Bush's faith-based initiative gets embrace from Obama

You know it's a strange political year when Barack Obama -- who is trying to convince voters that John McCain represents a third term for George W. Bush -- embraces one of President Bush's signature domestic programs.

But that's exactly what happened today.

Obama, campaigning at a church youth program in Zanesville, Ohio, called for expanding Bush's controversial faith-based initiative. Obama took issue with how the Bush White House has handled the program, citing a lack of adequate funding and a partisan ax to grind. But he embraced the idea of empowering "millions of Americans who share a similar view of their faith, who feel they have an obligation to help others."

Obama's support did not come as a surprise at the White House. Bush has noted that 35 governors have faith-based programs -- 19 of them Democrats. And spokesman Tony Fratto, citing the good works done by faith-based groups in cutting recidivism of former prisoners and dealing with global health issues, told reporters, "If the future potential presidential candidates support it, I think that's something that we all would be very happy about."

But perhaps the most striking aspect of Obama's speech at the East Community Ministry is that at times he sounded a little like the president.

Obama: "The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone."

Bush: "Bureaucracies can put money in people's hands, but they cannot put hope in a person's heart."

Obama: "Change comes not from the top down but from the bottom up, and few are closer to the people than our churches, synagogues, temples and mosques."

Bush: "Groups like yours have harnessed a power that no government bureaucracy can match."

-- Johanna Neuman

Photo: Jae C. Hong/AP

Comments

[ODQ]

I'm sorry but I thought Obama was a Democrat? He's beginning to sound like a Republican. Great job, Obama supporters.

[RepublicansRHypocrites]

Why are "Obama supporters" to blame for Obama starting to sound like a Republican? I just don't get the logic in that statement at all.

Look, Obama is applying "strategery" to his campaign:
1. He needs to convince (stupid people) that he is not, nor ever been Muslim.
2. He needs to win over what we will kindly refer to the "red states", which generally have stupid religious fanatics in them. (No offence, really.)
3. He is in the middle of an election where the Republicans play dirty. No matter what he says they will twist it around and try to sound bite it into "truth" for people in red states, or those that like propaganda like Fox News.

His biggest failure isn't this. It isn't accepting private funds for a campaign he -must- win. It is probably his FISA vote that will happen in the next week or so. That will bite him in the butt either way.

[Hatshepsut]

As many of us suspected all along, Obama would be supportive of funding such "faith-based" efforts as one sees at his Black liberation church---never mind how much bigotry, anti-semitism, and anti-white rhetoric it employs. So long as it's got soup kitchens and after-school programs---so long as it "works"--, Obama sees nothing wrong with them--THAT was his defense of Trinity, recall, and that's precisely why so many of us GREATLY FEAR his potential as POTUS.

[Chris Nugent]

Believing in the power of faith to affect meaningful change makes you a Republican? Since when did Republicans have a monopoly on God?

[Aja B.]

So Obama's a Republican if he acknowledges the good that religion can do in a society? I have to disagree. Though I don't have much use for organized religion in my own life, I respect the hundreds of millions of fellow Americans who do benefit from their religious affiliation, and I think it's great that Democrats are finally reaching out to these folks and refusing to be boxed in as narrow-minded god-hating heathens by Rove and his ilk. Liberalism and Christianity have far more in common than the Religious Right would have us believe, and it's about damn time someone started talking about it.

[countrycide]

Considering real republicans are for smaller, hands-off government, I'd say this is right up a religious democrat's ally. The biggest downside I see to this program is the decisivism inherent in any "faith based" program, as even people who have minority faiths or no "faith" at all are implied to be closet greedsters who don't give a damn ( I guess we can't, since we don't believe in damnation).

If there could be a more inclusive name to the program, something that doesn't inject religion into helping people, then I'd be much more comfortable supporting the program.

[EN]

ODQ,

"35 governors have faith-based programs -- 19 of them Democrats"

So actually, a majority of the governors that support faith based programs are Democrats. It's clearly not a Republican issue. It's an across-the aisle overture. And a key gesture for November.

Please do better.

[SHOCKED AND UPSET]

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

[Dwayne Jones]

Under the Bush administration, our country is experiencing a major transformation from a secular to a religious government. The President's faith-based initiative is central to this transformation and raises serious questions about church-state separation.

http://www.theocracywatch.org/faith_base.htm

[Phabe:.diji:.]

What difference does it make if a Democrat or Republican came up with a good idea?
Churches do a whole lot for communities with little or no government funding.
Imagine if they get a little governmental boost, and you wont have to fear most of the money being spent on "overhead" or six figure salaries that these so called non profits need to run.
I think its plain stupid when people dismiss a great idea because the "other side" came up with it first.
If its good for the people im all for it!

[Joe Lyon]

I think a lot of you are being narrow minded and generally stupid. Embracing a particular faith doesn't mean you're against the separation of church and state, nor does going to church or believing in a higher power make you conservative, republican or a religious fanatic. Everyone has beliefs of one sort or another and backing this policy doesn't show support for any particular religious belief, just support of religion in general which isn't narrow minded at all but smart political thinking.

[kingstephus]

How are Barack's comments Republican? I would say they are more human than anything else. I would think that there are a few things that both parties could agree on. It's just nice to see them agree on the same solutions every once in a while too. I would hope that we can realize that some problems really can't be solved entirely by the government.

[Billy Club]

@ODQ
Perhaps FOX News sounds so 'righteous' to you because you have been indoctrinated by the zealous liberals at every other media outlet?

Think relatively. If all you do is listen to leftist rhetoric, then perhaps middle of the road journalism will sound off-center.

Reevaluate where you are getting your media from.

[AJB]

So you are saying that Democrats could not possibly have a faith in God or a greater power? I certainly believe in her! For way too long I have felt my faith hi jacked by the Republicans. Bravo Obamo. Yes, giving of oneself is important and those with a spiritual side have always recognized this. We must give and give and give to others in order to be happy human beings, in order to have humanity. And whether that is through giving money or volunteering one's time, everyone should do it. President Clinton recognized this, too.

[HemiHead]

Yeah, Obama's talking about helping people, and Bush uses it for a cover. George W Bush is on his own personal crusade. Oil, money, and power is all that he cares about. He even makes laws to free himself of war crimes. Your going to have to try harder than this to put Obama on the same path as G. W. Bush. There are not many people left, that are willing to play this little game.

[Obamathelesserof2evils]

In order for Obama to secure the presidency he needs to appeal to all the bible thumping fanatics. McCain has done little to win them over so the least Obama can do is try.

[Susan Lane]

It's a tribute to Obama that he is learning from the political strategies of not just the Democrats, but Repubicans too. Government funds simply don't fill all the gaps in this country, and smite the dogma though ye may, churches are a great resource of people who are willing to put their money and time into helping the least of this country. Kudos to Obama for recognizing it.

[Edd Doerr]

As an Obama supporter I am distressed that Obama has endorsd Bush's fundamentalist-pandering charitable choice plan. It is of doubtful constitutionality, ignores Madison's stern warning against government "employing religion as an engine of civil policy" and Franklin's dictum that there is something seriously wrong with any church that has to depend on government for support. Those who are attracted by tax aid to sectarian charities are likely to vote Republican anyway. Obama should admit this was a mistake and endorse our constitutional principle of church-state separation before he loses any more support.

[ed]

why does everyone make faith be a requirement for humanity.. so simple minded.

[jen]

It seems rather unfair for the government to award grants to religious groups to provide support to people in need - separation of church and state is designed so that our individual beliefs do not become pivotal in determining whether or not we get governmental help or protection, but the faith based initiatives do make faith an issue. I would not want to be pressured to attend a church, synagogue, temple or mosque as the price for accepting aid (financial aid provided by taxpayers) in a time of need - that is just not fair. Frankly, I have experience churches where the congregation and leaders lie, cheat, steal, do drugs, drink and sleep around with impunity. My atheist ethics are a lot stricter than that, thanks, and I get Ever so tired of religious people calling me a blight on the world, and how would it feel if a person had to put up with their spiel and pressure to get taxpayer money in a time of need???? Obama has sold out in an attempt to win the election. What good does it do to have a democrat in the white house if they have sold out to get there and stay there (witness B Clinton.)

[anne]

What is with all of and your "Religious Fanatic" talks. Have you ever had a personal relationship with a Christian? You act like Religious people are a crazy fringe minority. They make up about 40% of America. Those fanatics serve meals in soup kitchens in the inner-city. They are the ones volunteering at the Red Cross. They are the ones who donate their time and energy serving their community. Who is crazy?! The media portrays them as crazy and they are not. They have strong values and just think-They were your ancestors because they came over here for religious freedom. You should thank them before you trash them. Christians are normal people that care about their country. They are very patriotic and want to serve their country.

[Georgi]

Obama: "The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone." -- Is Obama saying that he would not be able to lead a government that would deal with the current challenges? .... that's plain stupid.

[None of the Above 08]

I don't necessarily have a problem with what Obama is doing, but I will curious to see how the media spins this away.

What if any other candidate was doing this?

[maggie]

Obama is the Democrats' GWB. Runs on an easy slogan that is impossible to legislate. GWB's Compassionate Conservatism = Obama's Change you can believe in. I've seen the similarity from the beginning of the primary, Obama is running on the politics of personality, just like Bush did. Obama is more intelligent and a far better communicator than Bush is, but doesn't necessarily make him a more effective leader. If the sell outs and missteps we're seeing from the man now, we really really ought to think twice and even thrice about the assumption that Obama emerges in August as the Democratic nominee.

[Don]

In his speech today, Obama called Bush's faith-based initiative "a failure." He's going to scrap it and start over - new name, new focus, new commitment to constitutional safeguards. So where do you get off in the headline saying Bush's failure "gets embrace from Obama"?? That couldn't be much more inaccurate.

[JM@rt]

Come on people...I think we are jumping the gun on this. I think that what Obama wants to do is include the not for profit world in the task of improving the state of this nation. I know that for hardcore Secularists it is a hard pill to swallow, but the faith community is the best bet we have at tackling some of these issues without all of the red tape of government. He clearly mentions "churches, synagogues, temples and mosques." He clearly wants to support all of us regardless of our faith, whereas Bush's policy was directed at paying back the religious right for political favors during his campaigning. There is a huge difference between BUSH and OBAMA for anyone who is willing to give this a clear and honest look. Instead we all just react to how Ms. Neuman chooses to frame this issue.

[X_POLYGAMIST WIFE]

Did anybody notice the 99.99% white attendees at the republican convention? CNNs cameras were hard put to find a person of color. I saw three Hispanics huddled together and two African-Americans. That's scary!

Sarah Palin sounds like a polygamist wife pushing the white
patriarchal agenda. She and McCain should join the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints (FLDS) and move to Colorado City, Arizona where there are plenty of down syndrome babies, tons of teenage pregnancies, and ALL women support white male supremacy.

http://www.bankingonheaven.com

Vote for change - Vote for Obama!