The editorial board of the Detroit Free Press could not come to a consensus opinion regarding the latest “controversy” (cough, distraction, cough) over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s relationship with Barack Obama. So they did a neat thing and published the thoughts of individual editorial board members. They’re pretty amusing, but I like Barb Arrigo’s best:
After enduring what is arguably the most faith-based presidential administration in history, why are we attacking the candidate who is most likely to ensure a strong separation of church and state? Or why are we not at least asking him (and the others) how much faith-based money the federal government should continue to hand out, and whether hearing the voice of God factors into their major decisions? From everything I’ve read about Obama, he takes the Constitution very seriously after teaching constitutional law. I think he’d steer us away from church-state entanglements, rather than into more of them, regardless of who his pastor is/was. In fact, if you’re a constitutionalist ala Ron Paul, I think Obama is your best bet among those left standing in the major party fray.