brian mclaren has posted some interesting questions for the ’08 democratic presidential candidates on jim wallis’ “God’s Politic’s” blog. i am particularly fond of the insights that he brings forth in his question for Hillary Clinton—2 families (bush/clinton) will have been in the white house for 28 years (more than 10% of our nations history) if she wins both terms—and of John Edwards (his Obama question seems to be a softball).
in his question for edwards he likens terrorism to crime in the ghettos of america both the result of a widening economic gap. an interesting insight, and one that might just gain some traction as time goes forward and we begin to truly understand the causes of terrorism in the world.
take a look at his short post, it’s pretty interesting. i’d love to see these questions actually get answered by the candidates—tough questions for a change instead of the mincy little pansy questions that are constantly being allowed through the filters of campaign managers.
Related posts:
- questions: an intro
- questions: relationships—outside (or cultural ignorance)
- questions: the gospel.
- questions: re-thinking the focus of atonement theology.
- Baptists withdraw invitation
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
Enough said. Against wars, against taxes.
Haha, good reply Jason
For those unfamiliar with Ron Paul, he’s the secret that the current brand of Republicans don’t want you to know about. He’s been in federal office since the 70s, yet has no dirty laundry. He’s pro-life, but also knows that the Constitution has no allowance for any laws on the Federal level (he was an ObGyn who delivered thousands of babies in his career). He’s also against taxation, against the use of government force for any reason, and believes the healthiest and safest US is one where we trade freely, but align ourselves with no other country or organization.
Even though I don’t vote (moral consideration), I still have donated to his campaign. Watch him in the debates — he’s the only one who actually has answers to the problems plaguing us. Go Paul!
ah, good ol’ ron paul—the great white hope.
Sounds like a typical lib to me. Stop the charade!!! I’m talking to you, Wallis. I’m talking to you, grinning beard face. Moderates are just smart-sounding political cowards.
Those are some of the weakest, hoplelessly leading questions I’ve ever heard.
And Dada, I’m Ok with you not voting
and you sound typically conservative rags…
how are these weak questions? dissect the weakness of them for me because i’m honestly curious…
and you sound typically conservative rags…
Wait, rags is a conservative? Didn’t he support Bush, whose bill-signing record is more liberal than Clinton? I would definitely NOT call a Bush support a conservative, since Bush himself proved he’s no conservative. Ultra-liberal, maybe, but conservative? No way.
how are these weak questions? dissect the weakness of them for me because i’m honestly curious…
I don’t see them as weak, either. Loaded, maybe, but that’s the whole point of questioning liars — to get them to openly lie, rather than dance around the lie, right?
1/2 hour to the Fox debates — Paul’s gonna massacre the Republican liberals again!
Conservative and proud of it. I want to hear one of these in-the-closest-liberal emergents just come out and admit they are liberal. Really, I would respect them much, much more. At least our mainline friends are upfront and honest. I’m not saying it is more “Christian” to be conservative or liberal (heaven forbid that God should favor one party over another). It is simply more “Christian” to be honest and upfront rather than putting yourself off as a moderate while consistently blasting and ridiculing all things conservative.
As for the comment about light and easy questions…let me explain. A good, challenging line of questioning would directly address a condidates’ stand on a certain issue. For instance, Hilary, how can you one day be a Cubs fan and the very next day when you are running for Senate in New York you claim to be a lifelong Yanks fan (This may sound like a joke, but to me it is a serious breach in character.) Our for instance, Barack, explain to me why a Christian should vote for anyone who supports a mother’s right to kill her unborn child (What? A Christian asking a question about abortion? How passe.) Or could you explain why anyone (Christian or otherwise) should vote for a person (as nice as he may be) with little or no record? Or Jon Edwards, don’t you think that this classism and race baiting is bad for the country? Or could you perhaps comment on tort reform and how radically irresponsible trial lawyers are driving up the cost of health care? You see what I’m saying. Every single one of grinning beard face’s questions is blatantly slanted to the left. They aren’t challenging at all. They simply would call for an answer such as, “You’re absolutely right Brian…” These questions aren’t designed to be challenging or even loaded. They are designed to preach McLaren’s message (a very left-friendly message) – heck, they will never even be asked of any of the candidates. It is nothing but grandstanding. I would love to see how his questions to the Repubs would compare.
liberal and conservative are all relative to the person making the judgment call… so, they are pointless labels.
to me rags, you’re very conservative, but that’s because my center point is way to the left of you. but to many i’m very conservative because their center point is way to the left of me… and the cycle even goes backwards. the point is, the labels are all relative.
i think your questions are great too, and i’d love to see them asked. but i still like “grinning beard face’s” questions if for anything because of the insights that they pose. it brings to light some of the issues that we don’t often times think about. if these questions were in fact answered honestly i’m sure there would be some rather interesting responses.
(i too would like to see his corresponding questions to repubs–or as i like to call them pubes)
I get what you’re saying about labels – and you’re right. I’ve been having this discussion with some students lately in terms of theological issues. To some, I would be a liberal because I question a literal seven-day creation, but to others I would be a fundamentalist because I believe scripture is inerrant (another loaded term) and inspired. Labels are not perfect, but they do “work” to a certain extent. On most issues, I would come down as a political conservative. We don’t have to commit an either/or fallacy and say that to be conservative you have to be so on every issue.
i’m not really all that sure that these labels do work, especially considering the center is an imaginary line.
Actually, there is a VERY functional system for gauging where one falls on the political spectrum — Gary Nolan’s “World’s Smallest Political Quiz.” It separates a person’s views into two spectrums — personal and economic. Then it gauges if that person wants more State control or more Market control within that spectrum. It plots the answer on a chart, and where your overall “points” fall is what you are.
Most “conservatives” today are Statists and don’t really understand what conservatism means. If you believe you want to uphold the Constitution, then you can not justify any political party today (not even the Libertarians!). Unfortunately, the youngsters (such as all of us) are unaware of the actual platforms of both the Classical Liberal and Classical Conservative parties. The Democrats today are not Liberal, they’re eco-progressive. The Republicans today are not Conservative, they’re neo-progressive. Both want to rule the world by force, and both love controlling what you do in your mind, your bedroom, your business and your family.
Christians were given such freedom from Christ to absolutely ignore, and abhor, political alliances. I really wonder what book many mainstream Christians are reading, and if it is the Bible or if it is just some fantasy fiction created by political elites. I say take the freedom Christ gave you, and avoid the political debate
If you are a true conservative rags, then you should be all for Ron Paul too. He is the true conservative of the bunch. Pro life, pro state control, less taxes, less war, less spending, less big government, strong NATIONAL defense, NOT worldwide policing. These are all true conservative stances.
Paul hit it square on the head in the Fox debate the other night. How would we like it if Iran or Cuba had military bases in over 100 countries around the world including ours. Stop trying to be the world police and protect American soil by staying on American soil.
Ron Paul…Must a true liberal then vote for the Small Woodland Creature masqueradeing as the senator from Ohio? According to Dada, if I was an honest conservative (or Christian?) I wouldn’t vote at all.
Anyway, I don’t know much about Ron Paul except what I’ve heard here and since I abhor what we have come to falsely call televised political “debates,” I didn’t waste my time watching it. The only thing I know about Paul is that he is a high-minded idealist which also means that he has about as much a chance for the presidency as Monts does (see also Ralph Nader). I’m not saying idealism is wrong. I’m simply saying that idealism has its place, and it probably isn’t in the oval office. To be president of the most powerful nation on earth requires for instance that you see a fundamental difference between Cuba, Iran, and the US. Of course we wouldn’t “like” it if Cuba had bases all over the world. But that’s what makes them Cuba. Here’s the reality. We are the world’s superpower (until China passes us at least). We are the world’s police (as much as that idea is patently distasteful). When crap happens around the world, who does the world call and/or hold responsible? I’ll give you a hint, it ain’t Cuba. Isolationism is a failed policy – it always has been and it certainly will continue to be. Maybe this doesn’t make me a pure conservative, but I think maybe it makes me a realist.
By the way, we’ve closed all bases in the Koran Belt (Saudi Arabia). They’ve been closed for a long time – but they still hate us.
hmmm… monts for president. that has a nice ring to it don’t you think?! maybe i’ll throw my hat in the ring as a write-in candidate!
VOTE MONTS ’08!