It is illegal for liberal politicians to speak at their chruches.

Well, maybe not, but, “[t]he Internal Revenue Service has notified the United Church of Christ’s national offices in Cleveland, Ohio, that the IRS has opened an investigation into U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s address at the UCC’s 2007 General Synod as the church engaging in ‘political activities.'”

Don Clark, a Chicago attorney who serves as the UCC’s national special counsel, said the IRS investigation will afford the UCC the opportunity to correct “inaccuracies and misperceptions.”

“It’s disconcerting, since the IRS did not communicate with us, or seek any facts from us, in advance of their coming to this understanding,” Clark said. “But we feel confident that once they are made aware of the facts that they’ll draw a different conclusion.

“This inquiry will provide an opportunity for the United Church of Christ to correct any factual inaccuracies and misperceptions that may have prompted the underlying concern, and to reaffirm the importance of the constitutional rights of free speech and association that have been implicated,” Clark said.

Was this new that a political figure would speak at a church? Maybe to a liberal church while the worst president in American history in office. But for the record:

Sitting presidents and presidential candidates have a long history of speaking before non-profit, faith-based bodies.

In January of this year, both Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton spoke separately to the national gathering of the National Baptist Convention of America. In April 1996, when her husband, Bill Clinton, was seeking re-election, then-First Lady Hillary Clinton, who is United Methodist, spoke before her denomination’s quadrennial General Conference.

In March 1983, President Ronald Reagan gave his famous “Evil Empire” speech before the National Association of Evangelicals.

In September 1960, then-candidate John F. Kennedy, a Roman Catholic, appeared before the Greater Houston Ministerial Association to explain the “so-called religious issue” and “to emphasize from the outset that we have far more critical issues to face in the 1960 election.”

Full report from the church.

We need to remember how bad this administration is. We need to remember that its slash and burn political behavior has infected government agencies everywhere. It is not just about illegal wars and illegal wire taps. It is everywhere.

Hopefully the investigation will go away, but why find reason to believe without contacting the church? How is it possible that after eight years of tearing down the separation of church and state with everything from abstinence only to creationism to editing EPA reports to hiring unqualified lawyers from religious schools to violating the Hatch Act this administration possibly has the nerve to do this? I believe we discussed early the audacity that Clinton showed in some of her attacks on Obama. This, this my friends is audacity.

2 replies on “It is illegal for liberal politicians to speak at their chruches.”

That is craziness.

I believe we discussed early the audacity that Clinton showed in some of her attacks on Obama. This, this my friends is audacity.

And indeed the Clinton’s do. In sort of personal denial of reality in front of the world in a “are they insane enough to believe I’ve not seen CNN at all in the last 25 years?!?” kind of way, the Clintons are indeed more audacious.

In an Andrew Jackson, “let me use my army to do whatever the hell I want” kind of way, George Bush takes the baton directly from Julius Caesar.

Do you think it would be poorly received if Obama fired every person hired by the federal government after 2001?

I guess it would be.

I approve and enjoy your distinction wrt to audacity, by the way.

Leave a Reply