I was enjoying my breakfast and then came across this story. "Public cool to Michelle, doesn’t know Cindy." What next? A poll on their children?

While 30% have a favorable view of Michelle Obama only 27% have a favorable view of Cindy McCain. But Obama gets a 35% unfavorable response and McCain only a 17% unfavorable rating. Those are very high numbers for Michelle Obama. I have to believe her comments about being "proud of her country" for the first time did not help her at all. The poll also indicates, sadly to me at least, that race clearly plays some part in this perception. After all, she is a highly education, very successful, black woman! Sadly, many will despise her for this if for no other reason.

But I have to ask, "So what?" This is what disgusts me about our present political polling and our intense fascination with personalities and images. Is this the "Oprahfication" of politics or what? What happens when this kind of data seems to really matter? I am more nervous about this type of interest than I can tell you. It shows how little attention we actually pay to real issues in an election.

But as an important aside I have to tell you the same is true inside most churches. The view that people have of the pastor’s spouse is very important. If the spouse is seen "unfavorably" then the minister, especially in evangelical churches, is in trouble. If you do not believe me you have simply not been a minister or really known one well enough to see firsthand that this is true. Pray for your minister and their spouse.

Related Posts


  1. Edward Holm July 7, 2008 at 9:21 pm

    A number of years ago I attended a conference led by the nationally known writer M Scott Peck. One of the other speakers was Parker Palmer, a nationally known writer and community organizer. The subject of the conference was “Building Community Through Consensus.” One of the major points I remember was that democratic decision making often resulted in decisions which reflected a popular vote and, as soon as the vote was taken, the losing side immediately began to undermine the winning side, so that the decision could be reversed. This seems to be the state of the nation for the past decade or more.
    The definition of consensus was one whereby all members would come to an agreement whereby everyone agrees to support the group’s decision and not work against it. Needless to say, the process of consensus is cumbersome and depends on members living in a covenantal arrangement. Few groups can do so, and probably none manage to do so regularly. None-the-less, I believe that the Church is called to live in such a manner. Present day politics does not approximate this at all and I am afraid that the politicalization of churches has only led us farther from the ideal. Perhaps the stresses of current economic disasters and political blunders a can cause us to become “communities of crisis” for a time whereby we might witness another paradigm for awhile, but I am afraid that shortage and strife might only serve to further make us see one another as competitors for diminishing resources. Perhaps we ought to study deeply the feeding of the 5000 in order to regain a proper perspective.
    Just some ramblings…

Comments are closed.

My Latest Book!

Use Promo code UNITY for 40% discount!

Recent Articles