January 09, 2008
more mublings about politics
I think there is an enormous danger for public figures to rationalize their actions by claiming God's mandate.
- Barack Obama, professional hope-ster
You see, he walked down the aisle at Trinity UCC and I walked across the stage at The Mosque (The edifice is now called something else entirely. People found the name troubling. Strange. It looks kinda like a mosque. I refer to 
it as The Building Formerly Known as the Mosque. It's called The Landmark Theater now.) for graduation. Our High School did not have a place large enough for the potential crowd. My memories of that evening are sketchy at best. I was sober at my graduation (shock and awe). So, I am still unsure why I have repressed so much of that occasion. Ah well. Life goes on.
Back to Falsani and Obama...
Barack speaks of the difficulty of the politician who is called upon to speak of their faith. They really don't stand a chance. The very nature of their job is to find ways to attract people to them so that their ideas and goals for themselves and the country come to fruition. Thus, they spend time trying to make people happy. That's what they do. "Like me." is the creed of the politician. It has to be. I get it. I have no problem with it. Like Obama said, however, that creates certain challenges when speaking of something as intimate as one's faith. And I think that is what is so troublesome for me in the recent election coverage. Politicians are somehow compelled to speak about things that almost always seem insincere no matter how honest they are being.
Perhaps Hillary has found her voice. Heck. I hope she has! That would be great. But that the news centered around her statements about finding her voice, or around Obama's sense of hope and the total "ga-ga" response of many in Iowa and New Hampshire still stumps me. Why? I am still puzzling through that. It's a good question.
I have wondered about this off and on today. I know I am a skeptic where our political process is concerned. But I also know that, as one who is to vocationally called upon to exemplify a certain faithful/hopeful posture, I need to work that stuff out. Cynicism is not always healthy. Skepticism is not always healthy. Pharaoh had a hard heart, if you recall. Bitterness, skepticism, and cynicism are both symptomatic and causes of a hard hart. I would rather my heart be pliable and open to all...not hard and incapable of receiving God's messengers when they arrive. That is how I try to pastor my church. That is how I hope to engage my country's political system. But it is difficult.
I want to be hopeful. I want to be excited that two of the most viable candidates for President of the United States represent people who were not even allowed a vote a century ago. 3/5th a person? Holy cow! Yeah. This is a cool time in our history. I resonate with Barack. He's only nine years my senior. Even Romney is a change of sorts. Huckabee (HuckabeeHuckabeeHuckabee) is not a rabid fundamentalist. He's an orator and political conservative. I can even dig him somewhat.
And yet...the system is so clouded, so muddled. The media coverage is so sensationalist, hyped up, and "entertaining." I'm just divided. Maybe I'm disillusioned somehow. I just don't know. I just wanna reach into the TV set and shake all those talking heads until they start making sense.
Feh.
I am rambling now. I'll keep working through this mess off-line and come back later.
Posted by tripp at January 9, 2008 06:01 PM"I would rather my heart be pliable and open to all...not hard and incapable of receiving God's messengers when they arrive."
Me, too.
I think this was just what I needed to read, Tripp.
Posted by: Songbird at January 9, 2008 06:48 PMI hate to be cynical, but I'm reading The End of America by Naomi Wolf and see little hope. I wish more people knew about Dennis Kucinich. He's the only candidate, IMHO, who *might* steer our county back toward democracy. Maybe.
Remind me to give you a URL for non-corporate TV election coverage. It's way better than watching CNN.
Oh, and wear orange on Friday.
Posted by: William at January 9, 2008 10:33 PMOrange? And why would I do that?
Posted by: Tripp at January 10, 2008 06:28 AMTo be subversive.
It's the anniversary of the opening of Guantanamo Bay. Carly and I are attending a protest downtown tomorrow at 4:30. Email me if you want more info.
I'll wear my orange cardigan...Nice.
Posted by: Tripp at January 10, 2008 07:32 AMPolitics have failed to interest me for several years now, and I am definitely guilty of the cynicism which you describe. I guess what it comes down to is that I believe that real and lasting change will never come from a government entity, and, based on history, I just don't give politicians that much credence. Even the best politician still has to contend with all the other politicians with whom he must work to "get the job done".
Still, I admire the "Mr. Smiths" of the world, who have the spark and energy to fight the system and the powers that be...it's just sometimes difficult to know who he might be. Imposters abound.
I do find myself somewhat drawn to Obama...can't say for sure what he's made of (cyniciam rears its ugly head), but, for what it's worth, I really like the idea of history in the making with the potential for the first African American president. Superficial perhaps, when you get right down to it, but it's the most enthusiasm I've been able to muster when it comes to politics and politicians.
Thanks for the heads-up about Friday. I've got an orange shirt.
Of course, Tripp, if you ever stand for office somebody will read about 'the Mosque' and accuse you of being a terrorist.
A candidate's religion is a red herring (or blue depending upon the place) in a constitutional, neutral system.
As for faith building character, that's fine and often true, but again which house of worship if any the president goes to is irrelevant.
It's about principles as shown by a candidate's record - not membership in a religion, sex (the only reason I can think of that people imagine Clinton's idealistic and a change: positive prejudice about women), race ('not by the colour of their skin') or age (Obama's the Pepsi kid and Huckabee's Coke - so what?).
I understand liking Huckabee - his statism in domestic policy fuelled by his doubtless sincere faith fits 'progressive' American Christianity going back to William Jennings Bryan.
Given that I don't really know either man, personally I don't dislike him or Obama.
But they're not getting my vote. Because they wouldn't really change anything. They're both really pro-war.
My candidate, Ron Paul, has never used his individualistic Protestant faith (not 'ecclesial short of an infallible church', the mode of many mainline including liturgical Protestants; he sometimes goes to a Baptist church in Texas but isn't a member), a brand of course I don't agree with but a Christianity that does bolster his character, to cadge votes.
His campaign is entirely secular. And not lacking in idealism.
It's about universal principles that work in a free society.
Posted by: The young fogey at January 10, 2008 10:22 AMTripp, I hope you won't mind that I quoted you at my place.
Posted by: Songbird at January 10, 2008 03:39 PM