This is the story of a collection of people who follow Jesus. We live in Littleton. We encounter people in the name of Jesus, we allow Jesus to turn us into disciples, we gather often, and we equip people to love and serve other people better.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

A case for re-electing Obama?

 – Twitter   Oct 18, 2011

: I have not yet had the chance to watch a GOP debate. Who should I vote for?

 – Obama :-)   Oct 19, 2011

Mark Kraakevik – Haha - yes, of course. So make your case. Why should I vote for Obama? I love his speeches, I am not quite as thrilled by some of his policies. And, in general, the country is not doing so great under his watch.   Oct 19, 2011

Holly – I understand the frustration folks have about how we are doing. So why are we still in this funk and how did we get here? 

Of course, the answers are not simple, but extremely complicated. Anyone who says it is one person's fault (even if they say it's GW's, my favorite villain) is just plain wrong. 

Nonetheless, I do believe the policies promoted during the Bush years were hurtful. I was not in support of the war in Iraq, but even if it had been a "good war", it was short-sighted to not make a plan to pay for it. Bush added an amazing amount to our national debt through the war and through tax cuts that went primarily to the better off (thus, those who don't need to spend it immediately and so it didn't go back into the economy as quickly as it would have otherwise). 

But of course, Bush didn't come up with all this by himself. De-regulation began with Reagan, I believe, and that contributed greatly to the economic crisis we are now in. The idea pushed for so long (and certainly for Libertarians still is core) was that an unfettered economy would naturally lead to growth and everyone would benefit. Trickle down. Float all boats. Accordingly, we just needed to cut down on (or better, cut out) all these regulations, and Capitalism would prove its merits. This idea was applied to the financial markets as well, and so innovation thrived unhindered, including those mortgage-backed securities that led to the Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisis which has become a global problem, making it extremely difficult to get out of this mess quickly. 

-- On a lighter note, I just love the Onion article of November 5, 2008: Black Man Given Nation's Worst Job (http://www.theonion.com/articles/black-man-given-nations-worst-job,6439/). --

These are just a few of the ways we got to this position. Clinton isn't blameless either. As I understand it, his administration pushed for every American family to own a home and that policy became the goal rather than a policy that promoted ownership only when it was the best financial decision. Home ownership isn't best in all situations, but facts get in the way of policy sometimes.

Since countries around the world are facing financial crises and we are in a global economy now, no longer insulated as much as we were, I don't see how we can bounce back quickly. What I am looking for is someone who will lead us forward through the storm with policies and plans that support the least among us, for they are certainly the ones who get hit the hardest no matter what kind of storm it is. That seems a lot more Christ-like than making sure the well-off can keep the money in the family after they die or seeing that taxes are low. Jesus made it clear 2000 years ago that he is not interested in tax policy but in people living their lives for God, doing what he says (Mark 12:13-17). And since God has said a whole lot about caring for the poor, that seems to me to be one of his stronger priorities. 

Obama is not the savior we so wanted him to be 2008. No one on Earth could single-handedly get us out of this position. He is not pleasing anyone very much. But that is because he is much more moderate than those who enthusiastically supported him in the 2008 election and, I think, demonized by vocal groups on the right. The middle moderates tend not to speak out much nor are they as inclined to vote. So, along with the fact that those in power (extremists more than not) work to stay in power (e.g. redistricting, resisting or changing bills for election reform), we are trapped in a political culture that honors those who draw a line in the sand and refuse to compromise or negotiate. This means little or nothing gets done. Our system is set up with checks and balances which prevent any one branch from running away with power. It also just slows us down at times like this. 

Back to your original question: whom to vote for. Looking at all the candidates, I see no one who will lead us out of this mess quickly. The Republicans are offering mostly people who are eagerly courting the Tea Party voters: way too far right (and promoted by Libertarian corporations, e.g. Koch). The Republican candidates are much further to the right than Obama is to the left. Of course, that is not the way the political operators want us to see it, but I think the actions and words clearly bear it out. They have tried to denounce Obama as a Socialist, but his record doesn't bear this out. Mitt Romney might be along the closest to a traditional Republican conservative and therefore more palatable to me than his fellow Republicans, but not better than Obama from what I can see. 

I know you are a thoughtful person, open to learning from a variety of opinions. I love that. We may or may not vote the same way, but I am so grateful that you are who you are and that you listen to others, trying to understand a different perspective. It's refreshing. 

Give Heidi my love and a big hug!   Oct 20, 2011

Mark Kraakevik – I love that you took the time to write this out. This is very insightful. Thank you. I want to copy it and post it on my blog, so others can see it. I am guessing it will not get the attention it deserves here. Would that be ok?   Oct 20, 2011

Holly – Sure. Thanks for the confidence booster!   Oct 20, 2011

Posted via email from Mark Kraakevik

No comments: