Rev. Arnold Conrad’s prayer at McCain rally

Rev. Arnold Conrad’s prayer at McCain rally October 16, 2008

According to the opening prayer evangelical preacher Arnold Conrad offered at a McCain rally on Oct. 11th, John McCain is God’s candidate, and God must “guard [God’s] own reputation” against believers in “other” “gods, like Hindu (sic), Buddha (sic), and Allah” by allowing McCain to be elected president.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • The pastor is clearly deluded. Doesn’t he realize that Obama is the One?

  • The pastor is clearly deluded. Doesn’t he realize that Obama is the One?

  • Zak

    Didn’t the campaign immediately issue a statement separating themselves from this guy?

  • Zak

    Didn’t the campaign immediately issue a statement separating themselves from this guy?

  • I don’t know. Did they?

  • I don’t know. Did they?

  • Why the sic: “guard his (sic) own reputation” ? Y’all got a male god, too =o)

    Buddha was surprised he’s a god. Asked for comment, Gautama said, “Aw man, now I gotta listen to prayers ‘n all ? So much for Nibbana! ”

    Who’s the god “Hindu” ? Also: He forgot Voodoo, you know, as in I like that voodoo that you do cause you do that voodoo so well.

    Allah’s response was, “Kill the infidels, get virgins,a ham sandwich, yada yada. Drinks are on me.”

    Btw – After all those virgins, wouldn’t one want a professional ?

    Btw 2, what’s the difference between a sycophant and a Hindu ? The former curries favor, the latter favors curry :o)

    Btw 3 – What did the Buddhist monk say to the hot dog vendor ? “Make me one with everything.”

  • Why the sic: “guard his (sic) own reputation” ? Y’all got a male god, too =o)

    Buddha was surprised he’s a god. Asked for comment, Gautama said, “Aw man, now I gotta listen to prayers ‘n all ? So much for Nibbana! ”

    Who’s the god “Hindu” ? Also: He forgot Voodoo, you know, as in I like that voodoo that you do cause you do that voodoo so well.

    Allah’s response was, “Kill the infidels, get virgins,a ham sandwich, yada yada. Drinks are on me.”

    Btw – After all those virgins, wouldn’t one want a professional ?

    Btw 2, what’s the difference between a sycophant and a Hindu ? The former curries favor, the latter favors curry :o)

    Btw 3 – What did the Buddhist monk say to the hot dog vendor ? “Make me one with everything.”

  • joseph

    What did Rev. Wright say again?

  • joseph

    What did Rev. Wright say again?

  • … In Jesus Name, Amen.

  • … In Jesus Name, Amen.

  • What did Rev. Wright say again?

    The truth.

  • What did Rev. Wright say again?

    The truth.

  • “The truth.”

    Yes, especially the part about the CIA inventing AIDS.

  • “The truth.”

    Yes, especially the part about the CIA inventing AIDS.

  • What did Wright say? Far less harmful stuff than this guy, Hagee, Parsley, Falwell, Robertson etc etc.

  • What did Wright say? Far less harmful stuff than this guy, Hagee, Parsley, Falwell, Robertson etc etc.

  • Policraticus

    What did Rev. Wright say again?

    Nothing about Obama being God’s candidate and McCain being the candidate of Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus, much less at an Obama event.

    If we are going to draw analogies between figures, then let’s at least draw accurate ones. Reason.

  • Policraticus

    What did Rev. Wright say again?

    Nothing about Obama being God’s candidate and McCain being the candidate of Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus, much less at an Obama event.

    If we are going to draw analogies between figures, then let’s at least draw accurate ones. Reason.

  • S.B.

    What’s the “sic” for in “guard his (sic) own reputation”? The lack of capitalization?

  • S.B.

    What’s the “sic” for in “guard his (sic) own reputation”? The lack of capitalization?

  • S.B.

    Actually, the guy said, “guard your own reputation,” so the word “sic” there is incorrect. The word “sic” after “Buddah” is also incorrect, given that the misspelling is yours.

  • S.B.

    Actually, the guy said, “guard your own reputation,” so the word “sic” there is incorrect. The word “sic” after “Buddah” is also incorrect, given that the misspelling is yours.

  • S.B., thanks for pointing out my typo. You’re such a swell guy.

  • S.B., thanks for pointing out my typo. You’re such a swell guy.

  • joseph

    Michael Joseph,

    I agree. Same thing with associations.

  • joseph

    Michael Joseph,

    I agree. Same thing with associations.

  • phosphorious

    Reverend Wright said that slavery is damnable.

    McCain supporters, apparently, disagree.

  • phosphorious

    Reverend Wright said that slavery is damnable.

    McCain supporters, apparently, disagree.

  • S.B.

    Well, if someone pronounces a word, and you transcribe it with a misspelling and put “sic” after it, it looks like you are attributing the misspelling to the other person. Which doesn’t make any sense when you’re referring to someone’s speech.

    And you still don’t explain why you changed the phrase “your own reputation” to “his own reputation,” and then put “sic” after “his,” when once again the error is yours alone. Very weird.

  • S.B.

    Well, if someone pronounces a word, and you transcribe it with a misspelling and put “sic” after it, it looks like you are attributing the misspelling to the other person. Which doesn’t make any sense when you’re referring to someone’s speech.

    And you still don’t explain why you changed the phrase “your own reputation” to “his own reputation,” and then put “sic” after “his,” when once again the error is yours alone. Very weird.

  • joseph

    Ok, phosphorious, this is getting weird.

    We have MM, MI, MZ, and you, all die-hard Obama supporters, all saying the same thing: If you don’t support Obama, you are a dirty, ignorant, uneducated Republican; you are the enemy. If you are not for us, you are against us.

    See where this is starting to validate the “Messianism” charge levelled at Obama supporters?

    There are several Democrats who have posted comments on this site that have stated that they will either abstain from voting or vote for a third-party candidate because they do not believe that it is morally permissible to vote for Obama and his radical pro-abortion stance.

  • joseph

    Ok, phosphorious, this is getting weird.

    We have MM, MI, MZ, and you, all die-hard Obama supporters, all saying the same thing: If you don’t support Obama, you are a dirty, ignorant, uneducated Republican; you are the enemy. If you are not for us, you are against us.

    See where this is starting to validate the “Messianism” charge levelled at Obama supporters?

    There are several Democrats who have posted comments on this site that have stated that they will either abstain from voting or vote for a third-party candidate because they do not believe that it is morally permissible to vote for Obama and his radical pro-abortion stance.

  • S.B. – The “sic” after Buddha is referring to the fact that the Buddha is not considered a God in Buddhism. It was not in reference to the spelling, which was indeed my typo. The “sic” after the word Hindu is obviously referring to the fact that “Hindu” is the name of a religion, not a God. Finally, I changed “his own reputation” to make you feel better.

  • S.B. – The “sic” after Buddha is referring to the fact that the Buddha is not considered a God in Buddhism. It was not in reference to the spelling, which was indeed my typo. The “sic” after the word Hindu is obviously referring to the fact that “Hindu” is the name of a religion, not a God. Finally, I changed “his own reputation” to make you feel better.

  • S.B.

    OK, but still for correctness’ sake, you should put brackets around “[God],” to indicate that you’re substituting the word “God” for the original “your.”

    All of that said, what a ridiculous prayer. (See, unlike the Obama flackies around here, I’m perfectly willing to criticize the messianic behavior of McCain supporters.)

  • S.B.

    OK, but still for correctness’ sake, you should put brackets around “[God],” to indicate that you’re substituting the word “God” for the original “your.”

    All of that said, what a ridiculous prayer. (See, unlike the Obama flackies around here, I’m perfectly willing to criticize the messianic behavior of McCain supporters.)

  • OK, but still for correctness’ sake, you should put brackets around “[God],” to indicate that you’re substituting the word “God” for the original “your.”

    Thanks. I changed that as well. Thank you so much for your hard work on that sentence.

  • OK, but still for correctness’ sake, you should put brackets around “[God],” to indicate that you’re substituting the word “God” for the original “your.”

    Thanks. I changed that as well. Thank you so much for your hard work on that sentence.

  • Unbelievable…

  • Unbelievable…

  • Franklin Jennings

    “According to the opening prayer evangelical preacher Arnold Conrad offered at a McCain rally on Oct. 11th, John McCain is God’s candidate…”

    This is simply untrue. The poor deluded man never said anything a fair listener could infer as meaning “McCain is God’s candidate.”

    “…and God must ‘guard [God’s] own reputation’…”

    HotDog!!! One accurate quote. Let us see if there is another one, shall we?

    “…against believers in ‘other’…”

    Nope, never once did he utter the word “other”. It never occurred in this clip. No, not once.

    “…’gods, like Hindu (sic), Buddha (sic), and Allah’…”

    Again, that’s not what he said.

    “…by allowing McCain to be elected president.”

    I’m curious. If you can’t accurately quote that guy, with access to a clear recording, with more than 33% accuracy, why should your false inference be given credence?

    And they’re still roughly the same size as beagles. Amazing work for a professional academic.

  • Franklin Jennings

    “According to the opening prayer evangelical preacher Arnold Conrad offered at a McCain rally on Oct. 11th, John McCain is God’s candidate…”

    This is simply untrue. The poor deluded man never said anything a fair listener could infer as meaning “McCain is God’s candidate.”

    “…and God must ‘guard [God’s] own reputation’…”

    HotDog!!! One accurate quote. Let us see if there is another one, shall we?

    “…against believers in ‘other’…”

    Nope, never once did he utter the word “other”. It never occurred in this clip. No, not once.

    “…’gods, like Hindu (sic), Buddha (sic), and Allah’…”

    Again, that’s not what he said.

    “…by allowing McCain to be elected president.”

    I’m curious. If you can’t accurately quote that guy, with access to a clear recording, with more than 33% accuracy, why should your false inference be given credence?

    And they’re still roughly the same size as beagles. Amazing work for a professional academic.

  • Franklin Jennings

    I agree with Mark DeFrancisis’ analysis, the poster is unbelievable.

  • Franklin Jennings

    I agree with Mark DeFrancisis’ analysis, the poster is unbelievable.

  • Franklin,

    Our Christian God has no need to– and does not– guard his own reputation.

    In case you missed it, he revealed himself in human terms as self-squandering love.

    As Thomas teaches, the mission of the Jesus Christ reveals the procession of the Son which is his essential Trinitarian activity.

  • Franklin,

    Our Christian God has no need to– and does not– guard his own reputation.

    In case you missed it, he revealed himself in human terms as self-squandering love.

    As Thomas teaches, the mission of the Jesus Christ reveals the procession of the Son which is his essential Trinitarian activity.

  • 1superdave

    “Why do you call me LORD an d do not the things that I say”

  • 1superdave

    “Why do you call me LORD an d do not the things that I say”

  • Franklin Jennings

    Mark,

    Please show where I made such a claim?

    Do you always ignore the things people say in favour of your fevered imagination? That’s two posts in about as many hours when you have done it to me. Who else do you refuse to engage honestly? Just how far has your support for war-mongering and death eroded your mental faculties?

  • Franklin Jennings

    Mark,

    Please show where I made such a claim?

    Do you always ignore the things people say in favour of your fevered imagination? That’s two posts in about as many hours when you have done it to me. Who else do you refuse to engage honestly? Just how far has your support for war-mongering and death eroded your mental faculties?

  • little gal

    I think this writer has hit the nail on the head regarding Obama as Shaman…”he has entered the American psyche not as a hero but as a healer”.

    http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_3_obama.html

  • little gal

    I think this writer has hit the nail on the head regarding Obama as Shaman…”he has entered the American psyche not as a hero but as a healer”.

    http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_3_obama.html

  • This is simply untrue. The poor deluded man never said anything a fair listener could infer as meaning “McCain is God’s candidate.”

    Actually, this is precisely what we MUST infer because he said that worshipers of other gods are busy praying to “their candidate.”

    “…against believers in ‘other’…”

    Nope, never once did he utter the word “other”. It never occurred in this clip. No, not once.

    Quotes can be used for various purposes. My use there was not to suggest that he used the word other but to question the fact that he implies that Allah, for example, is a different God than the Christian God.

    “…’gods, like Hindu (sic), Buddha (sic), and Allah’…”

    Again, that’s not what he said.

    True. He said “…gods, whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah.” So yes, he said “whether it’s” instead of “like.” Thank you for the insightful, helpful clarification. It should give us pause to rethink what the man prayed about.

    You know for a guy who claims he does not support John McCain, you will go to strange lengths to defend idolatrous prayers on his behalf.

    Listening to this again, this prayer is the perfect example of Republican phallic religion.:”My god is bigger than your god.”

  • This is simply untrue. The poor deluded man never said anything a fair listener could infer as meaning “McCain is God’s candidate.”

    Actually, this is precisely what we MUST infer because he said that worshipers of other gods are busy praying to “their candidate.”

    “…against believers in ‘other’…”

    Nope, never once did he utter the word “other”. It never occurred in this clip. No, not once.

    Quotes can be used for various purposes. My use there was not to suggest that he used the word other but to question the fact that he implies that Allah, for example, is a different God than the Christian God.

    “…’gods, like Hindu (sic), Buddha (sic), and Allah’…”

    Again, that’s not what he said.

    True. He said “…gods, whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah.” So yes, he said “whether it’s” instead of “like.” Thank you for the insightful, helpful clarification. It should give us pause to rethink what the man prayed about.

    You know for a guy who claims he does not support John McCain, you will go to strange lengths to defend idolatrous prayers on his behalf.

    Listening to this again, this prayer is the perfect example of Republican phallic religion.:”My god is bigger than your god.”

  • Franklin Jennings

    “Actually, this is precisely what we MUST infer because he said that worshipers of other gods are busy praying to ‘their candidate.'”

    If he said “worshipers of other gods are busy praying to ‘their candidate’…” then to make your inference, John McCain must be running against Allah, Hindu, and Buddha. Since John McCain is running against Barack Obama, and no evidence has been given that Barack Obama is an incarnation of either of these candidates, the inference is false.

    Again, if you can neither communicate your own thoughts clearly, nor quote another correctly, why do you think your opinions should be given an ounce of credence?

    “Quotes can be used for various purposes.”

    Yes, and these purposes should not be mixed in a single statement without clarification. It is infelicitous to the extreme. Toddle over to the English department and have them explain it to you.

    “You know for a guy who claims he does not support John McCain, you will go to strange lengths to defend idolatrous prayers on his behalf.”

    Yes, in calling the man praying a poor deluded soul, I was bringing out the big guns in his defense. Merely because I dispute your uncharitable inference, and point out that you can’t even provide accurate quotes is no defense of his prayer.

    How low are the academic standards at St Michael’s?

  • Franklin Jennings

    “Actually, this is precisely what we MUST infer because he said that worshipers of other gods are busy praying to ‘their candidate.'”

    If he said “worshipers of other gods are busy praying to ‘their candidate’…” then to make your inference, John McCain must be running against Allah, Hindu, and Buddha. Since John McCain is running against Barack Obama, and no evidence has been given that Barack Obama is an incarnation of either of these candidates, the inference is false.

    Again, if you can neither communicate your own thoughts clearly, nor quote another correctly, why do you think your opinions should be given an ounce of credence?

    “Quotes can be used for various purposes.”

    Yes, and these purposes should not be mixed in a single statement without clarification. It is infelicitous to the extreme. Toddle over to the English department and have them explain it to you.

    “You know for a guy who claims he does not support John McCain, you will go to strange lengths to defend idolatrous prayers on his behalf.”

    Yes, in calling the man praying a poor deluded soul, I was bringing out the big guns in his defense. Merely because I dispute your uncharitable inference, and point out that you can’t even provide accurate quotes is no defense of his prayer.

    How low are the academic standards at St Michael’s?

  • Franklin Jennings

    I will note, since it has come up repeatedly with Vox-Nova contributors and commenters as of late, another way in which there ain’t a hair’s difference between Democrat and Republican ideologues, besides all the war-mongering and baby-killing you both support, is your absolutely fealty to the notion that anyone who disagrees MUST be a supporter of the competing war-n-death ideology.

    The idea that the rest of us hold both of your ideologies in contempt is simply incomprehensible. Sin really does diminish one’s rational faculties.

  • Franklin Jennings

    I will note, since it has come up repeatedly with Vox-Nova contributors and commenters as of late, another way in which there ain’t a hair’s difference between Democrat and Republican ideologues, besides all the war-mongering and baby-killing you both support, is your absolutely fealty to the notion that anyone who disagrees MUST be a supporter of the competing war-n-death ideology.

    The idea that the rest of us hold both of your ideologies in contempt is simply incomprehensible. Sin really does diminish one’s rational faculties.

  • Provincial benightedness.

  • Provincial benightedness.