How Evil is Using Mother Teresa as a Campaign Tool?

Evil? I don't see anything evil about it, nor do I think it's the smartest thing. But my opinion of Mother Teresa isn't much better than my opinion of the person that would use her this way so it breaks pretty even for me.

I barely see the difference between the versions, to be quite honest, but I suffer from the same problem as Sandy: I don't have a very good opinion of Mother Teresa.

Wow, I'm neutral about Mother Theresa, but I didn't realize people had bad feelings. Why? I guess it makes a better story if Mother Theresa asks you to adopt a baby, but why would you take a good pure deed like adopting a special-needs baby and ugly it up with lies?

Probably to appeal to Catholics who might have heard something about certain ties to a preacher with anti-Catholic views....

I am offended that the story of the adoption needed to be juiced up to make them look better. This has nothing to do with Mother Theresa, it is about the McCain's and their need to look good.

I would say it is literary license by his campaign. The story in truth is too good to mess up with lies. Someone don't want McCain elected. If I were him I would find that artistic liar and get rid of him/or her. What they did was an honorable and decent thing all by itself without someone named "mother teresa" involved.

Well, shall we now start talking about the differences in stories for Obama too?

I've heard about this. An example of how a story gets told over and over again and each time it gets even better. Next thing you know, we'll be hearing about how it was the voice of God that spoke in a burning bush.

Sure, Marilyn. Go ahead and tell one.

ty for sharing with me

No defense of McCain Marilyn? Just a "Well your guy did it too?"

If this story is actually true, I wouldn't defend him. Since it comes from the Huffington Post though....... I simply don't believe it.

I give him credit for adopting the kid though.

How about the Christian Science Monitor Jeff? A bit left leaning but beyond reproach journalistically,

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/08/20/watchdogs-make-it-harder-for-politicians-to-stretch-the-truth/

This is what happens when Religion, or the practice of, or the perception of, becomes an issue at all in a political campaign.

I had hoped that when JFK faced down the haters who used his faith in Catholicism against him and did so very well at proving them wrong, that we would have learned and grown at least a little bit, intellectually from that. But NO!!! Why would we do that when we can go after a candidate because of their skin color, their height, their hair, their name, their gender...and I ask you what do any of these things have to do with forecasting if they will be a good President or not.

The qualifications to be President of the United States of America are clearly spelled out in the US Constitution and in no part is religion one of the qualifiers. Religion, Race, Personal finances, middle names, lapel pins, nor is their a maximum age....none of those are listed in it.

Senator McCain was a man I admired a few years ago and it is not just pandering here. He is pleading to get the 'evangelicals who would normally not go vote' - statistical fact, to go and vote for him. In 04 Rove's crew managed to get the same sex marriage issue on 11 states ballots, most of those were big number electorates, and it brought out that group. I am sure that in the 11th hour they will pull a similar stunt. In a sense one could say he is selling his soul...but to who? Because it is not in the best interest of this country to elect a President who owes anything but doing what is right for the country to anyone or any group.

I would think with the last two terms that we would have learned how horrible things can go when you put more stress on a candidate's faith, than intelligence. But maybe not.

And I dont buy it as a mistake that those things were on McCain sites. There is too much vetting done to make such a mistake.

6/10, I see I struck a nerve with somebody, lol. Hey, for me it comes down to this, if you'll lie about something that simply needed no lie to be a fairly big plus, it speaks to pathology. McCain, and his campaign have passed that barrier long ago, and it only takes one look at Snopes or Factcheck to prove it.

Thank you everyone, for carrying on the debate while I napped my tushie off. Got up way too early, and now here I am again, at this God awful time of the morning......

Again, I am disappointed by the tearing down of candidates when supporters should be out selling their own candidate! This occurs on both sides of the isle and is despicable politics. Unfortunately, it often works. Look at Kerry, who was swiftboated. Look at Ducacus, who didn't duck the stuff thrown at him.

These are classic cases and I'd like to see people grow up and campaign positively. O intend to vote for Obama, but I could make a case for voting for McCain, so I'm sure that real supporters could build their case around that rather than Obama's preacher!

Can some fo the Obama bashers figure how to support McCain instead of the lame non issues and blatant lies about Obama?

This is not a criticism of the author and the article. It's only a single link. It is a criticism of the trend we are seeing for dirtier and dirtier politics in presidential elections!

And lest the author think otherwise, I usually don't rate articles at all, this one being no exception. How on earth do you fairly rate a link?

Debora,

Excellent observations and explanation! I can't help but agree with all of it!

James,
It's a link that I wanted others to be exposed to, so don't worry about the ratings, and I won't worry about your critic about it, fair enough? And Deborah IS right. Would that it worked that way. Negative campaigning works, it's being employed as McCain's total campaign of late, and that is the problem. A little of the other side of the coin is going to have to be exposed, period. Hypocrites don't deserve a pass because it's distasteful to the liberal mind. That's been the doom of many a campaign of late. Conservatives practice politics as "war by other means", and so should we, if we want to see progressives in office. I don't see it as "dirty politics", as a reaction to the same, anyway. In fact, where did anyone get the idea there was such a thing as clean politics, these days. That era is long past, if it indeed ever existed at all.

My thoughts exactly, Sharon. Totally unnecessary, and typical of the McCain campaign, of late.

Ron,

Fair enough! Appreciate the comment! And, for the most part, I am in agreement. I was mostly wishing it could be different. I've challenged a number of conservatives to use straight issue arguments rather than character assassination. Haven't seen any results yet.

I just wanted you to know that in spite of my criticism, I did not rate you down. If I were to rate, I'd not do that. And my criticism was as much directed to McCain supporters as anyone!

Excellent article!!! BS like that is typical of politicians and/or their managers. Utterly shameless they are. Always glad to see the BS exposed myself. Wasn't planning on voting for McCain anyway tho!

Thanks, James, I kind of got that, but the posting of a link to an article isn't always a bad thing, either, in my book. I've taken some pretty worthwhile rides here jumping to a link with very little prose in front of it. On politics, I think many don't want to write, so much as get the facts out there. Sometimes I write a synopsis, sometimes I don't, especially when I feel that I can't do half the justice to the subject that the writer already has. The message is what's in the forefront of my concerns in this election season, especially. Hopefully, they can still make a small difference in cutting to the truth.

Thanks Missy, glad you liked it.

PS, I'm planning a secret family recipe cookbook, but it seems Cindy and I have the exact same recipes. Hmmm.............

Deborah B. said something very wise:

"This is what happens when Religion, or the practice of, or the perception of, becomes an issue at all in a political campaign."

It is very bad thing when one believes that they can vote for "righteousness".

Wow!!!

King Louis IX,
Yes it is, and yet the past several elections have hinged on that perception. This is merely a microcosm of the whole Republican lie machine at work. Politicians are the last example I would ever consider as righteous, in the first place. It's an oxymoron, used in that context.