There's an amusing debate (more, and even in Time magazine) going on as to whether John McCain is making conservatives think that Obama is the antichrist. The narrative seems to be, roughly:
1. McCain's latest parody ad of Obama-as-Messiah contains subtle, coded signals that evangelicals will decrypt as meaning Obama is the antichrist. (A "a sinister orange light" and Obama's own seal figure prominently!)
2. Democrats who have experience with "red" states, or who otherwise grew up knowing some Christians, testify that this is so.
3. Finally, this thesis is proven beyond doubt by objective evidence: There are hundreds of thousands (plus one more, now) containing the words "obama" and "antichrist."
Gee: such a rich field to mine. Where to begin?
First, McCain's ad is what, a week old now? Do we really think that most or all of those 700,000+ pages arose in response to McCain's ad? Look at, for example, barackobamaantichrist.blogspot.com, the most prominent of these search results. The site dates back to May, admits, frankly, "I am not calling Barack Hussein Obama the Anti-Christ", and goes on to say he's simply disgusted with the "moon-eyed adoration are indicative of people mindlessly enthralled."
So: (a) most those pages undoubtedly existed long before the ad, and (b) many/most of them don't seriously make the argument that Obama is actually "the antichrist."
This is another example of the specious but popular argument that Americans never think independently: Do or did some number of Americans think Iraq sponsored 9/11? Bush administration must have convinced them of that. Likewise, if some number of Americans link "Obama" and "Antichrist", then McCain must have convinced them of that. Americans apparently listen intently to their politicians (and even spend their time decrypting subtle coded signals) and believe every word. Even more those on the "right wing", who, we know, are especially trusting toward government!
It's also an example of a stunning inability to detect humor: McCain's previous "Love" ad was in the same vein, depicting media talking heads (using their own words) as falling head-over-heels in love with Obama. While the Democratic "experts" testify that YES, evangelicals will know his is a coded message that Obama is the antichrist, it simply hit me as a rather funny send-up.
Finally, the Democratic "experts" are sitting on a much more obvious explanation for the few web pages which seriously link Obama with the word "Antichrist": to the extent that you portray yourself, or others portray you, as a kind of messiah, a number of people will react by saying you're really a false messiah. And indeed, would-be messiahs are about a dime a dozen these days.
In an era when Time, Newsweek, and Rolling Stone covers depict Obama with a halo of glowing light around him, in an era where a politician appears to claim he's causing the ocean levels to fall, a few will push back in that manner. And yes, their narrative may be overstated, but I find it far scarier that so many more Obama supporters either nakedly embrace such a portrayal, or give such absurd an inappropriate claims a pass.
Those who most vocally fear the "coming theocracy" seem oddly unable to detect the same (or even welcome it) when their own candidate claims he is "doing the Lord's work."
Is that the argument?
You're right: I was being sloppy and I was wrong. That's not Amy Sullivan's argument in Time. I read hers at the same time as a bunch of others (I first saw the number on another page), who portrayed it the other way around: that McCain was generating/amplifying the meme:
It is designed to galvinize [sic] a very specific group: Evangelical Christians of the End Times, Rapture-Ready variety. It is designed, more to the point, to scare the **** out of these people by insinuating that Barack Obama is the Antichrist. This is a particularly nefarious and crafty argument to make because it is the one context in which all the candidate's strengths -- his smarts, his articulateness, his contagious smile and way with people -- can become evidence against him. All these traits are associated in the Bible with the charismatic, popular, well-spoken man who is supposed to become the leader of the world and bring about the Tribulation.
Apparently, my brain then grafted that narrative onto Amy's mention of the web pages. My bad!
But in my defense, she does tend to also equivocate a bit, implying McCain's campaign is doing the "convincing" in the headline and in the close of the article:
But McCain advisers are aware that one of the goals of Democratic outreach to Evangelicals has been to simply neutralize their opposition....
A new TIME poll finds that the most conservative Evangelicals are the least enthusiastic about McCain's candidacy. Convincing them that Obama does have two horns and a tail might be the best way of getting them to vote.
And here:
"If they wanted to be funny, if they really wanted to play up the idea that Obama thinks he's the Second Coming, there were better ways to do it," she says. "Why use these awkward lines like, 'And the world will receive his blessings'?"
Ummm: cause that is funny?
Many times, an mainstream news article actually says one thing, if you pay close attention (as you did) but seems to imply something quite different if one reads quickly, and lets the headline, unsubstantiated implications, and general tone be the more dominant elements in one's memory. (As I did.) My bad. Sullivan SAID the idea came from elsewhere, spontaneously, but her article does seems to imply, repeatedly, it's some sort of organized effort associated with McCain.
(Ironic, since that's exactly what a "subliminal" suggestion is.)
(Am *I* now making silly allegations? Doesn't seem so, when I compare the facts the article presents to the tone which seems to hang over it.)
it seems that a fraction, say at least 5%, of those hits are sincere...
One one hand, if the argument is that Obama would probably support a strengthened world government, then that a rather reasonable prediction, I would say, given some of the lines he read in his Berlin speech.
On the hand, if the argument is that he IS *the* antichrist (not just another false messiah figure) then, well, I'd point out surveys used to show about 5-10% of the population thought Elvis was alive. So I sometimes remind myself there's always a 5% or so fringe belief for just about anything.
(Good heavens! I'm one of those crackpots who still thinks that Saddam had a definite interest in WMD, and intent to develop it)
There do seem to be a lot of rumors flying about Barack...
You mean more than there were about George Bush? War for Halliburtion? Sold cocaine? Being divorced any minute now by Laura? Back on the bottle? Had Karl Rove plant the Kerry campaign's fored "AWOL" documents? Really deep in the pockets of the House of Saud? Currently embroiled in an affair with Condi?
You mean that sort of scale of thing? ;-)
You know: that's the funny thing about rumors. Why is something a "rumor" if it's actually got a grain of truth? I mean, Iraq wasn't supporting al Qaeda, right? Who started that rumor? Only there's apparently plenty of evidence they actually were.
That he's actually a Muslim...
I've read both side of this argument. For example, here's Snopes' "debunking" of some portion of it. Note the various rebuttals. Now read the actual evidence. For example:
Nedra Pickler of the Associated Press reports that "documents showed he enrolled as a Muslim" while at a Catholic school during first through third grades. Kim Barker of the Chicago Tribune confirms that Obama was "listed as a Muslim on the registration form for the Catholic school." A blogger who goes by "An American Expat in Southeast Asia" found that "Barack Hussein Obama was registered under the name ‘Barry Soetoro' serial number 203 and entered the Franciscan Asisi Primary School on 1 January 1968 and sat in class 1B. … Barry's religion was listed as Islam."
The public school: Paul Watson of the Los Angeles Times learned from Indonesians familiar with Obama when he lived in Jakarta that he "was registered by his family as a Muslim at both schools he attended." Haroon Siddiqui of the Toronto Star visited the Jakarta public school Obama attended and found that "Three of his teachers have said he was enrolled as a Muslim." Although Siddiqui cautions that "With the school records missing, eaten by bugs, one has to rely on people's shifting memories," he cites only one retired teacher, Tine Hahiyari, retracting her earlier certainty about Obama's being registered as a Muslim.
If those are the allegations, the rebuttals are straw men, picking only the least plausible allegations (that he was "radical Muslim", and his school was a "madrass"), rebutting them, but not informing readers about the real substance of the debate. (Sigh.)
So did the various news sources named above actually report such things? Perhaps I'm being blind again (it does happen) but I'm not seeing any rebuttals. And if true, this would, in fact, make Barack at least a former Muslim, in Islamic eyes.
So is that a mere "rumor", or another bunch of interesting facts being elided?
(Let me be clear: I'm not saying Barack IS a Muslim. I'm a Christian, so my view is that you can be whatever belief you say you are. And that even kids raised as Christians aren't truly Christians until they decide, for themselves, what their own beliefs will be. But that isn't, in my experience, how Islam views such matters.)
... that he's not actually a citizen, that he was sworn in on the Koran for his seat in Illinois.
There was a story that Obama held dual US/Kenyan citizenship. I don't know what became of that. Likewise, people are conflating Keith Ellison with Obama. (People DO tend to mix up people from other ethnic groups, sadly.)
Hmmm... I can't find the whole speech anywhere for context. Only exerpts.
I had the same problem with his statement about tire inflation. It would be nice if someone would put recording of these things out there (data's cheap these days) and possible transcribe them. There's a quote here, and he sounds tongue-in-cheek about it (though who knows what that elipsis omits) and making a joke.
I'm not at all convinced Obama thinks he is a Messiah of some sort. But, as with Ron Paul, his followers scare me quite a bit more, as does his willingness to play up those aspects at time. I mean, how does one interpret his grandiose claims (not, sadly, taken at all out of context) about the ocean levels falling (etc)?
Given that, as you say, McCain's political ads have been, in fact, rather funny, light, and cordial, I don't feel it was disgusting to have included this example -- though it IS taken out of context. But, as you have said, he DOES say quite a lot of this sort of thing, much of it a lot less jokingly.
For the record, I haven't made any decisions yet on how to vote so I'm not committed towards any particular candidate.
Like most conservatives, I'm hardly excited about McCain. And, in truth, it's not impossible that Obama could turn out better than my expectations.
But, if I could bend your ear a bit further, there are, roughly speaking, a few things which gravely concern me about Obama:
(a) Chameleon.
Not a good tendency in an executive. I don't think he MEANS to be deceptive, etc. (To his credit a teacher, his course at U Chicago, I have heard, did a pretty good job at presenting both sides of many partisan arguments.) BUT I don't really think Obama knows who he is.
It takes a lot of political backbone to do the right thing in Washington & the world. The prevailing political tendency ("common wisdom") is wrong nearly every time. And short terms gains look mighty tempting.
(b) Deceptive.
He speaks of everything he isn't, or hasn't been. He speaks of bipartisanship but his voting record is hard left. He speaks of transcending racism but his history says nothing of the sort. He says he never heard such things in his church but "Audacity" records that he clearly did. He spoke against NAFTA, but called Canada and warned them not to take him seriously. And on and on.
This is very troubling.
(c) Poor judgment.
Holding a major event at a former terrorist's house was incredibly stupid. Samantha Power & a host of his other advisors don't reflect the international policies he claims to embrace. (I could argue this is deception, but I *do* try to assume the best.) Wright knew he would be a problem for Obama, but Obama couldn't see it. Obama botches almost every stance on any major international subject, including the surge, the importance of Afghanistan, Pakistan, drilling, etc.
I'm not saying, here, that I disagree with his policies. (Though I do, to the extent I can discern the vague outlines of one, at specific moments.) If I were *Pro* Obama I would be frustrated with this aspect of him. (As many supporters apparently are.)
(d) Lack of any meaningful experience.
Senators often make terrible executives. And yes, that probably applies to McCain too, though less so, given his military background. McCain has certainly organized & rallied people for certain causes (ones I object too, incidentally, such as campaign finance reform). But at least he's demonstrated the ability to successfully pursue goals, and get opponents on board.
(e) Judges.
Every principled person, left or right, should want to have our laws enacted with the consent of those governed, though representative democracy. Thomas Jefferson warned about the dangers of allowing the present situation -- where judges create or annul new law (out of whole cloth at times) whenever they feel it socially expedient. As Jefferson said, that's an unchecked oligarchy, a kind of tyranny, not a form of democracy.
I wish the US to continue as a Democratic Republic. Therefore, I want judge who, whatever their own beliefs, who will endeavor to apply the law, not create it or strike it down based on their feelings. Yet Obama will appoint exactly that later sort of judge.
(f) His policies.
As mentioned above, I think I disagree with his policies. (Again, I have to say "think" because nobody's sure what they are. Which is, to me, even scarier than disagreeing.) He's an economic ninny, for example. Of course, McCain is too, for the exact same reasons. (And so was I, for most my life.)
But I suspect McCain would be easier to pressure into doing the right thing. Like McCain, he buys into all the warming climate change scare legislation. (Even if we believe in warming, Kyoto did nothing, I'd point out.) I expect both would love another round of campaign "reform." So there's only a matter of degree here. It's sure not Reagan versus Mondale. But that degree still matters.
(And let's not overlook opposition to nuclear power.)
(g) Social issues.
McCain will be marginally less bad on illegal immigration. McCain will be better on opposing rewrite-society initiatives like making it harder for people to school their own kids, legally restructuring marriage, or silencing unpopular speech.
If you want to understand how truly radically the current crop of Democrats want to remake America, look, as just a sample, at the Orwellian-named "Employee Free Choice Act", which wants to eliminate an employee's right to cast a secret ballot concerning unionization. This opens workers up to coercion, bribery, and threats. (There's a good reason the secrecy of our political votes is protected.)
The expected result is union control of more workplaces, more union control of workers, more fear and threats for employees who oppose unionization, and higher prices and less flexibility in most businesses you deal with. (Which means lower real wages for workers, on average; and let's not forget about dues.)
But it's the anti-freedom pro-bullying aspect of this which I find most troubling. (As I do with Democrats' consistent opposition to any reasonable checks on vote fraud.)
Likewise, Democrats are utterly serious about the "Fairness Doctrine", which will shut down the few remaining right-leaning media outlets (on AM radio, for heaven's sake) and do NOTHING about reforming the pervasive left-leaning bias in print news, most TV news networks, and universities.
And these are only the first round of measures that we know about.
(For yet another example, at a more local level, check out this presentation of Michigan's "Reform Michigan" plan (found in a UAW web site). Voters are being told it's about cleaning up corruption, spending, etc, but the Powerpoint slides reveal to be a very clever trojan horse meant to pack the courts and hand the entire government over to one party for the next decade. Even a few principled Democrats have complained about it. I expect to see something analogous at a national level soon. Perhaps after the political trials get underway. (I feel almost an alarmist or extremist to even mention it, but it's not me chomping at the bit to do that.))
Isn't much of that troubling? A lot of that strikes me as deeply troubling, and I don't see why it doesn't bother most other people -- or what they think eclipses such.
Don't most people think we should drill for more oil and support nuclear power? Don't most people think it's kind of scary the way judges are simply making up laws these days, or striking down laws they don't like? Don't most people think it's kind of totalitarian to be that enthusiastic about passing a law to prevent your opponents from speaking out, politically?
Strikes me as something right out of 1984, but most people seem positively enraptured about the people are proposing to do all that.
Yeah, Republicans suck. They just don't scare me nearly as much. I'm just not as afraid of the results of, say, their ridiculous overspending. (Which Democrats seem to do, also.) Or appointing judges who think the legislature should decide important questions. Or leaving marriage as just one man and one woman. Even if we think that's wrong (I don't) we at least know what that looks like. The 1980s and 1990s weren't exactly a horrifying vision of totalitarian oppression. Even for gays and lesbians.
Christians taught the wrong understanding of anti christ!
Body: I am still getting massive numbers of e-mails from people who fear that the anti-christ was just elected president. How can we minister to frightened Christians in deep despair? We do have the spirit of Babylon rising in our own country, and the foundations were being built long before 2008’s election.
The public is not challenging the salaries of Police and firemen unions. These organizations are not needed in our society. Yet they have taken control of New York City, California and many other cities and states. These government unions are masking their use of public employees in an organized effort to grow government and remove local control of government. Unions were originally created to help private sector employees and were never intended for gaining government power.
The Soviet Union was another massive government workers union! Our city government located in my town is entirely unionized, they represent a left wing voter block that we cannot remove in the election process. Arnold the governator tried to break California's public employees unions power and quickly learned that they were strong enough to terminate him. When will the people in this nation see these trends? Our schools are unionized, and controlled by the left, and have educated a generation of kids who feel perfectly at home with socialism.
I have spent years writing a book to re-educate people by waking them up to the fact that we are supporting a state growing within a state, and it has formed deep roots within our most trusted institutions. This government power and abuse are a twin prophecy connected to the 3 Hebrews who were forced to fall down and either worship the golden statue erected by the state of Babylon, or die in the fire. (Daniel Chapter 3) The Idol we must bow and worship today is political correctness! If we do not do this we may be fired, or destroyed by character assassinations directed by the Babylon media. If you do not fall down and worship the image of the beast you must be destroyed. (Daniel 3) That is how they sought to destroy Sarah Palin and George W. Bush, even though Bush desperately tried to stop Freddie and Fannie 7 times.
The time has come where we cannot buy nor sell, nor have employment without our tax money being used to build this modern Babylon. They are literally building a political God of gold by taking our own money, robbing our own job. They are ignoring sound principles and offering us as sacrifices to appease their angry god.
We are like cattle (property) being lead by those we have elected to the slaughter. Our thoughts are that these people are honest humans who intend to take care of us. We are being lulled into slavery by the beast of Babylon. And they have us paying for the transportation to the train station, the ticket for the journey, and all the failing plans of scheme. They are empowering their status by allowing us to think all is well as we become enslaved to build their palaces with our sweat and money! They are actually Beastly men who have sold out their own humanity. Everybody is anxiously looking for the mark of the beast while we are being marked by the Beast through our service in Babylon with our own right hand. The mark in the forehead is not a computer chip, like Christians imagine. It is a mark of deception brainwashed into their minds, or foreheads. When did John the Revelator ever say that this prophecy was to be a marked tatto placed on the forehead? He specifically said it was a mark placed "into peoples foreheads". the forehead in the context of scripture represents peoples intellects, and their individual thought processes. A computer chip cannot possibly force a person to go to hell! It is the selling their minds and souls to Satan becoming marked through their personal choice to follow evil.
Look how people just voted with their right hands! What kind of Beast has entered their brains? Is it not the mark of the beast implanted into their thought processes by the media? This deception causes people to sell out their own freedom! Peoples’ right hands voted for slavery in Babylon. Your right hand is the work hand! By their own will people in fear sacrifice their freedom thinking they are accomplishing a greater good. The poor are being used to justify this mass robbery done through slave taxation. Our education systems, and our health care are to become the final foundation to construct the monsters idol. Poor people become the image of the golden idol. The money Idol in which the beast hides himself behind, in order to hide the fact that our sacrifices are not for the poor after all, but actually for the beasts own glory. The poor are just pawns, and will soon become slaves to this modern Babylon after their plight is used.
I have great hope that this failing economy will not respond to Babylon’s social fixes, and things may get much worse. Christians do not comprehend what the mark of the beast is! This makes it easier for them to also be enslaved by spiritual ignorance. They think a tattoo is coming that will be placed upon their head. This blinds them from seeing the true mark! They misplace the Bible's true meaning of the real mark. Did anyone ever notice that John the revelator clearly stated the mark would be imposed "in the forehead" and not placed on the forehead?? The forehead represents mans intellect. His mind, and thought processes being influenced by either good or evil.
The mark is spiritual, and not literal! There were not any computer chips present when Cain was marked in ancient times! The number 666 is the measurement of Nebuchadnezzar’s golden idol. The mark of the historical calendar for the Babylon system, was 600 BC. Sixty cubits high and six cubits wide. See Daniel Chapter Three verse one. Therein resides the meaning of 666. Herein is depicted Babylon’s beastly slavery as recorded in your own Bible. How did so many miss this? The measurements are written in the Bible.
I am still getting frightened e-mails from lots of Christians who believe that the anti-christ has just come to power. Millions of these people have been taught wrong meanings for the "Beast of Babylon" from self serving preachers who do not understand, nor can they properly identify this enemy within correct Bible context. Suddenly after the election millions of these people are confused and lost, not knowing where to turn for spiritual understanding! The evil one wants to destroy America. America protects Israel.
The enemy wants to remove our presence in the Middle East. This is why Sarah Palin and others supporting victory in Iraq must prepare to lead America after they learn hard lessons. Perhaps I can help re-educate willing minds when they begin to feel the hard times.. I believe God will even give ignorant people another chance. He will attempt to teach them something before he resorts to his final judgments.
I am trying to be of some positive assistance, even though I am not a writer, and require another author to help me articulate and promote my book. Help me to reach thousands of frightened and confused Christians, who do not understand what prophecies are happening, or where they can go to find the correct biblical information, to change it.
Read about the 8th beast on this sight www. eternaltrut. net
Do we really think that most or all of those 700,000+ pages arose in response to McCain's ad?
Is that the argument? Or are people claiming that McCain is aligning himself with that meme? I agree that I don't think McCain is calling Obama the antichrist or using coded messages or similar. The ads were more flattering to Obama and lighthearted than just about any political ads I've ever seen.
From one article on the topic;
The blog dedicated to the topic, as you mentioned, doesn't take the meme seriously.
This particular article, at least, seems to assert that the meme existed previous to McCain's ad.
Looking through the results of a web search, it seems that a fraction, say at least 5%, of those hits are sincere in their belief or tenative belief. There do seem to be a lot of rumors flying about Barack; That he's actually a Muslim, that he's not actually a citizen, that he was sworn in on the Koran for his seat in Illinois. Etc. One conservative talk show host, whose name I can't remember, commented that he had never heard anything like that coming from his listeners before in that volume and wondered what the cause was.
For the record, I haven't made any decisions yet on how to vote so I'm not committed towards any particular candidate.
Posted by: Ryan W. on August 11, 2008 12:43 PM