Good, yes...Brian's post can be distilled into Bush voters=bad. Way to start off the comment section.

Unfortunately, none of the candidates is running as an outsider to "the political world," they are all of it. None of them are innocent of or immune to the faults Brian and Bob mentions.

Posted by: Eric | January 2, 2008 7:07 PM

Brian's post doesn't single anyone out for attack. It makes the excellent point that it is systems, not individual politicians, that are at the core of the problem.

Thanks, Brian. Those are helpful reflections as we enter an election year.

Posted by: Bill Samuel | January 2, 2008 8:01 PM

Eric's not talking about Brian's post. He's talking about I and I's first comment.

Posted by: jesse | January 2, 2008 11:27 PM

"We’ll need wisdom to resist the machinations and manipulations that successfully suckered religious voters in recent elections … the shallow appropriation of religious language, the destructive use of wedge issues that distract us from bona fide crises, the games of fear-mongering and false-promising that are amazingly effective on voters who aren’t pursuing wisdom."....McLaren

I don't find anything partisan about that statement. Both sides do it, and it can be done on many, many issues.

You hear some Republican candidates doing that on the issue of immigration, taking the genuine violations done by illegal aliens - and turning them into larger-than-life monsters. Using demagoguery, appealing to yours and my baser instincts and fears.

And I hear some Democrats doing that too. Taking genuine problems of pandering to the wealthy and powerful interests - but pumping it all up into a larger-than-life monster. Appealing to our baser instincts, using demagoguery.

We must be careful of anyone, any party who takes genuine abuses and issues and starts to shape rhetoric that appeals to our more base fears.

No, nothing partisan there.

Another "keeper" to chew on in McLaren's article:

"What would happen, the line prompts me to ask, if we began the year admitting that we don’t have God all that well figured out? That God doesn’t fit in our little political frames? That God’s mysterious name – the one we pray to be “hallowed” when we pray the Lord’s prayer – is bigger, deeper, higher, more textured, more mysterious, more wonderful, more surprising, and more revolutionary than we understood last year? "

This is really important! No matter how good a candidate is, he or she is highly unlikely to have it ALL figured out. God often reveals His will in pieces - as a person is ready for a new piece of understanding.

So...to take the attitude so prevalent among many people the past 8 years....that because a leader is a Christian means he has special access to God's Will and Wisdom, and we dare not question his decisions or engage in open discussion about the issues involved...is pure foolishness!

God simply tends to reveal wisdom in pieces, as we're ready. And He often uses other people to show us new insights.

We must be careful about that.

Posted by: Amazon Creek | January 3, 2008 12:43 AM

Brian McLaren wrote:
"We’ll need wisdom to resist the machinations and manipulations that successfully suckered religious voters in recent elections … the shallow appropriation of religious language, the destructive use of wedge issues that distract us from bona fide crises, the games of fear-mongering and false-promising that are amazingly effective on voters who aren’t pursuing wisdom."

Yes, Brian, I too wish that the National Council of Churches and those who blindly follow its Machiavellian leaders would realize that the Democrats are taking advantage of them and distracting them from the real societal crises such as the breakdown of the family and abortion.

Posted by: Ben Wheaton | January 3, 2008 8:12 AM

Eric, Jesse, Moderate, and Kevin,

Bush voters do not = bad. I know so many good, hard working, responsible people who voted for Bush. Many people from the very liberal Northeast voted Bush and everywhere throughout. Bush voters have a lack of urgency when it comes to their level of interest in good governance. Same goes for many anti-Bush voters. The Bushites and their supporters equal a shallower, less imaginative, and intellectually lazy voting base for political progress in general. So they're not "bad" they're just often a little too stubborn and woefully uninformed. The bad people are the actual cause of our current mess. I think if 80% of us agree on this, y'all can too.

Posted by: Matt | January 3, 2008 9:41 AM

Ben -- There are distinctions, however. "Liberals" are rarely so arrogant that they think they alone speak for God; many conservatives, however, still think they do and I thank God that Sojo is exposing those voices as suspect or even just plain false. There are reasons why the right is losing influence, even in evangelicalism.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | January 3, 2008 9:57 AM

If you want a song that tells it like it is, here's the lyrics from Joni Mitchell's Shine:

Shine
by Joni Mitchell

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh let your little light shine
Let your little light shine
Shine on Wall Street and Vegas
Place your bets
Shine on the fishermen
With nothing in their nets
Shine on rising oceans and evaporating seas
Shine on our Frankenstein technologies
Shine on science
With its tunnel vision
Shine on fertile farmland
Buried under subdivisions

Let your little light shine
Let your little light shine
Shine on the dazzling darkness
That restores us in deep sleep
Shine on what we throw away
And what we keep

Shine on Reverend Pearson
Who threw away
The vain old God
kept Dickens and Rembrandt and Beethoven
And fresh plowed sod
Shine on good earth, good air, good water
And a safe place
For kids to play
Shine on bombs exploding
Half a mile away

Let your little light shine
Let your little light shine
Shine on world-wide traffic jams
Honking day and night
Shine on another asshole
Passing on the right!
Shine on the red light runners
Busy talking on their cell phones
Shine on the Catholic Church
And the prisons that it owns
Shine on all the Churches
They all love less and less
Shine on a hopeful girl
In a dreamy dress

Let your little light shine
Let your little light shine
Shine on good humor
Shine on good will
Shine on lousy leadership
Licensed to kill
Shine on dying soldiers
In patriotic pain
Shine on mass destruction
In some God's name!
Shine on the pioneers
Those seekers of mental health
Craving simplicity
They traveled inward
Past themselves...
May all their little lights shine

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2007; Crazy Crow Music

Posted by: Ashpenaz | January 3, 2008 11:14 AM

moderatelad, slugs and butt-heads? I guess I can't win for losing sometimes. I thought I actually said the opposite. I don't think I meant since people are unaware or uninformed they are lazy slugs or butt-heads. All types of voters are shallow, intellectually lazy, too conventional, etc., etc. when it comes to the oversight of our elected officials. You'd agree that's a common consensus of the electorate, would you not? You'd also agree the country wants to see more progress and change, right? We will find out how free this country is. I think some people, on both sides, are getting it and some aren't. But I think it's OK to make the observation that, in our particular moment in history, there is the better grassroots way coming from the left and the not so better strand of thought coming from the non-progressive, more traditionally/conventionally conservative GOP ticket. And since change is unavoidably in the air, I'm sticking with those who embrace new and creative ideas, instead of those looking to apply the same recycled techniques for improving the nation.

Posted by: Matt | January 3, 2008 11:59 AM

"moderatelad, slugs and butt-heads? I guess I can't win for losing sometimes. I thought I actually said the opposite."

Well, you didn't. You said that those who voted for Bush are intellectually lazy and ignorant pawns of an evil administration. Slugs and buttheads would be a kinder evaluation. Either way, nothing in your comment demonstrated what I would call intellectual vigor. 80% of people would agree with me on this.

"You'd also agree the country wants to see more progress and change, right?"

That depends on the progress and change. Some people want to see drastically reduced role for the state. Some want a much strong foreign policy. Some want government to stay out of foreign affairs entirely. You, presumably, want to see the state do more to compensate the poor. All could be considered progress and change by some, and a major blow to freedom by others.

I would cast this as a difference of opinion, and you would be more persuasive if you did the same.

"But I think it's OK to make the observation that, in our particular moment in history, there is the better grassroots way coming from the left and the not so better strand of thought coming from the non-progressive, more traditionally/conventionally conservative GOP ticket."

See, I think this is intellectually lazy. First of all, you are drawing a comparison between a tactic (grassroots organization) and an ideology (traditional conservatism).

Second, you are assuming that conservatives do not engage in grassroots tactics. Having worked with countless grassroots organizations in the past, I can assure you they do. Just to take one example, the homeschooling associations that cropped up in the mid 1990s have not only fought diligently for the right of parents to homeschool, but have helped make it feasible for more parents to do so.

"And since change is unavoidably in the air, I'm sticking with those who embrace new and creative ideas, instead of those looking to apply the same recycled techniques for improving the nation."

And your third assumption, which is that the political left is attempting to do that which has not been tried. I can assure you that everything the Democratic frontrunners are offering has been tried, tested and focus-grouped to death.

I would also argue that what they are offering has been tried and has failed domestically and elsewhere. But that is my opinion, based on my understanding of the facts. You disagree, and I do not hold you in contempt (or accuse you of being stubborn and lazy) for having a different opinion.

Posted by: kevin s. | January 3, 2008 1:28 PM

Posted by: Matt | January 3, 2008 11:59 AM

I take people at what they say - plane and simple.
I believe that the voters in the country are serious and thoughtful when they go into the booth and make the selection on the ballot.
I believe that the American Voter is an informed voter and vote their convictions.

It is only my liberal friends that call the American Voter stupid and crazy when a Bush or Reagan get elected. It was my liberal friends that purchased a bottle of bubblie when Reagan wrote his letter about alzheimers and then cracked it open and toasted to the death of a Pres. when he died.

I have been compared to many degrading things because I voted and supported Bush and Reagan. If I made any mention to their character and that of the previous occupant of the oval office - then I am the unsensitive one.

I believe in the American Voter much more than most of the liberals in MN and elsewhere.

Looking forward to Nov-08

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | January 3, 2008 2:10 PM

And the religious left doesn't think that it speaks for God?

It doesn't say that, at least not consistently. Keep in mind that this blog does not really represent any "evangelical left" in the same way FOTF, the late Moral Majority and other organizations represent the "religious right" -- the difference is that, while Sojo is far, far more grass-roots, the right has always had well-heeded secular backers whom they are not about to offend.

Having worked with countless grassroots organizations in the past, I can assure you they do. Just to take one example, the homeschooling associations that cropped up in the mid 1990s have not only fought diligently for the right of parents to homeschool, but have helped make it feasible for more parents to do so.

And where do they get the money? From conservative secular foundations, truth be told, most of which couldn't care less about religion, faith or Christianity. One of them is within a stone's throw from me.

It is only my liberal friends that call the American Voter stupid and crazy when a Bush or Reagan get elected. It was my liberal friends that purchased a bottle of bubblie when Reagan wrote his letter about alzheimers and then cracked it open and toasted to the death of a Pres. when he died.

A lot of those people are African-Americans, who hate the right with a passion but who are really too independent for the left.

If I made any mention to their character and that of the previous occupant of the oval office - then I am the unsensitive one.

I now know for a fact that 95 percent of what you have heard about him was either false or blown out of proportion; meanwhile, right-wing media "protected" GOP lawmakers caught in seamy situations. Did you notice that the "Clinton" scandals stopped after the impeachment? That's because the press finally caught on.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | January 3, 2008 2:24 PM

"It's not dark yet but it's getting there."-Bob Dylan

When THAT DAY we call 9/11 happened, I remembered a dream I had in June of 2001.

I fictionalized it slightly and told it through Jack, a fictional character in my first book "KEEP HOPE ALIVE" and i offer it 2 U again:

Jack spent a ten-hour day at the BLAC, as its founder and administrator, and the mornings on the track were when the couple had their best conversations. He inhaled the aroma of tar as he wondered what was keeping Julianne from him.

He bladed for what seemed like hours, when a silver spandex-clad apparition with a golden helmet flew by, sharply turned, and with a backward stroke, called out:

“Hi, Jack, don’t look down; don’t look back; look out straight, Jack, look out straight, don’t look back!”

“Yeah, I can; I can do that,” Jack called back, but the apparition had already vaporized into the distance.

Then Jack rolled onto an exquisite grace, knees freed from bone-on-bone grinding and not an ache in his fifty-three-year old body that had been abused by two motor vehicle accidents and hours of overuse syndrome. Jack glided on the blacktop effortlessly for what seemed like hours, when suddenly, a roar of thunder assaulted his senses, and his eyes were magnetized upward, to view two fireballs thrown down from on high, miles from where he stood.

He saw them hit the ground; one traveled east, the other west, and then they circled back around, burning a path straight towards him. Just before they collided, Jack woke up, not believing he had only been dreaming.

Not until after he had downed a pot of coffee did the phone ring. “Jack? Are you watching TV?” Maureen, the day supervisor at the BLAC asked, as she fingered the framed mission statement that sat upon every employee’s desk and on the north wall of every resident’s room:

‘Peace, peace, peace. God’s peace be upon you. But living today in a time of war, crying out peace, peace, peace, where there is no peace. Fearing age and death, pain and darkness, destitution and loneliness, people need to get back to the simplicity of Brother Lawrence.’ [Dorothy Day]

Brother L was a monk in the 17th century, who lived in a monastery and was consigned to the kitchen. He spent his life baking bread, chopping onions, scrubbing pots and floors. He also ran all the errands, did all the shopping, and always brought back the finest of wine. He loved his brothers deeply, but they merely tolerated his many eccentricities, or he was totally ignored. Truly, I tell you, if ever a saint was born to bring hope to the addicted and those afflicted with obsessive-compulsive tendencies, he is the one. For Brother L learned that by continually re-remembering the Lord, no matter what the activity, or where one might be, the Lord was ever-present and a holy habit was born, just re-remembering that.

Jack thrived on curiosity and spoke as he reached for the remote. “Mo, you know I never watch TV in the daytime; what’s up?”

“Well, isn’t Julianne visiting her sister in the city?”

“Yeah, in fact, today’s plan was to meet her sister’s co-workers on Floor 101 of the North Twin Tower.”

“Jack, turn the TV on.”

“Oh, Mo, I just did; my God, is it the end of the world?” He spoke as he hung up the phone and never heard Mo say, “I don’t know.”

Jack knew in his bones that Julianne had been vaporized as he recalled a song he had first heard at a Bob Dylan concert in 1981:

See the massacre of the innocent
City’s on fire
Phones out of order
I see the turning of the page.
Curtain’s rising on a new age.
See the Groom still waiting at the altar.

And then, II Chronicles 6:1 welled up within him: “The Lord has said that he would dwell in thick darkness.” -end excerpt from "KEEP HOPE ALIVE"

"Some people are still sleeping, some people are WIDE AWAKE"-Bob Dylan

Eileen Fleming,
Reporter and Editor WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/

Author "Keep Hope Alive" and "Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory"

Producer "30 Minutes With Vanunu" which is freely streaming on WAWA

+

By the way-

Vanunu's FREEDOM OF SPEECH appeal in Jerusalem begins January 8, 2008, the same day Pres. Bush is due to land in Israel Palestine.

Posted by: eileen fleming | January 3, 2008 5:52 PM

The "Christian" rhetoric on this blog is getting meaner and meaner. I really liked the Joni Mitchell song and the Bob Dylan Song and the Eileen's wonderful rant. These are investments in the majesty of language and they capture the imagination with heartfelt challenges to fear and manipulation.

I don't think courage is a thing of the past, even among politicians. I see no shortage of courage or of the truths that Jesus taught in Dennis Kucinich's message or life. I am sure he is as human as anyone but his is one of the rare political lives I truly admire.

As far as God's politics, I encourage you to write to your local papers, and state and Federal representatives and to participate in the party or organization you see as having the best chance for positive change. So much is at stake.

Posted by: jonabark | January 3, 2008 11:10 PM

"the difference is that, while Sojo is far, far more grass-roots,"

By what metric do we measure the extent to which something is grassroots. What is and is not grassroots? I have heard this claim bandied about, that one party is more "grassroots" than the other. What does that mean, exactly?

Can you cite data that demonstrates that Sojo is more grassroots than FOTF? I support neither organization financially, so I do not have a horse in this race.

Posted by: kevin s. | January 5, 2008 2:55 AM

There is no question, Dylan has inspired a lot of people. Certainly, he inspired me when I sat down to write my new novel, BLOOD ON THE TRACKS.

And since you seem to be a fan, I thought I'd apprise you of it.

It's a murder-mystery. But not just any rock superstar is knocking on heaven's door. The murdered rock legend is none other than Bob Dorian, an enigmatic, obtuse, inscrutable, well, you get the picture...

Suspects? Tons of them. The only problem is they're all characters in Bob's songs.

You can get a copy on Amazon.com or go "behind the tracks" at www.bloodonthetracksnovel.com to learn more about the book.

Posted by: Tom Grasty | January 5, 2008 3:31 PM