Ok. . . This is terrifying.

[Gaspar]

I'm annoyed that I'm sharing a country with people who are that dense.

. . .the true believers nutballs. . .

Two very interesting parts of your comment that really require no explanation.  I think you represent a significant segment of the liberal establishment.  By your own admission, you are sharing the country with people who are far less intelligent than you, and you view those of faith, or at least "true believers" (as opposed to those who just offer lip-service) as nutballs.

Am I correct or did I miss something?  The context and language seems very self explanatory.

[RecycleMichael]

This whole "controversy" about Obama is really for the mid year elections. If they can get enough people to be afraid of Obama ruining their life by not going to church, them many of them will vote for republicans in November to stop him.

Republicans don't run against their opponents, they run against Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Their tool is fear.

This is their perfect weapon.

[Hoss]

This whole "controversy" about Obama is really for the mid year elections. If they can get enough people to be afraid of Obama ruining their life by not going to church, them many of them will vote for republicans in November to stop him.

Republicans don't run against their opponents, they run against Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Their tool is fear.

This is their perfect weapon.

And, unfortunately, it appears that it is working for those Americans who believe the mob mentality that has started to propagate the Republican party and it's mouthpieces.

[guido911]

It is idiotic, and a little offensive, (not because there's anything wrong with being a Muslim, but because the answer is so plainly obvious and well known that it shows ulterior motives when you get it wrong) to call someone who professes to be Christian a Muslim. Especially when there was so much coverage of his former church. It's not as if he's been secretive about exactly which religion he subscribes to. If he was less open about it, I could understand the confusion.

http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2008/03/obama-pastor-go.html

[Townsend]

http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2008/03/obama-pastor-go.html

What's your point?

[Hoss]

What's your point?

Does he ever have one?  My 6 year old nephew can make more coherent points.

[Conan71]

I'm not mad, I'm annoyed

Where's that hair splitter graphic when I need it?  So anyone who disagrees with your "facts" is dense?  To people who gauge it only by his works and actions, it's not a "fact" that he's Christian when it's suspected by many he went to Wright's church to be a more effective community organizer, he was raised as a Muslim for part of his childhood, and he does not publicly worship at a Christian church these days.

Let's face it, one of three things is going on here: President Obama doesn't seem to worry much about his public perception, he's a simp along the lines of Forrest Gump or Chauncey Gardner, or he's a complete iconoclast.  Some previous Presidents have not become "members" of churches in D.C. but they have publicly worshiped at them on a regular basis.  He's given the rumor mill or stupidity mill plenty of fodder not following in the foot steps of his predecessors by being more private about his chosen method of worship.  

I don't fault him for worshipping how he sees fit, that's his personal prerogative.  Spirituality is all about your relationship with whatever your higher power is, religion is how we go about trying to find spirituality.  Perhaps he simply does not have a need for religion to maintain his spirituality.  I'm good with that.  Personally, my church has two wheels on it or a couple of oars attached.  

He does a lot of things which make him appear out of touch or like he doesn't quite get it.  Like telling Americans his "administration won't rest" on a multitude of issues or blaming Bush for the record deficit, yet he's off to another golf outing or vacation at a playground for the wealthy.  In reality, no President ever gets a day off.  It's a 24 hour a day job for four to eight years, I understand that.  However, in the court of public perception it makes him appear he's above the kind of austerity many of us are having to live with during tighter economic times and that he'd rather play than face the tough issues.

Perception is more important than reality when it comes to winning elections and maintaining power.  That's one of the reasons he was elected with such a thin resume in the first place.

[Conan71]

This whole "controversy" about Obama is really for the mid year elections. If they can get enough people to be afraid of Obama ruining their life by not going to church, them many of them will vote for republicans in November to stop him.

Republicans don't run against their opponents, they run against Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Their tool is fear.

This is their perfect weapon.

And President Obama continues to run against President Bush. He was even doing it last night.  Someone needs to remind him he's no longer campaigning.  He's running the country.

[guido911]

This whole "controversy" about Obama is really for the mid year elections. If they can get enough people to be afraid of Obama ruining their life by not going to church, them many of them will vote for republicans in November to stop him.

Republicans don't run against their opponents, they run against Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Their tool is fear.

This is their perfect weapon.

Kinda funny. Obama didn't help his case here (go to 1:12)

As for your comment as to what Repubs campaign against, are you freakin serious? Obama has been president for what, close to 20 months, and he is still blaming Bush for all our country's ills. More to the point:

According to one very plugged in Dem strategist, Democrats are privately asking themselves whether they are partly to blame for that separation.

After the 2008 elections, which were all about Bush, Dems turned to governing and largely dialed down the argument that the current crop of Republicans is indistinguishable in policy terms from Bush. They worry that this lull has allowed Republicans to rebrand themselves as different from Bush, even if that brand remains unpopular.

And that's why Dems are turning up the volume on the point that today's Republican policies -- the support for continuing Bush's tax cuts, the embrace of deregulation, Paul Ryan's push to do away with Social Security -- show that voting GOP is voting for a return to Bush.

"Why in the world would we want to go back to the same economic agenda that lost jobs for eight years?" DCCC chief Chris Van Hollen asked on Meet the Press recently. "What are you going to get that's different?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/the_real_reason_dems_are_tying.html

[guido911]

What's your point?

No point whatsoever. I hear "G-d Damned America" all the time in my church. FOR THE RECORD, the debate over Obama's faith in my opinion is a waste of time.

[nathanm]

And President Obama continues to run against President Bush. He was even doing it last night.  Someone needs to remind him he's no longer campaigning.  He's running the country.

I don't think that every time he mentions Bush's name he's "running against Bush".

[Conan71]

I don't think that every time he mentions Bush's name he's "running against Bush".

Good point, the other reason people run down other people is because there's nothing good they can point to about themselves and it helps them cover up their own lack of accomplishments.

[nathanm]

Good point, the other reason people run down other people is because there's nothing good they can point to about themselves and it helps them cover up their own lack of accomplishments.

Yeah, that's not what he was doing. He stated that Bush spoke to us from the Oval Office seven years ago to announce the beginning of hostilities in Iraq. He also stated that while the decision was contentious, that doesn't make him any less of a supporter of our troops.

None of that can even be remotely called "running against Bush," at least in my world view.

[Gaspar]

You guys keep dancing around the point.  This whole religion debate is just a symptom. 

President Obama does a very poor job of staying in front of the message.  He has to change this, and define the message or the message will continue to define him.

In the past election he had a "movement" willing to elect him on cult of personality alone.  He never even made an effort to confront such issues, because he didn't have to.  Experience, ability, background, leadership skills, these were all secondary to the orgasm that surrounded his campaign. 

Well, the orgasm is over and now we have to deal with the person.  Do we make this a one night stand? 
We will answer that question based on his abilities. . .Or I should say based on our perception of his abilities.  The problem is that he has stayed behind message on nearly every issue that he has encountered.

The Economy--Don't let a crisis go to waste. . .Blame Bush.
Healthcare--Pass $900 billion bill. . .Don't read it. . .Don't let anyone else read it. . .Pelosi: "We have to pass it so you can see what's in it". . .No one understands it. . .Not workable.
The BP Spill--Wait a few months. . .Play golf. . .Vacation. . .Finally act after duress. . .BP offers 20 billion to hush. . .Where's the oil?
Increasing Unemployment--Don't explore remedies. . .Continue unemployment. . .Pelosi: "Unemployment Checks are the best way to create jobs."
Nuclear Iran--Do nothing. . .Do nothing. . .Increase sanctions. . .Do nothing. . .Too late they have a reactor.
Afganistan--McChrystal demands 30K troups. . .Denied. . .Denied. . .Announces his plan for 30k troups. . .McCrystal fired for disrespect.
Iraq--Surge will not work!. . .Surge starts to work. . .Establish draw down time. . .remove 30K in combat troups change designation of remaining 50K troups to "support capacity". . .Give speech, but don't mention the surge.

So basically he stays cautiously behind every message.  Therefore they define him. This is the sign of a politician, not a leader or a president.  This is what people are beginning to see now.  I think there is a certain degree of regret among his fold.  Anything he might have to hold up as a triumph has already been defined by his opponents as a failure.  He has let this happen by being reactive rather than proactive.  The silly debate on his religion is just another example.

[Conan71]

Yeah, that's not what he was doing. He stated that Bush spoke to us from the Oval Office seven years ago to announce the beginning of hostilities in Iraq. He also stated that while the decision was contentious, that doesn't make him any less of a supporter of our troops.

None of that can even be remotely called "running against Bush," at least in my world view.

If Gibbs ever quits, I will make sure your adroitness at defending President Obama at every turn gets the attention of someone in the White House and you can be the new press secretary.