My own take...

So, everyone and their dog has blogged about the values debate today. But I feel the need to weigh in. And my thoughts best summarized by Rahm Emanuel via Bull Moose Blog:

"Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter got elected because they were comfortable with their faith," said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, a former Clinton aide. "What happened was that a part of the electorate came open to what Clinton and Carter had to say on everything else - health care, the environment, whatever - because they were very comfortable that Clinton and Carter did not disdain the way these people lived their lives, but respected them." He added: "We need a nominee and a party that is comfortable with faith and values. And if we have one, then all the hard work we've done on Social Security or America's place in the world or college education can be heard. But people aren't going to hear what we say until they know that we don't approach them as Margaret Mead would an anthropological experiment."

And this is what bothers me about this use of "faith-based" v. "reality-based" community. By using the phrase "reality-based" we imply superiority. In order to win evangelicals over, we must speak their language. We must remind them that abortions have gone up under the Bush administration, that just-war doctrine is a Christian doctrine abolished under the Bush administration. So, for those of you like me, who speak evangelicalese, drop me an email at truthaboutkeyes@hotmail.com. I want to know how you changed your mind. How did you become liberal, how did you become a democrat. It took me 10 years--did any of you get there faster? We have to work on American evangelicals. And so for those of you who know what a "praise and worship" band is, who have read Left Behind, or its predecessor, a Thief in the Night, for those who remember Ralph Reed before he hit it big, drop me an email. Let's talk about a strategy for converting evangelicals.