Also interesting from the 2004 Obama,  distinguishing between “Separation of Church and State” and avoiding/eschewing the “abandoning of the role of faith in politics” as some tend to do when explaining their working out of that “separation”.

in my own public policy, I’m very suspicious of religious certainty expressing itself in politics.

Now, that’s different form a belief that values have to inform our public policy. I think it’s perfectly consistent to say that I want my government to be operating for all faiths and all peoples, including atheists and agnostics, while also insisting that there are values tha tinform my politics that are appropriate to talk about.

via Obama’s Fascinating Interview with Cathleen Falsani – Steven Waldman.

For me,  there’s always an artificiality to that separation;  that this is an INTELLECTUAL separation that really is simply a linguistic slight of hand that ignores the inevitability of one’s values shaping the policy.  Those “values” go deeper than the stump speeches.  They express themselves also in attenuating the policies to align with the economic/political pressures to keep on top and “remain viable” as a politician.  We’ve heard it:  “If you don’t get re-elected,  then what good can you accomplish”.  Words which smack of “working within the system” to the point of acquiescence,  therefore solidifiying one’s perpetuation of it.  I hear this from hard-core Obama supporters all the time.