Obama to expand Bush's faith based programs
69charger
Posts: 1,045
Oh noez!! WTF are you going to do now!?! 
"Meet the new boss... same as the old boss"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_el_pr/obama_faith
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 24 minutes ago
Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and — in a move sure to cause controversy — support some ability to hire and fire based on faith.
Obama was unveiling his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday in Zanesville, Ohio, at Eastside Community Ministry, which provides food, clothes, youth ministry and other services.
"The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama was to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks obtained by The Associated Press. "We need all hands on deck."
Obama's announcement is part of a series of events leading up to Friday's Fourth of July holiday that are focused on American values.
The Democratic presidential candidate spent Monday talking about his vision of patriotism in the battleground state of Missouri. By twinning that with Tuesday's talk about faith in another battleground state, he was attempting to settle debate in two key areas where his beliefs have come under question while also trying to make inroads with constituencies traditionally loyal to Republicans.
But Obama's support for letting religious charities that receive federal funding consider religion in employment decisions could invite a storm of protest from those who view such faith requirements as discrimination.
Obama does not support requiring religious tests for recipients of aid nor using federal money to proselytize, according to a campaign fact sheet. He also only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities, said a senior adviser to the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe the new policy.
Bush supports broader freedoms for taxpayer-funded religious charities. But he never got Congress to go along so he has conducted the program through administrative actions and executive orders.
David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.
This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.
"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.
Kuo called Obama's approach smart, impressive and well thought-out but took a wait-and-see attitude about whether it would deliver.
"When it comes to promises to help the poor, promises are easy," said Kuo, who wrote a 2006 book describing his frustration at what he called Bush's lackluster enthusiasm for the program. "The question is commitment."
Obama proposes to elevate the program to a "moral center" of his administration, by renaming it the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and changing training from occasional huge conferences to empowering larger religious charities to mentor smaller ones in their communities.
Saying social service spending has been shortchanged under Bush, he also proposes a $500 million per year program to provide summer learning for 1 million poor children to help close achievement gaps with white and wealthier students. A campaign fact sheet said he would pay for it by better managing surplus federal properties, reducing growth in the federal travel budget and streamlining the federal procurement process.
Like Bush, Obama was arguing that religious organizations can and should play a bigger role in serving the poor and meeting other social needs. But while Bush argued that the strength of religious charities lies primarily in shared religious identity between workers and recipients, Obama was to tout the benefits of their "bottom-up" approach.
"Because they're so close to the people, they're well-placed to offer help," he was to say.
He also planned to talk bluntly about the genesis of his Christian faith in his work as a community organizer in Chicago, and its importance to him now.
"In time, I came to see faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he was to say.
"Meet the new boss... same as the old boss"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_el_pr/obama_faith
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 24 minutes ago
Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and — in a move sure to cause controversy — support some ability to hire and fire based on faith.
Obama was unveiling his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday in Zanesville, Ohio, at Eastside Community Ministry, which provides food, clothes, youth ministry and other services.
"The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama was to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks obtained by The Associated Press. "We need all hands on deck."
Obama's announcement is part of a series of events leading up to Friday's Fourth of July holiday that are focused on American values.
The Democratic presidential candidate spent Monday talking about his vision of patriotism in the battleground state of Missouri. By twinning that with Tuesday's talk about faith in another battleground state, he was attempting to settle debate in two key areas where his beliefs have come under question while also trying to make inroads with constituencies traditionally loyal to Republicans.
But Obama's support for letting religious charities that receive federal funding consider religion in employment decisions could invite a storm of protest from those who view such faith requirements as discrimination.
Obama does not support requiring religious tests for recipients of aid nor using federal money to proselytize, according to a campaign fact sheet. He also only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities, said a senior adviser to the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe the new policy.
Bush supports broader freedoms for taxpayer-funded religious charities. But he never got Congress to go along so he has conducted the program through administrative actions and executive orders.
David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.
This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.
"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.
Kuo called Obama's approach smart, impressive and well thought-out but took a wait-and-see attitude about whether it would deliver.
"When it comes to promises to help the poor, promises are easy," said Kuo, who wrote a 2006 book describing his frustration at what he called Bush's lackluster enthusiasm for the program. "The question is commitment."
Obama proposes to elevate the program to a "moral center" of his administration, by renaming it the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and changing training from occasional huge conferences to empowering larger religious charities to mentor smaller ones in their communities.
Saying social service spending has been shortchanged under Bush, he also proposes a $500 million per year program to provide summer learning for 1 million poor children to help close achievement gaps with white and wealthier students. A campaign fact sheet said he would pay for it by better managing surplus federal properties, reducing growth in the federal travel budget and streamlining the federal procurement process.
Like Bush, Obama was arguing that religious organizations can and should play a bigger role in serving the poor and meeting other social needs. But while Bush argued that the strength of religious charities lies primarily in shared religious identity between workers and recipients, Obama was to tout the benefits of their "bottom-up" approach.
"Because they're so close to the people, they're well-placed to offer help," he was to say.
He also planned to talk bluntly about the genesis of his Christian faith in his work as a community organizer in Chicago, and its importance to him now.
"In time, I came to see faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he was to say.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Right. God forbid the man use his faith and influence to appeal to the faith community to actually get involved socially and help people rather than just sit on their hands and pass judgements on people. What in the heck is wrong with one Christian using faith, influence, and, yes, money, to encourage other Christians to behave in a manner that is *gasp* Christlike!?
Hardly the "same as the old boss".
Whats the problem with that?
If I were to be more involved with my church I would expect all workers there to have the same faith as me.
This is hardly continuing Bush's policies.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
:rolleyes:
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
I'm confused here...
Do you think that President Bush's Faith Based Initiative is a worthless piece of shit or not?
Hail, Hail!!!
Wrong. I'm probably going to vote for the guy now that the 2nd Amendment is defined. I just love seeing the left start to eat it's young
now i know Obama is going to win
The cups may be different, but the Kool-Aid is the same
for the least they could possibly do
Wow, where were these comments when Bush started the program years ago? Jeez, proves the theory that everything is partisan.
they take in tons of money every year and they can pay their fair share of taxes and still help people.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
- Ben Franklin
not a single dollar should go to any religious organization and they should pay taxes....Obama's pandering...he's getting sadder and sadder by the day.
No it doesn't. i'm not partisan. This isn't merely a contiuation of the same bush program. Bush is one who claims to be of Christian faith but is policies speak otherwise. War and fear mongering are not Christian values. Nor are tax cuts for the extremely wealthy. Furthermore, Bush did very little to encourage the type of action from faith based organizations that Obama is calling for. Not the same.
How 'bout a trade off...
Churches get taxpayer dollars to help the poor (and not themselves) if they quit trying to pass off that Creationism as a Science on our Public Schools.
Hail, Hail!!!
The first amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion. That, in no way, is happening here. Furthermore, the first amendment protects the free practice of religion, which IS being encouraged here, so one might turn your first amendment citation around on you.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
- Ben Franklin
Because Obama IS a Christian, and calling upon other Christians to behave in a Christlike manner, its hard to accuse him of pandering in this case. My opinion, of course. What he is doing is appealing to actual Christian values and awakening Christians to issues they SHOULD concern themselves with rather than blowing smoke in their butts with abortion and gay marriage. He's driving a steak through the heart of the "religious right". He is appealing to the faithful in an honest way, the way they SHOULD be appealed to. That, to me is not the same as pandering.
If support was afforded to ONLY Christian churches, for example, or ONLY mosques, or ONLY synogougues etc., you may have a weak argument. Because, that isn't happening, however, you don't even have that.
Furthermore, an honest, sincere, appeal is not the same as pandering. There is a difference.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
- Ben Franklin
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
- Ben Franklin
Pehaps to a degree, but, generally speaking, faith organizations are not federaly funded organizations. They operate almost exclusively on member donation.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
- Ben Franklin
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
- Ben Franklin
Hey, man, if you can pass yourself off as legitimate and attract enough members willing to support you in exchange for the spiritual guidance and teaching you have to offer so that you can support your family and pay your bills... cool.
Good luck with that.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
Been defined, or been destroyed !?!
What part of that SC ruling gives you ANY comfort?
They all but crossed it out of the bill of rights.
They said, you have a right to own guns, but we can basicaly do anything we want to restrict that right, short of an outright ban.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
How about, based on the Constitution's FAILURE TO DEFINE A SPECIFIC POWER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DISTRIBUTE (ILLEGAL) INCOME TAX DOLLARS TO RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS, THERE IS THUS NO SUCH AUTHORITY FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO THAT?
How about THAT for an argument?
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?