Video: John McCain, Christianist?
posted at 12:13 pm on October 1, 2007 by Allahpundit
Three vids at the link but the controversy du jour is wafting up from the ones entitled, “What Religion Should the President Be?” and “Is America a Christian Nation?” Maverick answers both of those questions the way most Republicans would like him to, but even then it’s appropriately watered down: yes, as most Americans surely do, he prefers a candidate of his own faith; yes, America is a Christian nation, but only insofar as it’s founded on basic Judeo-Christian moral principles. The one place he gets jerky is here:
I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, ‘Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?’”
I thought the number one issue was winning the war on terror. But then, there’s some debate about that these days, isn’t there?
His campaign climbed down afterwards by affirming that he thinks the best candidate should win, that America should welcome people of all faiths, that he loves everyone, etc. Click the image to watch.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
yeah – and that must be why he wants to give ALL Terrorists in the world the FULL SCOPE of American Civil Rights, no matter WHERE they were born or live.
He’s helping The Terrorists – almost as much as Murtha.
grtflmark on October 1, 2007 at 12:22 PM
What a useful idiot.
PRCalDude on October 1, 2007 at 12:23 PM
has anyone asked any of the dems such questions?
trailortrash on October 1, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Huh. I thought “pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right” was a bad thing.
Slublog on October 1, 2007 at 12:27 PM
He’s going down, down, down! Stick a fork in his campaign already. Hell, Ron Paul is doing better than him.
mram on October 1, 2007 at 12:34 PM
I would really love to like him enough to vote for him for president, but I can’t. He’s right on a very very few things, and then there’s the rest of it . . .
Mommynator on October 1, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Keep talking…Moron. Yay!
tickleddragon on October 1, 2007 at 12:42 PM
I’m sick of politicians “clarifying” their remarks all the time. None of them have guts to say what they believe anymore. Where are the leaders who will say and believe something and stick by it!?! I hate political correctness. It’s infected the GOP and I’m sick of it.
CP on October 1, 2007 at 12:46 PM
Now let’s not exaggerate. Allahpundit has a better chance of winning the nomination than Ron Paul.
Hollowpoint on October 1, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Christianist…Christianesque….Chrislam….there. Fixed it for ya.
Jewel on October 1, 2007 at 1:04 PM
…or maybe chrislum. Some mutant mixed up religiony thingy.
Jewel on October 1, 2007 at 1:05 PM
And Allahpundit is at least 60-65% less crazy.
Slublog on October 1, 2007 at 1:07 PM
Hello, hollowpoint. If Allah P. is going to be the nomination, will he be doing photoshops of himself with the word “Glavin” in a balloon coming out of his mouth, because I would love to see that happen…it could be a campaign slogan.
Jewel on October 1, 2007 at 1:08 PM
In so far as carrying on Judeo-Christian traditions, I actually agree with McCain, but I think he is using this as a subtle jab at Mitt Romney who many argue is not a “real Christian” and McCain is hoping to confuse people into thinking that Mormonism is a dangerous cult that does not respect those traditions.
I define those “traditions” as the ideals of liberty enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, and codified in our Constitution and Bill of Rights – not to mention the cultural traditions our country has observed over the Centuries.
Buy Danish on October 1, 2007 at 1:14 PM
Will AP then allow himself to be imaged? It’s hard to vote for a person you can’t see.
AP, if you win, I think Michelle would be the perfect nominee for the head of Homeland Security.
Bigfoot on October 1, 2007 at 1:19 PM
No, that may be number two, he missed the number one train…protecting our borders.
Sorry, train left and you weren’t on it…looks like you take the midnight train to loserville.
right2bright on October 1, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Faith is one of those personal things. Assuming that the candidate isn’t out to inflict his/her/its personal faith on all Americans, the only thing that matters when it comes to assessing a candidate’s faith is consistency.
I still get angry at the image of Bill Clinton (at the height of zippergate) emerging from church waving his Bible like some sort of a prop with Jesse Jackson in tow. Little did I know at the time that “Reverend” Jackson was attempting to keep his mistress quiet about the existence of yet another bastard child. Christianity doesn’t condemn sinners but it doesn’t support using the faith as a photo-op either!
I simply don’t see faith as being a huge issue in 2008 and if it has any importance at all it will be in the GOP primaries. Among the Democrats you’ve got Hillary who seemingly has no faith but, more importantly, Obama’s faith history is so shady and so suspect the MSM will not bring up faith as an issue so long as he is poised to be on the ticket. Far too many unanswered questions about madrassas, Islamic relatives, and Obama’s middle name for faith to be an issue.
highhopes on October 1, 2007 at 1:47 PM
In these videos McCain comes across as not believing very much of what he is saying. He looks pained by the pandering, but he really really wants to be the POTUS.
It is interesting how candidates are pressed to speak to the Judeo-Christian foundations of the country, but don’t often speak to the Enlightenment’s influence—most prominently Locke and Paine. Enlightenment thinkers were often in contention with monarchs and the church over the issue of limiting state power, and in the case of Locke using the concept of natural law as a justification for overthrowing a government.
While the Christianity had been around for some 1600 years at that point, there were important philosophical developments in the two centuries before 1776 that were essential to the founders’ thinking. Some of those developments were challenged, rather than supported, by the churches.
dedalus on October 1, 2007 at 1:56 PM
I agree that McCain is pandering, to a degree although I don’t doubt that he believes in the historical significance of Judeo-Christian influences.
I am not speaking of faith, but of traditions that we have all benefited from, regardless of our personal faith, or lack of it.
Obviously the Enlightenment influenced men like Jefferson, but that alone was not enough to create this Country which is unique in the world. Men like Governor John Winthrop and Governor Bradford also had an undeniable influence on our nation’s character, and Paine recognized the Puritan’s belief that America was a God-given refuge from tyranny in the pages of Common Sense.
Buy Danish on October 1, 2007 at 2:23 PM
All very good points.
dedalus on October 1, 2007 at 3:32 PM
You know I’m getting tired of hearing about the Statue of Liberty!
It did not exist at the time of our founding fathers. To hear the way it is justified to trash our sovereignty and plain common sense – our founders would have torn her down!
It is turning out to be a Trojan horse. I say we build a new statue and put a sign on it that says “send us your everybody, especially criminals”. Then we should send it to France.
Agrippa2k on October 1, 2007 at 3:35 PM
USA is not a strictly “Judeo-Christian” country.
People just choose not to mention the Greco-Roman roots and the influence of the W.European secular Enlightenment.
Syndic Nuruodo on October 1, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Obviously the Greek example of Democracy played a part by planting the seeds of an idea, but that experiment didn’t last too long, did it?
As for the W.European secular Enlightenment, I hope you don’t mean to include John Locke in that category. Just out of curiosity, who are you referring to exactly?
Buy Danish on October 1, 2007 at 4:18 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Reason
Syndic Nuruodo on October 1, 2007 at 4:23 PM
McCain, caught again, speaking before he knows what the hell he’s saying.
“I admire the Islam” indeed.
Especially the helpful hints in Sura 9:5-
“…slay the infidels wherever you find them, take them captive, beseige them, and lie in wait for them in every ambush…”
-right John?
profitsbeard on October 1, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Syndic Nuruodo on October 1, 2007 at 4:23 PM
John Locke
He was the heir to a Christian tradition, it was through the church received an education, and he was not opposed to Christianity, but to authoritarianism.
Buy Danish on October 1, 2007 at 5:15 PM
More on John Locke, who wrote The Reasonableness of Christianity
I would hardly put him in the “Secular” category, except when it is defined to mean not having a state religion.
In the Reasonableness Locke considered what it was to which all Christians must assent in faith; he argued that the answer could be found by anyone for themselves in the divine revelation of Scripture alone. He maintained that the requirements of Scripture were few and simple, and therefore offered a basis for tolerant agreement among all Christians, and the promise of peace, stability, and security through toleration.
And-
These different strands cannot be understood properly in isolation from each other: so the broader aim of this edition is to help towards an improved understanding of his religious thought in the context of his work as a philosopher, political theorist, and exponent of religious toleration.
Buy Danish on October 1, 2007 at 5:32 PM