The Obamas Go to Church
The Obama family attended services at St. John's Episcopal this morning, and the Secret Service even let them walk the two blocks across Lafayette Park on this gorgeous October day. It marked the first time the family has gone to church in Washington since Easter, when they also visited St. John's, although the Obamas have been worshipping at Evergreen Chapel at Camp David whenever they spend the weekend at the Maryland retreat.
It has also been three and a half months since the White House insisted that the First Family continues to look for a church in Washington to join. Few people would blame them if they decided it would be too disruptive to upend a local congregation--Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush all chose to largely avoid Washington churches for similar reasons, and conservatives defended their decisions to do so. It's all the more surprising then that the White House has chosen to dig in on this point and continue to maintain that the Obamas will choose a local church as their main place of worship. It only becomes a Church Watch if they make it one.
-
1
Is there an emoticon for vomiting?
-
2
"It only becomes a Church Watch if they make it one."
.
Interesting. Amy the media are just innocent bystanders. -
3
I don't get it. I'm a liberal/progressive regular church going suburban mom. I should be right in your demographic, Amy, but your posts really do make me angry. I have to second jcapan's emotion and echo gysgts213's attention to the messenger.
Just give the Obama family a break. Let it go. Is nothing sacred? Is nothing private? This is just like the smoking thing: Let. It. Go.
How about covering the real issues Jesus cared about like poverty and justice? At least that is politically relevant.
-
3.1
Beth, my scorn is broader than this vast charade of public piety. Who or how the Obama family worships is, of course, none of our f'ing business. They could paint a freakin' pentagram on the oval office tiles and sacrifice a hog and I'd still feel that way. The same should be true when an agnostic/atheist/jew/muslim runs for office. It is, however, apparently shocking for someone like Amy or her christian-pandering bosses to consider such a thing. She is the equivalent of a the Japanese character on Heroes (to ramp up viewership/proceeds in Asia, where it's on). That's what our media amts. to, marketing ploys.
.
Furthermore, in our quilt of faiths, inlcuding secularist/spiritualist/philosophical buddhists like me, Amy's role here (Time's fault more than her own) is inherently exclusive. 300 million Americans--are all of them Christians. If this was her own blog, it'd be fine and dandy, but the fact that the leading news-mag. feels an obligation to have a christian voice is highly disturbing.
.
That said, your closing lines, "How about covering the real issues Jesus cared about like poverty and justice? At least that is politically relevant," would at least make her role less cringe-worthy. Her work, from start to finish here, as never strayed for even a moment beyond the superficial. -
3.2
"Is nothing sacred?"
.
Yo -
3.3
sacredh, Bravo!!
-
3.4
I got home from work last night after midnight and there was that little gift all wrapped up and just waiting for me.
-
-
4
[...] This kind of thing makes me want to puke: [...]
-
5
Do you really have nothing better to do than this, Amy? Get a life.
-
6
This post basically comes down to, "if only the Obamas would hurry up and make a personal decision about which church they will attend on reporters' time schedule, the media could stop reporting stories about their attendance at church services." Please, grow up.
Yes, I'm sure the White House did "insist" that they are still looking for a church . . . because, they are still looking for a church. And how is it "surprising" that the Obamas continue to "insist" that they haven't decided on a church? It takes some people years to settle on a church; are the Obamas somehow exempted from the experience that everyone else has when deciding where to worship?
I really can't believe you get paid for crap like this.
-
7
Stupid question: Didn't Amy already do this post? Is she just recycling for the weekend folks?
-
8
NOBODY. CARES. ABOUT. THIS.
-
9
Amy, what the heck is wrong with you?
-
10
This is undoubtedly the stupidest, most mind-numbingly insipid post on the most ridiculous subject I have seen lately. IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Whether they go to church or not simply is not germane to anything.
The demise of Time Magazine just accelerated 20% based solely on the quantity of stoopid in this post alone, thank Flying Spaghetti Monster.
-
11
Amy Sullivavn:
It has also been three and a half months since the White House insisted that the First Family continues to look for a church in Washington to join.
So the "White House" is directing President Obama where/how to personally worship?
.
How does that work, exactly? Who is the Commander-in-Chief's church-boss? Who's job is it in the White House to tell the President what to do on Sundays?
.
How do you know this information with complete certainty, Amy Sullivan?
.
Please provide at least two named sources and quotes.-
11.1
The "white house" IS Obama. HE IS the sitting president and as such HE alone controls the White House. Same as it has been since the beginning of the presidency. Who else do you think controls the White House message? Gibbs? Rohm? WHo?
-
-
12
Hooray! It's unamaminimous.
-
12.1
vat is?
-
12.2
I think I have a new favorite word.
-
-
13
Why is this important?
-
14
Sorry to add to the pile on, but does anyone really give a crap about this? Can't you find something more worthwhile to write about? This has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with petty, small-minded gossip that may give you and your fellow DC hacks little tingles, but leaves the rest of us supremely disinterested.
The reason I'm being so unpleasant along with the others is that we are trying to toilet train you. When you stop writing stupid gossipy crap like this, we'll stop being nasty. Deal?
-
15
Jesus thinks you're boring.
-
15.1
I'm getting a chuckle out of your posts. Amy never responds to us so it's a little on the futile side to expect a response. I tried for months to provoke her but never got anywhere. I doubt if she even reads her threads after she posts them.
.
Amy, your semi-faithful servant. sacredh -
15.2
" .. I doubt if she even reads her threads after she posts them."
Could it be that she views the posts as necessary rite, an ablution, perhaps? -
15.3
It's probably in her contract. I'm inclined to believe that her not responding is somehow related to the Purity Ball stuff and abstinence. I get cranky if I go without for a couple of days. I can't even imagine what going years would do to me. I saved myself for just the right woman. She was alive.
-
-
16
She is the equivalent of a the Japanese character on Heroes (to ramp up viewership/proceeds in Asia, where it's on).
.
jcapan, I completely agree about Heroes and I've never heard anyone else say that. It's so frustrating too because Masi Oka and James Kyson Lee (Hiro and Ando) are good actors. I'd add they also serve as comic relief in a "look at those funny but harmless foreign people" way.
.
And that TV digression was more relevant to politics than this post.-
16.1
Rose, I've still not managed to watch Heroes, but then I don't watch any shows. I recall when Lost first started, during my interlude stateside--I was so excited to see Asian characters, both the Iraqi guy and the Korean couple, and the fact that the producers were unafraid to show them actually speaking a foreign language. That was shocking, particularly in light of American filmgoer's aversion to subtitles.
.
I'm not taking away from these actors' contributions to either show, but over the years, I've realized it's not merely H-wood's multicultural conscience at work here. As with Danny Glover or Eddie Murphy's wingmen to white cops back in the day, this was a very savvy move on the part of LA suits, but I don't think it's Asian or Arab Americans they're targeting.
.
I see this a lot more now vs. my first stay in Japan, when the only drama you'd find on here was vintage BH 90210. I don't watch any of it, but you name the US drama on there and it's on here too. You'd get a kick of how they market them--it's nothing short of carpetbombing. And, sadly, this CA tripe is kicking J-TV's arse. Surf around and it's CSI, Gossip Girl et al. The impact this will have in places like Asia, where gender roles are quite different, is hard to say--but it's hard to imagine it'll be positive.
-
-
17
Wow, who could have imagined what a dust-up Amy Sullivan's post would have caused? I sure didn't until I started reading the comments. I don't get it - why all the anger over this post? Amy Sullivan's beat is religion. The previous church of which the Obamas' were members made a bit of news during the campaign, so it seems to me the next choice might be of some interest to some people (e.g. why did all the people with the angry comments read the post if it was so non-newsworthy?). Just the human interest angle of seeing how a church is affected by the First Family joining is mildly interesting.
Poverty & justice are covered a lot in many news outlets but as I understand it people on average don't find these articles as interesting as, for instance, the cause of Michael Jackson's death, Tom Delay on Dancing with the Stars, or who won American Idol. Even NPR has to cover news that people want to hear to stay in business. Hence articles about how the media blew covering the financial meltdown (justice denied) is immeasurably more compelling than all the articles that did cover it (which was boring financial news). Again, I can't imagine what was to get so angry about in this post.
-
17.1
Poverty and justice are not, in fact, covered "a lot" or even very much in any news outlet.
Even if they were, that would not be an excuse to concern troll an issue as stupid as this one.
-
17.2
" .. Amy Sullivan's beat is religion. .. "
OK.
When is she going to get around to recognizing the " agnostic, atheist, jew, muslim" and the "secularist, spiritualist, philosophical buddhists" and the wiccans and voodoo guys too ...
Be a pall, Amy ..
---- ahem
The way things are going right now, an assumption can be made that Americans prefer or tolerate, eh, homosexuality than polygamy ....But there is rampant polygamy in (the old versions of) that bible. What is going to feature in the brand new conservative version?
-
17.3
And Adam and Justin begat Jane MaryLou and Tomweka ...
-
17.4
And it came to pass that BillieJean and Martina begat Ellen, Jodie, Gabriela and Amelie ...
Ah. An American bible.
-
-
18
"Amy Sullivan's beat is religion."
That doesn't mean it is her job to harass politicians about where they go to church. Do food writers spend all their time figuring out what politicians are eating? Do health reporters give us weekly updates on politicians' cholesterol numbers?
-
18.1
What the Presidents eat, their chefs, their state dinners to their casual dining, as well as their eating habits is often covered. I recall reading about Gerald Ford's breakfast preferences when he was in office.
The Presidents' physicals, their skin cancer surgery, choking on pretzels, torn ligaments, and their weight are also covered regularly. I don't believe I have ever read the specific cholesterol numbers, but I do recall it being reported as high/normal/low after their annual physicals.
-
-
19
OK, old-versions-Bible gal, let us start from the beginning:
Why is it obvious that the Obamas need a church - or that they must go to church? And on a Sunday?[Look at it this way: Suppose they skip church one Sunday ... OK, I retract that.]
-
19.1
Maybe the implication is that the search is taking so long because finding a church that is really a Mosque is proving difficult.
-
-
20
It's a shame politicians have to submit to this charade just because the tut-tutting DC guardians of morality demand it.
I don't really believe that anyone outside DC gives a sh*t where or whether Obama goes to church...except of course for those people who didn't and won't vote for him anyway.
-
21
Justice:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/us/politics/05scotus-side.html?scp=6&sq=supreme%20court&st=csehttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/us/politics/23secrets.html?scp=3&sq=justice&st=cse
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/opinion/13sun1.html?scp=5&sq=justice&st=cse
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/opinion/17goldstone.html?scp=7&sq=justice&st=cse
poverty:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/11/AR2009101101582.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/11/us/11poverty.html?scp=5&sq=poverty&st=cse
OK, so maybe that is not "a lot", but it is covered - how about "somewhat frequently"?
-
22
Oh dear. I'm sorry you went to all that trouble to be so unpersuasive.
.
To the extent that "poverty" gets coverage, the dominant theme is "what's the matter with all these poor people and why are they demanding things?" To the extent that "justice" get covered the prevailing themes are "What if Cheney's right?" and "Poor Roman Polanski."
.
Sorry, but even if our media took the issues of poverty and justice seriously, it would not excuse Amy Sullivan clucking like your annoying grandmother about "did you go to mass today? WHAT WAS THE GOSPEL ABOUT??"-
22.1
In Ms. Sullivan's post she was not "clucking" about whether the Obamas went to church. The post was about them choosing a church.
The gospel was about turning the other cheek, and love thy neighbor as yourself, not angry, rude flaming about a rather innocuous blog post.
There are many good papers and periodicals that cover stories like habeus corpus rights of detainees, torture and what the Justice Dept is going to do about it, increasing poverty in this recession, issues concerning sub-prime borrowers - victims or irresponsible, should they be helped or made to pay for their mistakes, people working multiple jobs to make ends meet and still not making it, people bankrupted by uninsured medical problems, loosening the bankruptcy laws because of the current recession. Yes, many trivial issues are covered in today's media because many people are interested in them (the media needs to make a living too) but there are substantive issues of justice and poverty covered everyday.
-
22.2
" .. The gospel was about turning the other cheek ."
Yikes!
And then?
I mean, after we turn both - or all of them - then is that when we get to sock them with the left and the right and the drones and the stealth 'shock and awe' and the storm troopers and .. right?
-
-
23
Ah, Pastor Amy Pastrami, everyone's least favorite denomination-hopper, just can't quit her two-story world of prurient moral scolding. Only a restraining order will save her.
-
24
Hey Committee, fabulous posts here. I couldn't say it any better.
But I will ask Amy: I gottanutha topic for you: how does one reconcile the teachings of Christ with the coaching to always "cover the controversy?"
Hint: maybe you should try covering the conflict between Christ's teachings and the military-industrial complex, or between the function and income of I-Bankers and the welfare and labor of the common person.
Where you are right now is some weird cross between Drudge/Harris/Halperin and The Church Lady. It ain't interesting and it ain't pretty.
-
25
Sacredh, that is the subtext of Amy's post. The longer it takes for the President to find a Church, the stronger is the belief that he is Muslim.
-
25.1
I suppose it might be important to the evangelicals or to the nutters, but most of wouldn't give a rat's ass if President Obama was Muslim, Christian or worshipped the moon. I do enjoy Amy's gossipy style though. It's kind of fun in a "yeah, this has been eating me alive...let's play yahtzee" way.
-
25.2
hmmmmm, I took the subtext to mean Obama is having a hard time making yet another decision. You know, like when to close GITMO, when to stop "don't ask don't tell", etc....... I suppose you would have to not dring from the Reps or Dems kool-aid to get that, though.
-
- TIME See the top 10 movies of 2009 | http://su.pr/21qEh7 - 53 minutes ago
- TIME See the top 10 news stories of 2009 | http://su.pr/5YMHW6 - 3 hours ago
- TIME See the top 10 tweets of 2009 (and check out TIME's top 10 of everything) | http://su.pr/2S5OSN - 3 hours ago
Most Popular »
- Best of the Decade: Sci-Fi Movies
- Is Harry Reid Burning Out?
- How Will Obama Pay For Stimulus 2.1? (or 3.0, 3.1, whatever you want to call it)
- The Health Reform Abortion Wars, Part Deux
- War of the Supermen: Q&A With Matt Idelson
- Quinnipiac: Obama Gets Bump on Afghanistan
- Economists Growing More Wary of the Senate Health Bill
- How to Outsmart a Debt Collector
- Best of the Decade: Gadgets
- "How Will Dave Ever Make Fun of Sex Scandals Again?"
- The Truth Behind the Leaked Climate-Change E-Mails
- Tiger Woods Must Face His Fans' Moral Outrage
- Mexico Witness Protection: Corrupt Program, New Killings
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Taiwan: World's Lowest Birthrate Could Affect Society
- Creating Jobs: Can Obama Government Boost Employment?
- How Strong Is the Evidence Against Amanda Knox?
- Humanure: Goodbye, Toilets. Hello, Extreme Composting
- Suspect Headley: Pakistani Terrorist Group Going Global?
- Study: Parents' Sex Talks with Kids Happening Too Late
Quotes of the Day »
RSS