Patterico's Pontifications

6/30/2012

Michelle Obama takes public position counter to Barack and Sec Sebelius

Filed under: General — JD @ 9:48 am

[Guest post by JD]

She makes the Church’s argument for them.

“It’s kind of like church,” Obama said. “Our faith journey isn’t just about showing up on Sunday for a good sermon and good music and a good meal. It’s about what we do Monday through Saturday as well, especially in those quiet moments, when the spotlight’s not on us, and we’re making those daily choices about how to live our lives.

“We see that in the life of Jesus Christ. Jesus didn’t limit his ministry to the four walls of the church,” she said. “He was out there fighting injustice and speaking truth to power every single day. He was out there spreading a message of grace and redemption to the least, the last, and the lost. And our charge is to find Him everywhere, every day by how we live our lives.”

— JD

36 Responses to “Michelle Obama takes public position counter to Barack and Sec Sebelius”

  1. Will he throw his wife under the bus? He had no problem chucking his Preacher of 20 years, and his Grandmother.

    JD (318f81)

  2. Oh. Ding!

    JD (318f81)

  3. We certainly don’t have much of the so called truth-to-power going on now.

    AZ Bob (1c9631)

  4. I love boilerplate Christianity. I do it even better.

    nk (875f57)

  5. What — are saying it isn’t graceful and redemptive to kill a baby?

    Racist.

    Icy (9332cf)

  6. even putin isn’t gayer than the phrase “faith journey”

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  7. I kinda don’t understand what this post is trying to say.

    Leviticus (102f62)

  8. Leviticus – think HHS mandate and how they attempt to define ministry for purposes of their faux compromised mandate.

    JD (318f81)

  9. Even the Devil can quote Scripture if it furthers his ends. Anybody can talk the talk and make himself (herself) sound like a saint. Walk the walk, Michelle.

    nk (875f57)

  10. “even putin isn’t gayer than the phrase “faith journey””

    Mr. Feets – This whole presidency is journey of personal discovery for President Social Justice and his hangers on.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  11. Michelle only walks the walk if its leading to the steps onto a 747.

    AD-RtR/OS! (2bb434)

  12. “And our charge is to find Him everywhere, every day by how we live our lives.””

    That’s why Michelle is having the lunches school kids bring from home inspected. She’s hoping find Him on a PB&J or apple slice.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  13. Liberals would be so much better Christians, if they believed that shit.

    carol (c1fe01)

  14. The times when you have seen only one set of footprints on your journey of personal discovery and social justice is when I carried you!

    cause of how choomed you were

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  15. LOL

    JD (ad6f40)

  16. proving, not that there was any doubt, that she is as much a room temperature IQ houseplant as her dumber than dirt husband.

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  17. And our charge is to find Him (Obama) everywhere, every day by how we live our lives.

    Obama will require you to work.(but not if you work oil rigs)

    He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. (just ignore my demanding to expose who are the big contributers to Romney)

    That you put down your divisions. (see above)

    That you come out of your isolation (like all the press confrences I do)

    …Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual (No shit)

    uninvolved, uninformed (especially if you watch NBC, CBS, etc.)

    Ipso Fatso (7434b9)

  18. Leviticus,

    JD’s link is to Hot Air, where Ed Morrissey explains the irony of Michelle Obama’s statement that churches aren’t limited to 4 walls:

    However, her husband and Kathleen Sebelius don’t see it that way. They only allow for activities within “the four walls of the church” to be classified as religious expression exempt from government regulation, and only that activity which excludes those other than believers as participants or recipients, too. The USCCB and its allies in the Fortnight for Freedom campaign have repeatedly argued exactly as the First Lady does — that the provision of charity, education, and health care to the greater community is an integral component of religious expression, for Catholics and those of other denominations, just as was Jesus’ ministry of healing, evangelization, and assistance to the poor. In fact, Mrs. Obama makes that case as eloquently as I’ve seen it made during this debate.

    Now that the First Lady has acknowledged that ministry is not limited to the four walls of the church and that it necessarily involves spreading the message of grace and redemption to more than just the choir, can we expect her husband and the Secretary of HHS reach the same conclusion?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  19. Y’all are are confusing categories here.

    What Michelle said applies to individual believers.
    (Breaks radio silence)

    What Obama and HHS said applies to the organized entities, the individual church.

    There’s no conflict between what she said and what they said, unless you think there’s absolutely no difference between yourself and the church you attend.

    (Returns to radio silence)

    kishnevi (2034de)

  20. She is speaking of their faith, so at worst, she was speaking of her family. The point is that there is no daylight between her words and how the Church would/does argue this.

    JD (ad6f40)

  21. kishnevi,

    Not only did Michelle compare one’s individual “faith journey” to the church’s ministry (“it’s kind of like church”), she also discussed Jesus’ ministry and He is the church.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  22. @kishnevi: If the State can silence a group because it is religious, then the State can silence a group because it is political, or expresses a political opinion.

    Phillep Harding (1b8b26)

  23. @6

    even putin isn’t gayer than the phrase “faith journey”

    Well it’s only liberals who speak of faith as a “journey” as opposed to a “commitment.”

    A journey isn’t something in which you necessarily have to do anything. You can Journey to Paris on the 4th of July and come back with a chunk of change simply by jumping on an airplane.

    @10

    This whole presidency is journey of personal discovery for President Social Justice and his hangers on.

    Case in point.

    Brandon (d777af)

  24. @17

    They only allow for activities within “the four walls of the church” to be classified as religious expression exempt from government regulation, and only that activity which excludes those other than believers as participants or recipients, too.

    Gee. That reminds me of something that happened a long time ago (prior to the 1990s) in an empire far, far away.

    Brandon (d777af)

  25. Our faith journey isn’t just about showing up on Sunday for a good sermon and good music and a good meal. It’s about what we do Monday through Saturday

    Oh, come on. There’s no contradiction. Black liberation theology isn’t about salvation but politics. So she’s right. That’s what the Obamas do Monday through Saturday.

    And black liberation theology was invented to counter what these radicals saw as the traditional purpose of the the theology of European based churches. To serve the cause of blackness the same way they viewed churches like the Church of Rome maintaining the white power structure.

    So making the RCC pay to ensure Malia and Sasha aren’t ever “punished” with a child is in their eyes doing the lord’s work.

    And we already know what they consider a good sermon, so nobody can accuse me of being too far off base.

    I would have said this earlier, but I had to wait a couple of hours after lunch as when I read “Michell Obama takes public position” Obama’s joke about his wife not going down all the way on the Ellen Degeneres show kept popping into my head.

    And I don’t need to buy another laptop so soon after getting this one.

    Steve57 (c441a6)

  26. Greetings:

    I think President Obama had already figured out that his “faith journey” “isn’t about showing up on Sunday”.

    Or, as we say in Cali, “Spirituality: Religion without the Work”.

    11B40 (900e54)

  27. “And black liberation theology was invented to counter what these radicals saw as the traditional purpose of the the theology of European based churches.”

    All liberation theology (black included) centers around the notion that Jesus didn’t so much come to save people from sin so much as that he came to liberate those who are under oppression.

    I went to a Christian college that didn’t necessarily teach liberation theology, but was sympathetic to the cause. Anthony Campolo (Clinton’s “escape from retribution over his sexcapades” pastor) was a prof. of sociology there at the time.

    Campolo’s ministries are much like those of the liberation theologians; all into social justice and condemning the sins of the powerful. He started a very large ministry in Haiti long before the Earthquake there; and he’s to be commended for recognizing the need there. I hear he’s changed a lot since then, and this was over 20 years ago; but I still hear of graduates from the college (now University) who are aiding the ACLU and other similar “voices of liberation.” So the college still leans liberal.

    Keep that image in mind if you want to have a clear idea of what this group is all about. Black liberation is simply an offshoot of the larger movement; which has elements in the Catholic church as much as in protestant churches. It’s a rejection of the more common forms of Christian – Catholicism, Calvinism, Methodism, reform theology and dispensationalism; which are all viewed as supporting the system of oppression to one degree or another.

    Preserving American exceptionalism, the constitution and individual liberty are as far from their thinking as is taking any responsibility for the federal deficit and limiting government intrusion in our lives. I wouldn’t be surprised if OWS had a large number of participants from this college.

    So yeah, when Michelle Obama talks about Jesus, she’s talking about the collective liberator and not the individual redeemer. There’s a huge difference in perspective there.

    Liberation theology, if it had been present and influential during the founding of the Republic would not have contributed significantly to the Declaration of Independence clauses concerning individual liberty and Creator endowed self-evident rights. The means towards liberation is through the government and Jesus is merely it’s champion.

    So HHS is doing a “sacred duty” more or less.

    Brandon (d777af)

  28. _______________________________________________

    when the spotlight’s not on us, and we’re making those daily choices about how to live our lives.

    Yes, uh-huh, Michelle. You’re terrific. You walk the walk and talk the talk.

    By the way, you and your husband’s level of big-heartedness, compassion and generosity when no one is looking — and when you’re not, as you say, in the spotlight, doing things like running for office — are illustrated in ways noted herein.

    nation.foxnews.com, January 2012:

    Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife Michelle gave $10,772 of the $1.2 million they earned from 2000 through 2004 to charities, or less than 1 percent, according to tax returns for those years released today by his campaign.

    The Obamas increased the amount they gave to charity when their income rose in 2005 and 2006 after the Illinois senator published a bestselling book. The $137,622 they gave over those two years amounted to more than 5 percent of their $2.6 million income.

    Romney charitable contributions

    Tax year 2010
    Taxable income:$21.7 million
    Charitable donations: $2.98 million
    Donations as % of income: 13.73%

    Tax year 2011 (est)
    Taxable income: 20.9 million
    Charitable donations: $4 Million
    Donations as % of income: 19.14%

    nytimes.com, March 2008: The Obamas’ returns are striking on a number of levels. They show that the couple made very few charitable contributions, sometimes less than 1 percent of taxable income, until Mr. Obama began his run for the White House.

    In 2004, before Mr. Obama entered the Senate, he and his wife gave $2,500 to charity, 1.2 percent of the taxable income. The next year, the donations jumped, to $77,315, or nearly 5 percent of the taxable income.

    “Their charitable giving only went up when it looked like he was campaigning for the presidential office,” said Paul L. Caron, a professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Law and editor of the TaxProf Blog, which examines tax questions and has posted the returns.

    Mark (90205b)

  29. Kishnevi:

    The church is not a building, a location, etc. It is the sum total of the community that worships together. If your church building burned down, when the congregation meets next time, whether in another building or even in a parking lot, then the church is wherever they are. Which is why

    “However, her husband and Kathleen Sebelius don’t see it that way. They only allow for activities within “the four walls of the church” to be classified as religious expression exempt from government regulation, and only that activity which excludes those other than believers as participants or recipients, too.”

    is so egregious.

    The workings of “the church” are actually nothing more than the entirety of the workings of each individual to spread the word and workings of the agreed upon beliefs of the congregation.

    Jay H Curtis (804124)

  30. @27

    Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife Michelle gave $10,772 of the $1.2 million they earned from 2000 through 2004 to charities, or less than 1 percent,

    Romney charitable contributions

    Tax year 2010
    Taxable income:$21.7 million
    Charitable donations: $2.98 million
    Donations as % of income: 13.73%

    Tax year 2011 (est)
    Taxable income: 20.9 million
    Charitable donations: $4 Million
    Donations as % of income: 19.14%

    But you see, these two examples represent two very different ideologies. One ideology that believes government is the servant towards the greater good, and one ideology that sees government as the overlord of all goodness.

    The Obamas are not being consistent enough with their ideology. If they were to be consistent, they would give precisely nothing to charity. It’s not charity that does good, but government. Thus, their desire to raise taxes in order to increase goodness.

    The Romneys are quite consistent with their ideology, and perhaps more so. They don’t have to give as much as they do, but they do it because they believe giving is good. They understand that the ills of the world are not solved by some government utopian master plan. Perhaps there’s some political expedience involved; but you have to understand that giving more than 19% of one’s income is overkill for whatever political expedience demands.

    Not so with the Obamas. Giving 1% is enough for that purpose. Their real charitable contribution is in seeing how much they can get the rich to pay their “fair share.”

    Brandon (d777af)

  31. This discussion is interesting because it further exposes complexities and differences of approach to politics between individuals and within the “religious” communities themselves– especially related to the mandate and exemptions to the mandate. But it leaves out atheists, several of whom have self identified on this blog and are smart, very involved in politics and like to mull around political and economic theory. I wonder if any of you “A’s” are out there lurking and would like to join this discussion?

    elissa (330e5f)

  32. Elissa,

    While American exceptionalism pretty much necessitates the assumption of a Creator; that assumption does not necessitate belief in a Creator. So not surprisingly many atheists who are politically conservative don’t appear to have much of a problem with the concept.

    And it comes as no surprise to me that one of the great atheist thinkers who recently passed, Christopher Hitchens became quite conservative on some issues towards the end. In fact, he was much more conservative on some issues than his Christian brother. I’m not sure if we can attribute much of that to the fact that he became a US citizen, or that he simply and gradually found some conservative approaches to issues much more intellectually feasible.

    Part of that I’m certain, came directly from his atheism. He was appalled by Middle Eastern theocracies, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, but equally by secular totalitarian regimes such as North Korea and Cuba. I think he found a very welcome balance in Western-style democracies, which found their basis in religious thought.

    Any other perspectives?

    Brandon (d777af)

  33. OT: I have a hard time understanding Seth Allen.
    Seth Allen ‏@Prepostericity
    RT @lorensuper Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.

    Here he claims to be a mediocre person. I would never do that on a twitter account. It probably drives away any few followers one has.

    scable (40a8c6)

  34. Fantastic issues altogether, you simply gained a logo new reader. What could you suggest about your post that you made some days ago? Any sure?

    pet shop animals (09a6de)

  35. Spywares are usually very rampant these days, i have got my pc reformated due to the fact it was corrupted with a crappy malware.;”*,, Hope This Helps! health and wellness article

    Nubia Hadson (c8c4bb)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3829 secs.