PING:
TITLE: The Hell We Don’t Welcome Faith
BLOG NAME: PostWatch
Dana Milbank asks Will Democrats Put Their Faith in Obama? and the answer is Perhaps If They Take Enough Valium. Sen. Barak Obama (D-Not Hillary) gave a religiously themed speech, promoting the usual Democrat talking points but emphasizing some new

PING:
TITLE: Barak Obama Lectures his Own
BLOG NAME: Taylor Marsh
Honest to God, we need a long meandering religious rant from Barak Obama about as much as we need people blaming it all on Bill Clinton. Mother Mary, that’s Sean Hannity’s line!

PING:
TITLE: Obama: Democrats Must Court Evangelicals
BLOG NAME: Morning Coffee
Sen. Barack Obama chastised fellow Democrats on Wednesday for failing to “acknowledge the power of faith in the lives of the American people,” and said the party must compete for the support of evangelicals and other churchgoing Americans. …

We should also be questioning whether the perception of Democrats as opposed to religion is accurate–I do not believe it is. Having said that, Obama’s comments should remind Democrats that they need to work harder to correct the perception.

This is a the begining of a Clinton-Obama 2008 presidential run.

If I wanted something like this I would move to the Middle East, and I sure as hell ain’t going there in my lifetime.

Come to think of it, that last sentence kinda sums it up, don’t it?

In context, I agree with Obama. Instead of trying to avoid all talk of religion, I think Democrats should take another angle. Offer the bible verses that discuss “turn the other cheek” and “let he who has not sinned cast the first stone” and similar verses when Republicans trot out the abortion, gay marriage, and similar religious stances. There are a lot of people whose values are shaped by religion but believe you can not legislate religion or simply believe helping the needy and living a good life yourself is the true message of religion, not legislating “morality” (whoever determines the definition of that). There is a real opportunity for Democrats here. I believe their values are in line with this philosophy but they have not taken the time to point this out. Instead, they stay quiet on the subject while Republicans define them as anti-religious secularists.

Conservative leaders, from Falwell and Robertson to Karl Rove and Ralph Reed, have been all too happy to exploit this gap, consistently reminding evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage, school prayer and intelligent design.

Democrats, for the most part, have taken the bait. At best, we may try to avoid the conversation about religious values altogether, fearful of offending anyone and claiming that — regardless of our personal beliefs — constitutional principles tie our hands. At worst, some liberals dismiss religion in the public square as inherently irrational or intolerant, insisting on a caricature of religious Americans that paints them as fanatical, or thinking that the very word “Christian” describes one’s political opponents, not people of faith.

Such strategies of avoidance may work for progressives when the opponent is Alan Keyes. But over the long haul, I think we make a mistake when we fail to acknowledge the power of faith in the lives of the American people, and join a serious debate about how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.

Full speech at alternet.

* * *

I believe that Obama is actually agreeing with you here. The Right has forced itself into a position where it gets to say that Christians have to vote Republican, and the Left is not challenging them on that point. What Obama spends most of his speech doing is explaining why the Democrats need to challenge them on that point.

There’s a lot of mainline Protestants, middle-and-left-leaning Catholics, and non-Christians who feel politically homeless right now. They see the Republican Party, which has narrowly defined Christianity in terms of gays, fetuses, and evolution; and the Democrat party, which politely asks one to either not vote with one’s conscience, or instead ignore the fact that one’s moral code is often shaped by their faith (and vice versa)

No right-wing talking points spun me into thinking that way, either. Just read the comments at any of the links you posted.

Maybe Kos and pals could find someone like Ned Lamont to run against him. Nothing like running the son of the nations most famous atheist crank to show youre not wildly secularist, eh?