| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"johac" |
| Date: |
05 Jan 2008 02:12:31 AM |
| Object: |
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in Americaıs heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it wonıt stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ³bridge between church and state² that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how itıs always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Rooseveltıs election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bushıs administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
That year, in response to Jimmy Carterıs personal faith story, Ronald
Reagan ran a campaign shot through with religious themes and calculated
visits with newly mobilized evangelicals. This approach was so
successful that subsequent presidents have followed suit. The result is
that presidential candidates today use religion as a political weapon:
to organize and explain oneıs values, to justify policy plans, and-most
importantly-to divide the electorate into allies and enemies.
The victors in Iowa on Thursday have used the God strategy to a degree
rarely seen in modern history.
Obamaıs public embrace of faith began in 2006 with a keynote address at
Sojourners magazineıs Call to Renewal conference. Syndicated columnist
E.J. Dionne suggested the speech ³may be the most important
pronouncement by a Democrat on faith and politics since John F.
Kennedyıs Houston speech in 1960 declaring his independence from the
Vatican.² Later in 2006 Obama spoke at an AIDS summit hosted by Rick
Warren-a conservative who is one of the most prominent evangelicals in
the world.
Since then, Obamaıs religious politics have only grown. He often begins
speeches-including his address in February 2007 in which he announced
his intention to seek the presidency-by giving ³all praise and honor to
God,² and regularly cites the biblical story of Joshua. In Iowa, Obama
had a faith steering committee and his campaign held forums across the
state titled ³Whatıs faith got to do with it?²
Still, he lagged behind Huckabee in his religious politics.
Early on, the little-known ordained Southern Baptist minister compared
himself to Biblical underdogs David and other Old Testament prophets. He
wowed Christian conservatives at the Family Research Councilıs Values
Voters Summit in October, saying ³I think itıs important that the
language of Zion is a mother tongue, and not a recently acquired second
language.² Huckabee began to surge in Iowa polls not long after, a rise
he attributed to divine intervention.
Huckabee sealed his ascendancy by airing perhaps the most religious ads
in U.S. presidential history. A signature spot featured Huckabee saying
³Faith doesnıt just influence me; it really defines me,² as the words
³Christian leader² flashed across the screen. In another ad, Huckabee
asked viewers to remember the real meaning of the holiday season: ³the
celebration of the birth of Christ.² When this message stirred up
controversy, Huckabee adroitly painted himself as the target of
secularists.
Obama and Huckabee: Two presidential candidates, two political parties,
one approach-and the same result.
The question now is whether this strategy has legs beyond Iowa. As the
candidates turn their attention to New Hampshire, theyıll find voters
who are likely to be a bit more cautious about too intimate a
relationship between religion and politics. But soon thereafter comes
South Carolina, where faith runs wide and deep. Indeed, Obamaıs campaign
had a ³40 days of Faith and Family² focus there in autumn.
One thing is for sure: weıre light years and a religious political
revolution from John F. Kennedyıs candidacy in 1960, when he famously
declared that ³I believe in an America where the separation of church
and state is absolute² and ³I believe in a president whose views on
religion are his own private affair.²
That was a winning message then. Today it would be a voice in the
wilderness-on both sides of the partisan aisle.
David Domke is Professor of Communication and Head of Journalism at the
University of Washington. Kevin Coe is a doctoral candidate in Speech
Communication at the University of Illinois. They are authors of
just-released The God Strategy: How Religion Became a Political Weapon
in America (Oxford, www.thegodstrategy.com).
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and
discover new web pages.
---
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/04/6184/
--
John #1782
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
05 Jan 2008 03:15:05 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dag Yo" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
05 Jan 2008 03:39:08 AM |
|
|
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
Yes. While europe has had an age of enlightenment and the US has had
revivals. Furthermore, in America there is a sort of traditional anti-
intellectualism.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 02:33:37 AM |
|
|
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 12:17:29 PM |
|
|
"johac" <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:jhachmann-1A0633.00333706012008@news.giganews.com...
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
--
John #1782
Iowa was a fluke, as far as Huckaby is concerned. He may
get some wins in the South, but he won't get anything in
the North, West or, probably, the Midwest. I'd really be
surprised if he did. In fact, he'll probably lost some of the
South, too.
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
BAAWA Knight & Bible Thumper Thumper
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
When fascism comes to America, it will be
wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross -
Sinclair Lewis
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 11:34:06 PM |
|
|
In article <W-6dnfEYBcuohhzanZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
"johac" <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:jhachmann-1A0633.00333706012008@news.giganews.com...
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
--
John #1782
Iowa was a fluke, as far as Huckaby is concerned. He may
get some wins in the South, but he won't get anything in
the North, West or, probably, the Midwest. I'd really be
surprised if he did. In fact, he'll probably lost some of the
South, too.
I agree. In states with a large evangelical population, Huckaberry Finn
will do OK, but everywhere else, such as in the electoral vote rich East
Coast and West Coast states, he'll do poorly. I think that the most
interesting result from the Iowa caucus was the turnout. Iowa is a 'red'
state, but almost twice as many Democrats turned out as Republicans. If
that trend continues across the country, the Repubs are toast.
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 03:36:14 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
07 Jan 2008 12:00:44 AM |
|
|
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
07 Jan 2008 10:29:08 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
08 Jan 2008 12:01:23 AM |
|
|
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
08 Jan 2008 12:47:12 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:01:23 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
The triumph of hope over history!
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
08 Jan 2008 11:50:27 PM |
|
|
In article <j276o3db6jd0ttblj2tt9vtv6uqqpocqj9@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:01:23 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa
caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God
strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably
public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall
of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and
2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the
modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's
there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again.
It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage
crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of
the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in
Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
The triumph of hope over history!
It may or may not be of relevance, but the fundy Huckabee got his butt
whomped in the New Hampshire primary tonight.
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
09 Jan 2008 03:29:00 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:50:27 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <j276o3db6jd0ttblj2tt9vtv6uqqpocqj9@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:01:23 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa
caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God
strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably
public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall
of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and
2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the
modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's
there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again.
It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage
crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of
the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in
Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
The triumph of hope over history!
It may or may not be of relevance, but the fundy Huckabee got his butt
whomped in the New Hampshire primary tonight.
Perhaps there is a semblance of sanity in the US.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
09 Jan 2008 11:51:33 PM |
|
|
In article <3u49o3peiff6smhohr9bn5dtuibjo6g57j@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:50:27 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <j276o3db6jd0ttblj2tt9vtv6uqqpocqj9@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:01:23 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa
caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God
strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this
approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably
public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional
wall
of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George
W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and
2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the
modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the
US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to
be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild
mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's
there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more
secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then
WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion
again.
It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and
"Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance,
the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane
society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage
crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise
of
the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until
the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the
other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in
Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things
will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation"
in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but
then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods
of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I
have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like
a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism
of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in
this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to
protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result
of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
The triumph of hope over history!
It may or may not be of relevance, but the fundy Huckabee got his butt
whomped in the New Hampshire primary tonight.
Perhaps there is a semblance of sanity in the US.
Like the blade of grass that grows between the cracks in a city
sidewalk, it rears its head every now and then.
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
10 Jan 2008 02:37:04 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:51:33 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <3u49o3peiff6smhohr9bn5dtuibjo6g57j@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:50:27 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <j276o3db6jd0ttblj2tt9vtv6uqqpocqj9@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:01:23 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa
caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God
strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this
approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably
public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional
wall
of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George
W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and
2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the
modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the
US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to
be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild
mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's
there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more
secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then
WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion
again.
It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and
"Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance,
the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane
society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage
crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise
of
the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until
the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the
other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in
Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things
will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation"
in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived, people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but
then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again. Periods
of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I
have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more like
a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme cynicism
of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in
this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to
protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One result
of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions. In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups. As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
The triumph of hope over history!
It may or may not be of relevance, but the fundy Huckabee got his butt
whomped in the New Hampshire primary tonight.
Perhaps there is a semblance of sanity in the US.
Like the blade of grass that grows between the cracks in a city
sidewalk, it rears its head every now and then.
Quick! Water that blade!
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
10 Jan 2008 11:42:47 PM |
|
|
In article <19mbo39092ljnk4qbg56tob4ac2dshshmi@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:51:33 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <3u49o3peiff6smhohr9bn5dtuibjo6g57j@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:50:27 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <j276o3db6jd0ttblj2tt9vtv6uqqpocqj9@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:01:23 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <ivu5o31vam6nnbvkt11picuods5tt8rgjl@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:00:44 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <o381o3lnat9o5cdt4lf87v8jimofv8lgrs@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa
caucuses
on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God
strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this
approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith
demonstrably
public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional
wall
of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that
George
W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and
2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but
our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by
political
leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of
the
modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush?
administration
revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that
the
US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims
to
be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile
degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild
mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the
1890's
there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came
the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more
secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more
Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then
WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion
again.
It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and
"Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam
resistance,
the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane
society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran
hostage
crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the
rise
of
the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted,
until
the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the
other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus
in
Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and
things
will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an
"explanation"
in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
I think that in times of stress or trouble, real or perceived,
people
turn to religion. The uninformed run to their sky daddy just as
small
children when hurt go running to their parents.
When things are better, they tend to act more normal again. Action
and
reaction. At least in some respects, history seems to be cyclic.
Authoritarian governments give way to more democratic regimes, but
then
something happens and they revert to authoritarianism again.
Periods
of
widespread conflict and relative peace alternate. I don't know if I
have
all the answers for why this might be so, but it seems to me that
if
human society is evolving it is not in a straight line, but more
like
a
sine wave.
Many other countries have gone through that lot, but remained
reasonably sane.
The only difference that I can discern is that they have all had
church & state mixed together, thereby inducing an extreme
cynicism
of
religion in the populace.
That is an explanation given for why evangelism is so prevalent in
this
country. We never had an official state religion. At the beginning
of
the country, we had a number of various Christian sects all
competing
with each other. The First Amendment was ratified not so much to
protect
non believers, but to protect religions from one another. One
result
of
this was that as the various denominations competed for members and
political power, they became more aggressive in spreading their
superstition.
In countries with state religions, you didn't have these tensions.
In
time, the churches became fat and lazy under government protection
and
didn't have to worry about competition from other religious groups.
As
you noted, after a while the people seeing how decadent the
protected
churches became tended towards cynicism and after a while rejection
of
the churches and for what they stood.
Perhaps there is the germ of an anti-religious strategy in there?
In the US? Many of the founders like Jefferson and Madison were
deists.
they believed in a 'creator' but in general the distrusted religion.
They were afraid of one religion becoming too powerful and taking over
the government. If many cults were allowed to flourish, each might act
as a check on the others. By protecting diversity, they hoped to avoid
homogeneity, and a majority of one belief.
Unfortunately, today the rise of the well funded evangelical movement
and the rise of the 'mega churches' seem to be tending to this
homogeneity. The recent series of scandals, e.g. Ted Haggard, may have
slowed the trend and hopefully provide an slim opening to reverse it.
The triumph of hope over history!
It may or may not be of relevance, but the fundy Huckabee got his butt
whomped in the New Hampshire primary tonight.
Perhaps there is a semblance of sanity in the US.
Like the blade of grass that grows between the cracks in a city
sidewalk, it rears its head every now and then.
Quick! Water that blade!
And tear up the sidewalk!
--
John #1782
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 06:48:51 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray's at wisdom:
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
***** man... our ancestors left your continent so they could be as kooky as
they wanted to in peace. We've got 200 years of tradition at being kooky.
Habits are kinda hard to break... I am the only one in my family not a
Xian, fer instance.
--
- Gary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 11:02:57 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 18:48:51 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Michael Gray's at wisdom:
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
You described it well enough, but I could not see an "explanation" in
there.
Perhaps it is just my limited perception.
***** man... our ancestors left your continent so they could be as kooky as
they wanted to in peace.
Your ancestors left Australia?
Why?
Were they Aborigines?
We've got 200 years of tradition at being kooky.
Practise makes pefect, they say!
Habits are kinda hard to break... I am the only one in my family not a
Xian, fer instance.
All of my family are atheist.
All of my friends are atheist.
Most of my "enemies" are atheist.
I have no idea what torture you must be going through, mate.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 01:11:37 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kevin Coe
The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on
Thursday make one thing clear: in America? heartland, the God strategy
works. Recent history suggests it won? stop there.In this approach
presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public
and wield it as a campaign centerpiece. Out is a traditional wall of
separation; in is a ?ridge between church and state?that George W.
Bush-who used the God strategy to perfection in 2000 and 2004-offered
early in his presidency.
This is not how it? always been.
God and religion have always been part of U.S. politics, but our
analysis of more than 15,000 public communications by political leaders
from Franklin Roosevelt? election in 1932-the beginning of the modern
presidency-through six years of George W. Bush? administration revealed
a striking increase in public religiosity beginning in 1980.
As a foreigner, I find it truly gobsmackingly astounding that the US
is so insane that the citizens PREFER a candidate who claims to be
delusional and psychotic, to the most alramingly juvenile degree.
Is anyone able to explain this phroot-loops phenomenon?
It seems that throughout our history, the US has had these wild mood
swings between secularism and intense religiosity. In the 1890's there
was a big religious revival which lasted through WW1. Then came the
'Roaring Twenties' where things loosened up and we became more secular
as America prospered, education levels increased and more Americans
began to travel abroad. Then in the 30s the Depression hit, then WW2,
then the beginning of the Cold War and many turned to religion again. It
was in the 50s that we got "In Gawd we trust" on our money and "Under
gawd" in our pledge of allegiance.
In the 60s the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam resistance, the
rise of feminism, and the sexual revolution led to a more sane society
which lasted into the 70s. Then the Energy Crisis, a persistent
recession and several foreign policy shocks like the Iran hostage crisis
led to a more conservative outlook and we got Reagan and the rise of the
Religious Right. This mood, as the article notes has lasted, until the
present day.
For a bit, I thought that the pendulum was starting to swing the other
way, but with a Baptist preacher winning the Republican caucus in Iowa,
I'm not so sure. Hopefully that one result was a fluke and things will
right themselves as the campaign progresses.
It was noted (Friday evening, but I watched the re-broadcast this afternoon) by Charles
Krautgeneral, er I mean Krauthammer, that Evangelicals constitute some 60% of the
Iowa Republican caucus constituency, of which Hucklebuckle took half to get his win.
The same standing among NH Evangelicals would return no better than a 25% showing
overall, by his analysis.
I don't agree with a lot of his politics, but he's sharp when he's not wishful-thinking or
hate-ranting.
--
Apostate a.a. #1931
..sig currently undergoing maintenance
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work |
06 Jan 2008 11:29:03 PM |
|
|
In article <nc92o3prk5n7dj2sbh6t3fcfu01k30dc84@4ax.com>,
Apostate <godless.*****@yeehaw.org.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:33:37 -0800, johac <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
In article <hfiun35g81042enlt5esj8k2l25feghns5@4ax.com>,
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:12:31 -0800, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Marching towards theocracy.
---
Published on Friday, January 4, 2008 by CommonDreams.org
Explaining Iowa: The God Strategy at Work
by David Domke and Kev | | | | |
