My understanding is that he was raised largely without religion (lucky dog) and that he had an epiphany in Rev. Wright's church. Also, I'm not sure whether he currently affiliates with UCC as opposed to some other church (he surely needs to consult with Sally Quinn on that, of course).

Perhaps he had more Christian indoctrination before that, from his grandparents as you say, not that there's anything especially right with that.

is in no position to call anyone else out for "trolling."

on not capping credit card interest rates versus the traditional position on interest rates for many of the Muslim faith.

Shariah law condemns the taking of interest. Basically, and as I'm remembering though the intertoobes may prove me wrong, usury and interest are raised in the Koran, linked linked to almsgiving, social justice, and not haranguing people who owe you money.

It's a pretty interesting subject and there was a rise in acadmic study on Islamic economic theory pertaining to investment versus interest a few years ago. I lifted this quickly from wikipedia, but I think this is right: concepts from Islamic banking are profit sharing (Mudharabah), safekeeping (Wadiah), joint ventures (Musharakah), cost plus (Murabahah), and leasing (Ijarah). There are some very interesting strategies for getting around the restrictions.

I think goldberry's point was that by refusing to cap the usurious rates on credit cards while in the Senate, Sen. Obama proved he was not Muslim and he did not follow Shariah law.

Agree that this point is, well, pointless, but it isn't trolling.

people had learned about his attitude toward usury (no limit on interest rates--which I didn't realize--Goldberry: Have a link for that shocker?), and ,given that Islam proscribes usury, then no one in his or her right mind could have continued accusing Obama of being a Muslim.

Anyway, that's how I read it--that Goldberry was not pushing any trollish or rightwad lie.

Indeed, she was giving the lie to such accusations. (Did I use that phrase correctly??)

As to Obama's religious preferences, I would be very happy to see him assert that his religion is a private matter and will not be flaunted as a political cloak. I am a bit surprised to hear he is not attending church, and hasn't for some months, but that is his choice as well. Personal and private choice. (Altho' the AOL "quiz" found a slight majority concerned about it.)

I'm not sure how that will be preceived by the religions right voters, but he won't need to woo them for a little while.

Anyway, the body is the temple of the lord; so what's wrong with going to the gym on Sunday mornings? Works for me.

St. Paul asked in 1 Corinthians: “Don’t you know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?” and “Don’t you know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which you have from God?” In 2 Corinthians he comes right out and says it plainly: “We are a temple of the living God; even as God said, ‘I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.’”

The disciple John hints at this when he recounts in his gospel an event when Jesus was in the great temple in Jerusalem and was asked to show the people a sign. “Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The people at the temple said, ‘Forty-six years was this temple in building, and will you raise it up in three days?’ But he spoke of the temple of his body.”

my immediate reaction was the same as dcb's, but here it is the next day and i've calmed down, and it still reads like muslim is being used as a slur here, as in 'there may be a lot of things wrong with obama, but at least we know he's not a muslim.'

Perhaps the reason I'm not terribly unsatisfied is that I truly wasn't hoping for much more than the ability to properly pronounce "nuclear" and I have that, in both the President and the VP. Such a relief to the ears and the psyche and, I would argue, a fairly decent general indicator of more good things to come.

In fairness to Obama he did say very publically that he appears as a blank slate, a shiny reflector, to many people who will in turn be disappointed that he does not meet their projected expectations. That is a refreshing sort of self-analysis, certainly a cut above the self-absorbed lack of analysis inherent to both Bush and McCain.

Obama is a bright lad, I'm pretty sure of that, and seems so far to be free of the grip of any radical ideology in any direction. As a stabilizing influence then, he can not but act in ways that are generically Progressive; government policy has been dragged so far to the Right over the last 40 years that he can't do anything but pull Left or he too will be crushed politically. Seems a feeble sort motivation for change, I know, but it will be change and it is in the proper direction.

I expect he won't want to pull far enough or fast enough, but in contrast to your statement that there is little we can do to affect the course of events I think Progressives are in the best position we have been in since Oh Forever, a real opportunity to push Leftward and add to the momentum of change that is inevitable and going our way – however slowly at first.

My glass is half-full, and there is a scent of rain.

But lucky me, he's all upside now, while others are either contorting themselves to make everything he does perfect or dealing with disappointment or confusion.

I have had much the same feeling. I cannot help but smile when I read some these posts of dawning understanding that we have elected the American Tony Blair. Obama's hedgefund contributors (who provided his early big money) realized that a black Democrat could achieve what no Republican would dare.

Everyone had to STFU, or STFUed themselves, so now that the facts for the debate are in the public record, you're a bitter dead-ender for saying something like that.

To make matters worse, when you raise a legitimate concern about Obama today, people act like you're screaming "Hillary! Hillary! Hillary!" even if you said and meant nothing of the kind.

Yet, in Jane's defense, there had been Digby's example for all to see. It's easy, on one hand, to say you would have stood up, different on the other hand to be the woman to say something honest, and then stand up to all the horrid misogyny on display when the Obama lovers came to call on your site(and this is even before the threats of the fish in the mail that Lambert found).

Me, I was trained to be a fighter, and never duck one. That was my reaction to facing this woman hating world we live in, but not all women react that way. And I can't blame them.

if I hadn't also been a well-documented Hillary supporter and, therefore, not associated with or responsible for the awful unfounded allegations hurled by some of the more thoughtless Obama supporters.

As to motive, you can always ask me in lieu of accusing. Most of the time I know why I do what I do, and am more than happy to explain.

At my previous job as a News Monitor. Especially in the winter. It gets dreary and rainy, but it beats frigid and icy, any day.

but seriously, maybe we should consider having regional meetings of the mighty Corrente?? it seems like there are several of us here in the Bay Area; i think it would be just awesome to have a cup of coffee together and talk politics! and, most importantly, to connect with people who are on the same wavelength; it's a rare and precious gift, really. :)