Is This Argument Really Necessary?

So at church yesterday, I heard one of the reliably Democrat parishioners hectoring one of the reliably Republican parishioners that "Jesus was a community organizer, Pontius Pilate was a governor!"

Let me say right here that I don't feel it's ever appropriate to interject party affiliation into religious discussion and claim one party is more "Christian" than the other. They're both highly flawed vessels, from a spiritual point of view. But this is the one lady that inevitably wants to inject Democratic talking points into any religious discussion, so I like to needle her when I can.

For parity's sake I do the same with the Republicans. Okay, it's really because I'm a butthead and I enjoy needling people. Anyways, I decided to get my two cents in.

"Ooh, ooh, can I play?" I butted into their conversation. "I've got one: Ronald Reagan was a governor, Joseph Stalin was a community organizer. Your turn!"

She goggled at me a moment, lost for speech. Apparently she'd only planned one move in advance, just like Barack Obama.

"I've got another one! How about Franklin Roosevelt was a governor, but Nathan Bedford Forrest was a community organizer?"

"Who?" said the Republican. Apparently history's not his strong suit.

"He founded the KKK," I said.

"Um, uh," she continued to founder.

"I can come up with another one!" I said. "How about Thomas Jefferson was a governor, Pol Pot was a community organizer? Does that one count?"

"Oh yeah?" she finally shot back. "Well, Martin Luther King was a community organizer, but Jimmy Carter was a governor!"

"Yeah, but Jimmy Carter was a Democrat," I said. "And so was Nathan Bedford Forrest, and Joseph Stalin, and Pol Pot. Are you sure you wanna play this game any more? Or can we just say that I win?"

She just gave up and went away. Which was too bad, because I hadn't even broken out "Julius Caesar was a governor, Hitler was a community organizer" yet.