I don't know if this just sounded so brilliant because I drank one Manhattan and two glasses of Sangria, but my dad made an observation over dinner on Friday night that I thought was spot on.
We were discussing the latest hoopla over Obama's ex-preacher. The talking heads were calling for Obama to more strongly denounce his church's ex-leader for his most recent comments as well as for decades of other comments.
What my dad wanted to know was why isn't John McCain being called out to denounce his leader, the current leader of this nation? John McCain honorably served his country in combat and was even subject to torture in a POW camp. At the same time, our current president was doing his best to avoid active military duty and currently does his best to allow torture while denying that he condones it.
Shouldn't the talking heads be angrily calling for McCain to vehemently denounce his "preacher" and protest by leaving his "church" (the senate) in an angry huff? I would argue that who's someone's preacher is far less important than whom one currently supports as leader, when they themselves claim to operate by different ideals.
Isn't McCain sitting silently in the pews of congress by allowing our current administration to torture POW's (excuse me, "enemy combatants")? Shouldn't he be called upon to stand up and denounce the leader that is not leading the way he says he himself would lead?
Why do we care more about a political candidate's religious leader than their political leaders? If it is supposed to say something about the candidate's character, or the way he will lead, isn't there much more of a correlation between a man and his political leader?
If this isn't sounding as brilliant as it seemed to me on Friday night, go drink a couple shots and read it again.