Thursday, September 04, 2008

My six favorite words in this election: "...and you will know their names..."

I am listening to John McCain at the Republican National Convention. Darn he can speak. I am almost ready to give him another point on the basis of the quote above. In what is a pretty rippin' speech by McCain, he mentioned that he would veto pork barrel spending bills coming across his desk as President, and concerning the politicians who try load the pork on the bill he said, "and you will know their names."

Now that rocks! If a President does that, I will seriously be impressed by the power of the leadership.

Now the speech is keeping it's momentum, as McCain talks about cutting taxes, but does not have quite the impact as those six little words, which are my favorite so far in this election.

16 comments:

carl said...

those were some good words.

Pastor Phil said...

I do think that it makes it McCain 2 Obama 0 for me, but the game is still early.

I was impressed that McCain seemed to take the high road in his speech, and actually praised Obama. This mirrors my belief that we should be looking for the good, even in those with whom we disagree.

john heasley said...

I just pray that there is that honesty, integrity, not just hollow wors, it is easy to get cynical and jaded, but I would love to believe in leaders and know that although they aren't perfect like the rest of us, they will stand up and be counted and be leaders.

Bruce said...

McCain throws conservatives because he is willing to seriously consider and sometimes get on board with liberal policies. I mean, he cosponsored a bill with Ted Kennedy this last term. But thru the convention I got to see that he knows where to draw the line for the public good without being an ideologue.

Palin--the fact that her husband is a world champion snowmachine racer (x4) and a fisherman and steelworker and rock star good looking--tells me that she's Prov 31, didn't just marry some weak guy who would let her get her way. Plus, I don't know any pol anywhere who waded into entrenched economic interests and actually made any change--which she did.

They both seem reality oriented, a little loose on ideological boundaries, but more rooted in family and community and real faith than many of their peers. 'Reality oriented' resembled 'unprincipled pragmatism' except it's bounded by family, community, faith, so the outside lines are pretty well hard wired. They aren't saviors, but they can lead.

Pastor Phil said...

Hey Hease!

I love the words, but I will only be impressed by the actions. I suppose to some degree the words themselves are action, because mouthing them publicly has got to challenge some very powerful people.

Pastor Phil said...

Bruce,

Interesting perspectives, and seemingly astute. I always wait to see, and hear more about these public personas who can appear larger than life in both good and bad ways, but so far I am finding the Palin's interesting, and somewhat refreshing.

g13 said...

of course, what was left unstated in the speech is that for the past year and a half the biggest name in pork has been spelled p-a-l-i-n.

i realize that the economics of alaska, and many other rugged individualist western states that espouse libertarianism while relying on the government tit, are quite different than the economics of other states.

however, when you look at her record on issues such as the bridge to nowhere - where she indeed canceled the project...after accepting over 220 million federal dollars that were never returned - her "reformer" credentials start to look a little skimpy.

that's not to say that i disrespect mccain. he's got a great personal story and he would have been a good president in 2000 (before he turned tail on his condemnation of the bush tax cuts, flipped on immigration and (soon to come!) flopped on drilling in anwar), but his time appears to have passed.

Pastor Phil said...

Hey Gman,

Have you been writing the Democratic talking points for the party? or just memorizing them? ;-)

g13 said...

hey now, the palin assertion is not a talking point. it's simply a fact. for an excellent 411 on palin check out slate's helpful palin faq section.

of course, my thoughts on mccain - outside of the points about the tax cuts and immigration - are built upon my own judgments.

Pastor Phil said...

because something is fact does not mean it is not spin. Facts combined with half truths, or unknowns - some found in Slate's faq in fact - combine to make biased pictures of the candidates. People who want to spin in a certain direction mark the evils of the opposite party, and ignore the evils their own preference.

Do you think your quick reference to the problems with Palin are an assumption that she must be a hypocrite because she is conservative? Unless you as quickly reference the hypocrisies of Obama or Biden I would guess so.

It is these kind of talking points I am moving away from telling myself in this election. This is the problem of a two party system, and we like puppets have been playing the party politics for too long.

Perhaps the Gospel calls us to be Republicans when with the Republicans, and a Democrat when we are with the Democrats. Could it be that we are not called to be neither, but to be both? Not sure myself - just a thought.

g13 said...

i'm not sure what the gospel calls or expects us to be in regards to the politics of man. unfortunately the NT has precious little to say on the matter and what it does say seems to raise more questions than it provides answers.

i agree that facts can be utilized in the process of spin, but i don't think it is spinning the truth to point out that mccain's, admittedly powerful, denouncement of earmarks raises significant questions about palin's skillful utilization of earmarks in alaska.

one more thing, i never said that palin was a hypocrite. rather, i questioned her skimpy credentials a a "reformer." that being said, i'm sure she wrestles with hypocrisy just like the rest of us.

james said...

If anyone's interested in a Snopes verified letter from a resident in Alaska who claims to know Palin, check it out here.

Yes, it is one person's opinion. But if she is on a first name basis with Palin there is some worth to this.

Pastor Phil said...

Hey Gman,

But I think you do know what the Gospel calls for in politics. It is not any different than what it calls for in life - Galatians 5 has a list, and so does 1 Corinthians 13, and these are the fruit of the Gospel in our own lives. I think that this applies to politics, and to every area of life. Whadayathink?

Pastor Phil said...

Hey James,

Thanks. The worth is in the fact they know each other, but not knowing the person sending the letter, or the city politics of Wasilla, it is worth a limited amount.

I have known small pieces of inside politics in Salem, and have heard the naysayers respond to the same information of which I had an inside scope. The story sounded so dark from what I knew. This letter could be the same, or might be an accurate personal appraisal, or a mixed bag. That's the problem with democracy at a distance. I am a small and local government kinda guy.

james said...

I think you make a good point. While the letter is true, we need to keep in mind that one persons bias can color the content. With the information listed however, we can easily research the numbers to determine if they are true or not. For example, according to the letter, she left the city with over $22 million in debt and the writer describes why this happened. So, she either did or she didn't leave the city in debt (or there's more to it) and a little research can reveal the truth of this or not.

Josh Jinno said...

what about what the gospel calls for from us in politics, since we are afforded the opportunity to have a say in picking the next Nero. How much moral responsibility should we bear if we helped elect someone who turns out totally evil? Maybe that is an invalid question... I think ethics should play a stronger role than morals in our decision making process. I feel that ethics (like a categorical imperative) provide for an individual to consider the weight of ones actions and decisions without a whole load of moral guilt if they screw up... having not come to a reasonable conclusion on this myself I'll probably write in someone who has no chance of winning.