Palin

Okay, one more election-related post...

McCain's choice of Gov. Palin to be his running mate struck me as pretty foolish on his part at first--she's younger and less experienced than Obama, she's hardly the kind of woman that Clinton supporters will vote for, etc. But Nate Millman is fairly persuasive. It's going to be interesting.

At any rate, it's now certain that, one way or the other, January's Inauguration Day will mark a historic first. I'm in no way suggesting that this makes the two tickets equally desirable. But still.

Last DNC post

A few bits and pieces--

A seriously alarming video of a cop arresting an ABC News producer for standing on a public sidewalk and photographing senators meeting with VIP types:



As a defense-attorney friend likes to remind me, it's a serious mistake to assume that not doing anything wrong will keep you out of trouble with the cops. And this guy wasn't some anarchist blogger with a cell-phone camera--he's from ABC! Don't the powers that be at the DNC and the Denver PD know what he can do...wait, actually, the video isn't even featured on the ABC site, and it has yet to get 1,000 viewings on YouTube. Looks like nobody cares. Via Firedoglake.

On a lighter note, the Illinois delegation loves each other:



Anyone who's ever followed Chicago or Illinois politics knows how bizarre this is. Via Chicago Public Radio.

Apparently Cameron Strang is getting quite a bit of grief for his decision to pull out of the DNC benediction slot. And Kristin asks why white Protestants such as Strang were asked to pray at the Pepsi Center but not included in the interfaith panel.

Dave takes issue w/ Obama's borrowing from the New Testament in his speech last night. Mark is less concerned.

Okay, no more election posting for awhile...hard to avoid right now.

Obama the theocrat?

Adele Oltman makes the fairly bizarre argument that the Martin Luther King Obama resembles is actually King Sr.--because Obama's theology and views of church and state are too liberal conservative [corrected typo--thanks, Anonymous] for the younger King.

Not so fast, says Mark Silk.

Anti-pluralism on the right

The Republicans get out the English-class-slacker vote:

Via Josh.

Abie Nathan is dead

Gideon Levy has a remembrance.

Not sure whose tax plan will help you more?

Wonder no more.

Birthdays

Today, my little sister is 24.

And this blog is one.

Each is EXTREMELY advanced for her/its age. I'd totally rent a car to my sister w/o adding an age surcharge; I'd also vote for her to represent me in Congress. And the blog's been walking for weeks--we're thinking of starting piano lessons this fall.

Thanks for reading.

WTF, food feds? part two: USDA on beef safety

In part one, we looked at the FDA's affection for irradiated food. Well, mostly we fantasized about the unlikely possibility of an Obama administration actually prioritizing a better farm bill in 2012, but we BEGAN the post intending to look at the FDA thing.

Today, the USDA. The agency's Food Safety and Inspection Service decided recently to combat the food safety problems of large beef producers by tightening regulations on...small beef producers.

With a deck this stacked, it must be infuriating to be a small-scale farmer selling at a market and to have to politely answer questions about why things are more expensive than over at Costco or whatever.

DNC digest

Sifting through hundreds of "are-the-Democrats-really-united?!" pieces, I did manage to find a few interesting things:

The National Journal's audio slideshow of the interfaith gathering.

Donald Miller's benediction apparently was toned down a bit by the convention organizers. The problem had nothing to do w/ implicitly acknowledging the Republicans as equals or addressing Jesus by name. Instead, he was asked to back off a statement about the U.S.'s diminished standing in the world. The DNC: We'll push your faith buttons all day long, but we're too scared to talk about the fact that the world hates America for reasons CAUSED LARGELY BY THE OTHER GUYS. Here's the prayer:



Elsewhere, Sister Helen Prejean did her usual "hey, maybe we shouldn't be torturing and killing people" schtick. Crazy nun. So far out of the mainstream! And Ezra offers an uncharacteristically reflective post about the distance between The Poor of the DNC and the poor of Denver.

Finally, for those of you who share my evident frustration with the small-bore version of Change® the Democrats continue to represent, Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher put on their muckraker hats and crash the Blue Dog/AT&T party:

Back in the Twin Cities

This billboard will greet the RNC:

Via Bennett.

New McCain ads contradict each other

I'm house-sitting for friends w/ cable and thus watching a lot of MSNBC and CNN.

Since Obama announced Sen. Biden as his running mate, McCain has hit back quick w/ two negative ads--two ads that make pretty much the exact opposite argument.

The first points out that Biden had some critical things to say about Obama in the primary. The guy's running mate doesn't even like him--WTF?! Vote McCain: His running mate likes him and doesn't say bad things about him.*

The second offers that the only reason Sen. Clinton didn't get the nod is that she was brave enough to speak the truth in the primary: the anti-Obama truth. He refused to offer her the VP slot just because she asked serious questions about his candidacy--WTF?! Vote McCain: His running mate will be someone who isn't afraid to criticize him.

Naturally, the cable networks are re-playing the ads for free and talking about which constituencies they're aimed at, etc.--w/o bothering to call McCain out for the utter incoherence of this argument. Fortunately, the baseball game's about to start. Time to change the channel.

*Unless his name is Mitt Romney, in which case his running mate admires him but isn't afraid to engage in spirited debate during the primary. You know, like Joe Biden.

FDA: The answer to dangerous food is different dangerous food

You'd think that with all the food safety scares coming at a time of existing anxiety about global warming and energy supplies, local food advocates would get a hearing at higher levels of the advocacy and government communities. You'd be wrong, of course. Instead, you get the FDA ruling in favor of solutions such as this one.

Maybe you can hope for better policy if and when the feds work for Obama. Furthermore, maybe he'll push for a better farm bill in 2012 than the one you finally got this year. Of course, he'll be running for re-election and needing to prove himself a Friend of Business and generally a Non-Extremist at each and every turn. Not that you've ever counted on Democratic leadership on food issues anyway...

Here's a daydream. What if

• Obama wins in November.
• The Republicans, as expected, change their primary schedule effective 2012 but don't go so far as to stop letting Iowa and the other early states go first.
• Obama's people take political advantage of the fact that, as the party not running in the primaries, they're the ones who don't have to pander to big ag in Iowa.
• When the farm bill debate coincides with the general election campaign, Obama pushes for serious reform and attacks his challenger for pandering in Iowa.
• With congressional majorities strong enough to stand up to farm-state representatives up for re-election and the strong, this-is-finally-a-priority support of the White House, the Democrats pass a seriously reform-oriented farm bill. Unlike this last one, the bill is at least well on its way by November.
• Obama wins re-election. Farm-bill reformers get serious subsidy reform AND major initiatives to support small- and medium-scale produce and livestock producers. Everybody gets progress toward tastier and more healthful food, stronger communities, and pathogen outbreaks that are less common and far easier to track and contain.
  

I'm not holding my breath.

"I've used my skills as an impeccable wearer of blazers and boat shoes to avoid a principled stand on any subject"

Don't miss Sally Jenkins' column in the voice of of IOC president Jacques Rogge:

It's one thing for the Chinese government to jail dissidents, to forge the passports of underage gymnasts, and to set up official protest zones and then arrest anyone who applied to use them. These are matters that I met with disciplined silence, or as I so adroitly put it, with "quiet diplomacy." But I cannot ignore Bolt's disturbing spontaneity. Him, I feel compelled to rebuke.

And:

How is [Bolt] different, for instance, from the U.S. women's beach volleyball team, which shrieked, hugged each other, cavorted, and fell about in the sand for several minutes, before congratulating its opponents?

Isn't it obvious? They are women in bikinis.

Best of all:

To sum up, over the years I have been an ally to the Soviet Union, Iran and China, and now I have demonstrated that I am not afraid to take on a Jamaican.

DNC to be less Relevant!® than originally planned

Cameron Strang has backed out of giving a benediction, recommending Donald Miller in his place.

I'd quote Jeremiah Wright on (upper) "middle-classness" if it wouldn't betray me as an extremist and a hater-of-freedom

A CTI survey finds that the average senior pastor makes more than $80k annually. A couple questions this Christian Post story doesn't answer:

• $80k is the mean. What's the median?
• If you were to eliminate from the formula all televangelists who make the kind of money that is liable to, say, get them investigated by Republican senators, what would the mean be then?

Obviously, a simple average number like this one can be pretty skewed by just a handful of astronomically high outliers. Still: $80,000?! For folks w/ a job description that includes preaching the immanence of a kingdom not defined by worldly standards of wealth and value? Sad.

The world on Saddleback

Tom Heneghan has a nice digest of international press coverage of the Warren extravaganza.

Theda Skocpol takes the words right out of my mouth

Several hundred frustrated ones, to be precise.

In short: Start hitting BACK, Obama! If you do so truthfully and fairly, you won't have to sacrifice the moral high ground in which you've staked your claim...with the added benefit of having a (fighting!) chance of actually being elected president.

We get it: The Democrats have found their faith

Next week in Denver, the Democrats are throwing a tent revival convention. Speakers include a whole mess of strategically placed Christian leaders, a couple of whom no one's ever accused of being Democrats, along with four whole rabbis and, in lower-profile, non-prime-time-TV slots, a token Muslim or two a diverse array of religious leaders reflecting the party's commitment to the common good as articulated by our nation's rich patchwork quilt of faith traditions.

A house for some people

Some time ago I linked to a story about a church that barred an autistic boy from attending mass. Now, the Oregonian highlights some examples of more hospitable approaches.

Via The Lead.

The more-pithy-than-classy Richard Land

The SBC policy head, speaking as usual not for himself but for Christian conservatives generally, on why McCain's a better choice than Obama: "I'll take a third-class fireman over a first-class arsonist."

Slick move

Great Obama moment at Saddleback: Asked for an example of a time he put the country's interest above his own/his party's, Obama cited campaign finance reform--and gave McCain a shout-out for his leadership on the issue. How sportsmanlike! Of course, fairly or otherwise, the religious right crowd hates McCain for that one...

Asked the same question, McCain somehow neglected to mention McCain-Feingold. He did mention his opposition to torture, though not so much his later equivocation on the same...

The faith-based thing at the Saddleback thing

I haven't actually watched the Rick Warren thing w/ the two presidential candidates yet, at least not in full. Having seen clips and the transcript, I'm not sure I have the stomach to sit down w/ the whole thing: Seeing an evangelical pastor do a better job than any of the MSM debate moderators at actually asking questions about real things that matter BUT still fail to dig into more difficult territory about how one's faith actually influences one's beliefs about policy, governance, etc. is, well, depressing on multiple fronts.

One of the more interesting threads post-Saddleback has to do with this Warren question about the faith-based initiative program:

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 says that faith-based organizations have a right to hire people who believe like they do. Would you insist that faith-based organizations forfeit that right to access federal funds?

J. Brent Walker points out that the question's awfully biased in its wording. Barry Lynn, writing on his cool new BeliefNet blog he shares w/ Jay Sekulow, agrees and points to additional examples of bias in Warren's questions. (Of course, Lynn also opposed the Saddleback thing generally, on principle.)

Elsewhere, Jim Towey thinks Obama's position on the faith-based thing--BO wants to expand it but enforce fair hiring restrictions--is triangulation/double speak/whatever. Don Byrd takes Towey down concisely and effectively.

Another option for disgruntled conservative Episcopalians

If you're seeking a refuge from the big, bad, women-and-gays-loving TEC, you could always forgo developing-world archbishops in favor of an option much closer to home.

Vatican: No "Yahweh" in mass

The decision will affect OCP but not GIA, as the latter publisher already has a no-YHWH editorial policy.

Guess who the two highest-profile contributors to this year's Jewels of Elul are

Two hints:

• Neither one is Jewish
• Both are running for president
  

White House: Lousy endangered species can fend for themselves

Sorry if my headline isn't quite fair. Just trying to provide balance, because neither is the Post's. Giving the agencies more say over Endangered Species Act compliance! That has to be good, right? We're all about freedom here...

Abortion and the Democrats

The Democratic platform's new language on abortion--which several high-profile left-leaning faith-based types helped craft--has caused quite a stir.

David Brody posts the old and new language together and allows that, while hardly a paradigm shift, the change may put some anti-abortion folks who otherwise lean left more firmly in the Democrats' camp. Steven Waldman points out that, from an anti-abortion perspective, the language steps both forward and back: It names the goal of reducing the need for abortion, but it also eliminates the (in)famous Clinton language of "safe, legal, and rare." Amanda Marcotte makes the very important point that, by spelling out the need to help women who want to carry to term AND eliminating the word "rare," the new language actually does a better job representing pro-choice orthodoxy than the old language did. (If earlier debates about the distinction between "reducing the need for abortion" and "reducing abortion" had turned out differently, this would be a harder case to make.)

Steven goes on to say that the statement represents a missed opportunity for Obama to do some serious evangelical outreach. Mark Silk disagrees, arguing that Obama, and the Democratic party, are utterly pro-choice, and that it's unhelpful to try to talk your way out of that one. Elsewhere, Mark offers some helpful historical perspective on the argument the Dems are making--namely, that their policies will do more to actually reduce the abortion rate than the other guys' will. And Eric McFadden looks ahead to the Saddleback forum, calling on Rick Warren to ask Obama and McCain about "how women can be empowered to make other choices instead of abortion"--prompting Pastor Dan to push back against the use of the right's language and assumptions to frame an ostensibly left-leaning position.

Hmm. I've long been of two minds about this stuff. On the one hand, I'm in favor of anything that

• tempers the political power of the abortion mindless shouting match debate,
• encourages anti-abortion voters who lean left on economic and foreign policy to prioritize those beliefs and vote Democratic, and/or
  
• supports poor people.

On the other hand, the Wallis-Campolo-etc. trick of reducing the abortion question to a question of economic justice is awfully problematic. Insisting that disadvantaged women need to have real access to a full set of options is great as far as it goes, but it entirely (and, of course, deliberately) dodges actual, fundamentally moral questions about abortion itself. Still, avoiding those questions may be exactly what it takes to move the conversation forward, so a certain pragmatism may be helpful here. The bigger problem with this approach is that it's terribly patronizing: It implicitly paints women as helpless objects rather than decision-making subjects, a morally outrageous assumption and one that can't be good for progressive causes in the long run.

Anyway. I often have a hard time letting the philosophical stuff go in this sort of situation. I guess what matters most right now is this: The platform is likely to be at least modestly helpful in cutting through some of the abortion-debate crap, giving anti-abortion folks permission to stop being single-issue voters, and for crying out loud getting Barack Obama elected president. THAT all sounds good to me.

Meanwhile, having an abortion apparently does not cause mental illness. And more Protestants are avoiding artificial contraception in favor of natural family planning.

Our partners in freedom

The Saudis are cracking down on pet owners.

Harold Fording Obama

McCain's people want you to know that "hot chicks dig Obama":



Despicable. But Obama can't say so, as KD points out--the bizarre rules of this election dictate that if McCain race baits and Obama calls him on it, it's Obama who's guilty of playing the race card. And Obama's made it harder for the 527s to do this work for him, too.

Josh observes that it's pretty naive to think this isn't all part of McCain's team's calculated aproach.

And today's outrageous theological statement by a member of Congress award goes to...

...okay, no surprise, it's Congresswoman Bachmann again. The Republican from Minnesota pointed out today that Speaker Pelosi and others need not worry about saving the planet--because JESUS ALREADY DID THAT FOR US.

(Actually, good for her for allowing that Christ's redemption extends to the whole creation and not just to her personal, individualistic Soul. It's her conclusion that's troubling...)

Via Eric Kleefeld.

Well, I'M relieved

The Left Behind guys insist that, contrary to the McCain campaign's implications, Obama is not the Antichrist. Good for them. (Though it's important to note that their argument is about the details of the [supposed] biblical witness--the Antichrist is apparently unlikely to be an American politician--and not about, say, the fact that suggesting that your [Christian] opponent is the Antichrist is an astonishingly offensive thing to do.)

Elsewhere in premillennial dispensationalism land, folks wary of accidentally receiving the mark of the beast (oops!) should shift their attention from credit cards, SSNs, and microchips to...digital photos.

(Image from oldlutheran.com.)

200+ years after its most famous (slave-holding) member had the U.S. presidency designed for him...

...the Episcopal church is apologizing for slavery.

In other news, black TEC bishops observed that conservative Anglicans in the States have done little to build relationships w/ African-Americans--an irony given their ties to African archbishops. Of course, this speaks not only to racially and geopolitically fraught questions of Anglican identity but also to the wider reality of stateside evangelicalism: It's long been far better on global diversity than on racial integration in its own backyard. (At Wheaton, a fun parlor game is to look at posed, forcibly diverse publicity photos from the college and to point out which African country each black student hails from.) Obviously, there are many reasons for this--not the least of which is the fact that building international relationships is far easier than racial reconciliation. Almost anything is.

French Canadian amnesty for micro-organisms

I'm back, with a post about cheese to prove it.

In the States, raw-milk cheese aged fewer than 60 days is illegal. To get around this while staying within the letter of the law, you could always obtain some raw milk (by going to the farm in person to buy it and/or by buying a share of a dairy cow, depending where you live) and then make your own. OR you could just buy fish bait instead.

Another solution: Head to Quebec, which just legalized the good stuff.

Via Meghan.

Lambeth's over

Hello--I've been out of town all week, at the Jersey shore w/ Nadia's family. Then on to Wisconsin for a few days w/ MY family in the north woods. So very little blogging until next week.

The Lambeth Conference ended today. Here's the final "reflections" document; here's the final address from the Archbishop of Canterbury. Bishop Alan Wilson of Buckingham has some good thoughts.