consumed: How Does a Christian Deal with the Obama Phenomenon?
Welcome to Christ and Pop Culture
Pop Culture is everywhere. We just acknowledge it. Christ and Pop Culture is an attempt to discuss and think rightly about the common knowledge of our age.
-
Elsewhere – Noteworthy Links
Newt Gingrich Likes to say “Stupid”
The Rise of Christian Libertarianism?
Lingerie Model Quits for Christ
Creative vs Consumer Culture and SOPA
Asian American Poverty and Ethnic Enclaves
It’s Almost Like This Conference This School Is Organizing was Made For You
Reddit raises $65,000 for a Kenyan orphanage in less than a day
Recent Posts

Citizenship Confusion: Pamela Geller Abuses a Murder“Voices like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are very dangerous, particular for Christians and conservatives”

Grace Notes: Dead Can Dance, The Mary Onettes, Saint EtienneDead Can Dance come back from the dead, The Mary Onettes adjust their 80′s sound, and Saint Etienne just want you to dance.

Sacred Space: Superbowl Sunday“Something in the regular life of the church is going to conflict with the Superbowl this Sunday. What ought the church to do?”

Eat Your Vegetables: “The Age of Innocence” (Wharton, 1920)The novel’s tone is thoroughly ironic, as Archer continually misreads as progressive the very traits that consign him to the status quo.

Mixed Signals: What the Christian Message Says to the MassesTargeting a message to your “superfans” doesn’t mean that they are the only ones listening.
We Recommend:
-
Adam E
Citizenship Confusion: Pamela Geller Abuses a MurderRonald Hunsucker
Kirk Cameron’s Monumental ErrorMomof3
Kirk Cameron’s Monumental ErrorRonald Hunsucker
Kirk Cameron’s Monumental ErrorAlan Noble
Citizenship Confusion: Pamela Geller Abuses a MurderJohn Patterson
Citizenship Confusion: Pamela Geller Abuses a MurderJohn Patterson
Citizenship Confusion: Pamela Geller Abuses a MurderBrad Williams
Citizenship Confusion: Pamela Geller Abuses a Murder
Archive

Just because he says he isn’t small-minded doesn’t make it so.
His whole argument (once he actually starts saying what he means—after he’s spent 2/3 of his speech saying how he understands and doesn’t want to be patronizing) boils down to cheap propaganda.
Yeah, that’s not charged at all. Or, I guess sensible. Leaving aside the whole bit about “slaughter,” since when will any nominated candidate of the Big Two actively pursue the end of abortion? Certainly not in the 2009 presidency.
Oh by all means. Funny, I’ll bet a lot of people will vote for Obama for that same reason. *shrug*
Unlike Mr. 100 Years apparently. Come on, really. “Pro-death”?
You’ve linked to some goofy stuff before, but usually it’s a link to a report about the fact that something’s goofy—not to the actual motherlode itself. I almost want to turn that post into an email forward.
GOOOOO DANE!!!!
Amen.
I thought there might have been an allusion to Barack being a Muslim somewhere toward the end of the post based on that last paragraph.
It is funny when I read things like this…I recently wrote a paper regarding this idea of evangelical swing. I think as the older generation passes on, there will be more evangelical democrats who reject the bellicosity and pandering of the republican party (at least the republican party we have seen for the last 7 years) and drift toward the left. God forbid…right?
Again, I said it elsewhere when another poster labeled Barack as a baby killer, I find the whole proposition preposterous and I will spare everyone else my rant about it…I might just comment on his blog instead…
How does a Christian deal with Obama? Can’t speak for others, but I’m going to vote for him.
Exaggerations on one side of an issue never justifies exaggerations on the other side. While calling Obama pro-death might be going too far, calling this post “propaganda” is equally unnecessary and reductionist.
Oh, sorry. You’re right. It’s not propaganda in its truest form, but I think propagandist would be both a suitable and accurate adjective to describe the latter half of that article. It may even be the best adjective to describe his technique there, as he uses typical propagandists’ technique throughout that section. He uses loaded words and phrases, generalizations, and an incomplete or even false presentation of things to rouse an emotional response in bandwagon readers.
By the end, he’s abandoned all pretense of “understanding the other side” and is blatantly provoking action to an Us vs. Them mentality.
I agree, there seems to be a selective understanding of whose deaths “count” as real deaths, and whose do not.
Are the thousands of Iraqi children who have been “slaughtered” count as highly as those who die from abortions?
To me, being pro-war sort of takes the “oomph!” out of being pro-life.
I find these terms “pro-life” and “pro-choice” unhelpful in the extreme. The anti-abortion camp is hardly “pro-life” about everything — many of them support the death penalty, the war and so on. Ditto the pro-legal-abortion camp. Are they for any ol’ kind of choice? Of course not.
It would be great if the language could be more straightforward and focus us on the common ground — like reducing the number of abortions, which pretty much everyone, including Obama wants to see happen.