Some thoughts from this week’s mid-term elections (and I’ll stay off of politics for a while after this):
The news analysts are going crazy trying to figure out what kind of impact the Tea Party and “Tea Party candidates” had on the elections. It boosted Republicans but also hurt them, they’re telling us. Well, maybe. Ultimately, though, it comes down to – shock of shocks – voter preference.
As I have said before, I generally vote Republican but not always. If I lived in Delaware, I would not have voted for Republican Christine O’Donnel. If I lived in Florida I would have voted for Charlie Crist, who ran as an independent, instead of the Republican Marco Rubio. And if I had been an Alaskan voter, I would have written in Lisa Murkowski’s name. I’m not really too concerned about whether a candidate is part of the so called Tea Party or not, a movement with which I have some sympathies but also some differences.
Like any movement or group, there are strong and weak candidates. But obviously, this is a force to be reckoned with. More important is the fact that it’s the independent voter who is calling the shots in this country. As I read somewhere, “Yes we can” has met head on with, “Oh no you don’t.”
****************************************************************
I had been kind of excited about Tuesday night and thought it would be fun hearing the reports coming in from around the country and hearing the pundits babble a bit. Ultimately, though, it was the same tired rhetoric and not that interesting. Whether it was Fox, CNN, or one of the other networks, the talking heads were telling us the same thing with perhaps a different spin here and there. They seemed more excited about the cool special effects – touch-screen poll results, stand-alone graphs that seem to pop up out of the floor, etc. -- than anything very substantive.
And the candidates? Would someone please give them some new material? How many times over the course of my life watching election returns have I heard from every corner and every political persuasion something equivalent to, “The people have spoken and we are taking this country back?” Back from who? Back from what? Again, try something new.
***********************************************************************
I’m done with rock-star politicians. I had a lot of respect and admiration for Sarah Palin when John McCain picked her as his running mate. I think she did a decent job in the campaign. I realize, especially after reading the book Game Change and other accounts of the 2008 election, that she was in way over her head and of course the media crucified her. In hindsight, she probably wasn’t the best pick for McCain. Still, I think she gave it a good run, and in my continuing quest to believe the best in people, I like to believe she had the best interest of the country at heart. (I even believe that about Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank -- really).
If only she would have gone back to Alaska and finished the job to which she had been elected, I might still be one of her defenders. But I believe that she turned her back on the citizens of Alaska when she resigned as their governor and she lost me as a supporter when she did it. That was the job to which she had been elected and she should have fulfilled her commitment (unless, of course, she had actually gone on to be vice president). When she made the announcement that she was resigning, she said something totally nonsensical about not continuing “politics as usual,” as if that catch phrase was supposed to explain why she was abandoning the people who elected her.
She was barely out of the governor’s office before she was writing a book, touring the country on a bus and signing on with Fox News. I’ve heard that her daughter is on Dancing With the Stars and I don’t know if she’s considered a star or she dances with one (I’ve never seen the show). And of course a run for the presidency in a couple of years is probable. Her style is not unlike that of Barack Obama himself, once the darling of a certain brand of up-and-comers. She’s the darling of a whole different and diametrically opposed brand of them, of course, but the similarities are there.
And this ilk of politics – and politician -- turns me off.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The Audacity of Politics
As long-time readers here know, I've had a lifelong interest in politics, all the way back to the 60s when Lyndon Johnson ran against Barry Goldwater, the first presidential election I remember.
As a younger man, my interest in politics was also mixed with a strong leaning toward conservatism and I usually voted for Republican candidates. I'm still pretty conservative and usually vote Republican but over the past decade I have mellowed a great deal. I have voted in the last two Tennessee gubernatorial elections for our current Democratic governor, Phil Bredesen, who was also once the mayor of Nashville. Just as he was an outstanding mayor, he's been an outstanding governor. He's a shrewd businessperson and I believe business skills are extremely advantageous when one is running something as big as a state.
As I said, although I am still interested in politics, I don't get nearly as worked up about it as I once did. I look at candidates and I vote according to my conscience. Usually my preference will be Republican but, as was the case in the last two gubernatorial elections, occasionally I'll "cross over." I rarely display yard signs or bumper stickers anymore and, although I'll still participate in a spirited debate, I am careful when I discuss politics among my friends and never presume that someone has the same leanings I do.
This leads me to a telephone call I received yesterday. To give you some background, about a week ago Wife and I received in the mail an invitation to a "reception" which will take place next week at the home of some good friends. I put reception in quotes because it will actually be a fundraiser for one of the candidates running for governor of Tennessee. There's a primary election this summer and the general election will be in November.
We didn't mind receiving the invite from our friends but we also didn't mind tossing it when we saw that the price of admission was a minimum of $500. There was no reply required and I'm guessing our friends hosting the event gave a list of quite a few names to the staff of the candidate. We promptly threw it away and have not given it a thought since.
That is, until I received the aforementioned phone call yesterday.
"Bob," the voice on the other end said when I answered, "this is ________ and I am a friend of ______________ (our friends hosting the reception)."
He went on to say that he was following up to see if Wife and I had received the invitation. I told him yes, we had received it and then asked him, "Doesn't this require a pretty hefty contribution?"
He confirmed that a $500 contribution would get us in. I told him thank you for the invitation but we would not be attending, although we would give consideration to voting for this candidate. Our friends' endorsement carries some weight with us and we've had some other friends express an interest in this particular candidate as well. He thanked me for my time and we said goodbye.
Within about 30 seconds my phone rang and it was this guy again.
"Bob, this is _________ again."
"Yes?" I said, mildly annoyed.
"Well, I was just thinking after we got off the phone that I should call you back and tell you that, if your finances are tight right now . . . . "
And then I became more than mildly annoyed. I interrupted him and told him to hold on just a minute. I didn't say one word about our finances being "tight," I told him. Then I explained to him that we have a certain amount of funds we allocate for giving to certain things, and right now I had no desire to give to any political candidate, not to mention that I am undecided about the governor's race.
Then, as if he hadn't heard me, he said, "Well what I was going to suggest was that maybe you could contact some other people who have some resources and bring them with you, and you and your wife can just come."
And as if that weren't enough, he then proceeded to tell me how he and his wife were so enamored with this candidate, that they had decided to just take part of their "offering" (I guess he meant what he gives to his church) and re-direct it toward this guy running for governor.
And with that, friends, I was rendered speechless and I ended the call.
Is it any wonder the people in this country are FED UP with politics, whether it's on the national, state or local level?
As a younger man, my interest in politics was also mixed with a strong leaning toward conservatism and I usually voted for Republican candidates. I'm still pretty conservative and usually vote Republican but over the past decade I have mellowed a great deal. I have voted in the last two Tennessee gubernatorial elections for our current Democratic governor, Phil Bredesen, who was also once the mayor of Nashville. Just as he was an outstanding mayor, he's been an outstanding governor. He's a shrewd businessperson and I believe business skills are extremely advantageous when one is running something as big as a state.
As I said, although I am still interested in politics, I don't get nearly as worked up about it as I once did. I look at candidates and I vote according to my conscience. Usually my preference will be Republican but, as was the case in the last two gubernatorial elections, occasionally I'll "cross over." I rarely display yard signs or bumper stickers anymore and, although I'll still participate in a spirited debate, I am careful when I discuss politics among my friends and never presume that someone has the same leanings I do.
This leads me to a telephone call I received yesterday. To give you some background, about a week ago Wife and I received in the mail an invitation to a "reception" which will take place next week at the home of some good friends. I put reception in quotes because it will actually be a fundraiser for one of the candidates running for governor of Tennessee. There's a primary election this summer and the general election will be in November.
We didn't mind receiving the invite from our friends but we also didn't mind tossing it when we saw that the price of admission was a minimum of $500. There was no reply required and I'm guessing our friends hosting the event gave a list of quite a few names to the staff of the candidate. We promptly threw it away and have not given it a thought since.
That is, until I received the aforementioned phone call yesterday.
"Bob," the voice on the other end said when I answered, "this is ________ and I am a friend of ______________ (our friends hosting the reception)."
He went on to say that he was following up to see if Wife and I had received the invitation. I told him yes, we had received it and then asked him, "Doesn't this require a pretty hefty contribution?"
He confirmed that a $500 contribution would get us in. I told him thank you for the invitation but we would not be attending, although we would give consideration to voting for this candidate. Our friends' endorsement carries some weight with us and we've had some other friends express an interest in this particular candidate as well. He thanked me for my time and we said goodbye.
Within about 30 seconds my phone rang and it was this guy again.
"Bob, this is _________ again."
"Yes?" I said, mildly annoyed.
"Well, I was just thinking after we got off the phone that I should call you back and tell you that, if your finances are tight right now . . . . "
And then I became more than mildly annoyed. I interrupted him and told him to hold on just a minute. I didn't say one word about our finances being "tight," I told him. Then I explained to him that we have a certain amount of funds we allocate for giving to certain things, and right now I had no desire to give to any political candidate, not to mention that I am undecided about the governor's race.
Then, as if he hadn't heard me, he said, "Well what I was going to suggest was that maybe you could contact some other people who have some resources and bring them with you, and you and your wife can just come."
And as if that weren't enough, he then proceeded to tell me how he and his wife were so enamored with this candidate, that they had decided to just take part of their "offering" (I guess he meant what he gives to his church) and re-direct it toward this guy running for governor.
And with that, friends, I was rendered speechless and I ended the call.
Is it any wonder the people in this country are FED UP with politics, whether it's on the national, state or local level?
Friday, February 26, 2010
Couple of Comments
A couple of thoughts and then I'll try to stay away from politics for a while:
-- I was working, of course, yesterday, so only caught a few minutes during lunch of the live health care summit at Blair House, hosted by President Obama and attended by a sampling of Democrats and Republicans.
I am often accused of having a Pollyanna-ish view toward our government and elected officials so I will go ahead and plead guilty as charged on this one. But I thought the summit was a grand example of some of the things that are good about our country.
Yes, it was probably about a year late. There was no doubt a backdrop of extreme political motive behind everything that was said and, in fact, the whole motivation for having it was probably political in the first place. There were a few testy exchanges.
But, for even the most tried and true cynic -- should we not be thankful that we live in a country where elected officials who come from opposing points of view sit down together, offer their contributions and at least give the appearance of having the best interests of their countrymen (and women) at heart? And somewhere, in the midst of all of it, shouldn't we have found at least a glimmer of hope that maybe, just maybe, the health care system in this country will finally be repaired?
Maybe I am too optimistic and perhaps too unrealistic. But for at least part of yesterday, I liked what I saw.
##############################################
Newly elected Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown, who coasted to victory in the special election that was supposed to be nothing more than a formality for Democrats who thought they owned the seat, has caught flack for supporting a jobs bill that is mostly supported by Democrats.
In response to the criticism, Brown simply said that he went to Washington as an independent voice (after being elected, quite obviously, by independent voters). He thought the bill was good for the country and, more importantly, good for his constituency.
If you thought that I was a robot created in the image of Limbaugh/Palin/Pick-your-arch-conservative, he seems to be saying, maybe you weren't listening.
Again, I like what I see here.
-- I was working, of course, yesterday, so only caught a few minutes during lunch of the live health care summit at Blair House, hosted by President Obama and attended by a sampling of Democrats and Republicans.
I am often accused of having a Pollyanna-ish view toward our government and elected officials so I will go ahead and plead guilty as charged on this one. But I thought the summit was a grand example of some of the things that are good about our country.
Yes, it was probably about a year late. There was no doubt a backdrop of extreme political motive behind everything that was said and, in fact, the whole motivation for having it was probably political in the first place. There were a few testy exchanges.
But, for even the most tried and true cynic -- should we not be thankful that we live in a country where elected officials who come from opposing points of view sit down together, offer their contributions and at least give the appearance of having the best interests of their countrymen (and women) at heart? And somewhere, in the midst of all of it, shouldn't we have found at least a glimmer of hope that maybe, just maybe, the health care system in this country will finally be repaired?
Maybe I am too optimistic and perhaps too unrealistic. But for at least part of yesterday, I liked what I saw.
##############################################
Newly elected Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown, who coasted to victory in the special election that was supposed to be nothing more than a formality for Democrats who thought they owned the seat, has caught flack for supporting a jobs bill that is mostly supported by Democrats.
In response to the criticism, Brown simply said that he went to Washington as an independent voice (after being elected, quite obviously, by independent voters). He thought the bill was good for the country and, more importantly, good for his constituency.
If you thought that I was a robot created in the image of Limbaugh/Palin/Pick-your-arch-conservative, he seems to be saying, maybe you weren't listening.
Again, I like what I see here.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
A Poor Analogy
Ronald Reagan likened the U.S. to a “city set on a hill.” Borrowing from a sermon delivered by Puritan Pastor John Winthrop, who had actually borrowed it from the Sermon on the Mount, the phrase became inextricably associated with the Great Communicator. By the time he died, it seemed that more than a few believed it was a thought that had originated with him.
George W. Bush invoked another Biblical metaphor following Sept. 11, 2001, passionately describing the response of the U.S. to the attacks on our own soil. “The light shines in the darkness,” he said. “And the darkness will not overcome it.”
Reagan and Bush are certainly not the only political figures who have cited biblical language. It’s a fairly common practice. I appreciate it when our leaders go to the Scriptures for guidance; believe me, I'm all for it.
It would make me feel better, though, if they were a little more careful about the passages they cite, or at least more circumspect in their use of those passages
The “city set on a hill” was a phrase coined by Jesus himself. He was referring to his followers and their distinction as such. The imagery has since been used to mean the entire body of Christ, a reasonable progression. But is the entire United States a fair equivalent?
The “light” that “shines in the darkness” refers to Christ himself. I don’t see a likely comparison with any country, state or municipality. Bush caught some flack for that one -- and rightfully so, in my opinion.
I assure you that use and misuse of the Scriptures has been just as common among our Democratic brethren.
The latest example came just this week from none other than President Barack Obama. In a rather obscure speech on Tuesday that got very little press, Obama again reminded us that all that this economic mess had nothing to do with him (just in case we missed each and every other time he has told us this). He cited the parable of two men, one who built his house upon sand, only to have it wash away when the storms inevitably came; and the other who built his on a foundation of rock, and "when the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house, it fell not.”
This story also comes from the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus said those who heard his words but did not act on them were like the unwise man who built his house on sand; those who heard his words and did act on them were like the wise man who built his house on rock.
The implication, of course, is that we’ve been building houses on sand for quite some time now, which is why we’re seeing so much being washed away. Now is the time, he said, to begin building upon “the rock.” One must surmise that this includes components of his budget and economic stimulus plan, which contain more spending than has ever been contemplated in the history of our government. There are those of us who believe it might contain a great deal of sand.
If I have learned anything over the years, it is that reasonable people, including reasonable people of faith, will have differences of opinion. The so-called Religious Right has taken a beating over the past few years for trying to tie Evangelical Christianity to the Republican Party. That criticism is well founded; conservatism, however defined or interpreted, and Christianity are not necessarily synonymous. Those who see themselves as being on “God’s side,” to the exclusion of all others, begin a descent down a slippery slope in my view.
Similarly, for Barack Obama to use the words of Christ to try and persuade me as to why I need to get on board with his economic stimulus plan causes me great problems.
While I respect the president as our nation’s leader, pray for him and support him as much as I can (and greatly appreciate his strong faith), I have sincere conscientious differences with him in many areas and strongly object to the actions his administration has taken or proposes to take to supposedly heal our ailing economy. I don’t appreciate his telling me that, if I’ll just go along with his policies, I’ll be building my house on a rock.
So, Mr. President, I would humbly offer you a small bit of advice: Be careful when using the words of the Master. In that he was the Son of God, he had one up on you when he told his stories.
George W. Bush invoked another Biblical metaphor following Sept. 11, 2001, passionately describing the response of the U.S. to the attacks on our own soil. “The light shines in the darkness,” he said. “And the darkness will not overcome it.”
Reagan and Bush are certainly not the only political figures who have cited biblical language. It’s a fairly common practice. I appreciate it when our leaders go to the Scriptures for guidance; believe me, I'm all for it.
It would make me feel better, though, if they were a little more careful about the passages they cite, or at least more circumspect in their use of those passages
The “city set on a hill” was a phrase coined by Jesus himself. He was referring to his followers and their distinction as such. The imagery has since been used to mean the entire body of Christ, a reasonable progression. But is the entire United States a fair equivalent?
The “light” that “shines in the darkness” refers to Christ himself. I don’t see a likely comparison with any country, state or municipality. Bush caught some flack for that one -- and rightfully so, in my opinion.
I assure you that use and misuse of the Scriptures has been just as common among our Democratic brethren.
The latest example came just this week from none other than President Barack Obama. In a rather obscure speech on Tuesday that got very little press, Obama again reminded us that all that this economic mess had nothing to do with him (just in case we missed each and every other time he has told us this). He cited the parable of two men, one who built his house upon sand, only to have it wash away when the storms inevitably came; and the other who built his on a foundation of rock, and "when the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house, it fell not.”
This story also comes from the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus said those who heard his words but did not act on them were like the unwise man who built his house on sand; those who heard his words and did act on them were like the wise man who built his house on rock.
The implication, of course, is that we’ve been building houses on sand for quite some time now, which is why we’re seeing so much being washed away. Now is the time, he said, to begin building upon “the rock.” One must surmise that this includes components of his budget and economic stimulus plan, which contain more spending than has ever been contemplated in the history of our government. There are those of us who believe it might contain a great deal of sand.
If I have learned anything over the years, it is that reasonable people, including reasonable people of faith, will have differences of opinion. The so-called Religious Right has taken a beating over the past few years for trying to tie Evangelical Christianity to the Republican Party. That criticism is well founded; conservatism, however defined or interpreted, and Christianity are not necessarily synonymous. Those who see themselves as being on “God’s side,” to the exclusion of all others, begin a descent down a slippery slope in my view.
Similarly, for Barack Obama to use the words of Christ to try and persuade me as to why I need to get on board with his economic stimulus plan causes me great problems.
While I respect the president as our nation’s leader, pray for him and support him as much as I can (and greatly appreciate his strong faith), I have sincere conscientious differences with him in many areas and strongly object to the actions his administration has taken or proposes to take to supposedly heal our ailing economy. I don’t appreciate his telling me that, if I’ll just go along with his policies, I’ll be building my house on a rock.
So, Mr. President, I would humbly offer you a small bit of advice: Be careful when using the words of the Master. In that he was the Son of God, he had one up on you when he told his stories.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Final Thoughts
Election Post Mortem:
-- I am very disappointed, more than I thought I would be. I have predicted an Obama victory for months now and did not even watch the coverage Tuesday night, other than looking in for a total of about three minutes to confirm the result. I had prepared myself for it, but the reality is I hate to lose.
-- I want to make clear that my vote for John McCain was not just a vote against Obama, nor was it a vote for “the lesser of two evils.” I enthusiastically voted for John McCain. I would do it again in a heartbeat.
-- Tons of folks, even McCain supporters, disagree with me here, but the brightest part of the election for me was Sarah Palin. The die was cast long ago for a Democratic victory that was only going to be derailed by a major screw-up by Obama (and with the media cheering him on, that was not going to happen), but Governor Palin brought a breath of fresh air to the Republican ticket and to the entire election. And I loved how it just infuriated the hell out of her detractors when she kept right on going as much as they tried to discredit her. As I stated in an earlier post, borrowing from Rudyard Kipling, she kept her head about her when all about her were losing theirs and, being lied about, did not deal in lies.
-- Geraldine Ferraro graciously recognized Governor Palin for what she was doing. Ms. Ferrarro, who ran as Walter Mondale’s running mate on the Democratic ticket in 1984 and is now a commentator on Fox News, made it clear from the outset that she was not a McCain-Palin supporter. She was, however, extremely gracious and enthusiastic about what Governor Palin represented and symbolized for women. Oh my, if only some of the others in her camp would copy her grace and good manners.
-- As I have stated before, I like Barack Obama. I think he and I could be friends. I will do my best to be supportive of him.
-- I am very concerned about a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President. I am concerned about the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court who will make law rather than interpret it. I am concerned about welfare being disguised as a tax cut. I am concerned about pulling out of Iraq prematurely and jeopardizing our own national security as a result. I am concerned about a president who appears to have had very poor judgment about some of his past associations.
-- I am concerned but I am not scared. I do not think it is right to incite fear in people. As I said, I am disappointed, but I am also hopeful. Unlike James Dobson, who somehow decided he is a prophet and wrote a ridiculously awful hypothetical letter about what life will be like in just four years, I have great optimism that we will continue to be just fine in this country. The people have spoken. Thank God we live in a place where we are allowed to have a voice. In two years we will have that chance again in Congressional elections. And in four years, if Obama has not lived up to all of his own hype, we can boot him right out.
-- My blogger friend Michael wrote a great piece a few weeks ago, a parody of sorts about a debate between the candidates in which Michael is the moderator. Here's what he said at the end:
-- I am very disappointed, more than I thought I would be. I have predicted an Obama victory for months now and did not even watch the coverage Tuesday night, other than looking in for a total of about three minutes to confirm the result. I had prepared myself for it, but the reality is I hate to lose.
-- I want to make clear that my vote for John McCain was not just a vote against Obama, nor was it a vote for “the lesser of two evils.” I enthusiastically voted for John McCain. I would do it again in a heartbeat.
-- Tons of folks, even McCain supporters, disagree with me here, but the brightest part of the election for me was Sarah Palin. The die was cast long ago for a Democratic victory that was only going to be derailed by a major screw-up by Obama (and with the media cheering him on, that was not going to happen), but Governor Palin brought a breath of fresh air to the Republican ticket and to the entire election. And I loved how it just infuriated the hell out of her detractors when she kept right on going as much as they tried to discredit her. As I stated in an earlier post, borrowing from Rudyard Kipling, she kept her head about her when all about her were losing theirs and, being lied about, did not deal in lies.
-- Geraldine Ferraro graciously recognized Governor Palin for what she was doing. Ms. Ferrarro, who ran as Walter Mondale’s running mate on the Democratic ticket in 1984 and is now a commentator on Fox News, made it clear from the outset that she was not a McCain-Palin supporter. She was, however, extremely gracious and enthusiastic about what Governor Palin represented and symbolized for women. Oh my, if only some of the others in her camp would copy her grace and good manners.
-- As I have stated before, I like Barack Obama. I think he and I could be friends. I will do my best to be supportive of him.
-- I am very concerned about a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President. I am concerned about the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court who will make law rather than interpret it. I am concerned about welfare being disguised as a tax cut. I am concerned about pulling out of Iraq prematurely and jeopardizing our own national security as a result. I am concerned about a president who appears to have had very poor judgment about some of his past associations.
-- I am concerned but I am not scared. I do not think it is right to incite fear in people. As I said, I am disappointed, but I am also hopeful. Unlike James Dobson, who somehow decided he is a prophet and wrote a ridiculously awful hypothetical letter about what life will be like in just four years, I have great optimism that we will continue to be just fine in this country. The people have spoken. Thank God we live in a place where we are allowed to have a voice. In two years we will have that chance again in Congressional elections. And in four years, if Obama has not lived up to all of his own hype, we can boot him right out.
-- My blogger friend Michael wrote a great piece a few weeks ago, a parody of sorts about a debate between the candidates in which Michael is the moderator. Here's what he said at the end:
In four years, your life may be slightly different due to which candidate gets elected. Either man may be able to shape laws and policies to impact your day-to-day existence. But those impacts pale in comparison to what you do to shape your life over the next four years.You hope for change? You hope for better days? You hope for enriched family life?Don't hope. Choose.
Thanks Michael. Truer words were never spoken.
And Congratulations, President-Elect Obama. My prayers are with you and your family.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Loving My Neighbor
More thoughts on politics but with a twist at the end:
-- You can say what you want about “Joe the Plumber” and Obama’s statement about “spreading the wealth around.” Whether Joe is legitimate or not is not the question. Obama’s response is indicative of the fundamental difference of opinion he and I have about the role of government. He wants to punish you if you make too much money. He wants to give tax “refunds” to people who never paid taxes in the first place. I just don’t think that makes sense.
-- I thought Sarah Palin knocked it out of the park on Saturday Night Live last weekend. To be able to laugh at yourself, to be able to “keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you,” to be able to, when “being lied about, (not) deal in lies” (with thanks to Rudyard Kipling) – these are attributes worthy of a Vice President. I also caught a little bit of her address this morning to parents of children with special needs. All I can say is I love this lady. As I have stated previously, I do not think the McCain-Palin ticket will prevail. The circumstances, history and media fawning are simply not in their favor although, if ever there has been a time when I hope I am wrong, this is it. But we have all been enriched by getting to know Sarah Palin. She has done her country, state, family and gender proud. I predict we will see her again. I look forward to it.
-- Barack Obama is taking a couple of days off to go be with his grandmother in Hawaii who is gravely ill and may not even make it through Election Day. As I have said before, although I do not agree with his politics, I like Barack Obama and think he is a kind, decent person. His grandmother had a big role in his upbringing and he is not about to let his running for the nation’s highest office interfere with his being with her in what might be her final days. I like that.
-- I am accused of having a Pollyanna-ish view, but I believe John McCain, Sarah Palin, Barack Obama and Joe Biden are all good, decent people who have the best interest of this country at heart. Unfortunately, each in his/her own way has sold out to the nastiness of partisan party politics (and I look forward to a day when maybe that is no longer necessary), but I can still find a lot of good in all of them. McCain’s distinguished career as a Senator, his service to his country in the military and his ability to bridge division among his colleagues are all to be admired. Sarah Palin, although she has been treated cruelly and unfairly by the media and even by some of my blogger friends, represents so many of the things that are good about our country and she also represents a huge step forward for women. Barack Obama is a credit to African-Americans everywhere and has helped us move forward in race relations. His intelligence and pragmatism have served him well. I have always liked Joe Biden. His devotion to his family and his recovery from tragedy years ago are above reproach.
-- I still believe government is not responsible for fixing our problems. That’s what scares me about the Democrats and about having a Democratic President AND Congress. I am afraid it’s going to be Entitlement City.
-- Sadly, with the state of the economy and the focus on the middle class, there has been little if any talk this election season about the plight of the poor and downtrodden. Gone are the discussions about partnering with faith based organizations and the thousand points of light. But the “least of these” are still out there – the people who don’t worry about keeping a home but just having a place to sleep; the AIDS and Cancer patients who don’t have the family support to take care of them; the crack babies. And that’s just in this country. Read a little bit about what’s going on in Darfur. It’s enough to put all of this stuff in perspective.
-- And finally, as I have pondered the election and the plight of our country, I have been reading through the Gospels. Each of the writers – Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – presents a different perspective on the life of Jesus, yet there is a recurring theme. Although it was a drastically different time when He walked the earth, many of the problems were the same. There were political divisions, economic challenges and oppression of the weak. And yet this guy who mysteriously claimed to be fully God and fully man challenged his followers to lead simple lives of service to others, to love God with all their hearts, souls and minds and love their neighbors as they loved themselves. The message was so radical, so completely earth-shattering, that He was put to death for it.
-- So that’s where I am today – trying to figure out what loving my neighbor as myself means for me. As much as I concern myself with the election and the economy, this is really much more important. I went to the Gospels for insight and oh my, did I get it. Am I willing to live a life so radical and earth-shattering, so much that I would die for it?
-- You can say what you want about “Joe the Plumber” and Obama’s statement about “spreading the wealth around.” Whether Joe is legitimate or not is not the question. Obama’s response is indicative of the fundamental difference of opinion he and I have about the role of government. He wants to punish you if you make too much money. He wants to give tax “refunds” to people who never paid taxes in the first place. I just don’t think that makes sense.
-- I thought Sarah Palin knocked it out of the park on Saturday Night Live last weekend. To be able to laugh at yourself, to be able to “keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you,” to be able to, when “being lied about, (not) deal in lies” (with thanks to Rudyard Kipling) – these are attributes worthy of a Vice President. I also caught a little bit of her address this morning to parents of children with special needs. All I can say is I love this lady. As I have stated previously, I do not think the McCain-Palin ticket will prevail. The circumstances, history and media fawning are simply not in their favor although, if ever there has been a time when I hope I am wrong, this is it. But we have all been enriched by getting to know Sarah Palin. She has done her country, state, family and gender proud. I predict we will see her again. I look forward to it.
-- Barack Obama is taking a couple of days off to go be with his grandmother in Hawaii who is gravely ill and may not even make it through Election Day. As I have said before, although I do not agree with his politics, I like Barack Obama and think he is a kind, decent person. His grandmother had a big role in his upbringing and he is not about to let his running for the nation’s highest office interfere with his being with her in what might be her final days. I like that.
-- I am accused of having a Pollyanna-ish view, but I believe John McCain, Sarah Palin, Barack Obama and Joe Biden are all good, decent people who have the best interest of this country at heart. Unfortunately, each in his/her own way has sold out to the nastiness of partisan party politics (and I look forward to a day when maybe that is no longer necessary), but I can still find a lot of good in all of them. McCain’s distinguished career as a Senator, his service to his country in the military and his ability to bridge division among his colleagues are all to be admired. Sarah Palin, although she has been treated cruelly and unfairly by the media and even by some of my blogger friends, represents so many of the things that are good about our country and she also represents a huge step forward for women. Barack Obama is a credit to African-Americans everywhere and has helped us move forward in race relations. His intelligence and pragmatism have served him well. I have always liked Joe Biden. His devotion to his family and his recovery from tragedy years ago are above reproach.
-- I still believe government is not responsible for fixing our problems. That’s what scares me about the Democrats and about having a Democratic President AND Congress. I am afraid it’s going to be Entitlement City.
-- Sadly, with the state of the economy and the focus on the middle class, there has been little if any talk this election season about the plight of the poor and downtrodden. Gone are the discussions about partnering with faith based organizations and the thousand points of light. But the “least of these” are still out there – the people who don’t worry about keeping a home but just having a place to sleep; the AIDS and Cancer patients who don’t have the family support to take care of them; the crack babies. And that’s just in this country. Read a little bit about what’s going on in Darfur. It’s enough to put all of this stuff in perspective.
-- And finally, as I have pondered the election and the plight of our country, I have been reading through the Gospels. Each of the writers – Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – presents a different perspective on the life of Jesus, yet there is a recurring theme. Although it was a drastically different time when He walked the earth, many of the problems were the same. There were political divisions, economic challenges and oppression of the weak. And yet this guy who mysteriously claimed to be fully God and fully man challenged his followers to lead simple lives of service to others, to love God with all their hearts, souls and minds and love their neighbors as they loved themselves. The message was so radical, so completely earth-shattering, that He was put to death for it.
-- So that’s where I am today – trying to figure out what loving my neighbor as myself means for me. As much as I concern myself with the election and the economy, this is really much more important. I went to the Gospels for insight and oh my, did I get it. Am I willing to live a life so radical and earth-shattering, so much that I would die for it?
Monday, September 29, 2008
Resign, Madam Speaker
OK, I retract anything I might have said about staying away from politics.
The House today rejected the proposed bailout plan. Although I had misgivings about it, I had decided I was in favor of betting this extraordinary amount of money on the government being able to acquire these failed assets, stabilize the economy and ultimately recover the investment. But a large number of American people felt differently and made those feelings known to their congressional representatives. Those representatives, many of whom are up for re-election in about a month, heard those voices and voted down the bailout.
I am disappointed that the legislation did not pass. I believe both sides worked to get to a plan that would begin to fix some of the problems that are severely hurting our financial system.
My disappointment, however, is far surpassed by the anger I feel at one Nancy Pelosi, our esteemed Speaker of the House. Just before the vote in the House, Madam Speaker took it upon herself to remind her colleagues one more time just what, IN HER OPINION, got us to where we are today -- the failed policies of the Bush administration.
She might be right. I am not writing today to defend President Bush. But when it was time to vote on the proposal, it was time for her to put aside her own personal agenda (although I truly believe she is incapable of doing so) and simply call for a vote.
But no, Speaker Pelosi could not resist the temptation to make it personal one more time and kick the guy who, when she presided for the first time as Speaker at a State of the Union speech, graciously recognized her and her accomplishment at becoming first female Speaker.
There are those who say her statements today actually caused some Republicans to change their votes. I doubt that is true but that is not the point. The fact is that the timing of her statements was inexcusable and indefensable and her statements have nothing to do with anything but her own partisan political leanings.
I can only conclude that Nancy Pelosi has an agenda far more important to her than passing legislation to heal the economy and help the American people, and that is to make sure that a Republican no longer resides in the White House come January.
That's disgraceful. Please, Madam Speaker, do us all a favor. Resign as House Speaker and go ahead and start posturing for a cabinet position in the Obama administration.
The House today rejected the proposed bailout plan. Although I had misgivings about it, I had decided I was in favor of betting this extraordinary amount of money on the government being able to acquire these failed assets, stabilize the economy and ultimately recover the investment. But a large number of American people felt differently and made those feelings known to their congressional representatives. Those representatives, many of whom are up for re-election in about a month, heard those voices and voted down the bailout.
I am disappointed that the legislation did not pass. I believe both sides worked to get to a plan that would begin to fix some of the problems that are severely hurting our financial system.
My disappointment, however, is far surpassed by the anger I feel at one Nancy Pelosi, our esteemed Speaker of the House. Just before the vote in the House, Madam Speaker took it upon herself to remind her colleagues one more time just what, IN HER OPINION, got us to where we are today -- the failed policies of the Bush administration.
She might be right. I am not writing today to defend President Bush. But when it was time to vote on the proposal, it was time for her to put aside her own personal agenda (although I truly believe she is incapable of doing so) and simply call for a vote.
But no, Speaker Pelosi could not resist the temptation to make it personal one more time and kick the guy who, when she presided for the first time as Speaker at a State of the Union speech, graciously recognized her and her accomplishment at becoming first female Speaker.
There are those who say her statements today actually caused some Republicans to change their votes. I doubt that is true but that is not the point. The fact is that the timing of her statements was inexcusable and indefensable and her statements have nothing to do with anything but her own partisan political leanings.
I can only conclude that Nancy Pelosi has an agenda far more important to her than passing legislation to heal the economy and help the American people, and that is to make sure that a Republican no longer resides in the White House come January.
That's disgraceful. Please, Madam Speaker, do us all a favor. Resign as House Speaker and go ahead and start posturing for a cabinet position in the Obama administration.
Friday, September 26, 2008
More Random Musings
Oh my, the goings on in our government continue to get “curiouser and curiouser.” Here are more random thoughts from my overtaxed mind:
-- I do not like the term “bailout” and conceptually I am not in favor of it. But I am also the first to admit that much of this goes way over my head. I am a lawyer who happens to work for a bank, so I have a basic understanding of regulation, but as for all the other economic stuff, I am next to clueless. I’m with those who believe that, with regard to how we got here, there is plenty of blame to go around.
-- I thought Bush did a relatively good job of conveying the gravity of the situation in his speech Wednesday night. It is ironic that he, who has espoused smaller government, is spearheading what is perhaps the biggest government intervention in history. I don’t think it’s what he wants to do, but I believe he thinks it is what he has to do. Again, I don’t understand enough to even venture a guess as to whether he is right or wrong. I hope he is right about the part that, once the government buys all these bad loans, they will eventually get their money back. Especially since it’s our money.
-- There was no way this thing was not going to get political. And I think this has essentially sealed the deal for Obama. No matter the reality of the situation, he's been able to use it to his advantage (with plenty of help from his media admirers). Unless something unpredictable happens between now and Nov. 4 (which is, of course, quite possible), I believe he is going to be our next president. The election is going to be decided by the undecided voters. I believe the majority of them will probably look at this situation and decide that we have had a Republican administration for eight years and things are not looking too good. Maybe it’s time to give the other side a try. I really hope I am wrong but that's my prediction.
-- Not sure what I think about McCain’s latest moves – “suspending” his campaign, going to Washington and trying to put off the debate. Did he really do this in the best interest of the country? I like to think he did but that’s really between him and God. The part of me that wants to think the best of him, though, believes that he had to have known that the mainstream media -- who are, let’s face it, in the midst of a love affair with Obama -- would blast him for it, which they have, and that it could/would ultimately cost him the election (which I think it will). He’s not stupid, so maybe he decided it really is more important to participate in this process and let the chips fall where they may as far as the election is concerned. Who knows, history might treat him kindly for it. But for now, the sky is falling and a Republican is in the White House (see previous bullet point).
-- I thought the account we got of Obama trying to call McCain on Wednesday was rather comical. Of course each tried to put his own spin on it but it appears that Obama called McCain at 8:30 a.m. and McCain called him back around 2:30 p.m.. Just how are those calls placed? Does each carry his own private cell phone? Something makes me think they are not in each other’s “five.” I would guess there are a few layers you have to go through to reach either of them, no matter who you are. They do each have a few irons in the fire right now (although Obama has assured us he is quite able to multi-task). If they were able to make connections within a six-hour time frame, that seems pretty good to me.
-- I am ready for it to be over. I have, since I was a very young person, always enjoyed the process. The first presidential election I remember is Lyndon Johnson and Barry Goldwater. Needless to say, things have changed drastically since then, especially the way we get information. And I am somewhat addicted to getting that information. I don't get near as upset about it as I used to, but I can get pretty worked up. I need to get over it.
-- Well it looks like the debate is going to happen. It wouldn't look too good for McCain not to show up. Word is that Obama's going to go at him fully loaded and, in his most sanctimonious way, question why in the world McCain would want the two of them to high-tail it to Washington and do their respective jobs as senators when they needed to be telling the American people what they'll each do as president. As I said -- and I really hope I'm wrong -- I think we're headed for an Obama presidency.
-- I do not like the term “bailout” and conceptually I am not in favor of it. But I am also the first to admit that much of this goes way over my head. I am a lawyer who happens to work for a bank, so I have a basic understanding of regulation, but as for all the other economic stuff, I am next to clueless. I’m with those who believe that, with regard to how we got here, there is plenty of blame to go around.
-- I thought Bush did a relatively good job of conveying the gravity of the situation in his speech Wednesday night. It is ironic that he, who has espoused smaller government, is spearheading what is perhaps the biggest government intervention in history. I don’t think it’s what he wants to do, but I believe he thinks it is what he has to do. Again, I don’t understand enough to even venture a guess as to whether he is right or wrong. I hope he is right about the part that, once the government buys all these bad loans, they will eventually get their money back. Especially since it’s our money.
-- There was no way this thing was not going to get political. And I think this has essentially sealed the deal for Obama. No matter the reality of the situation, he's been able to use it to his advantage (with plenty of help from his media admirers). Unless something unpredictable happens between now and Nov. 4 (which is, of course, quite possible), I believe he is going to be our next president. The election is going to be decided by the undecided voters. I believe the majority of them will probably look at this situation and decide that we have had a Republican administration for eight years and things are not looking too good. Maybe it’s time to give the other side a try. I really hope I am wrong but that's my prediction.
-- Not sure what I think about McCain’s latest moves – “suspending” his campaign, going to Washington and trying to put off the debate. Did he really do this in the best interest of the country? I like to think he did but that’s really between him and God. The part of me that wants to think the best of him, though, believes that he had to have known that the mainstream media -- who are, let’s face it, in the midst of a love affair with Obama -- would blast him for it, which they have, and that it could/would ultimately cost him the election (which I think it will). He’s not stupid, so maybe he decided it really is more important to participate in this process and let the chips fall where they may as far as the election is concerned. Who knows, history might treat him kindly for it. But for now, the sky is falling and a Republican is in the White House (see previous bullet point).
-- I thought the account we got of Obama trying to call McCain on Wednesday was rather comical. Of course each tried to put his own spin on it but it appears that Obama called McCain at 8:30 a.m. and McCain called him back around 2:30 p.m.. Just how are those calls placed? Does each carry his own private cell phone? Something makes me think they are not in each other’s “five.” I would guess there are a few layers you have to go through to reach either of them, no matter who you are. They do each have a few irons in the fire right now (although Obama has assured us he is quite able to multi-task). If they were able to make connections within a six-hour time frame, that seems pretty good to me.
-- I am ready for it to be over. I have, since I was a very young person, always enjoyed the process. The first presidential election I remember is Lyndon Johnson and Barry Goldwater. Needless to say, things have changed drastically since then, especially the way we get information. And I am somewhat addicted to getting that information. I don't get near as upset about it as I used to, but I can get pretty worked up. I need to get over it.
-- Well it looks like the debate is going to happen. It wouldn't look too good for McCain not to show up. Word is that Obama's going to go at him fully loaded and, in his most sanctimonious way, question why in the world McCain would want the two of them to high-tail it to Washington and do their respective jobs as senators when they needed to be telling the American people what they'll each do as president. As I said -- and I really hope I'm wrong -- I think we're headed for an Obama presidency.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Random Political Musings
I just can’t stay away from politics. I have had a lot of thoughts rumbling around my head in the last few weeks so here goes:
I will probably vote Republican. I’m sure of it, unless something really, really wild happens between now and the election. The reason I will vote McCain-Palin is that I think national security is the number one issue and I think John McCain is best equipped to handle it. I am afraid the Democrats way under-estimate the terrorist threat. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in a politics-of-fear philosophy, but we have to be realistic. And the reality is they are not going away. The other reason I will vote Republican is that I still believe in as small a government as we can get away with. The Dems still seem to lean toward the big government approach. I am sure they have their reasons but I can’t buy it.
That said, the Republicans must tell me more about how they are going to deal with the economy and health care. John McCain says he is not going to raise taxes and, while I appreciate that, how does he propose to get things stable without it (remember “Read my lips – no new taxes?”)? Obama says to expect a modest tax increase on the wealthy. Frankly, I appreciate that he is being up front about it.
As for health care, the system is broken. I do not know what to do to fix it but one of these people running for president needs to come up with something. How did we get to a system where the insurance companies dictate treatment? And how is it that (some) doctors assume that, because of their lofty education, they are entitled to be millionaires? Is there not some middle ground somewhere? I was having dinner with a surgeon recently and he was lamenting the threat of universal health care. I asked him point-blank, just for the sake of conversation, why he would be so opposed and he said “Because I wouldn’t make as much money.” Sorry, Doc, that doesn’t do it for me.
I like Sarah Palin. I admire her strength, her poise and her grit. It looks like she has done a good job in Alaska, standing up to bullies and special interests, including those in her own party. But is she ready to be president? Can she rise to the occasion? I hope so. This is too important for on-the-job training.
Come to think of it, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter had both been governors before ascending to the presidency. I don’t recall them having a lot of foreign policy experience. Not that they are good examples.
I don’t think anyone can deny that Sarah Palin has been treated unfairly by the media and certain Democratic underlings since McCain announced her as his running mate. It is really comical when you think about it. Feminist organizations like NOW advocate a wide variety of equal rights for women and so do I. But you know it is driving them crazy that a conservative woman is possibly headed for the nation’s second highest office. Have you heard any of the NOW members coming to her defense? The silence you hear is deafening. That’s because they want equal rights for women and they want women in positions of leadership, but not Sarah Palin-type women. In other words, if you’re pro-choice and Democrat, they’re on your side. Anything else, well, you’re on your own.
Can Sarah Palin handle the job of the vice presidency with a family of five children and soon-to-be one grandchild? Hello, are we asking the right questions here? Ever read Proverbs 31? That woman was a wife, a mother, a businesswoman and a servant to the poor, for starters. I don’t know if she did it all at one time. I bet she had a really supportive husband and some good employees but don’t try to tell me she was a fulltime stay-at-home mom. Solomon saw fit to include her in the Book of Proverbs. Can Sarah Palin handle the job of vice-presidency given her current station in life? Please. God created each of us – men and women – with unique gifts and characteristics. If Sarah Palin believes this is her time, even on the heels of having a down syndrome baby and learning that her teenage daughter is pregnant, all I can say is you go girl, and may your husband and children rise up and call you blessed.
I like Barack Obama. I think he is a good guy and I think, much like Bill Clinton, if I were to meet him, we could be friends. I was impressed with his remarks at the Saddleback Civil Forum and I believe he is a committed man of faith. I think he is a good husband and dad and that he truly wants to make a difference, do good things and unite the country. He and I have a fundamental difference of opinion in that he sees the government as the vehicle for doing good and fixing things. I see it as the vehicle for enabling the people to do good and fix things. Too many times, through oppressive laws and taxes, the government stands in our way. But I like Barack Obama and I am praying for him during this election.
Speaking of the Saddleback Forum, I thought it was great. The moderator, Rick Warren, a Southern Baptist who formed his congregation from scratch as an alternative for those who had become disillusioned with church, and who subsequently authored the insanely popular “A Purpose Driven Life,” is not an evangelical cut in the mold of Falwell, Robertson or Dobson. In an appearance on Larry King Live following the forum, he confirmed that he comes down squarely in the middle, which frustrates both the right and the left. He counts both Obama and McCain as friends. Though he is pro-life, he is also equally if not more passionate about social issues such as justice for the oppressed, AIDS and the environment. He is part of a new breed of evangelical that is taking into account the totality of the Gospel message and finding more there than being anti-abortion and pro-family – much more.
As one who has been a part of the evangelical fold for most of my adult life (though I am becoming more and more uncomfortable with the label), I could not be more delighted with Warren’s entry into the faith and politics discussion. I was furious after the September 11 attacks when both Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson said that America had, in essence, gotten what it deserved after years of moral decay. I was equally angered just a few weeks ago when James Dobson picked apart a speech Obama had made some two years earlier, calling into question his faith and his “fruitcake interpretation” of the Scriptures. Falwell never spoke for me and neither do Robertson or Dobson. I have often found their comments to be more divisive than helpful. We owe a debt of gratitude to those like Rick Warren who are bringing about civility not only among Christians, but all those who long for a more civil discussion and analysis of the political process. Something makes me think he took seriously the passage where Jesus said, “Blessed are the peacemakers.”
###
P.S. There are those who might think I have a romantic or unrealistic approach to this. I have read other blogs where the writers are much more critical of the candidates than I, and in many instances, rightfully so. Those folks are probably a lot smarter and informed. I'll give them credit and take into account their opinions. These are just my thoughts to date for what they are worth.
I will probably vote Republican. I’m sure of it, unless something really, really wild happens between now and the election. The reason I will vote McCain-Palin is that I think national security is the number one issue and I think John McCain is best equipped to handle it. I am afraid the Democrats way under-estimate the terrorist threat. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in a politics-of-fear philosophy, but we have to be realistic. And the reality is they are not going away. The other reason I will vote Republican is that I still believe in as small a government as we can get away with. The Dems still seem to lean toward the big government approach. I am sure they have their reasons but I can’t buy it.
That said, the Republicans must tell me more about how they are going to deal with the economy and health care. John McCain says he is not going to raise taxes and, while I appreciate that, how does he propose to get things stable without it (remember “Read my lips – no new taxes?”)? Obama says to expect a modest tax increase on the wealthy. Frankly, I appreciate that he is being up front about it.
As for health care, the system is broken. I do not know what to do to fix it but one of these people running for president needs to come up with something. How did we get to a system where the insurance companies dictate treatment? And how is it that (some) doctors assume that, because of their lofty education, they are entitled to be millionaires? Is there not some middle ground somewhere? I was having dinner with a surgeon recently and he was lamenting the threat of universal health care. I asked him point-blank, just for the sake of conversation, why he would be so opposed and he said “Because I wouldn’t make as much money.” Sorry, Doc, that doesn’t do it for me.
I like Sarah Palin. I admire her strength, her poise and her grit. It looks like she has done a good job in Alaska, standing up to bullies and special interests, including those in her own party. But is she ready to be president? Can she rise to the occasion? I hope so. This is too important for on-the-job training.
Come to think of it, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter had both been governors before ascending to the presidency. I don’t recall them having a lot of foreign policy experience. Not that they are good examples.
I don’t think anyone can deny that Sarah Palin has been treated unfairly by the media and certain Democratic underlings since McCain announced her as his running mate. It is really comical when you think about it. Feminist organizations like NOW advocate a wide variety of equal rights for women and so do I. But you know it is driving them crazy that a conservative woman is possibly headed for the nation’s second highest office. Have you heard any of the NOW members coming to her defense? The silence you hear is deafening. That’s because they want equal rights for women and they want women in positions of leadership, but not Sarah Palin-type women. In other words, if you’re pro-choice and Democrat, they’re on your side. Anything else, well, you’re on your own.
Can Sarah Palin handle the job of the vice presidency with a family of five children and soon-to-be one grandchild? Hello, are we asking the right questions here? Ever read Proverbs 31? That woman was a wife, a mother, a businesswoman and a servant to the poor, for starters. I don’t know if she did it all at one time. I bet she had a really supportive husband and some good employees but don’t try to tell me she was a fulltime stay-at-home mom. Solomon saw fit to include her in the Book of Proverbs. Can Sarah Palin handle the job of vice-presidency given her current station in life? Please. God created each of us – men and women – with unique gifts and characteristics. If Sarah Palin believes this is her time, even on the heels of having a down syndrome baby and learning that her teenage daughter is pregnant, all I can say is you go girl, and may your husband and children rise up and call you blessed.
I like Barack Obama. I think he is a good guy and I think, much like Bill Clinton, if I were to meet him, we could be friends. I was impressed with his remarks at the Saddleback Civil Forum and I believe he is a committed man of faith. I think he is a good husband and dad and that he truly wants to make a difference, do good things and unite the country. He and I have a fundamental difference of opinion in that he sees the government as the vehicle for doing good and fixing things. I see it as the vehicle for enabling the people to do good and fix things. Too many times, through oppressive laws and taxes, the government stands in our way. But I like Barack Obama and I am praying for him during this election.
Speaking of the Saddleback Forum, I thought it was great. The moderator, Rick Warren, a Southern Baptist who formed his congregation from scratch as an alternative for those who had become disillusioned with church, and who subsequently authored the insanely popular “A Purpose Driven Life,” is not an evangelical cut in the mold of Falwell, Robertson or Dobson. In an appearance on Larry King Live following the forum, he confirmed that he comes down squarely in the middle, which frustrates both the right and the left. He counts both Obama and McCain as friends. Though he is pro-life, he is also equally if not more passionate about social issues such as justice for the oppressed, AIDS and the environment. He is part of a new breed of evangelical that is taking into account the totality of the Gospel message and finding more there than being anti-abortion and pro-family – much more.
As one who has been a part of the evangelical fold for most of my adult life (though I am becoming more and more uncomfortable with the label), I could not be more delighted with Warren’s entry into the faith and politics discussion. I was furious after the September 11 attacks when both Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson said that America had, in essence, gotten what it deserved after years of moral decay. I was equally angered just a few weeks ago when James Dobson picked apart a speech Obama had made some two years earlier, calling into question his faith and his “fruitcake interpretation” of the Scriptures. Falwell never spoke for me and neither do Robertson or Dobson. I have often found their comments to be more divisive than helpful. We owe a debt of gratitude to those like Rick Warren who are bringing about civility not only among Christians, but all those who long for a more civil discussion and analysis of the political process. Something makes me think he took seriously the passage where Jesus said, “Blessed are the peacemakers.”
###
P.S. There are those who might think I have a romantic or unrealistic approach to this. I have read other blogs where the writers are much more critical of the candidates than I, and in many instances, rightfully so. Those folks are probably a lot smarter and informed. I'll give them credit and take into account their opinions. These are just my thoughts to date for what they are worth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)