Last night Rev. Jim Wallis and Sojourners Magazine hosted an event on CNN which was focused on the issue of faith and politics. The three Democratic front runners (John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton) were invited to discuss the very personal issue of faith and how that influences their policy. They were each given 15 minutes to field questions from CNN moderator Soledad O’Brien and a panel of religious and community leaders.
For those of you who caught the event, you know as well as I do that it was a big deal. For those who didn’t, let me tell you: It was a big deal. It was the first organized television appearance for these candidates since their crucial New Hampshire debate last week, and it was focused completely on faith. It says to me that faith will be a major issue in the upcoming elections, and these candidates recognize the fact. It also gave us a glimpse into the personal lives of three very astonishing people.
The first to take the stage was John Edwards. He was the only one of the three that I didn’t have a preconceived bias about, and therefore of the most personal interest. Fortunately for Edwards, he was on his home turf. His pet issue is poverty, an interest he shares with event organizer Wallis, and therefore this appearance should have been a home run for him. And it was. I was very impressed with his sincere faith, his approachable demeanor, and his grasp of the issues. The first question asked was “Do you believe homosexuals should be married?” His unhesitant, unequivocal “No” took me by surprise. I was under the impression he was much more liberal than that. He went on to explain, however, that while his faith and morality make homosexuality a sin, it is not the job of the president to impose personal beliefs on the nation; a guideline which he believes protects the church just as much as it does the state (don’t have time to get into my thoughts on this here, other than to say that I agree. If you need more, comment and I’ll respond more in depth).
Edwards was also asked about the response to Katrina, which he asserted was a national embarrassment (it was) to loud applause. Asked how he would remedy the situation were he in office, he stated that he would appoint a knowledgeable, capable individual to lead the hurricane response. He would meet with this individual every morning to get an update on what was accomplished yesterday: not what happened last week, not what is planned for six months from now, but what progress was made yesterday. I like it. Hold people accountable for getting stuff done. Realistic? I don’t know.
Things got personal when Edwards was asked how his faith, more specifically prayer, impacted his everyday life. Edwards talked about his faith journey: raised as a Southern Baptist, falling away from the faith, and coming back in a strong way through the tragedies he has endured (his son died when he was six, his wife has twice been diagnosed with breast cancer). It’s a familiar story to me, as I’m sure it is to many of us, and it was real. He didn’t pretend to be a model Christian. He acknowledged that he screws up, that he sins. And he acknowledged that his faith and the strength of God get him through.
My one qualm: true he has done a lot of great work for poverty, but he is a millionaire many times over and gets $400 haircuts. Is he walking the walk?
Barack Obama, clearly the smartest of the 2008 candidates and the sharpest thinker in my memory (to qualify: I’m young), also hit a slam dunk (like my mixed metaphors?) He is good friends with Jim Wallis and was even more comfortable in this forum than Edwards. The first question he was asked, about the existence of good and evil in warfare and whether God chooses sides, was very intriguing and elicited a phenomenal answer. Pulling from his vast internal library, Obama quoted Abraham Lincoln: “my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right.” He asserted that God will not be manipulated to suit our causes, but that we need to make sure at all times that we are following God’s directives of justice, love, peace, etc.
He went on to say that there was undeniable evil in the world. That when men crash planes into towers and take innocent lives it is an evil, and there must be a response. But he warned that when we use moral causes to justify evil actions (ie torture) we contribute to the evil, and stray from the side of God.
As an extension to this question he was asked about his support for Israel. He condemned the Palestinians’ continued bombing of Israel, and said that first step towards peace between Israel and Palestine is forgiveness. Both sides have seen innocent people slaughtered, have been the victims and perpetrators of evil, and they need to forgive before any peace can be found. Preach on.
The next question came from Jim Wallis, who asked Obama how he would address the issue of poverty in America. Barack took it home. He started with the importance of early education, and talked about programs and increased funding to further this cause. He gave a statistic that $1 invested in early education saves the government $7 down the road in welfare, delinquency, drop outs, etc. He talked about the importance of breaking the cycle of poverty by giving people pride, a sense of accomplishment, and the tools necessary to succeed. I couldn’t agree more. Education is the most important factor in escaping poverty. The problem is that there is a pervasively negative attitude about education below the poverty line. It is seen as selling out, as conformance. This attitude will need to be changed and Obama’s early education programs are the necessary catalyst.
He also sees the need to provide a real second chance for men and women released from prison. He wants to increase educational programs in prisons to give ex-offenders the tools they need to right their lives. At first this made me cringe. Prison is a punishment. Why should my tax money go towards helping prisoners? But Obama’s right. If the cycle of criminality will be broken a step needs to be taken to give them hope. Obama also wants to raise the minimum wage. There are people who work full time and still can’t support their families. This is inexcusable.
Obama sees the poverty issue as a moral issue. We are connected, we are our “brothers’ keeper.” We have a moral responsibility to make sure everyone has food, education, clothing, shelter, and access to health care. We need to get rid of the “either/ or” mentality that has divided politics on this issue. The Republican thinking that with hard work we can all succeed and the Democratic thinking that it’s the government’s responsibility to care for everyone are both inadequate. The government must give people the tools they need so they can succeed for themselves.
Hillary Clinton was the candidate I was skeptical about, and she did nothing to change that. I honestly felt that she was heavily coached. Her answers were contrived. She had premeditated anecdotes demonstrating her faith, and she forced them into her responses. The result was that the stories she told often times had nothing to do with the question. She used clichéd Christianisms (“prayer warrior”). She vaguely mentioned “Bible stories” from her youth and made some obscure, unspecified reference to Pharisees, but never gave any specifics to suggest she knew what she was talking about. I certainly had no idea.
The first question concerned her vote five years ago to give Bush the power to invade Iraq and her refusal to apologize for it. I’m going to say this very clearly and hope every media figure reads this (they won’t): Get off it. Obama doesn’t deal with this because he voted against the war. Edwards has apologized for his vote since he announced his candidacy. But honestly, what difference does it make? She did what she thought was right at the time with the information she had, and apologizing now won’t change a damn thing. Besides, it’s all rhetoric and posturing. It’s too early to say for certain that she was on the right or wrong side of the issue. So please, let it go.
I’ve read a couple of different articles now that assert Clinton shined in this forum. I disagree. I’ve already stated my feelings about the sincerity of her faith, and if you couldn’t see through the act you may have been watching a different program. The only substantive question she was asked dealt with abortion. To this she sidestepped the issue of morality (which the questioner Rev. Joel Hunter was looking for) and suggested finding common ground be implementing programs to reduce the number of abortions. I don’t get as passionate about this particular debate as some do, but I feel that a person of faith would need to feel conflicted about supporting abortion. I completely understand the position of being Christian and pro-choice, but I feel like a person of faith would have some inner turmoil on the issue. I didn’t see any in Hillary.
Sorry for the brevity of my analysis. There’s a lot to be said, and I wish I could devote more time to each candidate. If you have any specific questions, feel free to comment. Otherwise, watch for a similar forum with the Republican candidates coming up. I’m not sure of the exact date, but I’ll keep you posted.
Thanks for reading.
A link to the transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0706/04/sitroom.03.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment