We are . . .

Crayons and Champagne for Everyone!

73071 — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:10:18 EST

Last night after school, my 2nd grade daughter delayed homework to make a cut out of Barak Obama standing in statue form in a running position. It is about 12 inches tall and 5 inches in width. When coloring time came, she looked for the brown crayon.

She has 3 or 4 packs of crayons scattered all over the house, and each pack was missing the brown crayon.

She tried to make it work with a brown magic marker, but it isn't working too well. As she got on the bus this morning I promised to pick her up a new pack of flesh toned crayons in a variety of colors.

When I voted for Jesse Jackson in Lawton Oklahoma in the 1988 primary, I didn't know of this little girl I would one day have. When I encouraged the Oklahoma Legislature to read one book of black history to celebrate Black History month, I didn't know I'd need to stock up on the variety of crayons to give life to my daughter's art.

I saw the mult-shade flesh tone crayons on the shelf, but didn't see the need to buy them, until now.

My budding little artist wants to share with the world her joy in supporting this great man for the last 2 years. She watched the primaries with me, was left with her dad while me and her bigger brother drove to Ft. Worth to help with voter protection during Super Tuesday.

She helped me draw the line across the ballot to vote for him in the Primary. She yelled "Go Obama!" out of her grandma's car while driving to vote on November 4, 2008.

She won't celebrate with champagne like her Aunt Melissa did in Grant Park on the evening of November 4th. Instead, my little fair skinned girl, will celebrate with a new box of crayons.

Calm Down My Christian Friends . . .

73071 — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 23:58:02 EDT

Recently, I have noticed my Christian friends are very upset and nervous about this upcoming election. If it is true that the signs point to the second coming, (although I am not confident that scripture supportis this) then we need to get our focus off of the election and start spreading the Good News of Jesus.

But if this is another corrective political response to the last 8 years, then Christians should wonder what went wrong.

Briefly, what went wrong for Christians, is that we failed to recognized that we are a strong minority in America. And if we want to influence politics and culture we cannot align ourselves with such highly offensive people as Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.

Christians voted for President Bush, but it appears to me he aligned himself with some fellars who are not inclined to seeking God's will. Instead, Karl Rove and Dick Cheney seem to have used the blessings of Christian followers to their own poltical goals. And now our minority culture is viewed in historical bad light. Jesus wanted us to live out our lives in such a manner that the fruits of the spirit exhibited in us would attract more to him. Under Karl Rove's leadership and influence, we have failed to maintain this way of life.

Consequently, the Christian world view grew gradually offensive to the larger population of people. Our world view is seen as hypocritical, as our President misled the world into a war with Iraq.

What should we do from now on? We should lead more people to Christ instead of trying to recruit people to be conservatives or republicans.

We should be objectively critical in the pure judicial and journalistic sense towards any politician who wants to court the Christian vote.

We should be prayerful in disclosing motives of our preachers to gain political power, instead of spreading the gospel. Some preachers in their desire to maximize their influence are tempted by the glitter of politics as an appropriate forum.

We should expect our preachers to biblically scrutinize candidates in a seriously bipartisan manner. And we should expect our preachers to be even handed in their scrutiny. Surely, Republicans have not been so innocent of biblical scrutiny during the last 8 years.

We should fight the cultural war for modesty and purety in our entertainment, education, language, music, by persistently pushing back against any offensive material.

We should remain objectively and sincerely prayerful that all of our leaders will be favorably disposed to those of us trying to live out our Christian lives in America.

At the end of the day we must rely on the message of Christ to change the world not our politicians. We can rest assured that there will be more opportunities to share what Christ accomplished on the Cross. And if God uses an election to inspire us to do that, then we are better for it.

Mommy Economics

73071 — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:14:53 EDT

Some women resist the need for a special economic plan for women. This is my response.

My ovaries and mammary glands single me out for different economic needs.

As I walked around pregnant 3 times as an attorney, my big tummy and leaking breasts effected the type of adjustments I needed on a temporary basis to succeed. My body demanded that I shift great resources to nurturing, and caring for the life of others. I couldn't delegate breast feeding to anyone. I had to carry the pump with me, and I had to keep track of whether I needed to pump thirty minutes before the Judge expected me to be in his chambers, or before the deposition started. If I forgot, I leaked everywhere.

Later on, after the kids were born, it was me who had to be there when my children were throwing up, or needed a parent at the school party. Of course the other parent can share the load, but then a system that discriminates against that sort of involvement makes it difficult for the father as well. And if the parent is single, the need to succeed at both, presents a no win situation for a single parent.

I want a economic plan for women, specifically, so that we can pursue the joys and successes of applying our body to care and raise other people for the next generation. Putting forth an economic plan that does not take into account ovaries, uterus, and lactating breasts, is what prevents women for making greater advances in the work place.

Read Care and Equality by Mona Harrington and Cornell West, and you'll understand what I expect.

Respectful Dissent

73071 — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:46:58 EDT

In order to preserve my continued support for the Obama Campaign I must hereby formally post my disagreement with the campaign's endorsement of Pride events.

America does not currently share a common value about these events, and the endorsement of them causes great division within many communities.

Endorsement of these events alienates many voters who would otherwise be strongly supportive of the campaign's common values theme.

I regret the need to identify this strong difference, but it is necessary so that I can stay focused and committed to the Obama campaign and advancing the values and ideals that are commonly held by Americans.

media emails

73071 — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:10:02 EDT

atc@npr.org, morning@npr.org, totn@npr.org, rush@eibnet.com, phil.boyce@abc.com, letters@latimes.com, readers.rep@latimes.com, letters@nytimes.com, nytnews@nytimes.com, editor@usatoday.com, wsj.ltrs@wsj.com, wsjcontact@dowjones.com, letters@washpost.com, ombudsman@washpost.com, letters@newsweek.com, letters@time.com, letters@usnews.com, info@ap.org, tips@upi.com, fair@fair.org, efm@cbsnews.com, mkx@cbsnews.com, pma@cbsnews.com, rbc@cbsnews.com, grain@cbsnews.com, aaron.brown@turner.com, am@cnn.com, 360@cnn.com, andrea.koppel@turner.com, bill.schneider@turner.com, bruce.morton@turner.com, candy.crowley@turner.com, carol.lin@turner.com, crossfire@cnn.com, daryn.kagan@turner.com, david.ensor@turner.com, daybreak@cnn.com, kurtzh@washpost.com, inthemoney@cnn.com, insidepoliticts@cnn.com, jeanne.meserve@turner.com, jeff.greenfield@cnn.com, jim.walton@turner.com, deirdre.walsh@turner.com, kelly.wallace@turner.com, kyra.phillips@turner.com, live@cnn.com, livefrom@cnn.com, livetoday@cnn.com, lou.dobbs@turner.com, loudobbs@cnn.com, miles.obrien@turner.com, moneyline@cnn.com, Caffertyfile@cnn.com, Gloria.Borger@cnn.com, ABRAMS@MSNBC.com, rmaddow@airamericaradio.com, rrhodes@airamericaradio.com, tfitzpat@lexmark.com, john.cusolito@libertymutual.co m, allison.vail@lendingtree.com, john.boul@edwardjones.com, ann_hartl@ahm.honda.com, executive-editor@nytimes.com, managing-editor@nytimes.com, washington@nytimes.com, news-tips@nytimes.com, national@nytimes.com, joe@msnbc.com, countdown@msnbc.com, hardball@msnbc.com, Abrams@msnbc.com, race08@msnbc.com, verdict@msnbc.com, letters@msnbc.com, steve.capus@nbc.com, bill.wolff@msnbc.com, jeremy.gaines@msnbc.com, phil.griffin@nbc.com, john.boxley@nbcuni.com, etaudr@abc.com, nightline@abcnews.com, 2020@abc.com, evening@cbsnews.com, earlyshow@cbs.com, 60II@cbsnews.com, 48hours@cbsnews.com, ftn@cbsnews.com, nightly@nbc.com, today@nbc.com, dateline@nbc.com, msnbcreports@msnbc.com, newshour@pbs.org, ombudsman@npr.org, public@nytimes.com, publisher@nytimes.com, national@washpost.com, bsmith@politico.com, marcambinder@theatlantic.com, watchdog@baracobama.com, roland@rolandsmartin.com,

pandering versus wise change

73071 — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 23:55:11 EDT

The producers and editors of daily television news seem to have a hard time telling the difference between a wise adjustment in policy and pandering.

Parents face the same dilemma. When we change our plans are we doing it to appease the cries of our kids, or are we doing it as a wise leader. One blogger gave the example of a teacher who tells her class that they will get to play outside, and then it rains.

So, lets give the news producers and editors a little help in knowing the difference.

Pandering occurs when:
The candidate changes a position, and the only thing that has influenced the change is his audience, or polling data.

A change in emphasis on a particular issue, does not mean that the candidate has changed positions. It is important to look at all of his previous statements to see if similar statements were made.

If a candidate talks a little about Faith in Politics during the primary, and increases emphasis on that topic in the general --- it is a change in emphasis, not a change in position.

Lack of decisiveness can be a concern when the candidate is all over the map. This happens when the candidate can't seem to find a position.

Another worthy investigation to take is ask whether the candidate readily tells audiences things they don't want to hear, or is difficult to accept. It is fair to remind the audience, when a candidate is accused of shifting positions, those occasions when the candidate discussed a similar position to audiences that would typically be resistant to hearing the message.

Wise changes, occur when the candidate receives new information that was not previously available.

Wise changes, also occur when circumstances significantly change that could not have been reasonably perceived.

Humans are not Disposable

73071 — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:08:25 EDT

America must leave our habit of treating other humans as disposable. Humans are not disposable. Ever. And it should not be easy to dispose of people when we find excuses to dispose of them in war, with criminal prosecution, and medical procedures.

Our leaders, like Senator McCain, continue to keep America captivated by violence when we conveniently find reasons to "kick people to the curb" when their views disagree with us, or their existence imposes upon us a responsibility.

Joking about waiting for people to die from cigarette smoke, or bombing people CANNOT ever be a source of entertainment.

I have the audacity to hope that this November, America can take a step towards maturing as a nation, and leave our juvenile tolerance for violence, and the leaders who embody it, behind us.

CNN

73071 — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:17:17 EDT

New York - christa.robinson@cnn.com
Atlanta - Atlantamatthew.furman@cnn.com
[[?]] - David.bohrman@cnn.com
Political Director - sam.friest@cnn.com
Tips for future shows - cnnfutures@cnn.com
Anderson Cooper - Anderson.cooper@cnn.com

Dear Producers,

It is critical that you exercise greater responsibility of informing the American Public about this election. Please consider the following:

1. Eliminate the use of "flip-flop". Karl Rove introduced this flimsy word into our public discourse, and it doesn't help citizens examine candidates.

2. Please take time to examine any accusation made by a campaign. Especially since they are trying to save ad dollars, don't let them get away with having a news network do their advertising for them.

3. If you want to report on the "race" instead of the message, then please cover the voter registration numbers, and the demographics. Explore the candidates use of the internet and how it is changing campaigns forever.

4. Introduce to the viewers basic concepts of democracy and elections, such as "Populism", and "grassroots".

5. Help mediate this election for the American people, instead of stirring up conflict that isn't present.

So, far it seems that your staff has gotten very sloppy in checking the spin given to you by Senator McCain's campaign. The American people were misled by political spin as we began the war in Iraq. Please don't fail us again.

Separation of State

73071 — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 18:05:44 EDT

The concept of "separation of church and state" is something other than religion should be kept in the closet and shall not be made public.

This is what the Constitution says about religion. You'll notice that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not there.

Amendment 1 says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Clearly this means Congress cannot set up a church. But Congress starts its session with a prayer. And the USSC has ruled that the prayer is constitutional.

So we ask, when has Congress gone too far and established a religion? And when does Congress go to far in silencing religious expression. That is the balancing act our beloved Constitution demands.

The Court's decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman established the "Lemon test", which details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It consists of three prongs:

1. The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
2. The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
3. The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
{wikipedia and consistent with my Constitutional law course.)

But the Lemon test is getting to be less clear in its application given the current Supreme Court.

There is significant latitude Constitutionally speaking to reach the conclusions that Professor Obama has reached. And in doing so, he assures millions of Christians in America that he values the perspective of religion in matters of public discourse.

Please refer to his position statement on Religion and Politics, under "Issues" and then Faith.

I agree that accepting federal funds, could compromise the pure message of religion and should be cautiously accepted. But, there is much more to Faith Based Initiatives such as sharing information, and making people in need aware of services available to them. For example our church hands out 300 backbacks to neighborhood kids, and our poster is distributed through public school folders.

Media Contacts from Bon's Post on the Community Blog

73071 — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 14:55:48 EDT

MSNBC (212-212-664-4444)

CNN (404-827-1500 ext 2) and leave messages

Ben Smith - Politico

Randi Rhodes
E-mail: randi@novamradio.com

Keith Olbermann -- MSNBC
Title: Host
Department: Countdown with Keith Olbermann
E-mail: countdown@msnbc.com

Chris Matthews -- MSNBC
Title: Host
Department: Hardball with Chris Matthews
E-mail: hardball@msnbc.com
Phone: (202) 783-2615
Fax: (202) 737-4986

Dan Abrams -- MSNBC
Title: Host
Department: The Abrams Report
E-mail: verdict@msnbc.c
Title: Host; Senior VP; Washington Bureau Chief
Department: Meet the Press
E-mail: mtp@msnbc.com
Phone: (202) 885-4548
Fax: (202) 966-4544

Bob Schieffer -- CBS News
Title: Anchor & Moderator - FTN; Interim Anchor - CBS Evening News; Chief Washington Correspondent
Department: Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer
E-mail: ftn@cbsnews.com
Phone: (202) 457-4481
Fax: (202) 457-1533

Jill Abramson -- New York Times
Title: Managing Editor - Newsgathering
Department: Headquarters
E-mail: abramson@nytimes.com
Phone: (212) 556-1234
Fax: (212) 556-3622

Robin Toner -- New York Times
Title: Political, Congressional Correspondent
Department: Washington Bureau
E-mail: rotone@nytimes.com
Phone: (202) 862-0445
Fax: (202) 862-0340

Dirk Mathison -- Los Angeles Times
Title: Online Political Editor
Department: LATimes.com
E-mail: dirk.mathison@latimes.com
Phone: (213) 237-5000

THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN reported to watchdog at Barackobama.com.
watchdog@barackobama.com

CNN
New York - christa.robinson@cnn.com
Atlanta - Atlantamatthew.furman@cnn.com
[[?]] - David.bohrman@cnn.com
Political Director - sam.friest@cnn.com
Tips for future shows - cnnfutures@cnn.com
Anderson Cooper - Anderson.cooper@cnn.com

MSNBC
Countdown - Keith Olbermann - countdown@msnbc.com
Race to White House - David Gregory - Race08@msnbc.com
General - letters@msnbc.com
Hardball - Chris Matthews - hardball@msnbc.com
Chuck Todd - Pol Director chuck.todd@nbcuni.com
Meet the Press- mtp@msnbc.com
Hardball Producer - john.reiss@nbcuni.com
Verdict - Dan Abrams' Assistant - Kathleen.kane@nbcuni.com
Andrea Mitchell - andrea.mitchell@nbcuni.com
Contessa Brewer - Contessa.brewer@nbcuni.com

NBC
President - steve.capus@nbc.com
Vice Pres - phil.griffin@nbc.com
GE's Board of Directors - Directors@corporate.ge.com
Today Show - today@nbcuni.com

ABC
Election Coverage Manager - peter.salinger@abc.com ABC World News Tonight - worldnewstonight@abc.com

CBS
Evening News - evening@cbsnews.com

FOX
Fox News - comments@foxnews.com
Spec Report - Brit Hume - Special@foxnews.com
Fox Reports - Shepard Smith - Foxreport@foxnews.com
O'Reilly Factor - Oreilly@foxnews.com
Hannity - Hannity@foxnews.com
Colmes - Colmes@foxnews.com
On the Record - Ontherecord@foxnews.com

Washington Post -
Eugene Robinson - eugenerobinson@washpost.com

Newsweek - Jon Meacham comments@jonmeacham.com

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
fair@fair.org

Forced to Unite for Change

73071 — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:44:13 EDT

Forced to Unite

My unite for change event occurred here on this blog. A series of issues had boiled to surface including FISA, Public Financing of the Campaign, Faith Based Initiatives, PUMA along with others. Quite a few supporters were out-right angry, while others were merely, confused frustrated or troubled. The effect on the blog community was extremely negative, and many retreated, waiting for the storm to clear.

I stuck with it, hoping to add calm words to offset the negativity. I joined a discussion about Faith Based Initiatives that included a gay couple from Texas. Soon, I sensed that we were polar opposites. I withdrew to avoid further conflict, and reflect. I watched the conversation with the remaining parties decline to the point of being called a "small-minded Okie" that had infested the blog and should be sprayed for extermination.

This made me doubt this would work, and wonder if I should continue -- knowing that my evangelical Christian value system was inherently offensive to so many involved in this campaign. And that's when my Unite for Change moment happened.

After all the episodes of dissent had been hammered out in this campaign, I realized that Senator Obama is making, forcing, insisting that all Americans work together. He is not satisfied with leading only progressives; he is willing to lead conservatives, too. And he is not satisfied to watch us live in our own convenient corners of the world. He will no longer allow us to politely avoid each other, and watch us scream at each other when our paths haphazardly cross. He is showing us that it is ESSENTIAL for us to live and work more effectively together for us to repair what threatens our country.

Soon I felt sad, realizing that Senator Obama wants us to be unified more than we want it for ourselves. We like our labels. They feel good, and we know what to do with them. We know who we can invite to dinner, and who to exclude. We know what neighborhoods have more of our kind in them, and we avoid those that don't. We know what a Democrat is "supposed" to stand for and what he isn't.

Given Senator Obama's policy positions, his campaign and administration is made vulnerable. He will only succeed IF we get used to talking and working with folks labeled in ways we have typically avoided. What an ambitious requirement to hinge a campaign upon! It's overwhelming. America can't be so diplomatic, I thought.

Quickly, I was comforted with the best part. I remembered 2004, when Senator Obama proclaimed from the DNC convention that he believed we could look past our divisions. He knew, at first, our political battle scars and trauma would cause us to resist. And that's why he is so accommodating.

He hopes, however, that if he persists through our growing pains, we will eventually see an urgent opportunity. That when necessary, Americans of opposite perspectives can suspend deeply held differences in our hearts. And at the same time, focus on strongly held common values, embraced by the Constitution, to Unite for Change.

Can we Play Nice?

73071 — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:33:38 EDT

Senator Obama is forcing divergent people to "play nice". He has done this over and over in his professional life, and he is forcing this on his campaign.

Any one of us who supported him because "he agrees with me on this" may experience some annoyance in having to deal with the the process of having to support him while he engages those who are our polar opposite.

Like I said yesterday, he is throwing us all in a room together and making us work it out.

But like your post said, he is kind enough to direct us through this process. He did that with forming alliances with Democrats and Republicans in previous phases of his life.

Much of our complaining is a result of us leaving our labels, and our convenient ways of living separately. We are o.k. with the idea that others will change their way of thinking to join us. But we are not O.K. with the idea that I will have to join others who will not change their way of thinking. And their way of thinking has previously been a threat to me.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, gays, minorities, conservatives, progressives, have all arranged to live in our own little worlds. And we have found convenient ways of avoiding each other.

Now we have to deal with each other and some of us don't know how to act.

We all need to accept that in order to support Senator Obama we have to accept his desire to lead us in spite of our differences.

And we will be asked to pick up the shovels given us, hold in our hearts our differences, and work next to someone who is our polar opposite on the trench in front of us.

We have to trust our Constitution will guide us as we keep our different perspectives, and work toward common goals.

Wesley Clark Letter to the Editor

73071 — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:41:35 EDT

And write the editor of your local paper, or blog on your local newspaper: Try this.

Dear Editor,

Voters should pause to consider the full context of General Clark's answer to the question recently presented to him on Face the Nation. He was referring to Senator McCain's foreign policy experience, not his dedication or patriotism.

General Clark said something that many did not want hear, which shows us that "the truth hurts".

Foreign policy experience in the Oval Office is something our country and world desperately needs in the next administration. Dick Chaney was our guide during the last 8 years, for a President who had no combat service. We were misled to believing that together they had the judgment needed for the office. The American voters trusted the assumptions spoon fed to us by compromised journalists. We failed to critique and question. Now, we are regrettably paying a humiliating price.

General Clark a Rhodes scholar, and decorated military man, is doing the American public a great service in challenging the journalistic assumptions about foreign policy experience and whether Senator McCain has the experience we deserve and can trust.

Instead of pushing General Clark aside, perhaps there is a moral blind-spot only he is capable of revealing. I hope the journalistic arm of our democracy will consider his perspective objectively and fully.

Sincerely,

Love the Overlooked

73071 — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:14:16 EDT

Max Lucado's message today explains how Christians can be Democrats

"Jesus "set aside the privileges of deity and took on the status of a slave, became human! . . . an incredibly humbling process. He didn't claim special privileges. .. . [H]e lived a selfless, obedient life and then died a selfless, obedient death--and the worst kind of death at that: a crucifixion" (Phil. 2:7-8 MSG).

Let's follow his example. Let's "put on the apron of humility, to serve one another" (1 Pet. 5:5 TEV). Jesus entered the world to serve. We can enter our jobs, our homes, our churches. Servanthood requires no unique skill or seminary degree. Regardless of your strengths, training, or church tenure, you can …

Love the overlooked. Jesus sits in your classroom, wearing the thick glasses, outdated clothing, and a sad face. You've seen him. He's Jesus.

Jesus works in your office. Pregnant again, she shows up to work late and tired. No one knows the father. According to water-cooler rumors, even she doesn't know the father. You've seen her. She's Jesus.

When you talk to the lonely student, befriend the weary mom, you love Jesus. He dresses in the garb of the overlooked and ignored. "Whenever you did one of these things to someone overlooked or ignored, that was me--you did it to me" (Matt. 25:40 MSG).

You can do that. ...[T]he cure for the common life involves loving the overlooked. You can also …

Wave a white flag. We fight so much. "Where do you think all these appalling wars and quarrels come from?" . . . They come about because you want your own way, and fight for it deep inside yourselves" (James 4:1 MSG). Serve someone by swallowing your pride. One more aspect of servanthood…..

Every day do something you don't want to do. Pick up someone else's trash. Surrender your parking place. Call the long-winded relative. Carry the cooler. Doesn't have to be a big thing. Helen Keller once told the Tennessee legislature that when she was young, she had longed to do great things and could not, so she decided to do small things in a great way. Don't be too big to do something small. "Throw yourselves into the work of the Master, confident that nothing you do for him is a waste of time or effort" (1 Cor. 15:58 MSG).

Doonesbury

73071 — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:53:39 EDT

This is our mission and purpose put to comedic definition. I hope everyone stays on the productive side of this equation.

http://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/

Letter to Dr. Dobson

73071 — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:51:37 EDT

Dear Dr. Dobson,

Thank you so much for trying to maintain Christian principals in our culture, homes, and government. I have come to expect helpful guidance with your perspective.

Recently, however, your notice regarding Senator Obama and his stance on social issues disappoints me. First, your notice fails to acknowledge the limits of Senator McCain's ability to recognize religious leaders influence in policy. His economic policy regarding the mortgage lending crisis and its impact on families, perpetuates the victimization of the poor. His alignment with the oil industry perpetuates a covetous foreign policy.

Furthermore, I am not sure that Senator McCain regularly attends church, or is a member of a local church. I was extremely disappointed in Senator Obama's former pastor and his church leadership, but at least he had attended a church for 20 years. Has Senator McCain?

I suspect that evangelical conservative Christians like us will have much to dispute with Senator Obama. But, I believe he will more respectfully consider my voice of dissent than Senator McCain will consider my voice of dissent on the war in Iraq, the deception of our government, and the oppressive and failed economic policies of the oil and mortgage industry. I think I will more effective on challenging Senator Obama on social conservative issues, than challenging Senator McCain on greed.

So, you see there are some evangelical Christians who can not over look the moral blindspots contained within Senator McCain. It is disturbing to me that you seem to be so quick to lead us in a way that would permit us to ignore Senator McCain's weaknesses.

I expect Focus on the Family to show us the moral weaknesses of both candidates and preparing us to encourage strength in the candidate is elected. When President Bush was elected we were not prepared on foreign affairs to challenge his neocon ideology. We were not prepared to challenge economic policies based on greed. It would be more helpful if all candidates for office were investigated with objective scrutiny. My prayer is that God you would lead you to find ways to be as assertive with Republican weaknesses, as you are with Democratic ones.

Sincerely,

Mary Brown Boren,
Norman Oklahoma
constituent of Congressman Tom Cole

If it Takes a Villiage

73071 — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 23:18:55 EDT

to raise a child, . . . What does it take to overhaul the Democratic Party's poltical machine?

When we answer this, we'll answer why it is so hard to deliver the knock-out punch. And we give full credit to how ambitious this campaign is.

Let's answer it together!

Mary from Norman Oklahoma

Hurry up and take away her Keys to the Machine

73071 — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:38:17 EDT

Super Delegates. Hurry up and take away Senator Clinton's keys to her democratic machine.

Hillary Clinton's electability arguments assume that the Democratic Party will be unified. If the Democratic party is war torn beyond repair, she is unelectable. Her only remaining strategies to win inherently compromise the strength and unity of the Democratic Party.

Her Super Delegate horse-trading strategy is absolutely sure to divide the Democratic Party. And while we wait for the Super Delegates to step up and lead, she bides her time with another strategy: hope that Obama will self-implode and continue to lay traps to increase the likelihood that he will take a critical misstep. Her "gotcha" strategy also threatens the unity of the Democratic party, as we painfully wrangle in our seats watching the negativity increase with each day.

More troubling for the super delegates should be that the Clinton camp acts as if HRC doesn't need a strong unified party to beat McCain. She has already thrown MoveOn.org, and black voters under the bus. Next it will be all of the Obama delegates and his million plus contributors.

The pride and delusion that it takes to ignore the complications with this strategy shows her inability to effectively lead our Country through the next 4 years to remedy the last 71/2 year's worth of problems.

Super delegates are responsible first to keep the party unified so that the nominee will win in November. Secondly, super-delegates also have the chance to dismember the Clinton's political machine redistribute power to the next in line. The newly registered voters are a sign that we are ready to rebuild a new generation of Democrats, but it is up to the Super Delegates to exercise the judgment and leadership that will take us down this course.

Assured Supporter

73071 — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:20:46 EDT

Given how well Senator Obama weathered the storm, and how he led our nation to consider a better way to address one another on these type of issues, I am assured. I feel less distraction by my disagreements and more hopeful about our areas of agreement. Senator Casey's endorsement also shows me there is a place for folks like me at the Obama table.

Parting Ways

73071 — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 00:52:08 EDT

It is difficult for me to support Senator Obama's view of Christianity and church. Not because I am threatened or worried about the message his former pastor gave. But because of the lack of care his church has given to scripture. I disagree with strategies used by his church to achieve political goals. I also disagree with conclusions reached by the church regarding the ordaination of ministers. I have a very heavy heart about this. I had hoped to avoid this conflict between my faith and Senator Obama's campaign, but it seems that it is irreconcilable. I don't know how I can confidently campaign for him and explain his position to friends and family who worship with me each week.

I am hopeful, however, that Senator Obama will take an independent view of scripture and chart out a better course for himself and his family. I understand his hesitancy to leave his church after having put so much time and energy with them, but if his relationship with God takes priority, then he will consider it.

Depite this troubling decision, I will continue to admire him for his vision of America, his temperment, and his devotion to reaching solutions without fighting and defeating others. I will continue to pray for God's protection for his family, his wife and children, and his leadership in the event he is chosen to serve as President of the United States.

Rethinking the Fight against Roe v. Wade

73071 — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 08:21:29 EST

Several posts assume that if we overturned Roe v. Wade that abortion would be illegal. I respectfully disagree.

First I believe it would still be legal in "pro-choice" states. As an attorney I realize that the effect of overturning Roe v. Wade would be that each state could make abortion illegal without violating the Constitution. And other states could keep the practice as legal. You may remember that Roe challenged Texas' law prohibiting abortion, and several states at that time legalized the procedure. This means that even if Roe were overturned each state could make abortion legal. Some pro-choice activitist have already started going state by state to get laws protecting the right to choose under state constitutions.

Second, Our pro-life and pro-choice debate would not be limited to a national debate, instead each state would be grounds for intense legal fights by the extemes on both sides. An intensified legal battle would take resources away from maternity homes, and crisis pregnancy support systems like adoption, etc. My focus is on reducing the number of abortions, not gaining political power around fighting legal battles.

I believe that abortions will be reduced most signficantly by changing the minds of women, not the minds of judges and legislators.

Third, the commercial aspect would change if some states become "choice states" and other states were "life states". The industry in "choice states" would start building clinics/spas along the borders of states that prohibit the procedure. This would be very disturbing. I suppose Planned Parenthood would still have offices in every state, and simply travel by van to states that authorized the procedure.

Fourth, It would be harder to track state by state the women in crisis pregnancy and provide them services. For example, Oklahoma would very likely be a "life state" and some would likely consider supporting maternity homes as no longer necessary because abortion would be illegal in Oklahoma. Also, it would be difficult to track who in Oklahoma had experienced a crisis pregnancy.

These are just a few thoughts to rethink the effect of over-turning Roe v. Wade. And this explains why I can be a Pro-Life without fighting to over-turn Roe v. Wade, and can find common ground to accept Senator Obama's leadership on this issue.