is that Obama believes what you believe. No matter who you are or what you believe, Obama believes the same things that you believe. That's why he deserves your vote. Even when Obama says or does something you think you disagree with, he only does that so he can get elected to do the things you (and he) believe in, no matter who you are.

The OFB clearly understands this. Why don't you? You must be a Republican (but even then, Obama believes what you, as a Republican, believe, so he deserves your vote).

Nice!

is where do I, as an atheist, fit into his plans. When do I get pandered to?
Ah well, the underside of the bus is familar territory.

are the not-to-be-pandered-to category.

Crazy fundies?... oh yeah, we have to understand their point of view on abortion or gay marriages. Atheists? Not so much.

Some of my atheist friends have a religios devotion and faith to Obama that rivals my more devout Christian friends/acquaintances.

The problem that atheists have with God is they don't believe he exists. Obama exists, and many of the same powers, properties (eg - infallibility, omnipotence) and adoration usually assigned to a diety (or comic book superhero) are directed instead toward Obama, so Obama is the perfect God-substitute for your atheist friends.

And, just as George Carlin noted about the Christian God, Obama loves you. And he needs money. If Obama didn't exist, your friends would have to invent him.

might be the best way to describe these non-religious devotees, hopfully they're less fanatical than the followers of Jones and Koresh, though their fondness of Kool-aid gives one pause and even the briefest visit to any of the pro-Obama blogs will dampen your hopes for less fanaticism.
Having said that, I can see where he's coming from, I think the pervasiveness of religion in politics in this country makes it impossible to get elected to any major office without first passing a "godliness" litmus test. Hence, we have our candidates parading themselves to the Vatican and Billy Graham and praying at the Wailing Wall. It's enough to hare-lip the Pope, if you don't mind having it in biblical terms.

in myself. and my impressions. my "lying eyes," as it were. i totally agree with you. at first, i thought, "well, it must just be the places i go, in which the people are very much like me." i suppose that's still true, and obviously, writing regularly in the Militant Atheist mode is likely to bring not a few more of us here, where we are safe. but i go all over the place these days, and atheism seems to me to be the fastest growing orientation of them all.

i got into a fight over stats about religious belief here once, and i'm not going to do that again, so no links. but religious belief continues to decline in this country, even as some of the fundie sects grow. the two directions needn't cancel each other out; the nice thing about fundies with huge families and crazy belief systems is that the kids who grow up in it are almost guaranteed to more than occasionally grow out of it, and often go to the opposite extreme. that's a story i've read all over the intertubes by fellow atheists. it makes me glad. we'll see if religion can withstand the coming collapse of consumerist society and a generation of lazy, spiritually hypocritical, overly wealthy, politically whorish religious leadership who will suddenly look very bad to their poor, starving congregations. sometimes this contrast strengthens them, historically speaking, sometimes it sparks revolutions.

Aren't we people, too? *snark*

And we're universally discriminated against by the ignorant religioned folk. Of course, morality isn't dependent on God. Some laws of morality were written in a book in a fairly roundabout way -- and not many laws of morality, just a few, since the central concern was the proper way to conduct animal sacrifices -- and that's all we have. But if we say it, we'll be lynched. It's an awful position.

That said, pandering to the ignorant religioned folk might actually pay off with votes. We as heathens should be accepted by default, without it being said. But it makes me feel like a pre-civil-rights black man. No, we can't serve you here. See, it's not that we have a problem with black people, no sir! But many of our customers are not so high-minded and will be uncomfortable with you here. Please leave.

On the other hand, "faith"-based initiatives are generally a good thing, since they mobilize local community members to a good cause. I've started going to services recently (if you're Conservative, it's good singing!), and one of the things that my local shul does is exactly the kind of thing a "faith"-based initiative is supposed to do. Helping people, etc. As a non-participating atheist, I would never be involved in these things; as an atheist shul-goer, well, I'm still too lazy, but there's a chance. Just because it's run by a religious organization doesn't make it inherently evil.

Finally, Judeo-Christian tradition, my ass. The law is founded on secular law beliefs like the Magna Carta, the social contract, and the idea of freedom. Stealing isn't illegal because it's in the Decalogue; it's illegal because we have property rights. Which, incidentally, is the same reason it was illegal in the Decalogue in the first place. Our system is founded on capitalism and its need for order while the English staked their companies' claims in the Colonies, on disrespect for other cultures (that one does have Biblical precedent, though), and on not letting someone else have all the power of a king. Saying our laws are Judeo-Christian is pure pander.