Obama Apologies, Part 2
A friend asks why I support Barack Obama for President. These are four reasons that persuade me. These are the macro-reasons, and his policy proposals also align with my preferred vision for the national government.
1. Faith and Philosophy Obama is a Christian. Not alone among the candidates, he expresses his policy ideas and guiding principles in terms of faith, not merely as pragmatic or unmoored morality. This is rarer among Democrats than Republicans, and I am exceedingly happily to find a progressive candidate who frames his policies and ideas in terms of faith. He and I agree that government has a significant role to play in addressing issues of inequity and injustice, problems of poverty and systemic bias against vulnerable and historically marginalized populations. I believe these issues are spiritual, ethical and moral, and that people of faith should use every tool as our disposal, including the state, to address them, wisely, pragmatically, prudentially, creatively and usefully. In the 2004 Convention speech, he described a distinction between private and public morality, which I believe is useful to describe government’s realistic use. Government is not very good and promoting individual morality but it is a very useful tool in addressing systemic, cultural and institutional injustice and corruption. In that speech, Obama suggested that this “public morality” is the greater role of government, and I agree.
2. Personal Narrative Perhaps I should be more interested in specific policy proposals and the ubiquitous criticism of inexperience, but Obama’s personal narrative stands for something remarkable in America and in the world. Obama is white and black. His father is from Kenya, and his mother is from Kansas. Obama’s father was a nominal, non-religious Muslim, and his mother was a secular humanist. As he worked with Christian churches in Chicago, Obama claimed Christ. He is a lawyer, the first Black editor of the Harvard Law Review, a civil rights attorney, who first devoted his career to the poor and vulnerable in Chicago’s south side. I may be maudlin about it, but this story and his candidacy is Important. Such a story only could happen in our great republic, and it represents a great turn of the wheel of history, beyond our dark past of racism and slavery, through the civil rights era, just passed racial harmony and right up to the edge of racial reconciliation. Not only will this thoroughly American point-of-view uniquely equip him to speak to our neighbors beyond his natural constituency, but it should give him a powerful means to interpret global complexity. 90% White Iowa demonstrated a dramatic rejection of the notion that “America is not ready to elect a Black Man.” This is big History in real time. I am willing to suffer some flawed policy ideas in exchange for the Meaning of the Obama presidency.
3. Partisanship and Moderation The Clinton and Bush presidencies and their accompanying Congresses, led us into a bleak season of partisan extremism. Practical and fruitful movement in our government happens best in the middle, with smart compromises and humble, tough negotiations, not raw power victories. At the risk of naiveté, I think that if we are to overcome the current stasis and escalating meanness, we need leadership who rejects those tactics. Here, Obama’s inexperience may just work in his favor, because he has not worked in the party apparatus so long as to be tainted by the hard knocks. ** I am not swooning so much to ignore the fact that Obama is a partisan and is in a party, but his rhetoric of unity and his history in the Senate makes me hopeful that he is serious about it.
4. Foreign Policy Long have I believed in engagement over isolation. I oppose the Cuban embargo as anachronistic and believe the best way to overcome such tyranny is with a flood of free market capitalism, dialogue and diplomacy. The Current Occupant promotes great and unnecessary harm by straight-arming every conceivable foe, like Iran, by demanding that they acquiesce to all our demands before we will negotiate. Where is the negotiation? We create more enemies than converts by such hubris. In virtually every crisis and with nearly every conceivable foe, engagement and dialogue will serve our national interests and security better than isolation and fear-mongering. I do not suggest appeasement or capitulation before any aggressor or dictator, but cocky bullying exacerbates extremism and others’ nationalism to no good end. Obama agrees and has committed himself to well prepared, tough, engaged diplomacy with friend and foe.
** In this space, I earlier wrote that Obama was a member of McCain's Gang of 14 as an example of bipartisanship and moderation. I was incorrect. Obama was not a part of that Senate episode.
1. Faith and Philosophy Obama is a Christian. Not alone among the candidates, he expresses his policy ideas and guiding principles in terms of faith, not merely as pragmatic or unmoored morality. This is rarer among Democrats than Republicans, and I am exceedingly happily to find a progressive candidate who frames his policies and ideas in terms of faith. He and I agree that government has a significant role to play in addressing issues of inequity and injustice, problems of poverty and systemic bias against vulnerable and historically marginalized populations. I believe these issues are spiritual, ethical and moral, and that people of faith should use every tool as our disposal, including the state, to address them, wisely, pragmatically, prudentially, creatively and usefully. In the 2004 Convention speech, he described a distinction between private and public morality, which I believe is useful to describe government’s realistic use. Government is not very good and promoting individual morality but it is a very useful tool in addressing systemic, cultural and institutional injustice and corruption. In that speech, Obama suggested that this “public morality” is the greater role of government, and I agree.
2. Personal Narrative Perhaps I should be more interested in specific policy proposals and the ubiquitous criticism of inexperience, but Obama’s personal narrative stands for something remarkable in America and in the world. Obama is white and black. His father is from Kenya, and his mother is from Kansas. Obama’s father was a nominal, non-religious Muslim, and his mother was a secular humanist. As he worked with Christian churches in Chicago, Obama claimed Christ. He is a lawyer, the first Black editor of the Harvard Law Review, a civil rights attorney, who first devoted his career to the poor and vulnerable in Chicago’s south side. I may be maudlin about it, but this story and his candidacy is Important. Such a story only could happen in our great republic, and it represents a great turn of the wheel of history, beyond our dark past of racism and slavery, through the civil rights era, just passed racial harmony and right up to the edge of racial reconciliation. Not only will this thoroughly American point-of-view uniquely equip him to speak to our neighbors beyond his natural constituency, but it should give him a powerful means to interpret global complexity. 90% White Iowa demonstrated a dramatic rejection of the notion that “America is not ready to elect a Black Man.” This is big History in real time. I am willing to suffer some flawed policy ideas in exchange for the Meaning of the Obama presidency.
3. Partisanship and Moderation The Clinton and Bush presidencies and their accompanying Congresses, led us into a bleak season of partisan extremism. Practical and fruitful movement in our government happens best in the middle, with smart compromises and humble, tough negotiations, not raw power victories. At the risk of naiveté, I think that if we are to overcome the current stasis and escalating meanness, we need leadership who rejects those tactics. Here, Obama’s inexperience may just work in his favor, because he has not worked in the party apparatus so long as to be tainted by the hard knocks. ** I am not swooning so much to ignore the fact that Obama is a partisan and is in a party, but his rhetoric of unity and his history in the Senate makes me hopeful that he is serious about it.
4. Foreign Policy Long have I believed in engagement over isolation. I oppose the Cuban embargo as anachronistic and believe the best way to overcome such tyranny is with a flood of free market capitalism, dialogue and diplomacy. The Current Occupant promotes great and unnecessary harm by straight-arming every conceivable foe, like Iran, by demanding that they acquiesce to all our demands before we will negotiate. Where is the negotiation? We create more enemies than converts by such hubris. In virtually every crisis and with nearly every conceivable foe, engagement and dialogue will serve our national interests and security better than isolation and fear-mongering. I do not suggest appeasement or capitulation before any aggressor or dictator, but cocky bullying exacerbates extremism and others’ nationalism to no good end. Obama agrees and has committed himself to well prepared, tough, engaged diplomacy with friend and foe.
** In this space, I earlier wrote that Obama was a member of McCain's Gang of 14 as an example of bipartisanship and moderation. I was incorrect. Obama was not a part of that Senate episode.
posted by JRB at 3:57 PM
24 Comments:
Obama was most definitely not part of McCain's Gang of 14.
You're right, and I've been laboring under a bad fact.
The no-negative campaign that Obama has thus far ran has made me ever more inclined to give him my unwavering support. As a selective apathetic (when it comes to American Politics) Obama energizes me to want to support him. His professionalism makes him a unique character, indeed. While Clinton plays the proverbial politician, Obama plays the unwonted unifier -- and people buy into this (hence Iowa).
I believe Obama to be authentic and genuine to his message of a unified movement. The nomination and subsequent election of Obama would be a watershed in American Political history. Obama has employed an unconventional strategy that seems to transcend the typical political circumlocutions and nonsense answers and statements. People have ridiculed him for being honest and upfront, saying that voters will dismayed at too through and honest an answer.
I think Obama is showing American what an honest campaign at the right time can do.
I am excited.
While I disagree with a good bit of his policies, I certainly agree that Obama is an inspiring speaker and campaigner.
However, a gifted ability to communicate--even among broad spectrums--is, for me, a low priority for such an important position as President.
I can only imagine that it is such a massively challenging, lonely, and maddening job to literally have the final say on policies that shape the world and history. So much so that I place great value on the totality of a candidate's life experiences.
Unfortunately, none of the candidates seem to combine the ability to inspire with the hardening that experience under fire brings.
For me, the closest one is John McCain. He has experienced firsthand some of the darkest places that a human can go and survive. He's also been willing to do what he believes is right ahead of what is politically most beneficial.
That is why I'm inclined toward him for the time being.
Hey Pax. You need to check your candidates a little better before you endorse them and give false reasons why. Obama was raised a Muslim and has never denounced his faith. He is a member of the Trinity Church of Christ at this time. This however is a United Church of Christ, a denomination, the same denomination that made public approval of gay marriage last year. Please remember that like it or not, we have influence over others with our words.
You had me at "Obama."
To dave:
Oh my God. I had no idea. I'm betting that he's probably the Antichrist to boot. Thanks for the heads up. And please keep your eyes on the lane, dear fellow.
Eye Guy,
I need your email address. JRB has talk to both of us about the other but we've yet to make a connection. Can you head to my blog and send it to me? I see some JRB, ERM, EyeGuy conversations in the future....
Thanks.
Dave Brumley,
Did you know that Mike Huckabee is a Southern Baptist, even a former Southern Baptist MINISTER? They believe in the eternal security of salvation, that is, "once save always saved."
Check it out!
Fred Thompson must be your guy.
By the way, Dave Brumley, are you related to our beloved Brumleys of Columbus, Mississippi?
If so, we might need to schedule an intervention.
For the record, Obama's father and paternal grandparents are African Muslims, but Obama's father took a very small role in his rearing. He was raised in a secular humanist home before he converted to Christianity in adulthood. He came to Christ through the witness of the churches in Chicago where he was an adult activist and organizer.
He wasn't raised Christian, but he made a conscious decision to claim Christ as an adult. That seems awfully New Testament to me.
Also, I think the conversion to Christ and Christianity probably implies an renunciation of Islam, even if he ever were one. At least, that's what Islam would say.
Dave,
you are getting jumped on a little bit here. I do apologize for that. But you hit on some issues that many here among the fellaship care about deeply. I can assure that nothing said here is mean spirited. I think we just STRONGLY disagree with you.
I am not sure which of JRB's reasons you think are false.
Barack Obama has stated that he accepted Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior and that he tries to determine His will. That is a pretty strong renouncement of Islam.
You seem to be disagreeing with JRB's assertion that Obama is a Christian because he is not a member of the conservative Church of Christ denomination but instead is a member of the liberal United Church of Christ denomination. I can assure you that no one here was laboring under the assumption that Obama was a member of the conservative Church of Christ denomination.
If being a member of the Church of Christ is your determining factor for who is a Chrisitan and therefore who you should vote for in a Presidential election then I can assume that you have never voted for anyone in any Presidential election.
GWB is a methodist. Huck is a Baptist. Romney is a mormon. I have no idea where McCain falls. Giuliani is a scumbag who cheats on his wife and then spends public money to guard his girlfriends. I suppose Fred Thompson was raised in the conservative Church of Christ denomination but from all accounts he doesn't darken a church house door unless his mom makes him. Ron Paul is a ... well I have no idea, but Ron Paul is just crazy. I think Alan Keyes is a Catholic. That's almost as bad as being a Muslim.
Chad,
I think that you would find some love for John McCain around these parts as well.
No one on this campaign trail has seen darker days that John McCain. He is, in my book, a hero. He also seems to be quite honest and running a clean and positive campaign. I really appreciated some of his comments in his victory speech that were complementary of his opponents.
I do believe that Barack's experience as a community organizer and a state politician has given him some very real world experience on how to make America a better place.
Barack does lack foreign policy experience but that is nothing new for a President. In fact unless they were previously a Secretary of State or an Ambassador or something along those lines then I would say all Presidential candidates are lacking foreign policy experience.
Yes, Dave Brumley, Kile is right to temper my point that I made rather snarkily. I was trying to be funny, but I should know better by now that occasionally translates into condescension.
Thanks for dropping by, please do continue to write and read and criticize all along the way.
Dave, for the record, I'm not one of the Fella's, so please don't hold my snarkiness against them (they're a bunch of peace-loving, hand-holding, Kumbaya-singing guys after all). I am merely an unruly crazy cousin who stumbles by from time to time and blurts out the first thing that comes to his mind. :-)
New to blogging I see! Well, good for you. I hope it as much a blessing to you as it has been for me. But remember--the public square is not the same as a church foyer. Be careful with your "facts," and be ready to defend them.
As they say around these parts, "Pax"
Eric--
miketheeyeguy@comcast.net
I understand from JRB that we share a love for liturgy and futbol. Please drop by the ol' blog sometime and chime in!
Ok. I am glad that you guys have had such a good time reaffirming your indoctrination today at my expense.. I only have two things to say.
1. I really dig how you replaced Atheist with the word "humanist."
2. I am well aware of what Obama has said about his faith. However I judge a man's faith as taught in the Bible, by his works (it's in the book of James and it sounds like James needs to be read around here so you guys find the verse, its a short chapter). Once you find it, how do you justify someone's works who so unabashadly supports and makes legal that killing of unborn children. Let me know what that action (work) says about his faith. Let me know when you Google the talking points on that.
P.S. I know no Brumleys from Columbus, MS, sorry.
One of the most difficult things in the church is struggling in the complexity of issues that are far more difficult than the simple black and white. For example, many Christians have taken the stance that to believe in the sanctity of life is solely devoted to the protection of unborn babies. Yet, in the very verse to which you refer pure and faultless religion is the care for all of those who have been marginated and oppressed, to all who find themselves unable to care for themselves. Obama has a deep care and concern for those that often don't enter into the church's discussion in sanctity of life cases, the sanctity of the lives of those already born. This is indeed something that the religious right needs to continue to bring to the table. I think that we all know the prophets well enough to remember that the judgment of God was most often due to that fact the Israel failed to protect the vulnerable as God would protect the vulnerable. Just check out the eighth century folks like Amos, or head to exilic Isaiah and read chapter 58, which redefines true fasting as the care for the poor and marginalized.
The early church picked up on all of this, attempting to honor and provide care for all people, even providing burial the dead! Not going to get too many baptisms out of burying a dead guy, but they saw it as a special need to honor the image of God in all people (obviously picking up on the language in the first 5 chapters of Genesis 1:26 and 5:1-2).
Of course, care for the sanctity of life moves beyond solely being concerned for the sanctity of human life. It also moves to the care for all of creation. That comes back to the very beginning of our canon, where humanity is called to serve as the viceroy of God by caring for all of creation. So, creation care is also a sanctity of life issue.
This issue, as with most, is very difficult. One of the great things about this campaign season is that people seem to be talking, dialoguing, not debating like we did with the Baptists 50 years ago, which was nothing more than yelling past one another. (Yes, I have and have read the transcripts.)
I think that the term "indoctrination" is an unfair one. You do not know us and haven't given us benefit of the doubt that we are in fact disciples in the process of transformation who take both our faith and our public life seriously and are trying to keep the two integrated and whole. We know our the biblical text and take it very seriously. We also know that the issues are more complex than the political pundits or those in the pews would often make them.
As a virtue epistemology proponent (I think Paul would be one, so I'm going with that approach, see Gal 5:22ff!), I would hope that all of our discussions would lead us to deep epistemic humility and greater virtue in our lives and with one another in our discussions.
I trust that you have come to your conclusions after a long and careful season of study, prayer, meditation, reflection, and seeking communal wisdom from others. We have too. We have come to different conclusions, but then that might just be alright if we embrace one another first with favor instead of suspicion. I think we might need to take a cue from the fact that the church chose to have four interpretations of the life Jesus (Matt, Mk, Lk, & Jn), rather than one as some like Marcion and Tatian wanted.
Who knows? Maybe I'm just off base here.
May the grace of God be with us all as we continue to seek his will and open our lives to the transforming work of the Spirit.
No offense Eric but somehow you managed to type alot but you actually said nothing at all. I cannot tell from your response if you think abortion is right or wrong and it is that kind of fence riding and double-mindedness that is causing the strife in many individual's Christian walks. I don't mean to offend you at all because you seem like a very smart and articulate fellow and I have really enjoyed our discourse on my blog about Erickson, but what are you? Are you pro-choice or pro-life. Take a stand. Put on your armor of God and take a stand.
One immutable law of blogging that I have learned the hard way is that debating abortion in this forum is neither fruitful nor edifying, so you probably are not going to get the answer you demand. I'm not going to debate with you, because I don't know you or your assumptions.
I will say this, however; although we care deeply about Life and are opposed to abortion, we are not single issue voters. An ethic of life and commitment to justice transcends any single issue to include access to health care, poverty, war, domestic abuse, capital punishment, global famine, AIDS, genocide, environmental issues, the sanctity of life and host of other problems facing our political field. We are doing our best to seek the candidate, platform, political theory and leadership who best will tackle those consistently and effectively, and all the better if that candidate is a follower of Christ.
I hear alot of eliminating poverty and AIDS and a whole host of earthly imperfections.
That's certainly admirable in a temporal sense but Jesus himself didn't feed the hungry because they needed an earthly meal or heal the sick because he wanted them to feel better.
Those were just necessary earthly devices to represent something much greater than anything we could ever do ourselves.
I get the sense from this discussion that some may feel that we humans can really do something about poverty, abuse, or disease ourselves.
If so, that is a point I disagree with.
We could protect a 1,000 battered women or feed a million hungry children but--those acts in and of themselves--are meaningless in an eternal sense if it does not lead people to Christ.
So you do admit you are opposed to abortin JRB. That's great. Why don't you just say that you are pro-life then? Please put it in writing for the world to see. Take a stand for what is right and against what is wrong. I am not asking for you to debate me, only that you take a stand for your own good. After you put that in writing, please inform us why you are opposed to abortion. If you can do those things and back point me to your Biblical support for that stance and then still choose as your earthly leader someone who makes it easier for these murders to occur, then I will give you kudos. I come in peace.
Thanks, Dave Brumley. That's enough. I would love to sit down with you, have a coffee, break out our Bibles and spend a few hours talking. Honestly, I would.
I and we have plowed this ground before in fora like this, and it never bears fruit or loving outcomes.
Please keep reading, and we look forward to reading more from you.
Why are you guys afraid to take a stand. I am glad that God's love isn't one he only tells me about over coffee. I can almost assume that you guys are afraid to state a chance of being pro-life. What is it in this world you are afraid of losing if you stand for what is right?
Dave,
I am pro-life. For me that means I am anti-abortion and anti-death penalty. I would very much like a President that agrees with me on both points. I would also like to have a President that would outlaw torture and not start pre-emptive wars. I also want a President that actively advocates for the poor and oppressed. I want a President that will do all of these things because I believe that is what Jesus calls us all to do. I also wouldn't mind a President that values the Constitution.
Unfortunately for me there is no perfect candidate. So I have to make a choice. ( I wonder sometimes if I should just take David Libscomb's approach and not vote at all)
I choose Barack Obama. I choose Barack Obama because I believe that his compassionate agenda is one most like my view of the Christian agenda. I am sure that I disagree with Barack on a lot of things including doctrinal issues. But his message of hope and change is an inspiring message and I am going to give him a chance.
This answer might not be good enough for you. But it's all I got. I have prayed and studied over this issue quite a bit.
Post a Comment
<< Home