The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Uncertainty Over Someone’s Faith Triggers Race Card? Only In Kosreich

Posted on | February 24, 2015 | 47 Comments

by Smitty

Shaun King, at DailyKos: The underlying racism in Gov. Scott Walker questioning whether or not President Obama is a Christian

Click image to to to Giorgio A. Tsoukalos's site

Racism and slavery were commonplace in Rome, and we know where all roads lead, don’t we?

*Sigh*. No, Shaun. Uncertainty regarding the faith of another, particularly one with whom you’ve not actually spoken, prayed, and studied, is a straight play for one of Baptist ilk. Beside Walker, there are plenty of other public figures laying claim to being Baptist (Al Gore, Bill Clinton) that one hopes are saved. As with the case of BHO, the deeds kinda seem at variance with the words on occasion. But, hey, we all shank it, don’t we? (1 John) Which is why the repentance is key. Right. Well, moving on, the real point here is that, while the bulk of Baptists don’t believe one is any more capable of un-salvation than salvation in the first place, most Baptists with whom I’ve ever spoken aren’t 100% confident in anyone else’s salvation.

Two words: Judas Iscariot.

You can have words aplenty. You can have deeds. You can have credentials and offices. You can have your own assurance (and I do). You can even take my word concerning myself. But until we meet in Eternity, you’re best off not pushing the question past “really confident” or “I don’t know”.

And I don’t know Scott Walker personally, either. He’s certainly not one to wear his religiosity on his sleeve a la Mike Huckabee. (I’m confident Huckabee is saved, but I’d really, really, really like to hear why that chap, after having been called to the ministry, would take a demotion and get into politics. Makes you go “Hmmm”, as a Baptist.)

Back to King:

In spite of all of this, including the reality that [Obama] is a devoted and faithful husband and father, Scott Walker, and now a growing chorus of conservatives, are just flat out stating that President Obama isn’t a Christian at all.

Notice, though, that you will never hear conservatives question the Christianity of Rudy Giuliani or Rush Limbaugh—in spite of the reality that both of them have been married seven times between them and refuse to really discuss any active aspects of their faith.

Why is it that Walker and others are so willing to doubt the Christianity of a good and faithful man who openly details and professes his faith, but never question the Christianity of men who struggle with morality and family values and don’t really speak at all on whether or not faith matters to them in the least bit?

It’s racism.

Couple of points: Walker did not, himself, question the President’s Christianity. As I’ve explained here, Walker was coloring within lines reasonable for a Baptist, though you’d have to ask Walker himself if he buys off on my analysis. Here’s the funny part, King: Walker is likely to answer in a similar way for both Giuliani (Roman Catholic) and Rush Limbaugh (no faith listed on Wikipedia).

Is it a bit much to ask King to spend some time actually researching the subject and the people involved? I don’t doubt that the President has said he is Christian. I rather hope to see the fellow in Eternity, where there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed, because this administration has been nothing if not a source of questions. And I don’t doubt that Walker is Christian, based on hearsay. If repetition counts as a score, I guess that Obama is more Christian than Walker. Has Obama been asked to judge Walker’s Christianity? Might Obama also offer an “above my paygrade” type answer?

Perhaps Mr. King can score an interview with the good President next month while the Israeli Prime Minister is all shootin’ the breeze with Congress and stuff.


47 Responses to “Uncertainty Over Someone’s Faith Triggers Race Card? Only In Kosreich”

  1. Adobe_Walls
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:50 am

    Walker should have led with the second part of his answer, from Hot Air, “To me, this is a classic example of why people hate Washington and, increasingly, they dislike the press,” Walker said. “The things they care about don’t even remotely come close to what you’re asking about.”
    That should have been the entire answer, as now that part will never get covered by MSM. I don’t care, since I can’t know, if Obama is a Christian. If he is he’s even worse at it than I am. I’ve always assumed he pretended to be a Christian for political reasons but is actually an atheist/agnostic, most Bolsheviks are.

  2. RS
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:53 am

    The problem, of course, is in the definition of the word “Christian.” It can mean a purely “cultural” Christian who makes the occasional appearance in church on Christmas v. the evangelical “born again” variety. The media has an incentive to conflate all the various definitions in their attempt to tarnish conservatives and advance progressives. If I were a politician, I’d respond to the question, “Do you think Mr./Ms.X is a Christian, with a demand that my interlocutor define the term. Then we’d all be on the same page.

  3. Adobe_Walls
    February 24th, 2015 @ 7:08 am

    The more words used in answering these questions the more cherry picking from that answer the media will do. All Dan Balz and Robert Costa wanted was a short phrase to base long accusatory pieces on. Republicans should always keep in mind that most of the media isn’t trying to inform the public but rather to mislead it. They’re only looking for cudgels.

  4. Dana
    February 24th, 2015 @ 7:27 am

    Some of us don’t actually care if other people are Christian or not, because that is their own business, not mine. But I do care if people are lying to me, and I am persuaded that President Obama has been lying to us when he tells us that he is a Christian.

    No, I don’t think that he is a Muslim, either. To be either a Christian or a Muslim, one has to believe that there is someone greater than himself, and that I do not see in Barack Hussein Obama.

  5. Adobe_Walls
    February 24th, 2015 @ 7:50 am

    Finding that Obama lied about his religious beliefs would hardly be surprising. He lies about everything. He lies when the truth would serve him better.
    I suspect that if he couldn’t have found a radical church in harmony with his political beliefs he have gone to one anyway just so he could say he had.

  6. CrustyB
    February 24th, 2015 @ 7:56 am

    Isn’t it strange that “racism” is the Holy Grail to liberals in terms of playing moralistic gotcha with anyone who opposes them? And why not? It requires no proof, no evidence, no logical argument. Just say “That’s racist!” and that’s it. You’re automatically right, the person you’re accusing is automatically wrong. To a liberal, racism is all around us. It’s everywhere, it’s the #1 problem facing America today. But when is the last time you actually saw someone victimized by racism?

  7. daialanye
    February 24th, 2015 @ 8:51 am

    Obama attended one church for a bunch of years. Based on the practices of that church and its minister it seems fair to call BO a Hatist.

  8. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    February 24th, 2015 @ 9:17 am
  9. RS
    February 24th, 2015 @ 9:39 am

    True enough. But the public expects answers/responses. Better to place the questioner on the defensive by making him define terms. For example, regarding the abortion rape/incest business, simply ask, “What is this thing we’re destroying, for surely we are destroying something?”

    Modeling Christ when tested about paying the poll tax and responded, “Whose image is on the coin?” is a pretty good method of dealing with these things, I think.

  10. Dana
    February 24th, 2015 @ 9:53 am

    Why did it need to be in harmony with anything, given that Mr Obama apparently slept his way through the Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s sermons?

  11. jakee308
    February 24th, 2015 @ 10:25 am

    Everyone’s a sinner except me and thee. And sometimes I think thee are.

  12. Steve Skubinna
    February 24th, 2015 @ 10:44 am

    “Is it a bit much to ask King to spend some time actually researching the subject…”

    Ha ha ha ha ha… *snort* HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!

    Jeez, that was a good one. How about a beverage alert next time, man?

    And on a serious note, to hell with these bastards and their BS race card. They are not good people, not reasonable people, not decent people, not honest people. In fact I doubt they really are actual people, simply bipedal vermin in a vaguely human shape. Screw this a$$hole and the rest of his race baiting a$$hole clique. They want a damn civil war, they’ll be very very sorry they start one. But not for long.

  13. Adobe_Walls
    February 24th, 2015 @ 10:56 am

    No the ”public” doesn’t expect answers/responses to moronic attempts to create a manufactured gaffe, the left does and they’re a small segment of the public. That small segment is TWANLOC and therefore lost to us in all cases. Do you really think the average person thinks it’s important what Walker thinks about evolution? What’s he going to do, repeal evolution? There is nothing to be gained by anyone, in trying to engage the leftist press. Most of these types of questions are predictable, some are repeated every cycle. Extremely concise pat answers should be developed whose sole purpose is to point out how stupid and pointless the questions are. The public would appreciate that. Much of the public holds the press/media in contempt, most of the rest would if they were shown why they should.

  14. RS
    February 24th, 2015 @ 11:11 am

    Actually, I think the public expects a response, more than an answer. If a politician demonstrates with his/her response that he’s onto the game and can outwit his interlocutor, I think that increases his/her stature immensely.

    Of course, these “journalists” have an ulterior motive. That’s the point. Demonstrate you’re smarter than they are; put them on the defensive.

    Refusing the to take the field is tantamount to giving up the field.

  15. Quartermaster
    February 24th, 2015 @ 11:17 am

    I’d say there is enough of a pattern of behavior to be able to tell if Zer0 is a Christian. He is not a Christian because he has lifestyle of lying. Liars will not enter the Kingdom.

    There are decent people about which it is impossible to have an opinion one way or the other. I can’t tell you if any other member of my Church is a Christian, but God knows beyond doubt.

    We’ve seen enough on Zer0 to have little doubt, however.

  16. Adobe_Walls
    February 24th, 2015 @ 11:53 am

    That’s why one should keep their replys as short as possible. Asking questions about the question is pointless. That part won’t make the newscast.

  17. RS
    February 24th, 2015 @ 12:01 pm

    Asking questions about the question is pointless. That part won’t make the newscast.

    Bingo. That’s the purpose, non? Prevent the Gotcha! What are the journalists going to say? “He asked me to clarify my question? To define my terms? To engage in actual journalism? But I refused.”

  18. Matt_SE
    February 24th, 2015 @ 12:05 pm

    At the core of King’s article is the Alinskyite tactic of holding the enemy to his own standards, or as close as a Godless leftist can get to understanding those standards.
    It’s amusing to watch; like a retarded chimp bashing on a typewriter, trying to write Shakespeare.
    Just remember that the point of his article isn’t to inform, enlighten or improve the reader in any way. It is to attack the psyche.

  19. Matt_SE
    February 24th, 2015 @ 12:10 pm

    The thing is, we already know that leftists don’t care about racism…not really. There’s too much evidence that they approve of keeping the Black man in his place, and too much evidence of looking the other way when it’s convenient for them.
    *cough* Robert Byrd *cough*
    The only reason they use it is because DECENT PEOPLE take it seriously. It is abhorrent to them on multiple levels and recoil from accusations of it.

  20. Matt_SE
    February 24th, 2015 @ 12:18 pm

    The purpose of interviews used to be to inform the public about the candidate.
    Now, their purpose should be to inform the public about the media.
    The only problem being that the media have editors who will twist the narrative to suit them no matter what.
    We need more live interviews.

  21. Adobe_Walls
    February 24th, 2015 @ 12:26 pm

    And candidates should have their own cameras on them as much as possible.

  22. Matt_SE
    February 24th, 2015 @ 12:30 pm

    The other problem is that this approach assumes the candidate can hold his own.
    Everyone makes mistakes. If you are interviewed often enough, you will make one.
    And the MSM has a legion of eager beavers to throw at candidates, if they don’t just start ambushing them with weepy waifs and their sob stories.
    Maybe the only winning move is not to play.

  23. Finrod Felagund
    February 24th, 2015 @ 2:10 pm

    I remember a preacher saying once: “If being a Christian was a crime, would there be enough evidence to convict you in a court of law?”

    The implications of this regarding Obama is left as an exercise for the reader.

  24. totenhenchen
    February 24th, 2015 @ 2:16 pm

    And vice versa.

  25. ameryx
    February 24th, 2015 @ 2:48 pm

    I grew up Missouri Synod Lutheran. Many churches in the Synod would not serve communion to another MS Lutheran who was not a member of the congregation, unless that person met with the Pastor, so that the Pastor would know he was enabling someone to take communion “to his own damnation”. The intent was not to insult the stranger; but given the danger that communion presents to the ignorant, it was considered better to err on the side of caution.
    Just so with the question Walker was asked. He effectively answered “Who am I to judge?”.
    Don’t liberals like it when people don’t judge?

  26. Erica Garner Slams Sharpton: It’s About the Money | Regular Right Guy
    February 24th, 2015 @ 2:59 pm

    […] Uncertainty Over Someone’s Faith Triggers Race Card? Only In Kosreich […]

  27. DeadMessenger
    February 24th, 2015 @ 5:47 pm

    Agree 100%. Matthew 7:16: “By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?”

  28. Kirby McCain
    February 24th, 2015 @ 5:56 pm

    Indeed, Obama lies consistently. I don’t believe that you have to lie to be a politician. The president’s dishonesty seems to be part of his personality. For instance, yes other presidents have used executive orders but not to rewrite the laws on immigration. He certainly hid the facts on Beghazi. He lied repeatedly to get Obamacare passed. He derided Bush for deficit spending and immediately spent more than all other presidents combined. Being a Christian means having a moral compass and I don’t see anything in his actions to indicate that.

  29. DeadMessenger
    February 24th, 2015 @ 5:57 pm

    “Don’t liberals like it when people don’t judge?”

    Hell no! Making any judgment, no matter how reasonable or truthful gives them a quick and easy way to bludgeon you.

  30. Dana
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:17 pm

    I remember, back in 2004, how some of us — myself included — questioned whether John Kerry was actually Catholic, as he claimed to be, because he was divorced and remarried, and supported abortion. Does that mean I was racist against whites?

  31. Art Deco
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:25 pm

    It’s reasonable to assume by default that a politician is not seriously religious unless there is evidence to the contrary. By ‘seriously’, I mean it makes a significant difference in his thinking and behavior. The most recent Presidential candidates who manifest some of that would be Messrs. Santorum, Romney, Huckabee, Bush, Keyes, Buchanan, Forbes, and Carter. Messrs. Gingrich, Bradley, and Brown would be more people who had an interest in religious topics than religious men themselves. With the elder Bush and Ronald Reagan and perhaps Ron Paul it’s difficult to tell because for men of their vintages religious practice and idiom was so much a part of cultural baselines. With Jesse Jackson it’s tough to say. As for the rest, doubt it.

  32. DeadMessenger
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:28 pm

    I denounce you, racist patriarch! Your kind makes me sick! You should leave and take all your crummy inventions with you!

    (*yoink* as you snatch the iPad out of my grubby fingers)

  33. ameryx
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:31 pm

    I dunno. They keep telling me not to be so judgmental…

  34. Art Deco
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:32 pm

    It was known that he’d sought an annulment of his marriage to Julia Thornton. She had objected when the documentation was dispatched to her by the ecclesiastical tribunal and the Archdiocese never came clean as to whether they had granted a declaration of nullity or not. In fairness to Kerry, it’s quite possible that the marriage was null because it was solemnized outside a Catholic Church (and it’s reasonable to guess that Kerry and Thornton did not go through the necessary paces with the archdiocese before marrying, as is required with mixed marriages). Also in fairness to Kerry, he was divorced for the same reason Ronald Reagan was: his wife had insisted on it.
    John and Teresa Kerry were known to attend the Mass at the Jesuit Urban Center, which has a reputation for being your last stop on your way out the door. Very few Democratic pols are Catholic in a way that would injure their careers, and those which have been in recent decades were mostly people who entered politics prior to 1976.

  35. Dana
    February 24th, 2015 @ 6:54 pm

    A lack of form annulment is actually fairly common, but that doesn’t mean that I consider it valid.

    However, it is the support for infanticide which is the bigger problem. I’l put it bluntly: if you support abortion, you are not a Catholic. Quite frankly, if you support abortion, you are not a Christian, period, and if you say that you are, you are not only lying to other people, you are lying to yourself.

  36. Uncertainty Over Someone’s Faith Triggers Race Card? Only In Kosreich | That Mr. G Guy's Blog
    February 24th, 2015 @ 7:24 pm

    […] Uncertainty Over Someone’s Faith Triggers Race Card? Only In Kosreich. […]

  37. DeadMessenger
    February 24th, 2015 @ 8:02 pm

    Yes but, wouldn’t they be judging you to determine that you are, in fact, judgmental? (Cue Twilight Zone music.)

  38. Art Deco
    February 24th, 2015 @ 8:20 pm

    but that doesn’t mean that I consider it valid.

    ‘Fraid it’s not your decision.

    Annulment due to defect of form can be accomplished administratively without the decision of a tribunal.

  39. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    February 24th, 2015 @ 9:26 pm

    No. You were racist against Lurch(es)

  40. tricknologist
    February 24th, 2015 @ 10:20 pm

    I wrote in the comments section somewhere else (don’t quite remember) that the correct answer is; “I don’t answer questions asked in bad faith.” And then walk off with no further comment.

    The key thing is to turn every single “gotcha” question into a question of journalistic bias, partisanship and integrity.

  41. tricknologist
    February 24th, 2015 @ 10:35 pm

    And the key to beating it is to get the majority of people to think; “Yeah, what of it, F U ?’ to accusations of racism. Or even better would be to make the accusers fearful of as physical assault.

  42. Dana
    February 25th, 2015 @ 6:42 am
  43. Dana
    February 25th, 2015 @ 6:44 am

    That’s exactly right: they are telling you not to be so judgemental. They are not saying that they cannot be judgemental, and you are a raaaaacist and h8ful h8ey h8er for thinking otherwise.

  44. LLC
    February 25th, 2015 @ 7:44 am

    Alternate headline: “Non-Christian anklebiter lacks understanding of Christian governor’s beliefs.”

  45. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    February 25th, 2015 @ 11:12 am

    He is as much of a Christian as Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi or John Kerry!

  46. CruisingTroll
    February 25th, 2015 @ 3:44 pm

    Correct answer to the question of whether or not Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a Christian:

    “God only knows”

  47. CruisingTroll
    February 25th, 2015 @ 3:45 pm

    Nah, it probably means that you’re more of a Hunts man rather than Heinz man.