: squeaky | September 4, 2008 4:13 PM

I felt the whole atmosphere of the convention was arrogant, sarcastic, condescending and mean-spirited. I watched and listened, as much as I could to Guiliani and wow, he was absolutely disgusting. Is he the model of Republican politics? And then Gov. Palin, I believe, showed very little graciousness or balance. I felt that more than I've seen with the Republican convention, the DNC speakers, particularly Biden and Obama, were able to point out the good points about McCain without reservation, and then moved to where they disagreed. Their pointed remarks pale in comparison to the mean-spirited remarks I've heard. If you don't think Obama is ready, then don't vote for him. But don't say he's NOT a Christian or intelligent just because you don't agree with his stances.

Also, when Palin applauded women who came before her, how come she didn't mention Shirley Chisholm?! Is it possible she doesn't know about her or does she not think her contribution to women, all women, in politics is insignificant?! In either case, it's sad. Do her policies over look, neglect people or are ignorant of people of color too??

Posted by: Rita | September 4, 2008 4:15 PM

I liked Jim's column for the most part.
Maydell:
....visited by "my local Assembly of God church and have been told that I am not a Christian because I am Catholic. "
I am sorry to hear of your experience. That is NOT a tenet of the Assemblies of God. No one is, or isn't, a Christian
by virtue of their denomination. The Assemblies
of God is a far more diverse group than your limited experience, and the mocking, divisive
comments of Sister Marie, would indicate. Where is YOUR tolerance, Sister?
Also, you c