Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Live blog — topic: your favorite Bible verse. And no, I’m not kidding.

By

Obama: Sermon on the Mount.  We have an empathy deficit.

Clinton: Golden Rule.

Gravel: most important thing is love.

Kucinich: prayer from St. Francis — Lord make me an instrument of your peace.

Edwards: what you do unto the least of those, you do unto me.

Richardson: Sermon on the Mount — social justice and equality.

Dodd: Good Samaritan.

Biden: Christ’s warning of the Pharisees.

And one more question from Alison King: Red Sox, or Yankees?

Richardson: Sox – Ramirez is back. Sox win pennant and series.

Kucinich: Indians going to the series.

Clinton: Long time Yankees fan.  Cubs-Yanks series would be the apocalypse. 

Gravel: Sox.

Edwards: Sox.

Obama: Sox, but White.

Dodd: Sox.

Biden: Yankees.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Russert loves his voice too much, and loves democracy too little.  Waste of a moderator.

    <

    p>
    Hillary won.  And not in the “she didn’t lose” type of way, but she was the best candidate on stage.  She handled Old Grampa Gravel well, and her line about Bill Clinton’s torture scenario — “well, he’s not on stage right now” was great.

    <

    p>
    Edwards and Kucinich: repeatedly talking about how you’re going to be president and when you’re going to be president doesn’t make you president.  It makes you look desperate or deluded.

    <

    p>
    Dodd didn’t capitalize on some decent momentum.  Nothing special.

    <

    p>
    A whole section on Social Security.  Number of times “education” mentioned in the debate: once.  Brought up as an aside by Richardson.  Timmy Russert needs less time worshipping his Dad and more time paying attention to his kids.

    <

    p>
    Global warming also mentioned as an aside about a gasoline tax.

    • they’re going to be elected, including Hillary.

      <

      p>
      Furthermore, Edwards has a very decent shot. Honestly, I don’t care what the national polls say (they’re beyond useless in a primary fight), his shot is as strong as Obama’s, maybe stronger. They’re all neck and neck in Iowa and whoever wins there has a solid shot at a bounce that will at least give them a chance to win NH, which could further the momentum.

      <

      p>
      I’d still give Hillary a solid chance in being able to come back from losing Iowa and NH, but only because I highly doubt she’ll back off the race if she loses both. She’ll have the money, support and name recognition to really go to the mattresses and win some big states further down the road and take it to the convention, if she’s willing to go through a long and bitter primary fight in the process. I’m sure she is, too. But if that happens, it doesn’t necessarily mean she’ll win it.

      • Sure, they all talk about when, not if.  But there’s a difference between saying it in passing, and someone like Edwards who shoehorned that phrasing three times in the first minute of debate.

        <

        p>
        The only thing Edwards has going for him is that he is kinda in a tie for first in Iowa.  That’s it.  He struggles to get to second in South Carolina and New Hampshire, his fundraising anemic, his union endorsements so far disappointing.  Things can turn, granted, but right now he doesn’t have much going.

        • is that Obama doesn’t either.

          <

          p>
          Edwards has a long way to go if he wants to win, but so did John Kerry at this very same point in ’04. His fundraising was anemic too and, unlike Edwards, he wasn’t winning or close to it in Iowa.

          • IA: Edwards slight lead over Obama for 2nd
            NH: Obama slight but consistent lead over Edwards for 2nd
            SC: Obama solid consistent second
            NV: Obama slight lead over Edwards for second
            Nat’l: Obama consistent second
            Total money: Obama first or second
            donors: Obama consistent first

            <

            p>
            You can say they’re about the same, but I disagree.  And Kerry had a lot more electoral experience than does Edwards at the time, and had “saved up” favors and stories for the run.  Edwards used up a lot of that in 2004. 

  2. That sums up my feelings via a Bible quote.

    <

    p>
    A lot of New Testament – no love for the Hebrew wing of the Democratic party? Is this some sort of coded anti-Leiberman message, lol?

  3. ok, what i want to know is did russert decide to ask that all by his lonesome, or did the dem party contract with him to have it asked so the biggie candidates could prove their religious bona fides?  either way, the question disgusts me for what it presupposes. 

    <

    p>
    second question: when will christianity cease to be a litmus test in this country?

    • “Lawd a mussy” is Zora Neale Hurston’s beautiful spelling of that same phrase in a Florida Black dialect.

      <

      p>
      Anwser to second question: Not soon. At least Russert didn’t ask “What’s your favorite 9/11-related Bible quote that could be used as guidance to solve the illegal immigration issue?”

      • and is white dialect spelling.  landagoshens! is another of my faves.

        <

        p>
        i like your alternate question.  but really russert missed a great repub-skewering moment.  as we all know, the dems are all happily married to their first spouses, whereas most repubs are helping themselves to 2nds and 3rds (at least) without being properly excused from the table between courses.  there must have been some biblical question about marriage and constancy the answer of which would have shown how great the dems are on the repub-defined moral plain.

        • “We have intellignece that suggests that Hitler is plotting with the Legion of Doom to assassinate Jesus!”

          <

          p>
          “We also have evidence that Darth Vader tried to buy yellow cake uranium from unwed teenage mothers!”

          <

          p>
          Here’s a great “Family Guy” clip where mayoral candidate Lois gets all Rudy Giulliani. It’s been kicking around, but always worth another look.

          <

          p>
          http://www.crooksand…

          <

          p>
          I think this clip should be played in parallel with every Rudy speech and sound bite.

          <

          p>
          “Nine-Eleven!!!”

        • …especially when juxtaposed against what he said about homosexuality (ie nothing).

          <

          p>
          “And it was said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of dismissal’; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the cause of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Matt 5:31-32)

  4. I was half expecting Richardson to say…

    <

    p>
    “because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave.”

  5. I know the subject line says no kidding, but please, please someone tell me this really just a joke. There was a Bible quote question in a political debate and all the candidates had answers at the ready???? I can’t decide which part is worse.

    • …could sing old spirituals better than many Black pastors, or so the old anecdote goes. Of course they have a bible quote on the ready. Almost every response is a canned response.

      <

      p>
      Did you see Rudy’s explanation for his flip-flop on the NRA and gun control: “9/11 changed everything”.  So reversing your position on gun control will stop extremists from flying planes into buildings and blowing up nuclear plants? Ok, buddy.

      • Whats your favorite Bible verse, well the Sermon on a Mount isnt a verse its a whole freakin monologue.

        <

        p>
        Id say for verses the best verse in the Bible is John 4 “God is love” three simply and true words.

        <

        p>
        But the more appropriate one for a politician is James 1:5 “giveth to any man that asketh of thee”

        <

        p>
        And this one especially for the winner

        <

        p>
        “For what does it profit a man if he should gain the whole world and lose his own soul”

  6. You know, Tim, I think that’s an innapropriate question. Faith, to me, is deeply personal and – furthermore – I believe a President must exist in a form that’s seperate from religion, since there’s a seperation between church and state. Furthermore, a President must represent people of all faiths, creeds and beliefs in America. This question is completely irrelevant in anyone’s capacity to being President and may only serve to divide the country in my ability to be everyone’s President and not just those of a particular faith.

    • Matthew 6:5-6

      When you pray, be not like the hypocrites who love to stand and pray in the temples and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.

      But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

      It simultaneously conveys religiousity and the fact that it’s none of your business.

      • I was about to post the same verse under the other of Ryan’s double-post, but decided to read the rest of the thread first.  Good to see you’ve got me covered 14 hours before I get an idea!

        <

        p>
        —>Shane

      • I wonder which verse from the SOTM exactly resonates with the candidates? Praying in the closet? Plucking your own eye out if it offends thee? Divorcing a woman and causing her to commit adultery? Blessed are the peace makers? Love thy enemy? Salt of the Earth? City on a hill? You are the light of the world?

  7. You know, Tim, I think that’s an innapropriate question. Faith, to me, is deeply personal and – furthermore – I believe a President must exist in a form that’s seperate from religion, since there’s a seperation between church and state. Furthermore, a President must represent people of all faiths, creeds and beliefs in America. This question is completely irrelevant in anyone’s capacity to being President and may only serve to divide the country in my ability to be everyone’s President and not just those of a particular faith.

    <

    p>
    I would have voted for that person.

    • One of my personal Talmud Favs:

      <

      p>

      Hear this, you who trample upon the needy
      and destroy the poor of the land!
      “When will the new moon be over,” you ask,
      “that we may sell our grain,
      and the sabbath, that we may display the wheat?
      We will diminish the ephah,
      add to the shekel,
      and fix our scales for cheating!
      We will buy the lowly for silver,
      and the poor for a pair of sandals;
      even the refuse of the wheat we will sell!”
      The LORD has sworn by the pride of Jacob:
      Never will I forget a thing they have done!

      –Am 8: 4-7

      <

      p>
      I’ll let you enjoy that one.  The Gospel last Sunday was also excellent.  I’ll spare you the entire parable, but I’ll drop in a Sermon excerpt about it:

      The Gospel Reading of the parable of the unjust servant brings contemplative discipline down to practical terms.  Contemplative life is living full in the Kingdom of God.  At the center of the contemplative life is a singleness of outlook.  The mystery of the Triune God and of Jesus, the Son of God, is the absolute focus that demands all our energy. “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind and with all your strength.  And you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”  No servant can serve two masters.  Either he will hate one and love the other or be attentive to the one and despise the other.  You cannot give yourself to God and money.

      The Gospel was Luke 16: 1-13 for those interested. 

      <

      p>
      The canned responses the Dems gave show they really have little interest in religion, which is unsurprising.  I wonder what Jimmy Carter or Mike Huckabee would have responded with. 

      • Uh, no.  The Talmud is rabbinic commentary.  Perhaps you were thinking of the Torah — though that wouldn’t be right either, since the Torah is only the first five books of the Old Testament, of which Amos is not one (it’s Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy).

  8. …from the Old Testament.  Proverbs 6:16-19:

    <

    p>

    There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to Him:

    haughty eyes,

    a lying tongue,

    hands that shed innocent blood,

    a heart that devises wicked schemes,

    feet that are quick to rush into evil,

    a false witness who pours out lies

    and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

    <

    p>
    I suppose that it is a good thing for Christians that they pretty much ignore the OT.

Archives