Progressive Revival

Once again, both political parties are heading into their national conventions with just about everything already decided – the candidates, platforms and even the speakers.The excitement of political conventions is a thing of the past.Choreographers and media consultants have replaced backroom political horse trading.

Some people might say, “Thank God.”I say, “We’ve taken the human emotion and fun out of politics.”We’ve taken the voice of average Americans out of politics and substituted it with slick “talking points” and punched sound bites.

“Mayor Flynn, do you have any suggestions?You’ve been in politics 50 years.”"As a matter of fact I do,” I responded.

At the upcoming conventions, don’t allow any longwinded political speakers from the past, including former nominees of either party for president or vice president.And definitely no movie stars.

The candidates will certainly address the specific issues on the war and the economy, but the other convention speakers should focus their comments on issues that are on peoples’ minds, but not often talked about by either party.

Such important topics include:

1. Tuition tax credits for non-public school parents.
2. Ending trade deals that ship American jobs overseas.
3. A discussion of right to life issues, including the death penalty and euthanasia.
4. A human rights policy that would have religious freedom as a key.Singling out offenders like China, North Korea and Vietnam.
5. Immigration reform, including border security.
6. Suggestions for media coverage of the conventions.Ask important questions about issues to strengthen American families and help the needy, children and elderly on fixed incomes.

I am already a bit weary of presidential politics, and it’s not even September. On the one hand, the excitement around Senator Obama’s candidacy that galvanized so many to engage the body politic stands alongside worn political tropes and familiar policy initiatives. (note this NY Times article about corporate interests trumping the concerns of the unions) and (Obama’s hawkish stance on Afghanistan)

We have seen this before: an abandonment of the critical reformed-minded base of the party in the name of something called centrism. On the other hand, Senator McCain has morphed, somewhat at least, into something acceptable to the base of the Republican Party – miming the grotesque gesticulations of an administration that has tried to send American democracy to the gallows. Salon ran an excellent article about how McCain is copying Bush’s disasterous approach to dissent and free speech.  

And public deliberation about the substance of each candidate, as much as we can call it that, remains, for the most part, surfaced and driven by pundits interested in a horse race and polls suggestive of a popularity contest.  (see how the media reporting on the media distracts from the issues) All the while the nation continues to fall precipitously into the abyss.

Democracy has been under siege over the last eight years. And since the Reagan revolution we have witnessed the declining status of the American citizen. In the face of corporate greed and power, and the imperial ambitions of the executive branch, the nervous American subject has replaced the discerning citizen. And, I fear that our nerves are wearing thin. 

We must shake off this nervousness and be ever diligent in our efforts to vet the policy initiatives of each candidate – even if one of them symbolically represents substantive change. We MUST be CITIZENS again! From Iraq to Iran to the economy to issues around race, we must wade through the muck of political double-speak in order to effect a substantive counter to the pathology of American politics. This requires, I believe, little patience for the current political theater (abroad or at home). As citizens, let’s say no to the nonsense and insist that these two men who seek to guide us in these trying times speak plainly and truthfully to the painful realities of our current days. In other words, and I mean this in the sense of the philosopher Harry Frankfurt, let’s say no to the bullsh*t.

First of all, I want to thank BeliefNet for assembling such an outstanding panel for this blog.  I am grateful to be included, and I am looking forward to spirited debates in the weeks and months to come.

While Senator Obama tours the Middle East this week, his campaign is still making news back home in the U.S.  According to Politico on July 21, the Obama campaign has hired a staffer to conduct outreach within the Muslim community.  This development is both positive and dangerous.

On the one hand, Senator Obama needs to do more to embrace the Muslim community.  The New York Times reported in June that many Muslim leaders have felt snubbed by the Obama campaign.  Senator Obama has had to deal with persistent rumors that he is secretly a Muslim, and he has responded by stressing that Obama is a “Committed Christian.”  In Kentucky and South Carolina, the campaign distributed brochures showing Obama preaching from the pulpit of a church with a stained glass window and giant cross behind him.  I have criticized those brochures in the past for two reasons: first, Obama is trying to make it look like God has endorsed him; and second, stressing Obama’s Christian heritage sends the implicit message that being a Muslim is a bad thing.

Islam is the third largest faith tradition in America, behind Christianity and Judaism.  It is a religion of peace, despite the actions of a tiny minority of extremists.  Even President Bush has gone to great lengths to say that we are at war with terrorists, not Islam itself.  And what if Obama were a Muslim?  Should that matter?  The Constitution provides an answer – NO!  Article VI states: “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or Public Trust under the United States.”

I wrote a letter to both presidential candidates in June urging them to do more to make the Muslim community feel included in this election.  Thus on the surface, the hiring of this campaign staffer appears to be a step in the right direction.

But on the other hand, I am deeply troubled by the notion of having campaign staffers whose sole mission is to conduct outreach to people of faith (from any religious tradition).  Of course, I should not place too much blame on the Obama campaign.  Senator McCain has similar faith outreach staff members, as did Senator Clinton (and President Bush and Senator Kerry before them).

Look, this is a political campaign, not an evangelistic crusade.  Neither Obama nor McCain have opened outreach offices to seek religious conversions of nurture .  They are running for president of the United States.  They are seeking voters who will vote for them.  The point is this: religious people should not be reduced to just another partisan constituency that can be herded into polls and expected to pull the lever for a particular candidate. That kind of campaigning shows disrespect to the sanctity of religion.  God does not endorse candidates.  It is arrogant of any political campaign to say that if you are a good Christian, a good Jew, a good Muslim, or a good Sikh, you are compelled to vote for their candidate.  

Every citizen can and should vote for the candidate of their choice regardless of the religious identities involved, or the lack thereof.  Just as people of faith have the power to make their own interpretation of their sacred scriptures, they should have the power to make their own electoral judgments as well.

I hope that this hiring is an indication of Senator Obama’s efforts to reach out to all Americans.  I pray that it will not become a campaign to manipulate religion and politics by suggesting that a particular religious posture on the part of a candidate or a voter demands a specific partisan allegiance.

I will be contributing to this blog.