Though I may pay greatly from the powers that be for saying this, not much would’ve changed for Christians if McCain had been elected, nor have things changed for Christians since Obama was elected. Again, for the sake of bluntness, we had a very devout Christian in office for 8 years. His name, if you’ll recall, was George W. Bush. What happened? Did abortions end? Was there an official constitutional ban on homosexuality? No… instead we just ended up in two wars, where, ironically, we sent 40,000 Iraqi E. Catholics into exile. In America we suffer from what Howard Zinn calls “historical amnesia.” Because we are so prone to forgetfulness, American Christians won’t see any real change in this country until they realize that “exceptionalism” is a sin.

Exceptionalism – The American Problem and THE American Sin (via apsies) (via brooklynmutt)

A fascinating article, and one that I (partially) agree with. While there are certain excesses of American Exceptionalism, I don’t see it as quite the inherent problem that Wheeler-Reed does. Also, I think he conflates the use of flowery and inspirational (and indeed, often correct) “city on a hill”-type language with a theological problem. I discount his assertion that patriotic Americans employing such language indicates idolatry simply because Jerusalem was the “original” city on a hill. However, he does have some points about American Christianity:

Nothing makes us US Christians better because we are Americans, and nothing gives us the right to think that we American Christians are better than Iraqi Christians.

That’s not all. The IAEA says its inspectors have been denied access to a heavy water reactor in Arak, and that Iran has put a roof over the site “rendering impossible the continued use of satellite imagery to monitor further construction inside the reactor building.” Most proliferation experts agree that the Arak reactor, scheduled for completion in 2011, can have no purpose other than to produce weapons-grade plutonium.

The International Atomic Energy Agency Reports on Advances in Iran’s Nuclear Program - WSJ.com

Now that Obama is president, one wonders if Democrats would oppose a war in Arak.

Obama still disagrees with Cheney’s view of the acceptability of some of these techniques. But citing as sage the advice offered by “the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history” (according to Joe Biden) — advice paraphrased by Obama as “we shouldn’t be making judgments on the basis of incomplete information or campaign rhetoric” — is a startlingly early sign of a newly respectful consideration of the Bush-Cheney legacy. Not from any change of heart. But from simple reality. The beauty of democratic rotations of power is that when the opposition takes office, cheap criticism and calumny will no longer do. The Democrats now own Iraq. They own the war on al-Qaeda. And they own the panoply of anti-terror measures with which the Bush administration kept us safe these past seven years. Which is why Obama is consciously creating a gulf between what he now dismissively calls “campaign rhetoric” and the policy choices he must make as president. Accordingly, Newsweek — Obama acolyte and scourge of everything Bush/Cheney — has on the eve of the Democratic restoration miraculously discovered the arguments for warrantless wiretaps, enhanced interrogation and detention without trial. Indeed, Newsweek’s neck-snapping cover declares, “Why Obama May Soon Find Virtue in Cheney’s Vision of Power.” Obama will be loath to throw away the tools that have kept the homeland safe. Just as he will be loath to jeopardize the remarkable turnaround in American fortunes in Iraq.

America brought untold shame on itself with the abuses at Abu Ghraib. It’s likely that the take-the-gloves-off attitude of Cheney and his allies filtered down through the ranks, until untrained prison guards with sadistic tendencies were making sport with electric shock.

Newsweek

The next sentence: “But no direct link has been reported.” This is illustrative of the pathetic way any evil can be attributed or connected to the Bush/Cheney. Really? Their attitudes “filtered down” to help cause the abuses? Perhaps some people will simply act depraved when given a chance. Then again, let no opportunity to disparage the Bush regime go untaken.