If you thought President Obama would get a whole year off from being attacked over a prayer breakfast, you would be wrong. A scant eight weeks after the media erupted over his audacious recollection of the religious justifications for Jim Crow, slavery, and the Crusades, Obama went back for more on Tuesday morning. Because one prayer breakfast isn’t enough, the White House held an Easter Prayer Breakfast two days after Easter, and the president included a rather ordinary, if humorous, observation about the practice of Christian love and forgiveness in politics:
“On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love. And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less than loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned. But that’s a topic for another day. Where there is injustice — I was about to veer off… I’m pulling it back.”
As you can see, the crowd seemed to get what he was saying, which is that all Christians face challenges (to put it mildly) in living up to the example set by Jesus, even allowing, moments later, that “I fall short so often.”
Rather than note the plain meaning of what he said, which actually reinforced the idea that the Christian standard is superior, right-wingers decided that the President was attacking Christians again. It didn’t stop there, though, because at Tuesday’s White house daily briefing, Press Secretary Josh Earnest fielded several questions from perplexed reporters.
First up was Fox News’ Ed Henry, who got a quick nothing from Earnest, followed by The Washington Examiner‘s Susan Crabtree, who gave it the full right-wing treatment, referring to the president simply as “Obama,” and shoe-horning in some concern-trolling about a vacant diplomatic post:
Setting aside the question of what Christian beheading rate is not alarming, is it now the right’s position that diplomacy with Iran is futile, but ISIS would stop beheading Christians if only Obama would appoint some half-assed ambassador-at-large?
Of course, the president only has himself to blame, or rather, the U.S. presidency and its tendency to mix religion with government. While not a believer myself, I’m not as anti-religion as some folks around these parts, but I absolutely object to any attempt to inject religion into government, and so did the fundamentalist church I grew up attending. That’s because of you don’t keep your church out of the government, you also can’t keep the government out of your church. These attacks on the president are an embarrassment to Christians, but the fact that our president has to go to these prayer breakfasts is an even bigger embarrassment.