Election '08: Faith at the Polls
Barack Obama asks us to take a leap of faith tomorrow.
-- We see his lack of experiencce and he says, "Trust me."
-- We see his liberalism and he says, "I'll cut your taxes."
-- We see his radical pro-abortion record and he says, "I'll cut the abortion rate."
-- We see him go along with the entrenched political corruption in Chicago and he says, "I'll change Washington."
-- We see him as a traditional partisan, and he says, "I'll reach across the aisle."
-- We see his America-hating friends, and he says he is a patriot.
For Sen. Obama to be a good president, he will have to go against everything he has stood for politically. That seems possible, I suppose, but not likely.
Unless you're willing to take that leap of faith.
posted by Stan Guthrie at 9:13 AM
StanGuthrie.com
8 Comments:
I'm not putting my faith in Barack Obama, Stan. I'm giving him my vote, and I'm planning to hold him (and my other elected officials) accountable to govern the country politically as I believe they ought. If McCain wins, I will do the exact same thing.
Fair comment, Steve, but you indeed are putting your faith in Sen. Obama--not your ultimate, saving faith, but your common-sense faith in him as a competent, straight-shooting politician.
He's asking you to put faith in his current words over his past deeds, trusting that his future deeds will match what he is saying now, in the heat of a closely contested election. That's a big leap.
Now obviously you may think it is a risk worth taking if you have been so turned off by the Bush administration and believe McCain is a Bush clone (though no one ever said that before the current campaign).
Obama obviously knows how to persuade people and how to run a strong campaign, two skills that may translate well for his presidency. But that's not enough for me to pull the lever for Obama, given his history and stated positions.
I think a lot of people tonight will be wondering whether Obama is a risk worth taking for the White House. No doubt hhe is a gifted politician, but is that the best reason to vote for him?
He won't need you or me to hold him accoutable. In fact, I doubt he will ever listen to people like us once he gets what he wants. Too late will many believers wake up from their Obama-inspired dreams to find out he is unalterably opposed to things we hold most dear.
Stan
Stan, you know how I feel, McCain is a politician, just like Obama. The difference is that McCain is politicking for many years longer than Obama. McCain is therefore much more entrenched in his allegiances to special interests. In my book, that makes McCain the much riskier option in this election.
McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time. That point has been made repeatedly and effectively during this campaign, because it is a legitimate statistic. If I don't George W. Bush's policies (which I don't), then McCain is the much riskier option in this presidential election. (How did Barack Obama get his rating as one of the "most liberal" senators in Congress? By voting *against* George W. Bush's failed policies.)
So, yeah, I know why you're putting this in terms of "faith," but I still think that's the wrong language to be using.
Let me quickly say that although Bush's name is mud right now, I believe history will judge him more kindly than the current political climate. (1) He has kept America safe from further terror attacks; (2) he deposed Saddam and the Taliban; (3) the economy has grown strongly for most of his two terms; (4) he named two strong Supreme Court justices.
However, he (along with everyone else) was wrong about WMDs and has done a poor job of articulating and defending his policies. He was much too slow to change his Iraq policy. Plus, he didn't do enough to restrain the Democrats from leading the way to our current financial crisis, and he did nothing to keep the price of gas down. So it is far from a perfect record, but he is hardly the devil incarnate, as so many today seem to think. Remember, he won a solid majority just four years ago; I hardly think he turned into an ogre overnight.
One more thing: Bush spent way too much money!
One more thing I do like: He cut my taxes, making it easier for me to support my family. Sadly, Obama is going to let those tax cuts expire.
Stan, do you make more than $250,000 per year? If not, then you should be getting a tax cut from Obama, so I wouldn't worry too much about Bush's tax cuts expiring.
I agree with you, BTW, that Bush will probably be viewed more kindly by history, but that doesn't mean I think Bush politics should continue for four more years. I don't think he's "the devil incarnate," but he (and/or others in his administration) might very well be guilty of war crimes. (One word: "waterboarding.") I hope there's justice in regards to those things. I would hope, as a Christian, you would care about those things also.
Would that I were! ; ) What I had in mind was the per-child tax credits I have been enjoying. I may be wrong, but I believe Obama will let those expire, and they have made a significant financial difference for us. It's not technically a tax hike, since Obama is not raising my rate (yet), but the effect will be the same.
Regarding waterboarding, I don't see this issue as absolutely black and white as you do. I agree we cannot use the same methods as the terrorists do, or we will be little better. Torture is not who we are, if you know what I mean. But waterboarding is not beheading. I am prepared to accept that we may need to do some things that would not be appropriate in other contexts.
What I mean is, context matters. You normally can't go around shooting people; but in a war that is approprate, as long as you follow the rules of war. It has not been demonstrated (to me, at least) that waterboarding is in fact torture, though it is unquestionably unpleasant, even terrifying.
So can we never use this kind of method in a war situation? If not, then we'll have to accept the possibility that some innocent people will die because we couldn't get potentially life-saving info in time.
That may be a price some are willing to pay to avoid any kind of rough interrogation methods, but it is a difficult issue, and not one to be settled with easy slogans about torture. No one, not even Bush or Cheney, is in favor of torture.
Post a Comment
<< Home