- List All

  • Web   The Point


+ Theology/Religion + Culture + Marriage & Family + Politics + Academia + Human Rights
Christianity Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Religion Blogs - Blog Top Sites
Link With Us - Web Directory

« ’Jesus is an Elephant’ | Main | If CNN had been at the Boston Tea Party »

April 16, 2009

What does Obama have against Jesus?

Georgetown stage According to this blogger, Obama asked Georgetown University to cover up the name of Jesus on a pediment before he arrived to speak this week--along with all other "signs and symbols there" behind the stage where Obama spoke. What does The Messiah have against Jesus? Oh--right. Competition... 

The White House claimed its request was "consistent with what they've done for other policy speeches." They just wanted a backdrop of a few discreet American flags. Perhaps they've forgotten the speech Obama made with THIS logo behind him--the symbol of International Baby Killers plastered everywhere you look.

(Image courtesy of CNSNews and A Catholic View)

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What does Obama have against Jesus?:



Caesar Obama is a jealous god.

I can't believe that a Roman Catholic church went along with that demand, though.

Kyrie elieson!


Obama: There can only be one, 'One'.

Some people have argued that Obama does not want to use religion to further a political ideology. However, Obama did evoke the Sermon on the Mount, at this Georgetown appearance, to further his economic agenda. Although Obama failed to mention Jesus Christ by name for the Sermon on the Mount.

“There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells a story of two men…‘the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house…it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock,’” Obama said.

“We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand,” he added. “We must build our house upon a rock.”

The last statement is particularly ironic since building your house upon a ‘ROCK‘ means to build your house with Christ as the foundation. Obama decided to blot out the real foundation from the timeless parable.

See the hi-res pictures:

Benjamin Ady

I wonder which is worse, in your mind:

1. Obama and whoever it was at Georgetown conspiring to cover up the name of Jesus.

2. Driving past a hitchhiker, in the rain, when you have 3 empty seats and 200 horsepower, and not giving them a ride, for whatever reason.

Richard Clark

I realize the concern here and identify with it, but I'm kind of astounded at the unnecessary and unhelpful tone that is taken here: "What does The Messiah have against Jesus? Oh--right. Competition..."

Seriously? This is the kind of fair political (or otherwise) discussion Christians want to be known for? I appreciate your blog but every time I read something like this I get closer to unsubscribing.

Gina Dalfonzo

Benjamin -- are you saying that displaying Christ's name and picking up a hitchhiker are mutually exclusive actions?

Richard, I can't speak for Anne, so all I'll say is this -- sometimes, my friend, you have to laugh or you'll cry.

Richard Clark

Then I guess I better start laughing at the fact that Christians can now just say whatever they feel like and chalk it up to keeping a single tear from streaming down their cheek.

Seriously though, first, I didn't really interpret it as a joke as much as a snide comment about Obama's supposed constant search for fame and glory. This is just an unfair assumption.

Gina Dalfonzo

Richard, the call to live a Christian life doesn't preclude us from observing the times and doing our best to interpret what we see. In fact, if I remember correctly (I write this before coffee, so I may be a bit fuzzy), the Bible praises those who do just that.

Jesus called Herod "that fox." I'll be the first to admit that we fallible followers of Jesus don't have the same authority that He does to make judgments. But surely we're permitted a joke or two now and then, based on what we see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears. And if the man who proclaimed, "A light beam will shine through -- will light you up -- and you will experience an epiphany -- I have to vote for Barack!" isn't a fit subject for a jest, then truthfully, I'm not sure who is.


I'm only a few pages into Jonah Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism", and it's stunning how similar the reception given to Obama mirrors the reception given to the pre-war Mussolini.

If Anne is being anything, Richard, it's that she's probably being more gracious than necessary. Gina didn't mention what Paul - that'd be *Saint* Paul, mind you - said about the Judaizers and their campaign for circumcision, in Galatians. (But then, Gina's female; strikes us males more forcefully, I think.) It was a rather (oy, sorry in advance) cutting remark. So Christian sarcasm is nothing new.

Note also that Anne is sufficiently sophisticated and experienced to understand that it's not just Obama himself, but all his supporters and staff, who contribute to such decisions. There were those who got very upset when Jesus allowed people to worship him instead of stopping them. Could President Obama say "Don't cover up the name of Jesus"? Why wasn't this discussed, or apologized for, or anything else, either at the time or now? The situation has all the odor of a messiah-complex in full bloom, and Anne is right to point it out so it can be discussed.

Gina Dalfonzo

By the way, Richard, look for a link to one of your (excellent) articles later today. This is not a blatant attempt to curry favor, whatever it looks like -- I didn't realize when I started to post it that it was yours! David Wayne shared it yesterday and I've been planning the post since then.

I think maybe, somewhere, our Lord is chuckling at us both. :-)

Ben W

LeeQuod, I can respect Obama's desire to emphasize the secular and a-religious character of his office, as long as he's consistent in the application of that going forward. But accusing Obama of putting himself on the same level of God, even jokingly? Not cool. That's like "jokingly" accusing someone of being a child molester.


Acts 12:22-24

22They shouted, "This is the voice of a god, not of a man." 23Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died.

24But the word of God continued to increase and spread.


I have always admired the Catholic leaders' ability to not go along with political thought fashions.

Hope they're not changing now!

A religious private university should not be covering up who it is.

PS. One commentator I heard did say that probably the "cover up the Christian stuff" request came from lower in the administration. Thus, Pres. O may have not known of this request.

(PPPS Wonder what will happen at Notre Dame???)


To Benjamin
If I had an "either or" ...

where I would be allowed to stop the religious symbols in that privately owned auditorium from being covered up
...BUT would miss out on that opportunity if I stopped to help someone in distress...then (of course) I should help the human in distress.

I think the hint that we not forget the humans around us in distress is worth remembering, tho.

But if the two choices were not connected, I would want to not cover up the religious symbolism and I would want to help the person in distress...


Richard's original observation is accurate; the remark is unnecessary and unhelpful. All that follows is effort to justify. By the way, does Jesus approve of Paul's desire to see his brethren mutilated? Christian sarcasm may not be new, but the question remains: is it helpful. Didn't Paul himself have something to say about the difference between that which is "permissible" and that which is "good"?

Jason Taylor

It is interesting that no one seems to have style anymore.

There is an old custom that only a conqueror can ride through the gates of Jerusalem on a horse. But Sir Edmund Allenby made a slight change in 1917. He rode up to the gates. But instead of riding through as was his right as a conqueror, he dismounted and said in effect that he would not ride where Jesus walked.
Now that is not quite humility; he probably had a very high opinion of himself at the time and it is hard to blame him. But it was most certainly style. Style which seems to be most lacking in politics today.


Ben, Anne wasn't joking. I realize that people's memories are short these days, but before he won the election there were these way-over-the-top statements about what he'd do once he got into office. They were in extremely messianic terms. Anne blogged about them then, with the same level of disgust in her tone - and others blogged about it, too.

And as Jason points out, Obama could "dismount" at any time and tell people to stop this nonsense. To this point, he has not.

David, can you get back to me after doing a word-study on the names Jesus used on the Pharisees? Sometimes ya gotta call them like they are. God bless Anne for her courage. And labrialumn's quote is a fair warning; Anne just might be saving the President's life.

Besides, the problem with being a messiah is that you might fail to meet everyone's political expectations, and if you do fail, those adoring crowds will turn on you and flat-out crucify you...


"Sometimes ya gotta call them like they are."

At least the phrase "... call them as I see them" leaves room for the possibility that one does not see perfectly. Evidently LQ and a few he so designates have reached a higher level of discernment than I.

And as for me and my house, we will not rely on "Jesus did it, so I can do it too!"

Jason Taylor

Oh don't worry LeeQuod my "old dear friend". Crucifixtion is out of fashion these days. At least the physical variety...


David snarked: "Evidently LQ and a few he so designates have reached a higher level of discernment than I."

And I know more about software engineering than you do, too, whippersnapper. I thought you said sarcasm was off limits.

But I don't need to defend Anne. By all accounts she's a most gracious and refined lady, but in terms of qualifications for arguing this issue, David, you're hurling stones at an M1 Abrams tank. I've no need to jump between the two of you with my slingshot. Rather, my intent is to warn you that you're merely being annoying and you might want to stop, or else that turret might turn your way and we'll name the crater "The Spot Where David Once Stood".

And as far as using names on the Pharisees, what does "being a follower of Jesus" mean? Becoming like the meek and mild guy who would never clear out moneychangers single-handedly? Someone who would stop preaching in Jerusalem when flogged once? Someone who would never confront a hypocritical St. Peter when he associates with goyim only when it's expedient? Lord, save me from such a gutless fate.

Pardon me; I'm going to go re-read the book of Jude.

Jason Taylor

David, Paul did not desire to see his brethren "mutilated". If by that you mean circumcision then he was against demanding that gentile believers be circumcised. Though as it happens there are a number of people who were circumcised including some goyim(they used to say it prevented itching but that is beside the point)who might find it a wee bit annoying having it called "mutilation".


Jason, check out Galatians 5:2-12, particularly the last verse. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%205:2-12;&version=31;

One of the reasons I can't be *that* angry at labrialumn is that he's following precedent.


Jason Taylor wrote: "Crucifixtion is out of fashion these days. At least the physical variety..."

Right - I was thinking of the suddenly hostile press conferences, the op-ed columns, the not-fawning-anymore-by-golly Katie Couric interview,... Is there any better term to describe instantaneous, irrecoverable vilification - or at least one that uses fewer syllables?

Jason Taylor

No LeeQuod. Crucifixion will do-unless one wishes as a source of metaphors for a list of some of the even more exotic methods that have been used.


David, so you and your house will do better than Jesus did? Will you also ascend into heaven and cast God from His throne? It's been tried before, you know.

The comments to this entry are closed.