Sacrifice and religion: More Sorensen video

Following up today on stuff I didn’t have time to deal with adequately before Christmas, what with Mike being off and me doing the pages in his absence…

One ball I dropped was to follow through on my promise to deliver more video from my interview with Ted Sorensen on Dec. 20. Here’s a link to the much-better-than-mine video that Andrew Haworth of posted that very night, covering the first part of the interview.

And here, from my dinky, low-res camera, are a couple of quick clips on other parts of the interview I found highly interesting. They are…

First, a clip covering the subject of my recent column challenging candidates today to challenge us the way JFK did. Since that was triggered by a JFK speech I had recently heard again, I thought it particularly apropos to talk with his speechwriter about the subject (The setup — my question — takes a while, but Mr. Sorensen’s reply is worth waiting through that to hear):

Second, we have Mr. Sorensen on the subject of another pair of speeches, both on religion and politics — Kennedy’s to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on Sept. 12, 1960, and Mitt Romney’s to a sympathetic crowd at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library on Dec. 6, 2007:

Viewing that second clip myself today as I edited it, I realize that much of what was said was said by me (pretty much what I had said already on the blog). But Mr. Sorensen adds some nuggets of perspective that no one else could contribute, so I thought it worth putting this up anyway. Normally when I edit video, I cut myself out as much as possible — why bore my readers/viewers? This time, I didn’t see a good way to do that and keep the context. So, sorry about that.

3 thoughts on “Sacrifice and religion: More Sorensen video

  1. Karen McLeod

    Thank you Ted Sorenson! So many are so specifically pandering to the “religious right” that it’s really getting old. I don’t mind people practicing their religion, or talking about it/discussing it among friends; I certainly do, quite frequently. But I would never ask anyone to vote for so-and-so because he’s a ‘good’ (fill in the faith/denomination/cult/atheist here). I want to know what his/her record has been, what h/h plans are, and how he/she came about those plans. If he or she is a good (faith-of-the-moment) my guess is that h/h basic spirituality will shine thru without any need to trumpet it. Part of what was attractive about Kennedy was that he was a) smart, b) caring, c)persistant and d) knowledgeable (different from simply being smart). His understanding of God’s will for social justice shone in his policies, and in his asking of all of us to contribute something (and I don’t mean just taxes). He did not have to say that the Roman Catholic Church tell him that he should be concerned about those less fortunate. Part of our problem today is an “I pay taxes for that” mentality, where it’s taken from us, and we have no reason to offer anything else. Oops. I’m on a rant again.

  2. James D McCallister

    Atheists get listed last, after “cultist”, for heaven’s sake? You should put us first–we’re the ones who are actively seeking the truth (as opposed to displaying obeisance to some invisible pater familias in the sky, and waiting for an answer to drift down like a snowflake, or perhaps that feather in Forest Gump that oh-so effectively symbolized the general intellectual tone of America).
    Having said that, I am disgusted in general by those in politics who the Bible clearly warns about, ie, those who would wear their “faith” on their sleeves in order to garner a flock of unquestioning followers… it’s all pandering, folks.
    In fact, I would bet money that not a one of the God-talkers running has any actual “faith” at all (even the Huckster). Feigning regiosity just plays well to the red state rubes–look at faux-born again Texas cowboy (snicker) Bush. If you believe any part of that persona about our leader, I’ve got a bridge for sale that you will definitely want to consider purchasing.

  3. S Benn

    I am a religious person and faithful in attendance to church but I do not base my vote for president on statements by the candidates about their religion, especially those who wear it on their sleeve. I look at the candidates records and how they have upheld the conservative view all their career and search out unbiased sites to give me more info. These sites and watching the debates have made me choose Fred Thompson as choice for the president! He has the National Right to Life endorsement and Rush Limbaugh stated that Fred Thompson is the only true conservative in the race. Phil Valentine and Mark Levin are big Thompson fans and other well known talk shows hosts give him excellent ratings! Check him out yourself and you will agree!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *