Browsed by
Category: politics

not ready for a color-ful president?

not ready for a color-ful president?

It’s a sad commentary on the state of our nation that an intelligent, articulate, Harvard-educated, church-going, family-oriented, compassionate, bridge-building presidential candidate requires early protection by the Secret Service … because he happens to be black. Racism is still embedded in our nation’s psyche — broadly and deeply — so much so that a truly viable candidate of color apparently poses an unacceptable threat.

We like to pretend this bile is not still in us. We like to pretend we are beyond it. Then the man who could be our next president must ask to be protected from those who think him too dark for the job.

(from a Leonard Pitts editorial, Obama’s Rise Fuels Hate)

When will we be the “land of the free” we profess to be, want to be, a land where someone other than a rich, white male could be president? It hasn’t happened yet …

And until it does, our claim to be a land of equal opportunity will ring hollow. And we must continue to bear the collective shame of our intractable racism.

heroes

heroes

The bottom line is the American people are capable of determining their own ideals of heroes and they don’t need to be told elaborate tales.

– Jessica Lynch testifying yesterday before the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee

some thoughts on terrorism

some thoughts on terrorism

Some thoughts provoked by a lecture I heard last Monday evening delivered by Dr. Louise Richardson. Her latest book: What Terrorists Want: Understanding the Enemy, Containing the Threat

  • Dr. Richardson spoke of the importance of “following our own rules.” I agree. It is beyond foolish to jettison our highest principles — our esteem for the rule of law and our commitment to human rights for all people — for the sake of protecting ourselves and “our way of life.” We are only dooming our way of life in the process, as well as severely undermining any international credibility we might have had in calling other nations and leaders to account.
  • “Terrorism” has become a catchall term, used to define — and defame — any “enemy” of any sort. When we refer to “The Terrorists” without any further elaboration, as if “The Terrorists” were a monolithic, coordinated opposition, it only confuses things. We are threatened not by “The Terrorists,” but by a variety of terrorists groups, each with their own distinct grievances, ideologies, political objectives, and modes of behavior: Al Qaeda, Hamas, Sunni insurgents, Shiite militias, etc. It is critical that we understand our enemies and what it is that drives their rage, even when it may mean acknowledging the legitimacy of some of their complaints.
  • Dr. Richardson defines terrorism as the “deliberate targeting of non-combatants for the sake of some political objective.” It seems to me that an additional element of any terrorist organization is a perception of powerlessness. Terrorism is a tactic adopted by those who cannot “win” a fair fight, the response of the “little guys” to the “big bully,” resorting to cheating or trickery or unfair fighting to strike back at the bully. In this regard, it is interesting to note that as Hamas gained some legitimate political power, it began to back off somewhat from its terrorist rhetoric and tactics. Terrorism is the “weapon” of the oppressed and the weak (unwarranted and morally unjustifiable), just as militarism is the “weapon” of the oppressor and the strong (just as unwarranted and just as morally unjustifiable!).
  • In that case, it is clear why a “bullying” response to terrorism is useless. It merely confirms the terrorist’s point of view and redoubles the determination to go on. The only way to defuse or contain terrorism is to stop the bullying … and to share power! But that is the one thing we are not prepared to do. We want to dictate the terms for the rest of the world. Unfortunately, as long as we insist on doing so, we provide a ripe environment for the growth of terrorism.
who’s irresponsible?

who’s irresponsible?

In a time of war, it’s irresponsible for the Democrat leadership in — Democratic leadership in Congress to delay for months on end while our troops in combat are waiting for the funds.

– George Bush, speaking to the press this morning in the Rose Garden

Is it irresponsible to exercise congressional oversight over a war that the majority of the American people believe is being mishandled?

Is it irresponsible to refuse to allow the administration to do whatever it wants, however it wants, without input from the people’s representatives?

Is it irresponsible to ask for dialogue about a war that is costing this nation dearly — in money, in lives, and in reputation?

Or is the truly irresponsible thing to undermine the moral credibility of this nation, to expend billions of dollars and thousands of lives, to provoke an enormity of sufffering and death among the civilian population of a foreign nation, all for the sake of a war of choice, a war without need, a war without cause?

american dynasties?

american dynasties?

Is anyone else troubled by the fact that if Hillary Clinton is elected president in November, 2008, we will begin a third decade with a head of state drawn from just two families? Since January, 1989 — already twenty years — either a Bush or a Clinton has occupied the Oval Office.

on the subject of the war in iraq

on the subject of the war in iraq

I reprint for you here an excerpt of the remarks Jim Wallis will make at a Christian peace rally to be held this evening in Washingon, D.C. His words are powerful and passionate and perceptive and faithful to the gospel of Jesus. As Christians, we must discern and root out the fear in our own hearts and minds, let it be rooted out as the love of God fills us more and more. As Christians, we take no sides, nor enlist God to defend “our side,” but do our best to put ourselves on God’s side …

For all of us here tonight, the war in Iraq has become a matter of faith.

By our deepest convictions about Christian standards and teaching, the war in Iraq was not just a well-intended mistake or only mismanaged. THIS WAR, FROM A CHRISTIAN POINT OF VIEW, IS MORALLY WRONG – AND WAS FROM THE VERY START. It cannot be justified with either the teachings of Jesus Christ OR the criteria of St. Augustine’s just war. It simply doesn’t pass either test and did not from its beginning. This war is not just an offense against the young Americans who have made the ultimate sacrifice or to the Iraqis who have paid such a horrible price. This war is not only an offense to the poor at home and around the world who have paid the price of misdirected resources and priorities. This war is also an offense against God.

And so we are here tonight, very simply and resolutely, to begin to end the war in Iraq. But not by anger, though we are angry, and not just by politics, though it will take political courage. But by faith, because we are people of faith.

This service and procession are not just another political protest but an act of faith, an act of prayer, an act of nonviolent witness. Politics led us into this war, and politics is unlikely to save us by itself. The American people have voted against the war in Iraq but political proposals keep failing, one after the other.

I believe it will take faith to end this war. It will take prayer to end it. It will take a mobilization of the faith community to end it – to change the political climate, to change the wind. It will take a revolution of love to end it. Because this endless war in Iraq is based ultimately on fear, and Jesus says that only perfect love will cast out fear.

So tonight we say, as people of faith, as followers of Jesus, that the deep fear that has paralyzed the conscience of this nation, that has caused us to become the kind of people that we are not called to be, that has allowed us to tolerate violations of our most basic values, and that has perpetuated an endless cycle of violence and counter-violence must be exorcised as the demon it is – THIS FEAR MUST BE CAST OUT!

And to cast out that fear, we must act in faith, in prayer, in love, and in hope – so we might help to heal the fears that keep this war going. Tonight we march not in belligerence, or to attack individuals – even those leaders directly responsible for the war – or to use human suffering for partisan political purposes. Rather, we process to the White House tonight as an act of faith, believing that only faith can save us now.

keeping things in perspective

keeping things in perspective

The blood is in the water. Democrats (joined now by Republican John Sununu) want Alberto Gonzales dismissed from his job as attorney general for his abrupt firing of eight US attorneys.

There may well be justification in condemning the political nature of the firings, but it is hard for me to get too worked up about this issue. An attorney general motivated by politics? And that is a revelation? It may be sad, but true, that the US attorneys do work at the whim of the executive branch and decisions about hiring and firing will be politically motivated.

It is hard for me to get excited about this crusade against Gonzales, because it is transparently a matter of political “gotcha” and of gaining, or at least appearing to gain, the moral “highground.”

Consider the cost of Gonzales’ actions. Eight undoubtedly capable and well-intentioned public servants out of a job … but I would guess not long out of a job. And yet another blow to the sagging edifice of democracy by yet another exercise of executive unilateralism.

Compare the costs of this unilateral action with the costs of another virtually unilateral action: the invasion of Iraq. You cannot compare the two! You cannot compare the fallout of a squabble over politics with the fallout of a war!

Heads must roll over the firing of eight attorneys, but who shall bear the responsibility for an unwarranted, unprecedented, illegal invasion of a sovereign nation without provocation? Who shall bear responsibility for the thousands of American lives and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives this war has cost?

That is something to get worked up about!

a politics “of the people”

a politics “of the people”

They are out there … those ordinary citizens who have grown up in the midst of all the political and cultural battles, but who have found a way — in their own lives, at least — to make peace with their neighbors, and themselves. I imagine the white Southerner who growing up heard his dad talk about niggers this and niggers that but who has struck up a friendship with the black guys at the office and is trying to teach his own son different, who thinks discrimination is wrong but doesn’t see why the son of a black doctor should get admitted to law school ahead of his own son. Or the former Black Panther who decided to go into real estate, bought a few buildings in the neighborhood, and is just as tired of the drug dealers in front of those buildings as he is of the bankers who won’t give him a loan to expand his business. There’s the middle-aged feminist who still mourns her abortion, and the Christian woman who paid for her teenager’s abortion, and the millions of waitresses and temp secretaries and nurse’s assistants and Wal-Mart associates who hold their breath every single month in the hope they’ll have enough money to support the children that they did bring into the world.

I imagine they are waiting for a politics with the maturity to balance idealism and realism, to distinguish between what can and cannot be compromised, to admit the possibility that the other side might sometimes have a point. They don’t always understand the arguments between left and right, conservative and liberal, but they recognize the difference between dogma and common sense, responsibility and irresponsibility, between those things that last and those that are fleeting.

They are out there, waiting for Republicans and Democrats to catch up with them.

I have purposefully omitted the attribution of this quotation, because I want you, the blog reader, to consider its assertions as free as possible of the political gamesmanship and polarizing caricaturing it seeks to surmount, and because it is not my intention, as the blog author, to endorse any particular political candidate or party, but to endorse the kind of thinking about politics it proposes — thinking with a healthy dose of humility, a readiness for cooperation, and genuine hopefulness.