KEEPINGBrothers

THINGS I'VE DONE:

2008-12-17T21:12:00.002-05:00

Since the Election has come to a close, I've run out of things to write about. To get things started back I thought a lighter post was in order, so here is a list of cool things to do in your lifetime, with mine in bold.

Looking at what all I had highlighted I felt a tad bit guilty - in the “wow, I’m privileged, I should feel bad” kind of way. But then I realized that thankfulness for the blessings and even sorrows in life is more appropriate.

1. Started your own blog (duh)
2. Slept under the stars
3. Played in a band (Drums - Middle School Band and with "The Borders")
4. Visited Hawaii (Honeymoon)
5. Watched a meteor shower
6. Given more than you can afford to charity (unfortunately, I could give more)
7. Been to Disneyland
8. Climbed a mountain (my wife will tell you I huff and puff all the way up)
9. Held a praying mantis
10. Sang a solo
11. Bungee jumped (sort of….if you count the pendulum at Emerald Point)
12. Visited Paris
13. Watched a lightning storm
14. Taught yourself an art from scratch
15. Adopted a child
16. Had food poisoning
17. Walked to the top of the Statue of Liberty (stayed at the base and looked up)
18. Grown your own vegetables
19. Seen the Mona Lisa in France
20. Slept on an overnight train
21. Had a pillow fight
22. Hitch hiked
23. Taken a sick day when you’re not ill (When I umpired in High School)
24. Built a snow fort
25. Held a lamb
26. Watched your favorite Team win a Championship (Braves, UNC, Miami Heat)
27. Run a Marathon (5K is the most I've run)
28. Ridden in a gondola in Venice (saw them, but didn’t ride)
29. Seen a total eclipse
30. Watched a sunrise or sunset
31. Hit a home run (Crosby Athletic - backyard Baseball)
32. Been on a cruise
33. Seen Niagara Falls in person
34. Got your feet wet in both the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean. (Hawaii counts as the Pacific right?)
35. Seen an Amish community
36. Taught yourself a new language (High school French doesn't count)
37. Had enough money to be truly satisfied (Doesn't take much)
38. Seen the Leaning Tower of Pisa in person
39. Gone rock climbing
40. Seen Michelangelo’s David
41. Sung karaoke
42. Seen Old Faithful geyser erupt
43. Bought a stranger a meal at a restaurant
44. Visited Africa (I will in August 2009)
45. Walked on a beach by moonlight
46. Been transported in an ambulance
47. Had your portrait painted
48. Gone deep sea fishing
49. Seen the Sistine Chapel in person
50. Been to the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris
51. Gone scuba diving or snorkeling
52. Visited New York City at Christmas
53. Played in the mud
54. Gone to a drive-in theater (my very first movie was Star Wars at the drive-in: I was 1 1/2 years old and don't remember)
55. Been in a movie (Home Videos)
56. Visited the Great Wall of China
57. Started a business (Half credit for taking over my dad's business)
58. Taken a martial arts class (I took Karate in 3rd grade, during the Karate Kid days)
59. Visited Russia
60. Served at a soup kitchen
61. Sold Girl Scout Cookies (I’ve eaten a lot though)
62. Gone whale watching
63. Got flowers for no reason
64. Donated blood, platelets or plasma
65. Gone sky diving
66. Visited a Nazi Concentration Camp
67. Bounced a check
68. Flown in a helicopter
69. Saved a favorite childhood toy
70. Visited the Lincoln Memorial
71. Eaten caviar
72. Pieced a quilt
73. Stood in Times Square
74. Toured the Everglades
75. Been fired from a job
76. Seen the Changing of the Guards in London
77. Broken a bone
78. Been on a speeding motorcycle
79. Seen the Grand Canyon in person
80. Published a book
81. Visited the Vatican
82. Bought a brand new car
83. Walked in Jerusalem
84. Had your picture in the newspaper
85. Read the entire Bible
86. Visited the White House (Sang there when I was in Burlington Boys Choir - Holla)
87. Killed and prepared an animal for eating
88. Had chickenpox
89. Saved someone’s life.
90. Sat on a jury
91. Met someone famous
92. Joined a book club
93. Lost a loved one
94. Had a baby
95. Seen the Alamo in person
96. Swam in the Great Salt Lake
97. Been involved in a law suit
98. Owned a mobile phone
99. Been stung by a bee
100. Been sent to the Principal's Office

OBAMA'S PRIORITIES

2008-11-15T13:04:00.010-05:00

On January 20, 2008, President-elect Barack Obama will take the oath of office with virtually no time to bask in his historic accomplishment of being the first African American elected to the highest office in the land. His first term will begin amid what are arguably the most challenging days for a newly elected president since Franklin Roosevelt's inauguration in 1933. Obama ran on the promise to bring change to Washington. Of course with the economy in disarray, the nation’s treasury draining, and the demand for a "bailout" coming from every corner of the country, Obama's #1 priority will be an Economic Recovery Plan to get the nation’s business system back on track and people back to work. However, there are other priorities like ending the war in Iraq, making America energy independent and ensuring affordable health insurance that all tie into improving our economy.

Like many of my Conservative friends I believe the most effective change comes not from Government, but from individuals working with and through businesses and civil society (non-government organizations, churches, charities, etc), but I also believe that these sectors of our society can not alone solve the problems we face. Government should be an active partner in protecting and serving the most vulnerable, aggressively promoting and ensuring equality, and attacking social injustices at home and abroad. I believe our biggest challenges today include extreme poverty in the midst of extreme wealth, a planet in peril due to our failure to be good stewards of God's creation, global pandemics stemming from the lack of clean water and available medicine for treatable diseases, genocide and violations of human rights, threats of terrorism, war as a response to violence, and the breakdown of communities into persistent divisions of race, socio-economic class, religion, ideology, and ethnic tribe.

With the understanding that no government can or will solve all these problems, what should the Obama Administration (along side the Democratic Congress) strive to accomplish during his first year in office?

1. Passing an Economic Recovery Plan that includes:
• Tax cuts for low-income and middle income Americans
• Expanding the Work Opportunity Tax Credit which encourages and rewards new hiring,
• Ending taxes for senior citizens making less than $50,000 a year,
• Rolling back Bush's tax cuts for wealthy,
• Increasing the annual capital gains loss deduction limit on income taxes to help working Americans who are seeing huge losses in their retirement accounts and kids' college savings.
• Stabilizing the housing market (leaving the details on this one up to the policy gurus)
• Extending unemployment benefits
• Creating jobs by investing in our national infrastructure, expanding broadband and communication technology, and alternative energy sources.

2. Extending SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Plan).
• The United States is the only affluent country that does not ensure all citizens are provided with health care. Nearly 47 million Americans (16% of the population) live without health insurance and the number of uninsured children in 2006 was 8.7 million (11.7% of all children in the US). For a little perspective, let's consider that the federal government spends about $8,287 a year educating one pupil and the state's spend on average another $10,000 a year per pupil. That's almost $20,000 a year our Government spends educating children. I believe we should place a similar priority on ensuring each child in America has access to affordable health care, and we could do it for a lot less than $20,000 per child.
• In October 2007, President Bush vetoed a bill that would expand SCHIP, a program that gives health insurance to uninsured children that cannot qualify for MEDICAID. This is unacceptable.
• Obama's plan should expand the eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs to cover all children. There should be a progressive sliding contribution scale, where families with incomes closer to $80,000 a year would obviously pay more a month than families making $24,000 a year. This would most likely result in upper-middle class and wealthy families to elect private insurance over coverage supplemented by SCHIP program, but the plan would ensure that all low and middle income earning families are able to find coverage significantly less than the current average of $8,000 to $12,000 a year for a family of four.
• I propose raising the Federal Excise Tax on Cigarettes and Alcohol to fund this program. I also believe states should have the right to legalize small amounts of Marijuana and tax the heck out of that as well...but that's an entirely different post.

3. Reach Agreement with Iraq to end America's Illegal Occupation:
• Obama must work aggressively with the Iraqi Government to reach a timetable to withdraw all combat troops from Iraq, preferably by the end of 2010. An agreement should also be struck to make Iraq more accountable for funding the reconstruction, training and services in their own country. I have high hopes that the illegal Iraq War will come to an end during Obama's first term and America's foreign policy will move from one based on redemptive violence to a policy of diplomacy, humanitarian aid, reconciliation, and support. A policy in the mold of Desmond Tutu, Gandhi, MLK, Jr. and Nelson Mandela.

4. Pass a Comprehensive New Energy Plan:
• I believe very strongly that the environmental degradation of our planet is the most crucial issue facing our generation. The economic downturn will reverse itself, the Iraq war will eventually come to an end, Religious factions will find ways to live in peace, and passionate people around the globe will continue to fight the causes of poverty, but as long as we continue to spill poisonous CO2 gasses into our atmosphere, consume and discard at alarming rates, and pollute clean water supplies, our world will collapse. It's not just about saving trees, squirrels and whales, it's about the quality of human life and preventing extinction and system breakdowns as resources become too scarce for our population.
• By the end of 2009, an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050 must be passed. It would contain climate change by putting a charge on carbon emissions. Companies would no longer be able to poison our air at the current rates without paying a price. As long as it is free to pollute our air, businesses and individuals have little incentive to clean-up. While this will be an expensive endeavor, it will be one of the most life-saving investments ever made by government, individuals, and business.
• Either this Energy Bill or the Economic Recovery Bill MUST include investments in clean-energy jobs and renewable resources like wind, solar, rain, tide, geothermal heat, and incentives for producing and purchasing "green" appliances. Cutting emissions will not be possible without this investment.
• Increase Fuel Economy Standards for cars and trucks, Get 1 million plug-in hybrid cars and other "advanced" vehicles on the Road by 2015, and create a new $7,000 tax credit for purchasing "advanced" vehicles.

5. Enacting a Pregnant Women's Support Act.
Perhaps no issue has been more politicized and manipulated in America than Abortion--by both parties. It has been used in every election cycle to galvanize highly partisan political bases in each party. With the emergence of the Christian Coalition and Moral Majority, it became for many Christians the defining issue, so important that they vote for a pro-life candidate even if the candidate's other views run contrary to their faith (i.e. war, tax structure, environment, social justice, death penalty, etc). However, after years of Democratic control and then Republican control we have seen year after year, the number of abortions remain roughly the same, no matter what party is in control. This is an issue that has created a lot of tension within myself as I struggle to balance my love and support for life from conception to natural death with deciding what public-policy will actually reduce the number of abortions in America. I am still in search of the words to untangle and illustrate my position on this issue and will attempt to tackle in a future post.

One thing that is clear is that the Evangelical Agenda has broadened for many young Christians to include concerns for poverty, war, the environment, immigration, and social justice, just to name a few. This affords Obama and the Democratic Party an excellent opportunity to live up their pledge of unity and to forge a new identity in politics by putting the administration's full support behind the Democrats for Life initiative known as the Pregnant Women Support Act (its goal is to reduce abortion by 95 percent over a 10-year period).

Statistics indicate the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are terminated for financial reasons. Overturning Roe Vs. Wade would do very little to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions in America, as its result would be to send the decision on abortion rights back to the individual states. Liberal states like New York, California, Massachusetts, and Illinois would surely uphold a women's right to an abortion. I propose that the most effective way to reduce abortions in America is not criminalization the procedure or simply overturning Roe. Instead we should push for out government to address the economic causes of abortion, while we as individuals take a stronger initiative to support single mothers and unwanted babies. This is a great opportunity for us to make both poverty reduction and abortion reduction become nonpartisan issues and bipartisan causes.

Highlights of the bill should include:
• Provide child care to low-income and student parents.
• Fund Maternity Group Homes that would provide support and care during and following pregnancy for low income, single and teenage mothers.
• Provide parenting education in maternity group homes.
• Make the Adoption Tax Credits permanent.
• Ensure that pregnant women are not denied health care by insurance companies and that coverage is continued for newborns.
• Extend coverage under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to low-income pregnant women and unborn children.
• Increase funding for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Nutrition Program.
• Provide grants to institutions of higher education to fund pregnant and parenting student services.
• Provide new mothers with free home visits by registered nurses.

As Ghandi said, "You must be the change you want to see in the world." We cannot simply hope that Obama is that change. But I have high hopes in Obama and believe that if these initiatives are passed in his first year we will be well on our way to building a future of greater justice, broader prosperity, and larger freedoms for all Americans and citizens of this world.

OBAMA WINS

2008-11-08T20:52:00.008-05:00

On Tuesday, November 4th, Senator Barack Obama shattered a racial barrier and was elected President of the United States of America. In his acceptance speech Obama declared, "a new dawn of American leadership is at hand." I was filled with pride as I watched my country and my home state of NC elect the first African-American to the most powerful position in the world. In light of America's long and dark history of racism, colonialism, and its white-male hierarchical domination, Obama's election illustrated the opportunity and rejuvenation that America promises. In America's journey toward a more just and truly democratic society, Tuesday was another milestone. And not just because an Hawaiian-born, son of a black Kenyan father and white mother is now President-Elect, but also because the decisive outcome was a declaration that we are once again a nation more driven by hope and promise than a nation driven by fear.

Election day for me began at 6:30 AM early Tuesday morning. After waking up to the surprise of some awesome "Obama" sugar cookies that Jess made for me, I met my friends Steve Cook and Ted Rosenau to canvass for Obama in the Wesley Heights neighborhood. We met some extraordinary people and even felt like we made a difference when we were able to find a lady a ride to the polls (Obama supporter of course). After spending the day "getting out the vote," Jess and I went over to South Meck to vote, and then headed over to the home of Billy and Tracy Strickland and watched the election results with some other "like-minded" folks from Watershed. Jess made me this awesome election map so we could color in the states as the results were announced. We popped the champagne at 9:30 when OHIO went for Obama.

The final electoral count is Obama 365 to McCain 162, which includes one of Nebraska's 5 electoral votes, which are split up by congressional districts. This is pretty close to my 353 to 185 prediction. The only state I predicted incorrectly was Indiana and Nebraska's 5th district (which includes Omaha). This was more than a victory for Progressives and the Democratic Party, it's a possible realignment campaign that comes only two or three times a century. In the last 100 years there have only been two presidential elections that fundamentally changed the course of American politics -- Franklin Roosevelt's victory in 1932, which ushered in a generation of Democratic rule, and Ronald Reagan's triumph in 1980, which marked the beginning of 28 years of Republican dominance of national politics. Though it is far too early to be certain, Barack Obama's victory could well be the third such realigning election.

I have high hopes for the Obama Presidency, but it will take more than big dreams to help America dig out from the many crises we face. From the global economic crisis, to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to a planet in peril from our failure to be good-stewards of God's creation. But, as we all know, "Great presidents do not emerge from quiet times; they arise in times of chaos and crisis." Tuesday was a night to celebrate a candidate whose victory reminds all Americans that the sun always rises and a new day dawns. I believe this is the time for America to recapture it's youth and optimism. It is our time to change America, living up to the sacrifices of our grandparents generation, who fought fascism overseas and endured the Great Depression. The dark years of the Bush regression are almost done. It's time for another American breakthrough.

In other election news...Kay Hagan stomped Elizabeth Dole in the race for the NC Senate once held by Jesse Helms. This was a race I only paid casual attention to this summer, as Dole appeared poised to win an easy re-election. However, after the economy collapsed and Hagan and the DNC began running great Ads against Dole the race tightened. And then a week before the election, Dole ran one of the most offensive ads of the campaign, implying that Hagan held anti-God views and associated with "Godless Americans". The ads were universally criticized and I couldn't be more happy than to see Dole go down in defeat. Not sure how effective of a Senator Kay Hagan will be, but its nice to see Jesse Helm's Senate seat held by a Democrat.

Coming Soon:
What do we expect and demand from Obama and the Democratic Congress in the first two years? I will lay out four or five of the most pressing issues that must be tackled by Obama and the Congress in order to see the hopes and prosperity talked about so much by Obama become real for ALL Americans.

2008 Presidential Election Prediction - 12 Days Left

2008-10-23T18:30:00.002-04:00

There are 12 days left until the election and at this point it is fair to say the question is whether Obama will blow McCain out in a landslide or whether it will be a nail biter with the election hanging in the balance by a state or two (most likely CO and VA).

Predicting an election outcome is really just fun and games, as people can change or make up their minds at anytime up until they pull the lever (or push the button if you live in 2008). However, there really is a science behind it and the three most important factors to consider include:

Polling Data: The problem with polls are they only show what would happen if the election was held on that particular day. And perhaps more significant, polling results are based on a pollster's prediction of what the demographic turnout will be on election day. That is particularly a problem this year as pollsters try to figure out the increase in turnout among African-Americans, women and young voters who tend to favor Obama. Pollsters are also faced with the task of predicting what the proportional turnout will be among Democrats, Republicans and Independents, considering the sizable increase in Democrat registration this spring and summer. The difference in Obama being up 10 in the polls versus 5 can be traced back to pollsters prorating the predicted turnout differently.
State-by-State Demographics: We know Obama enjoys more support from young voters, minorities and women, and McCain enjoys more support from older voters, rural voters and evangelicals. That makes a big difference in close states like NC and CO, which have totally different demographics.
The third important factor to consider is the campaigns' ground game organization, voter mobilization and base enthusiasm. The word from almost every reputable source is that Obama's community by community ground game is solid and impressive. This will make a big difference in the outcome of close states and can push the results a point or two beyond what the polls predicted. Not only does the voter mobilization make a big difference, but Obama's base is very motivated especially African-Americans and young voters.

The current outlook of the race indicates Obama has a lock on 239 electoral votes and McCain has a lock on 160. (see map below). Note: This map assumes Pennsylvania is in play. However, polling indicates Obama enjoys a 10 point lead, so that really is giving McCain some credit.

(sorry the map is cut off at the ends - My website technical ability is pretty limited)

This leaves 11 toss-up states. There is a great chance that Obama can win all 11 for a 378 electoral vote blow-out. However, the demographics in Montana, Missouri, and Indiana appear to create a ceiling for Obama. The most difficult state to predict at this time is Florida, which has a lot of demographics (older and military voters) that favor McCain. However, the state is hurt hard by the economy and has a large Hispanic population that has trended heavily Obama. The tie will go to Obama because of his ground game. The other state that is hard to predict is North Carolina, which has tons of conservative, rural, older voters. However, there are two factors that I believe will make NC go for Obama: a huge turnout among African Americans and young professionals in the Metro Areas of Charlotte and RTP.

Obama 353
McCain: 185

Official Ballot Selection: Mecklenburg County, NC

2008-10-23T11:40:00.004-04:00

I've reviewed my Sample Ballot and here is who I will be voting for on Tuesday Nov. 4th at my Mecklenburg County Precinct:

National:
President: Barack Obama - D

State:
US Senate: Kay Hagan - D
US House of Rep: Harry Taylor - D
Governor: Bev Perdue - D
Lieutenant Gov: Walter Dalton - D
Attorney General: Roy Cooper - D
Auditor: Beth Wood - D
Comm of Agriculture: Steve Troxler - R
Comm of Insurance: Wayne Goodwin - D
Comm of Labor: Mary Fant Donnan - D
Sec of State: Elaine Marshall - D
Superintendent of Public Instruction: June St. Clair Atkinson - D
Treasure: Janet Cowell - D

County:
County Commissioner: Harold Cogdell, Dan Murrey, Jennifer Roberts
Register of Deeds: Judy Gibson - R

Non-Partisan Judges:
Supreme Court - Suzanne Reynolds
Court of Appeals - James A. Wynn
Court of Appeals - Kristin Ruth
Court of Appeals - Cheri Beasley
Court of Appeals - Linda Stephens
Court of Appeals - John Arrowood
District Court - Charlotte Brown-Williams
District Court - Donnie Hoover
District Court - John Trotten
District Court - Gary Henderson
District Court - Kimberly Best
District Court - Theo Nixon
District Court - Ben Thalheimer

Powell Endorses Obama, Challenges Anti-Muslim Sentiment.

2008-10-19T16:44:00.004-04:00

Former Sec. of State Colin Powell, who served in both Bush Administrations, broke with his party and gave an eloquent and unequivocal endorsement of Sen. Obama, calling him "a transformational figure," "showing the steadiness, and intellectual vigor" to be "an Exceptional President." Powell criticized McCain's negative campaigning and the personal attacks made by the Republican Party questioning Obama's faith and trying to connect Obama to terrorist feelings. Powell even questioned McCain's judgment in his choice as Sarah Palin as his running mate, and stated that McCain "lacks complete grasp of economic problems" making somewhat erratic decision in his response to the economy.

My initial inclination is that endorsements mean very little in a Presidential Election. Endorsements help in local, low-information elections like Non-Partisan Judical Elections, Insurance Commissioner or Water & Sewer Commisioner. In a race like Obama-McCain you already have all the information you could ever want, and probably have established a fairly strong preference for yourself. However, Powell is one of the most respected military leaders and public servants in our country, and his endorsement gives national security and experience credibility to Obama. There are many undecideds who are looking at the many problems facing this nation and wondering if Obama can live up to the challenges. Powell may have helped ease some of those concerns.

Beyond the stirring endorsement and discussion about whether it will make any difference in the election, I found Powell's statements about American-Muslims to be the most significant and potentially transformative. Powell spoke passionately against the insinuations by some Republicans that Obama is a Muslim, but went further than just criticizing the incorrect labels: "Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian," he said. "But the right answer is, what if he is (a muslim)? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president one day? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, 'He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.' This is not the way we should be doing it in America."

Powell was appealing to our better senses, suggesting that Americans and Christians need to stop labeling Islam and Muslims as terrorists, and suggesting that being a faithful follower of the Islamic Religion disqualifies a person for being a public leader in America, even President. Christianity was perverted and used as a basis for the horrible atrocities committed against minorities, women and unbelievers during the history of our own country. That fact does not suggest that Christianity is bad or a Christian can not lead our country. In the same way, a perverted, fundamental form of Islam is the basis of Al Qa'ida's hatred for America and the ideology behind the terrorist attacks. Powell's statements challenge us to reconsider our relationship with and bigotry towards American-Muslims. We are not fighting against the Islamic Religion, even in its fundamental form. We are fighting against a terrorist organization that wishes the destruction of free societies including our own.

Best Shows on TV:

2008-10-17T19:42:00.003-04:00

Three for Three - Another Obama Win.

2008-10-16T00:12:00.005-04:00

While watching the debate I thought McCain did a good job making an argument that Obama is too liberal for America, especially on the economy and taxes, and appeared to be controlling the tone and arguments. However, Obama maintained his Presidential demeanor and intellectual command of the issues, and excelled on the issues of health care, education and even abortion. Immediately after the debate the pundits were proclaiming the night a glorious victory for McCain for his use of Joe the Plumber and the line of the night: "I'm not Bush. If you wanted to run against him, you should have run 4 years ago." However, about 30 minutes after the pundits began their talking points the insta-polls began coming in and showed an overwhelming win for Obama. The key numbers are independents which Obama won by a 30 point margin (60-30%). Obama is also doing better with Dems than McCain did with Republicans. This caused the pundits to change their tone and concede that the debates have come and gone and McCain has not managed to turn the election in his favor. At this point it is fair to say that a McCain victory would be a comeback of historic proportions. We are approaching the dead girl / live boy / massive terrorist attack time.

I think the state polling data that will come in the rest of this week will be enough for me to post a final Presidential Prediction early next week.

Bailing Out Consumerism

2008-10-01T10:46:00.006-04:00

I've been notably silent about the current economic crisis, mostly because I have an elementary understanding of the intricate workings of the American economy. I thought about pursuing a minor in Business while in College, but couldn't stay awake in Business 101, so I dropped that plan real quick. Topics we pursued in my Political Science classes such as death penalty, civil rights, immigration, poverity, crime, the environment, and war were all much more interesting. In reality my comprehension of our financial systems and the economy is pretty limited to depositing my paycheck into my bank account and paying my bills, and there's something called a 401k that I very occasionally send money to. Yeah, sure I understand we live in a free market capitalistic society driven by supply and demand, goods and services, but the influences on the market is well above my pay grade nor am I remotely interested to be honest.

However, after following the news and reading articles on the $700 billion bailout, I decided that I am in favor of some sort of governmental buy-in after realizing that the fates of Wall Street and Main Street are inextricably linked. Despite the political rhetoric we are all hearing this has nothing to do with pitting wall street against main street. We cannot watch one collapse and expect the other to stand strong. Yes, I am just as pissed off as everyone else that taxpayer money will be used to save the same financial institutions who exercised poor judgment and made reckless decisions all in the name of the bottom line profit. But to do nothing is to watch ordinary, hard working Americans suffer. This financial crisis is not only about the stock market crashing, its about middle class workers watching their retirement accounts disappear, struggling small businesses unable to get loans to meet payroll or purchase equipment, recent retirees who are watching their life's savings disappear, young couples unable to buy a home, and middle-aged parents trying to send their kids to college, just to name a few.

What I don't think people understand is that the bailout does not simply turn over 700 billion dollars to wall street and the failed financial institutions to use as they please. Instead it will transfer the troubled assets, mostly mortgage related, from the financial institutions to the federal government, which the government can hold until the housing market and economy turn around, returning the $700 billion investment back to the taxpayers. And even if the housing market does not recover, taxpayers should be protected by the Senate version of the bailout, which requires the financial industry to reimburse taxpayers for any net losses from the program after five years.

So in my untrained, very economically challenged opinion, I'm for passing a bailout and moving on to addressing the root cause of this crisis. I think if you traced this problem far enough back you will find that we have become a culture addicted to instant gratification and a fixation on the material, which has driven us to become an over consumeristic society financed on a mountain of debt. We are told that living in a bigger and better house means we are more successful and more comfortable--bling bling. We are told owning a faster more expensive car translates to a higher status--vroom vroom. Our financial institutions fed into that culture and when people apply for a loan for twice as much house as they could afford, the bank says yes. Over a million people have found themselves unable to make those mortgage payments and the banks find themselves overextended. And as home prices plummet the banks are no longer able to cut their losses by selling the asset, resulting in the massive wave of losses that has caused the damage we have seen thus far. Whew...I'm out of breath, and I understand I just oversimplified a complex problem.

But, I think there is a better way to live than working 60 hours a week, in order to buy a bunch of crap in the hopes of achieving a false sense of success and gratification, when an authentic, more fulfilling happiness can be achieved at no cost through our environment, and our family and friends. Believe me I write all this with a self-reflecting attitude, realizing I struggle to overcome a consumerist addiction (see Blackberry, name-brand clothes, Ipod and HD-LCD Flat Screen TV). I'm also struggling to balance the realization that American consumerism has created millions of jobs and in my opinion responsible for the explosion of the American middle class.

That's the dilemma we face, and if we really believe there is a better way to live then Everything Must Change. But I remain focused on supporting policies and worldviews that bring about equality (both socially and economically), reconciliation, ending exploitation and ushering in peace. Like many young progressives I have a worldview rooted in caring for “the least of these.” I don’t measure our nation’s greatness or world power by the richest individuals and corporations, or by it's military might, or what God we serve, or whether we got a gold metal in synchronized swimming or gymnastic trampolining (all though that was pretty sweet), but rather by how it cares for its most vulnerable people. When it comes to this election, I will not be asking myself which candidate will do the most for me and my nuclear family? I will extend my concern to my extended family, which includes people with special needs and disabilities, people with chronic illnesses and without health care, gay people, poor people, oppressed minorities, people with histories of addiction and crime and mental illness. How will they be treated in a McCain administration? How will they be treated in an Obama administration? Which president will be most concerned about them?

2008-09-11T14:58:00.003-04:00

I wanted to share with everyone a Malawi Video filmed and narrated by my friend Steve Cook and edited by my friends Keith and Amy Furr. Jess and I are planning to travel to Malawi, Africa next year with a team of volunteers, with the hopes of engaging the people of Malawi to learn, share, discover and help bring about much needed relief and change. Change for the impoverished people of Malawi and information to help raise awareness and inform the people here in the States about the needs across our globe.

We are working with Equitas, a non-profit group formed in 2007 by Steve Cook to raise awareness of the genocide in Darfur, to raise money to send children to secondary school in Africa and to dig clean-water wells and a basic garden for families faced with the devastation of disease and malnutrition.

For more information please go to www.equitas.cc

Malawi Video:

How Do We Respond to the "Enemy"?

2008-09-08T10:46:00.004-04:00

Jess and I are part of a "bloc" with some of our friends at Watershed Charlotte...our Faith Community (not a cult)...where we discuss life, faith, purpose, the Church, God and even raise questions we have on Christian Theology and philosophy. Our discussions this "semester" are centered around the book Irresistible Revolution, by Shane Claiborne, a self-described "ordinary radical." The book turns conventional Christianity on its head...and we love the way it challenges us on the ways we live our lives.

I wanted to post a link to one of Shane's recent blogs (actually not so recent...it was written in January 2007 after Saddam Hussein was executed). I love the way Shane presents how we, as people of faith, should respond and treat our enemies who do us harm. I've said many times before that I am not a proponent of our domestic or foreign policies being based solely on Christian principals, as I am a strong advocate of religious freedoms and separation of church and state. However, our government is responsible to shape it's actions based on values of ordinary Americans. With that in mind, I find it interesting the hard line position many Evangelical Christians take when it comes to war, terrorism, and responding to our enemies. And as the strongest base support for the Republicans, how different would our Foreign Policy look if Christians took a long look at the policies they demand of our Government when it comes to how we are responding to our adversaries.

Check out this article and let me know what you think.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2007/01/shane-claiborne-communicating-through.html

A Campaign Rooted in the Small Things

2008-09-04T17:37:00.006-04:00

I woke up Friday morning on cloud nine. I'd just watched 4 nights of the Democratic National Convention, which was capped off by Obama's much anticipated acceptance speech, 45 years to the day after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech on the Mall in Washington, DC. The Democrats achieved exactly what was required to carry them to victory in November. Bill and Hillary Clinton gave inspiring speeches that highlighted Obama's readiness, and the absolute imperative for their supporters to vote for Obama because the stakes are too high. Obama's rise in the polls in the days following Clinton's speeches are indicative that Clinton voters are rallying to Obama's side. Obama gave a speech that was not only inspiring, but directly challenged conservative philosophies:

"For over two decades, he's (McCain) subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy - give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is - you're on your own. Out of work? Tough luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? pull yourself up by your own bootstraps - even if you don't have boots. You're on your own."

But last night the campaign took a turn for the worse. I could barely contain myself as I heard the personal, character attacks Sarah Palin directed at Barack Obama. We saw a Republican Convention that was laden with small, petty, divisive, cynical, deceptive, condescending, snide remarks that were clearly meant to shift attention away from the real issue of this campaign--moving this nation forward for all Americans after the failed policies of the Bush Republican rule. This was Palin's opportunity to introduce herself to the world, to tell Americans who she is and what kind of VP and President she can be. What I learned is that she is mean and shallow and aggressive. She thinks being a leader is about tearing down your rivals. She lies about her own actions and she demeans the more generous actions of others. She goes for the easy laugh at the expense of good-hearted, hard working Americans. If there's a low road, she will take it. If she can pander, she will do it. Maybe with these words I'm guilty of the same mean-spirited attacks, but the tone of the GOP convention can not go unchecked.

More than anything, this election should be about the big issues of our time--ending a disastrous war, fighting the global network of terrorism not only with our muscle but through reconciliation, restoring America's reputation in the world, healing our planet - moving as quickly as we can to alternative energy resources, and building an economy that works for more than just the very rich. But we heard nothing from Palin about what kind of VP she will be or how she is prepared to be President should the unfortunate circumstance of McCain's passing occur. All we heard were misconceptions about her record and that she is like a pit bull with lipstick.

Obama predicted it all to well in his speech last Thursday:

"If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare the voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things."

But worse of all, Palin insulted the very idea that ordinary people doing extraordinary things can play a huge role in the political process. At the root of community organizing is challenging and reconciling societal injustices and community dysfunctions. Both Palin and Giuliani specifically mocked Obama's work as a community organizer, insulting hard working individuals who wake up everyday burdened by the very real responsibilities of the people in the communities around them for whom our economy and our government isn't working, and hasn't worked, for a very long time. Palin said "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities." Actual responsibility! How can this statement not send shockwaves through this country. Community Organizing is the foundation of the civil rights movement, women's suffrage, labor and child labor laws, and the emancipation of the slaves, just to name a few. Not to mention the self-less work of community organizers to assist children in poverty, battered women, homeless veterans, elderly Americans, and laid off workers. Community organizing in all about initiating change from the bottom up. The change voters want builds on the solutions community organizers have been nurturing and putting into place, under the leadership of everyday Americans all across our country to demand that America work for everyone.

I am sure like myself many Americans are firmly decided in this election. They subscribe to one ideology or another and embrace a particular worldview that fits a specific party. However, I urge any undecided or apathetic voters out there to take a hard look at what each candidate is proposing for this country. I would challenge you to ask yourself "will the least of these be better off in 4 years", rather than "will I be better off in 4 years." Ask yourself, if the marginalized are being services by the bitter partisan divide or will they be better off by the solutions offered by a Progressive agenda that measures the countries wealth and prosperity by the bottom of our society.

But there are signs of hope as illustrated by this video. Check it out:

McCain On Working Class Wages

2008-08-22T00:05:00.005-04:00

NBC Nightly News lead with the story tonight that's got the blogosphere rocking. John McCain responded to an interview with Politico on Wednesday that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own. "I think -- I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. McCain's comments are a serious potential gaffe, as they dovetail with an increasingly aggressive effort to paint the GOP nominee as wildly out of touch on economic issues. If McCain doesn't know much about his own finances, how is he going to be about to handle the nation's? This all in in the same week we're trying to figure out why McCain thinks an income of $5,000,000/year is needed to be considered rich (see Faith Forum with Rick Warren).

McCain's wealth, while certainly on the upper edge of the spectrum, is not an anomaly among candidates. Indeed, both Clinton and Kerry, like McCain, rank among the top ten richest Senators. The purpose of McCain's "housing crisis" isn't to hold McCain's wealth against him. The man married, and he married well. But when McCain's lifestyle is held up against his policies, it serves to inform voters about his perspective and his judgment. By the way, Obama is not rich according to McCain - He is only worth a little over $4,000,000. (i.e. doesn't pass the $5,000,000 threshold).

So with this "economy" gaffe hitting the air waves, I thought it might be worth revisiting McCain's opinion on the value of wages. I found an interesting story from back in 2006 when McCain, at an AFL-CIO convention, was asked about the effect of immigration in depressing wages, McCain declared that no Americans would be willing to do agricultural work for as little as $50/hour. At that rate, a worker would make as much in 6 months as the average annual household income in the US.

McCain said immigrants were taking jobs nobody else wanted (not entirely untrue). He offered anybody in the crowd $50 an hour to pick lettuce in Arizona.

Shouts of protest rose from the crowd, with some accepting McCain’s job offer.

“I’ll take it!” one man shouted.

McCain insisted none of them would do such menial labor for a complete season. “You can’t do it, my friends.”

Some in the crowd said they didn’t appreciate McCain questioning their work ethic.

I was not entirely opposed to McCain's position on immigration (atleast the old Maverick McCain). Before he changed his tune to a more Conservative stance in order to run for President, McCain supported a guest worker program and a path to citizenship for "illegal immigrants." But this comment is more than arrogant. McCain is totally out of touch with the realities of working Americans. I'd love for voters to ask McCain at townhalls this summer and fall whether he still thinks nobody's willing to work for as little as $50/hour. It's out of touch with working class America to make such arrogant statements.

State of The Race

2008-08-20T12:12:00.005-04:00

There is no question the race has tightened and has become essentially tied on the national level and on a state-by-state electoral vote count basis. However there is no reason for Obama supports to start freaking out. A new poll from Zogby has McCain up 5pts. Well, rest assured, Zogby is one of the most unreliable polls out there and at the same time, a new Q-poll has Obama up five, Gallup has him up three (after being tied a couple of days ago), Rasmussen has him up two, as does Bloomberg/Times. We must maintain perspective, in the poll of polls, McCain has never crossed the 45 percent threshold while Obama bobs between 45 and 50. Another interesting factor is many of the undecideds continue to be Clinton supporters. There is a much greater chance that these traditional Democrats will stay faithful to the Democratic Party and vote Obama.

Still, after weeks of attacks from McCain and the GOP, Obama has lost a lot of his post-primary lead he enjoyed in June and July. The tightening of the race corresponds with the move to the next phase of the nomination. In the next three weeks we will have VP selections and conventions and the the following phase of the election which will include intense campaigning and the October debates.

The Obama campaign spent July running ads and campaigning hard in traditionally GOP states of Missouri, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina, Georgia and Florida with hopes of scoring a knockout on election day. However, Obama will no doubt turn his focus to the true battleground states of New Mexico, Colorado, Michigan, Nevada, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

Obama has in some sense won an early victory by keeping Colorado and Virginia competitive, and maintaining his lead in Michigan, New Mexico and Iowa (all states Obama appears to be likely to win). That's indicative that this is still an election Obama can and probably will win. Assuming Obama will hold the Kerry states (incl. New Hampshire), which is very likely, Obama's path to victory will most likely include one or a combination of these scenarios (270 needed to win):

Kerry States + Win Iowa, New Mexico and Nevada. (this would result in a 269-269 tie and the House would give it to Obama)
Kerry States + Win Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado (273-265)
Kerry States + Win Iowa and Virginia (272-266)
Kerry States + Win Ohio (272-266)

These are the bare minimum requirements to win. It is very possible that Obama will sweep a majority of the swing states and score a 300+ EV count.

In response to the McCain attacks of July, the Obama campaign said the ad, called "Three Times," will air starting today in Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

VP Picks Right Around The Corner

2008-08-18T21:06:00.004-04:00

Reports have been flying today that Obama has settled on his VP choice and will roll out an announcement as soon as tomorrow morning. In response, Republican sources are reporting that McCain, in an attempt to off-set Obama's convention boost, will announce his VP selection on Friday, August 29th, the day after the Democratic Convention comes to an end.

It really is a guess who Obama and McCain will select as their running mate. However, history has taught us that VP names are typically leaked in advance so the campaigns can gauge reaction. Based on these leaks Obama is said to be focused on three choices, Evan Bayh, a middle-of-the-road Indiana senator with an extensive Democratic family lineage, Gov. Tim Kaine who leads the Republican-leaning swing state of Virginia, that Obama would like to put in his column in the Nov. 4 election, and Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee with extensive foreign policy experience. In preparation for the big announcement and at the suggestion of Laura and Jess, I figured I'd give my thoughts on these choices.

In my opinion, the key for Obama is to go with a relatively safe pick who would reiterate the focus and direction Obama wants to take the country. I don't think Obama needs to pick a risky game-changer like Hillary Clinton or Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas. Both of whom would be interesting choices that would help mobilize the female vote. However, both would come with heavy baggage. Clinton and Obama are obviously not going to the prom together and would make a horrible team. Also, would Clinton actually hurt Obama in some of the swing states like Colorado and Virginia? Sebelius would only piss off Clinton supporters in Ohio, Pennslvania and Michigan who would feel Clinton was slighted for the less deserving and inexperienced Sebelius.

Sen. Evan Bayh from Indiana has campaigned a lot with Obama in July and is certainly the safe pick. He would do little harm to Obama and help off-set Obama's liberal record. He is also very popular in the heartland swing states like Indiana, Ohio and Missouri. Bayh was an early backer of Clinton and would be effective in reaching out to disenchanted Clinton supporters. However, Bayh is a conservative Democrat who worked tirelessly in 2002 with Lieberman and McCain to authorize the Iraq War. As someone who is so very anti-war that's a big issue for me. Bayh would be tough to swallow on a personal level, but on a national stage would help considerably in swing states.

Gov. Tim Kaine from the swing state of Virginia was an early supporter of Obama. He is best described as a pro-life, Catholic, moderate Democrat who performed surprisingly well in the traditionally conservative areas of Virginia during his 2005 campaign for Governor. These are areas that McCain will need a big conservative turn out to overcome Obama's huge support in the Richmond area and Northern Virginia suburbs of DC. If Kaine could blunt McCain's support in the conservative areas Obama would have a great chance to win Virginia and the election. The negative is that he could potentially hurt Obama nationally because of his lack of foreign policy experience and his relative lack of results during his brief tenure as Gov of Virginia. I'm afraid that Kaine would provide the GOP plenty of ammo to attack. So while Kaine would reiterate Obama's out-side Washington, change message and would be a very effective and loyal VP, I am afraid he would make the ticket look very inexperienced against McCain, the veteran war-hero.

Sen Joe Biden of Deleware has certainly received the most noise of late after traveling this week to the Russian-occupied Georgia on a diplomatic mission. He has strong working-class roots, is well-respected, and would fill the perceived holes in Obama's foreign policy resume. Biden was originally one of my least favorite for the simple reason that he is old school Washington. He's been a Senator longer than I've been alive and is known for being long-winded and boring. More problematic, Biden voted for the Iraq war six years ago. However, Biden at least began speaking out against the war early, and in his original 2002 vote he tried to push through an amendment that tied the authorization to weapons of mass destruction rather than an open authorization for Bush (it failed). Biden is seasoned as a national campaigner, and an effective surrogate on national media. He excelled in all of the debates back in 2007, and would do well in the VP debate against anyone McCain selects. So other than the early Iraq support and the fact that Biden seems to run contrary to Obama's New-Democrat change message, he appears to be a capable pick.

The bottom line is that each candidate has positives and negatives. If it had no bearing on Obama's chances I would prefer Tim Kaine, only because he appears to share with Obama the desire to change Washington and the direction of the Democratic Party. Also, he and Obama have a genuine friendship and would work very well together in office. However, Kaine is the risky pick. Bayh is my least favorite in that he's so conservative and would not work as well with Obama. However, he would be the biggest asset for Obama in the campaign due to his heartland appeal and ability to impress moderate, independent voters. The liberal blogosphere would definitely disagree with Bayh being helpful, as they have devoted websites campaigning against Obama choosing Bayh due to his conservative record. That leaves Biden somewhere in the middle and by default the best choice in my opinion.

Whose Energy Policy Should We Support?

2008-08-04T21:23:00.007-04:00

Recent polling indicates that Americans favor lifting the ban on off-shore drilling by an almost 2-1 margin. Fifty-seven percent (57%) favor offshore drilling versus twenty-nine percent (29%) who are opposed. I have found this national development to be very frustrating as I seek to spread the word that our dependence on both foreign and domestic carbon-burning, air-polluting, oil must be drastically reduced for the consideration of our security and our planet's survival. We have to know that we cannot sustain a future powered by a fuel that is rapidly disappearing. Not when we purchase $700 million worth of oil every single day from some of the world's most unstable and hostile nations. Drilling for more oil is not the solution. It is a political answer of the sort Washington has given us for decades.

Obama has a much larger energy plan -- articulated in an awesome speech today -- centered on investment in renewable energy and fuel efficiency technology. Obama advocates investing in auto-factories in states like Michigan, with loans and tax credits to build the fuel-efficient cars that we need to reduce our dependence. The goal is to get one million, 150 mile-per-gallon plug-in hybrids on our roads within six years, providing an increased tax credit of $7,000 to consumers to buy these cars. Obama also proposes requiring that 10% of our energy comes from renewable sources by 2012 - more than double what we have now. To meet these goals, Obama proposes that both the government and private enterprise invest more in the clean technology research and development that is already out there. Investments that McCain has voted against in the past. This will certainly be a costly endeavor, but we can not afford not to act. And as Obama said in his speech, "Creating a new energy economy isn't just a challenge to meet, it's an opportunity to seize - an opportunity that will create new businesses, new industries, and millions of new jobs. Jobs that pay well. Jobs that can't be outsourced. Good, union jobs."

Obama also took the opportunity to criticize McCain's constant propagation that we should open up coastal drilling. To be fair that is not McCain's only energy policy proposal. He is also advocating loosening regulations on nuclear power and battery technology. However, anyone who has watched the news cycles and caught any TV ads by the campaigns can't help but notice that McCain is pushing the coastal drilling issue very hard, because he is aware of overwhelming American support for drilling. I believe McCain is promoting bad policy for political gain.

Obama pointed out in his speech today that McCain has said recently that our dependence on foreign oil has been 30 years in the making and caused by failure of politicians in Washington to think long term about the future of the country. McCain neglected to mention that for 26 of those 30 years he was in Washington and did very little to tackle our energy problem. He voted against fuel efficiency standards and tax credits for efficient cars, against renewable sources of energy, against clean bio-fuel, against solar power, against wind power. All of which I believe he opposed because of his conservative philosophy which views wall street and corporate profits as more important to the health of our country than acting to solve our energy and global warming crises.

So, what is McCain aggressively promoting--Off-shore drilling. A plan he only recently supported as the political winds shifted. A proposal that everyone knows will do nothing to reduce prices and little if anything to reduce dependence on foreign oil. It will take 7 years to produce this oil and by then world demand will be even higher resulting in an estimated $0.06 a gallon savings at the pump. We can save $0.12 a gallon just by properly inflating our tires. A fact that the McCain camp has made fun off by distributing tire gauges at an Obama event. In addition, if every square mile of coastal areas and Alaskan Refuge was drilled, which would be impossible, we could still only produce 3% of the world's oil. Nowhere near the 25% we consume. We have 68 million acres currently leased by oil companies that haven't even been touched. Senator McCain knows that, which is why he admitted that his plan would only provide "psychological" relief to consumers. Please, Americans need more than psychological relief at the pump.

What I believe this shows is more failure to lead on the part of John McCain on a great challenge that our generation faces. And perhaps even more important, a lack of judgement. Judgement that McCain also lacked in the run-up to the Iraq war. What judgement can we expect from McCain when it comes to dealing with Iran, poverty and disease relief, disaster preparation and response, job creation, solving the health care crisis and getting America out of our deficit and debt? What can we expect when conservative policies typically protect the upper earners and wall street over main street and the working class?

I choose to support Obama's energy policy, which is another reason I am voting for him in the fall. I urge you to consider these plans as you make up your decision. What energy policy will you support?

2008 Electoral College Projections:

2008-07-29T21:00:00.004-04:00

This is my first 2008 Presidential Projection post. I have spent a considerable time the last couple months surfing polling websites for this year's Presidential Election. The best polls out there in my opinion are Rasmussen, Gallup, Pollster, Real Clear Politics, and FiveThirtyEight. Polls can mean very little at this junction of the election, but they do identify toss-up states. I expect to see Polls shift during the VP picks, conventions and debates. And I will certainly revisit and revise my projections closer to the elction.

A state-by-state count of electoral votes is the key to analyzing the presidential race. A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to claim the presidency. For the first time this year, I run through the 50 states plus the District of Columbia and identify Obama States, McCain States and Toss-Up states. This year's election will hinge on two regions: Great Lakes and the Mountain West. If Obama can hold Kerry States (which he should) and win in New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada that would be enough to tip the scales, but a McCain win in Michigan and/or Pennsylvania could put the race out of reach. I hope you can bare with this long post as I go through each state. As things stand today I'm predicting an Obama win 291-247, and that's assuming Ohio goes to McCain.

TOSS-UP, 103 Electoral Votes: (EVs in Parenthesis). The outcome of the election will hinge on the results in these states.

Colorado (9), O+1: Bush won here in 2004 by 100,000 votes out of 2.1 million, but Colorado has shown a move towards the Democrats since then. In 2006, Democrats took over a Senate seat, the governorship, and a U.S. House seat and this year they are poised to pick up the second Senate seat. With the Democratic National Convention in Denver stirring liberal excitement, and the Latino vote favoring Obama, Colorado provides Obama a great chance to pick off a Bush state.

Florida (27), Mc+4: This state is teetering on Lean McCain, but keeps staying in the toss-up category. Florida is looking promising for McCain early on. The senior-citizen vote throughout the state will tilt strongly towards McCain because not only is he one of them, but older white voters will be hesitant to elect a young-black President. In addition, the veteran community will rally around McCain. I predict this will start to trend McCain's way as the fall campaign approaches, especially if Mccain picks Florida Gov. Charlie Crist as his VP. If Obama wins here then McCain can fagetaboutit.

Michigan (17), O+5: Pennslylvania and Michigan appear to be McCain’s best chances to win a Kerry state. McCain posted a strong primary performance here, while Obama boycotted the state. However, polls are consistently showing Obama with a slight lead. Michigan can quickly turn into a lean Obama state as the fall campaign approaches.

Montana (3), Mc+2: Clinton won this state in '92 thanks to a strong showing by Ross Perou, which pulled votes away from Papa Bush. Other than that, the state trends conservative. However, polls have consistently been close in this historically GOP stronghold. Montana voters like to take risks and are very open to a change candidate. Obama's appeal in the Mountain west is real and it may be enough to tip the state over to Obama. However, I'd still put my money on McCain.

Nevada (5), Even: Another prime chance for Obama to pick off a red state, Bush won only 50% in both elections. A significant libertarian turnout here is very possible. Immigration should play a role -- given the 20% Hispanic population. The question will be whether these voters can offset the conservative rural areas. Obama's mobilized and excited voters could be enough to tip the scales.

New Hampshire (4), O+3: New Hampshire was the only state Kerry managed to win back from the Bush-Gore election. The Granite State has seen a Democratic surge of late and that surge doesn’t look likely to slow down in 2008. McCain, however, has a sort of second home here, having won the state in the 2000 and 2008 primaries. His pragmatic moderation is appreciated here, but he will need to work very hard to peel himself away from Bush and the GOP. This state should stay blue in 2008.

New Mexico (5), O+5: Election Day ground zero could be New Mexico and it's northern neighbor Colorado. Bush carried the state in 2004 by 6,000 votes after having lost it by 365 votes in 2000. However, Obama has been polling very well here all summer. There has been a huge Democratic registration advantage and the state is 42% Hispanic. Obama has opened up a big advantage with Hispanic voters and I predict a big night for Democrats here where they should pick up a Senate seat, a few house seats and an Obama victory.

Ohio (20), Even: Like in 2004, Ohio looks to be another too close too call state. However, unlike in 2004, Obama's path to victory does not necessarily require winning Ohio thanks to his strength in the mountain west and Virginia. Both candidates have problems here: McCain is no Wal-Mart family-man conservative as Bush was, and these voters are holding the GOP responsible for the economic woes. But, Obama's perceived elitism, his race, and his liberalism will all hurt him here with rural voters, religious voters and gun-owners, all of whom voted for Clinton in the primary. Obama's chances lie in his campaign's ability to mobilize the pockets of wealthy suburbanites, black voters, and hardcore liberals. McCain will need to figure out how he will talk about trade and social issues.

Virginia (13), Even: There is much talk about Virginia as a Democratic pickup for 2008. Democrats hold the governorship and after November will probably hold both Senate seats. Democrats have made big advances in Northern Virginia as those suburbs have gained in wealth because of the growth of federal government. Add in a strong black vote near Richmond and Virginia Beach, and you see the reasons for Democratic optimism. However, many of the suburban moderates who have abandoned Bush and the Republican party may be drawn to McCain's moderation and turned off by Obama's Liberalism. Polls have shown Obama with a slight lead, but like Ohio and Nevada it really is anyone's guess how this state will break. Tim Kaine appears to be on Obama's short list. This may help break Virginia.

SOLID OBAMA, 161 EV:

California (55), O+15: Every four years Republicans talk about having a chance here. In truth, liberal, black, and college populations will turn out in droves for Obama, while Obama's popularity with Latinos and immigration resentment in San Diego and the Los Angeles area will hurt McCain.

Connecticut (7), O+20: Connecticut is liberal and Democratic, and a hawkish Republican is not going to do well. Not to mention, wealthy white liberals with advanced degrees are a big chunk of Obama’s base.

DC (3), O+55: Washington DC has two types of residence: African-American and rich liberal attorneys or lobbyiest. This could be a blowout of unprecedented proportions. Libertarian nominee Bob Barr could challenge McCain for second place.

Hawaii (4), O+30: Obama will dominate his native state in November as he dominated it in the Primary. McCain can save on airfare and reduce his carbon footprint by skipping this state.

Illinois (21), O +12: Obama’s home hasn’t been a swing state in a while, and this is not the year.

Maryland (10), O +20: The mixture of wealthy whites, college students, and urban blacks makes this Obama country.

Massachusetts (12), O+13: The Bay State is beyond the reach of any Republican. Obama might not fare as well in South Boston which is trending more conservative, but he won’t lose the home state of Liberal Lion Ted Kennedy.

New York (31), O+15: Obama will dominate. 'nough said.

Rhode Island (4), O +25: Welathy liberals. Rhode Island is even more liberal than Mass. Please, this one's out of reach for McCain.

Vermont (3), O +25: The heart of liberal hippiedom will vote for Obama.

Washington (11), O+15: The heart of liberal environmental greendom will vote for Obama.

LEAN OBAMA, 77 EV:

Delaware (3), O+9: Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s wins here in 2000 and 2004 were not dominant, and the Democratic Gov. Ruth Ann Minner barely won reelection in 2004. This state will not be a blow out, but in a year of GOP stench, Obama will score a victory.

Iowa (7), O+10: Iowa's been a toss-up almost every election cycle, but this year it appears poised to switch to the Democratic column. Iowa, of course, was the state that catapulted Obama towards the nomination while McCain skipped it for New Hampshire. This swing state should swing back to where it was in 2000: the Democratic column.

Maine (4), O+8: Interestingly, the demographics here cut in both directions. Old white people tend to be McCain voters, but leisure-class New Englanders are Obama people. Gore didn’t get a majority here in 2000, because Ralph Nader posted 6%. Obama is the strong favorite here, but this one could drift in either direction with a strong McCain push.

Minnesota (10), O+10: The 2004 election was close as Kerry won by less than 100,000 votes, and McCain's independent-moderate reputation my help. However, Minnesota was one of Obama’s strongest states, thanks to a strong liberal core in the Democrat-Farm-Labor Party that will provide enthusiasm and turnout in November. This state may stay competitive throughout, but it’s likely Obama will pull away here by the fall. Note: If McCain picks moderate Gov. Tim Pawlenty as VP it could get very interesting.

New Jersey (15), O+10: Bush surged here in 2004, but not enough to carry the state. That was a one-time blip, and Obama should have no trouble carrying the Garden State.

Oregon (7), O+8: Despite it's neighbors to the North and South, Oregon is not a liberal state, and McCain has made it clear he intends to compete here. McCain will make some inroads with rural voters, but that will be offset by the excitement of the strong liberal populations, which carried Obama to victory in the primaries and will also rally around him in Nov.

Pennsylvania (21), O+6: Obama’s dismal primary performance here is a sign of trouble, especially among white voters. However, Philadephia's excited and mobilized black population and Gov. Ed Rendell's get out the vote machine should make Obama's margin of victory similar to John Kerry. And, since securing the nonination, Obama has polled very well. The Keystone State favors Obama, but the closeness here gives McCain a second way to win if Ohio or Nevada falls to Obama.

Wisconsin (10), O+9: This is a usually close battleground state where Obama actually looks stronger than Democrats in the past. He shores up the Nader vote and motivates the liberal base. The black population in Milwaukee help out, too. This state is very close to moving to the solid Obama category.

SOLID MCCAIN, 78 EV:

Alabama (9),Mc+20: McCain will be safe in this Deep South state.

Arkansas (6), Mc+14: With two Democratic Senators and 3 of 4 congressional Democrats, Arkansas is the Democratic stronghold of the South. Still, Obama will struggle in all Southern states, and this one is no more friendly than the others.

Idaho (4), Mc+14: This state is too pro-gun and pro-life to vote for Obama.

Kansas (6), Mc+20: Obama dominated the caucuses here, but a liberal Democrat isn’t going to carry this state in a presidential election, even if Obama picks Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D) as his running mate.

Kentucky (8), Mc+15: Obama's inability to win rural white voters in the primary here demonstrates that Kentucky is not in play this year.

Louisiana (9), Mc+19: Popular Rep. Gov. Bobby Jindal’s 2007 landslide victory was the beginning of a GOP avalanche until Democrats captured a Baton Rouge congressional seat in a special election this spring. Louisianians are not opposed to voting for Democrats. Still, this is now a GOP state like the rest of the Deep South, and they are not about to elect a liberal, pro-choice Democrat.

Nebraska (5), Mc+15: Nebraska apportions one elector per congressional district (3), plus two electors to the statewide winner. McCain should win all five electors.

Oklahoma (7) Mc+20: This very conservative heartland state is not in play. Easy win for McCain.

Tennessee (11), Mc+18: Clinton would have put this state in play, but the days of Democrats winning Tennessee are probably over, at least for now. Safe McCain.

Utah (5), Mc+30: Utah is the most Republican state in the nation. It is to the GOP what DC is to the Democrats. We will probably go the rest of our lives without seeing a liberal or progressive Presidential candidate win in this state.

West Virginia, Mc+15: Another state that Clinton would have put in play. But, like Tennessee and Kentucky this state has fallen off the battleground state chart due to conservative's exploitation of social issues and gun rights during the 90s and 00s.

Wyoming (3), Mc+10: A common threme: Rural Voters. McCain will win here easily.

LEAN MCCAIN, 119 EV:

Alaska (3), MC +10: This state’s GOP is undergoing political upheaval, and Democrats could possibly steal a House and Senate seat thanks to corruption on the part of Republican incumbents. Still, on a national level, this is a Republican state. Obama's campaign insists it will play for Alaska, but the deck is stacked against him.

Arizona (10), Mc+9: McCain can't seem to pull away in his home state. The immigrant influx may keep Obama within single digits, but Obama will never pull closer than 5-6 pts.

Georgia (15), Mc+9: Obama talks about winning Southern states in November because he won them in the primary. But winning a Democratic primary is much easier for a black liberal than winning a general election is. Georgia might be his best shot in the South, but it’s not a very good shot.

Indiana (11), Mc+2: This is technically a toss-up state, but with Bush wins of 16 and 21 points, Indiana has been so solidily Republican for so long I just can't believe it will be in play. However, this year McCain will need to work hard to keep this state in the GOP column. Obama’s advantage is in the cities of Gary and East Chicago, as well as some liberal suburbs. Indianapolis has a high black population. Also, McCain lacks the down-home appeal that made Christian Midwestern voters so drawn to Bush, adding to Obama’s hopes. I just don't see Obama winning this state.

Mississippi (6), Mc+10: This state is very close to being a solid McCain, but Democrats can point to a special election congressional pickup here, as well as a large black population. However, this Deep South state should be safe for McCain with a liberal atop the ticket.

Missouri (11), Mc+4: Some people have this as toss-up as things aren’t looking so rosy for Republicans these days. They lost a U.S. Senate seat in 2006 and are poised to lose the governorship this year. Obama eked out a primary win here on Super Tuesday by winning big in the areas around St. Louis and Kansas City, but he lost badly in the rural regions of the state. His appeal to black voters and suburban voters makes him a real threat, especially if McCain fails to rally Christian conservatives throughout the state. As of now I'm predicting a close McCain victory.

North Carolina (15), Mc+3: Our wonderful tarheel state has not been in play since Jimmy Carter won in the 70s. However, this year polling is consistently close. The influx of young professionals in the Research Triangle Park area and the wine and cheese crowd in Charlotte, as well as the large black population in Northeastern NC is keeping it close. McCain will perform well in the sandhills, down the HWY 70 corridor from Clayton, NC to New Bern, NC, and the mountain west. I suspect McCain will pull a 5+ win thanks to these GOP stronghold areas.

North Dakota (3), Mc+4: Once again, Obama is showing his strength in a historically GOP country. Bush twice won more than 60% here. While McCain may not do as well, he should squeak out a win.

South Carolina (8), Mc+8: The Democratic primary electorate is majority black, but the November electorate is not. Obama can’t win rural whites, and so he can’t win South Carolina.

South Dakota (3), Mc+6: Are there white rural voters in South Dakota? Yes, so McCain can add 3 more to his EV total.

Texas (34), Mc+9: There hasn't been a poll out of Texas since mid-June and at that point it was McCain by 9. While that's alot closer than Bush's wins, it shouldn't get much closer than that. Even with the large urban pockets and latino vote, this conservative state will give McCain the edge.

Obama & McCain Tax Proposals

2008-07-28T22:17:00.003-04:00

I found this cool chart online.

So, for anyone out there who is afraid their taxes are going to go up if Obama is elected you may find this interesting. I might be wrong, but I'm almost positive that nobody I know who reads this post makes over $600,000 a year. I do realize that people argue that Obama also proposes raising the capital gains tax, which will hit some people in the $50K+ range, but I believe very strongly that Obama's income tax plan is much more equitable.

Despite consider myself a strong liberal, I do believe very strongly that our Government spends and wastes way too much money, the biggest waste pool being the war in Iraq. However, I also believe we need to restructure our tax system, especially in light of the fact that the Bush Administration is predicting a $490 billion dollar deficit in 2009. That's more money we borrow from China because the Bush Administration has given back to billionaires Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Paris Hilton and Howard Stern an additional $700,000 of their $100 billion dollar fortunes. Obama's plan would bring in an additional $700 billion in taxes over the next 10 years, while McCain's would cost the Treasury $600 billion.

Some people like to ask What Would Jesus Do (WWJD). Well I'm pretty convinced that he would tell all the conservatives complaining about their tax rates to stop striving to make more money and to give it all away and serve the poor and oppressed. So you are going to get no help from him on this issue.

"According to a new analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain are both proposing tax plans that would result in cuts for most American families. Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy. For the approximately 147,000 families that make up the top 0.1 percent of the income scale, the difference between the two plans is stark. While McCain offers a $269,364 tax cut, Obama would raise their taxes, on average, by $701,885 - a difference of nearly $1 million."

Summertime Update

2008-07-14T16:44:00.006-04:00

It's been a few weeks since I've posted a blog. Mainly because things have been so busy, and news out of the political arena has been pretty stagnate the last month. There's been no major news from either campaign other than soundbites and strategic commentary from the news outlets. We've seen Obama move a little towards the center, including his support for the FISA bill (the controversial secret wiretapping program), the Supreme Court ruling overturning the DC gun ban, and his opposition to the Supreme Court ruling that said the death penalty can not be used for child rapists. I disagree with him strongly on the last point. I'm strongly opposed to the death penaly. But Obama's still my guy -- we can't agree on everything! The polls have shown a steady 5 pt lead for Obama. We should see those numbers start to move as we approach the August/September conventions, VPs are selected and the candidates hit the airwaves. I'm actually working on my first "Presidential Prediction" post that will give a state-by-state analysis of where things stand as we move into the intense campaign season of August. Check back in a couple of days.

So, leaving politics behind (at least for a couple weeks, okay probably days) I wanted to share some thoughts on the summer. We recently celebrated the birth of our niece, Mackenna Grace Weisner, Jennifer and Matt's little girl on July 9, 2008. It's such an awesome experience seeing a newborn baby enter the world. People often say, "how can you not believe in God when you see a newborn baby". Well, I'm fully aware of all the reproductive science out there, but what I don't think science can explain is the intense love and connection we as humans have for each other. That love and connection is reiterated and strengthened when we see and experience new life. I am now a proud Uncle Kenny to my nephew Nate (born March, 2006) and my niece Mackenna. I can't wait to get to know Mackenna as she grows. I know she will bring me the same joy I get from watching and helping Nate as he learns and experiences the world around him. Who knows, maybe I'll even teach her the elevator game that Nate and I play (Sorry, you will have to ask my 2 year old nephew Nate for details).

Jess and I celebrated my birthday and the 4th of July in Atlanta last week. We watched a Braves game (they lost to the Phillies) and hung out downtown for a few days. I got Omar Infante's autograph at a mall the next day. He's one of their new players this year. So, that was pretty cool, other than Jess found her a new Braves player to have a crush on. We also toured CNN, the Georgia Aquarium, and loved watching the fireworks in the Centennial Park. We pretty much just enjoyed hanging out with each other and eating good food.

Of course no summer can be complete without a little So You Think You Can Dance. Jess and I are religiously hooked on the dance competition show. The moves these dancers can do are amazing and highly entertaining. Our favorite dancers this year (for any other fans out there) are Joshua, Twitch, Chelsie, Kherrington and Will. I'm all about pursuing your passion, especially when it comes to an outlet to express yourself, whether it's visual art, speaking, videography, wirting, painting, or in this case dance. It reminds me of my highschool days in musical theather and all the dance moves I had to make myself learn. I was not the best dancer in the world, but I always gave it a-go.

The most exciting news around the corner is Jess' trip to Guadalajara, Mexico. She's leaving next Sunday for 5 weeks to study abroad for her Master's in Teaching ESL. We had a going-away party for her Saturday night and we had an awesome mix of friends from Watershed, Jess' work, Raleigh friends and even family. We love spending time with our friends. We feel very fortunate to be surrounded by such fun and loving people.

While we are going to miss seeing each other, Jess is super excited to visit and experience a new place, and to disengage from our Western style of living, even if its just for a little while. I think experiencing a culture different than our own allows us to reflect on the way we live our lives, and put in perspective the things we value. We get so caught up in our day to day activities here in America we often forget that our greatest happiness is defined by our relationships with each other, our God (however you wish to define he, she or it), and our environment. It is so easy for us to place a bubble around ourselves, a bubble made up of fear and apathy towards those different than ourselves. That's one of the things I love about Jess--she shatters that bubble on every opportunity she gets, and is so willing to fully engage new ideas, ways of living, and worldviews. We both put a special value on these new experiences and feel very strongly that Americans can learn a lot from other cultures. I love America and would not want to live in any other country in the world. However, that does not mean I think our values, morals or cultures are necessarily better than every other country. I believe we can constantly improve ourselves by experiencing and learning from others. I believe it is important to hold that view as we engage the world on a political, societal, and individual level. The fabric of our nation is a web of cultures brought over by our ancestors from regions across the globe - Native Americans, Puritan settlers, Spanish nobles, servant workers, Italian and Irish immigrants, African Slaves, Mexican and Asian immigrants, and the list goes on and on. I believe we are a better people and a richer nation when we allow aspects of those cultures and customs to help shape our attitudes, worldviews and our own cultural norms. I know Jess will have a blast in Mexico and I can't wait to visit her in August.

I'm going to try and keep myself busy visiting friends and reading some books. Scott Hofert, One of the paster's at Watershed likes to say that our worldview is shaped and influenced mostly by the people we meet and the books we read. I couldn't agree more. My goal is to read one book on politics, one on social awareness/justice and one book on theology. I'm finishing up The Great Awakening by Jim Wallis (politics), preparing to read C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity (theology) and I want to finish up the summer with a book entitled, Serve God, Save the Planet: A Christian Call to Action by J. Matthew Sleeth (social awareness). It challenges us to be stewards of God's creations and to see being Green and saving the environment as a Christian responsibility not a left-wing, hippie movement (although that would be reason enough for me). Mere Christianity is unlike anything I've ever read. It is so deep in thought. I have to concentrate on every word.

I can't wait to see what tomorrow brings!

Bible Belt Conservative Senators Still Blocking HIV/AIDS Bill (PEPFAR). Unbelievable!

2008-06-27T15:36:00.008-04:00

Since I'm so quick to criticize President Bush and his policies, it is only fair that I give credit where credit is due. President Bush's program to fight HIV/AIDS is one of the most heralded foreign policy successes of his presidency. In 2003, President Bush helped push through congress The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a five-year, $15 billion American Government initiative to combat the global HIV/AIDS epidemic.

Since the bill was enacted the number of HIV/AIDS inflicted people around the world who are receiving lifesaving anti-retro viral (ARV) drug treatment for free through the Global Fund-financed programs have gone from 300,000 to 1.75 million people. These numbers are proof that the U.S.'s investment in the Global Fund (a public-private programs to eliminate the world's most deadly yet preventable diseases) is working. The U.S. contribution to the Global Fund has significantly helped provide infrastructure, prevention and treatment, services, food and free ARV treatment to those infected and affected by AIDS around the world through the PEPFAR program. This is a life-long commitment, so it is critical for the U.S. to maintain its strong support.

However, the bill expires in September and the Congress has scheduled debate on a new bill: The Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. The new legislation would:

1. Authorize $50 billion to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis during the next five years,
2. Provide treatment for at least three million AIDS patients, prevent 12 million new HIV infections,
3. Provide care for five million AIDS orphans, train and support 140,000 new health professionals,
4. Authorize $4 billion for the treatment and prevention of tuberculosis,
5. Authorize $5 billion to fight malaria.

Now, this is what I expect from my government. With all the wasteful spending in Washington, including $341 million a day for the Iraq War, it is easy to see why I am so supportive of the President's Bill.

The bill passed in the House with bi-partisan support (308-116), and enjoys broad support in the Senate. However, 7 Conservative Republican Senators, known as the "Coburn Seven" (including our Senator from NC) -- Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), David Vitter (R-LA), Jim Bunning (R-KY), and Richard Burr (R-NC) -- are preventing the bill from coming to the floor of the Senate for a vote. If you know me, I'm sure you can image how upset I was when I heard this. I was in my car headed to the coast for work when my friend Steve Cook emailed me the story. I was outraged beyond belief. I called Jess to tell her how upset I was and she helped calm me down. Anyway, I made it a priority to contact Senator Burr over the phone and send a letter to his office to voice my disbelief and disappointment over his actions to block this legislation. And to think all seven of these Senator's come from Bible Belt districts, AND run on Christian family values. We have to do better as Evangelicals in making our values known to our representatives. This legislation embodies the ministry of Jesus Christ. It is what he called us to be in our daily lives, to work tirelessly to serve the poor, oppressed, diseased and outcast. That is the definition of bringing the Kingdom of God from heaven to earth

What possible reason is there to block legislation that would help heal millions of people across the globe? Well, it's that "safe-sex education and condom distribution thing" that has the Conservative Republicans sitting with their panties in a wad. See, the conservatives don't like condom use, even though it has proven effectiveness, and these seven Senators refuse to allow the bill to pass unless the bill includes strict stipulations on how the money is spent, including 33% of the prevention money to be spent on abstinence-only education. They want to stop any safe-sex education that includes condom distribution or needle distribution from being funded. Does anyone else believe that instead of trying to push their narrow, rigid "view of morality" on people of different religions and cultures across the globe, maybe the Coburn Seven should make healing God's children the number one priority and be realistic about moving people out of the hell of HIV/AIDS, without making the help conditional upon thier narrow "view of morality." This bill has broad, bi-partisan support and these seven Senators are getting in the way -- unbelievable!

The Coburn Seven also point to the new price tag, $50 billion instead of $15 billion. They object to what they describe as a "mission creep" -- the funding of "food, water, treatment of other infectious diseases, gender empowerment programs, poverty alleviation programs" -- as though people surviving on AIDS treatment do not need to eat, work, or get their TB treated. And the senators are concerned that AIDS funds might be used for things such as abortion referrals and needle distribution, though the legislation doesn't mention these possibilities. So they are pushing for the extension of the spending mandate requiring that at least 55% of PEPFAR resources be used for treatment (where the money is--for their business and doctor friends), on the theory that this will starve "morally dubious" prevention programs. I told Richard Burr's office in my phone call and letter that I agree, we don't need to "mission creep" we need to "mission explode."

I'll let one of the seven senators blocking this bill explain this to the AIDS inflicted women across the globe who are systematically being raped, or the young mother who prostitutes herself because the only other option is starvation and death for her and her three children, or the orphaned child whose parents have succumbed to the disease. These people don't have a choice when it comes to the Coburn Seven's limited "view of morality."

This is a story I will continue to follow. And if you want to do something about it now, you can sign this petition. Or better yet, please call Richard Burr (202-224-3154) and voice your support for the new PEPFAR bill. It's real easy to contact his office and some nice staff person will answer the phone and record your support for the bill and opposition to Burr's blocking its passage. If enough people in NC contact his office, he will get the message that we do not appreciate him standing in the way of the reauthorization of PEPFAR.

IMMIGRATION

2008-06-21T12:51:00.006-04:00

I don't take literally all old Hebrew scripture, especially versus out of Leviticus. But my position on immigration is pretty much summed up in the Old Testament scripture listed below.

The current U.S. immigration system is broken. Families are in jeopardy, workers are being exploited, and the border is far from secure. As Christian churches, organizations and leaders, we should be more committed than ever to holding our politicians accountable to the values they profess: values of family, integrity, and economic progress. I hope the Evangelical Church will follow the example of the Catholic Church as the new Congress and new President take action on the issue of immigration reform next year.

"When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the stranger. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you. You shall love the stranger as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:33-34)

Wake Up, The Answer is Not More Oil

2008-06-18T16:45:00.006-04:00

As I blogged about this weekend, Senate Conservatives blocked consideration of the most aggressive, bipartisan, and comprehensive global climate change legislation to date. Republicans employed parliamentary tactics to stall consideration of the Climate Security Act despite the bill enjoying support from 54 Senators. We should all be outraged that Conservatives continue to value bottom line profits over the need to save our planet. While its disappointing that the bill failed, there is reason to be optimistic: only 3 years ago climate change legislation could only garner 38 votes - No doubt a result of increased awareness of global warming, pressure from constituents as gas prices rise, and of course there are 6 more Democrats in the Senate today than 3 years ago.

The above mentioned bill focuses on investing in renewable resources and ending our addiction and dependence to the carbon emitting fossil fuels, which pollute our air, warm our globe and alter our weather patterns. These policies and solutions are part of the Progressive Agenda. It is important for everyone to understand the Republicans' plan for reducing gas prices (The Conservative Agenda). Rather than focus our energy, effort and resources on mobilizing the US to find strong alternatives to oil, President Bush urged Congress today to lift the ban on offshore oil drilling, a move that was echoed by Republican Presidential Candidate John McCain. This follows Bush's push to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where an estimated 10 billion barrels of oil lie. A solution that according to the Department of Energy analysis, would reduce the cost of a barrel of oil by 75 cents., 17 years from now.

There are an estimated 18 billion barrels of oil available in off-shore drilling areas. But people understand that, in an area devoid of the appropriate infrastructure, it takes a long, long time to build the derricks that would line our shores, along with the pipelines to reach land and the refineries to process the oil. And people also understand that the type of production McCain and Bush are talking about is a drop in the bucket -- or a drop in the barrel -- compared to what this nation consumes. They may sell it as immediate relief at the pump, but what they're talking about is really a decade or more down the road and would amount to maybe a few pennies in savings, according to the Energy Information Administration. The combined effect of ending the ban on drilling in Alaska and off-shore sites would be a $2.25 reduction in the cost of a barrel of oil (currently at $130 a barrel) 17 years from now. President Bush and Sen. McCain's solution to ending high gas prices is to pump more oil that will be available 10-20 years from now. Oh and get this, this plan is seen as a pragmatic, short-term solution to high energy costs.

The problem with this plan is two-fold. First, it does nothing to lower gas prices, as it will take years for the oil to hit the market. This is a fact obviously overlooked by McCain, as he pointed out that opening off-shore drilling sites would be a pragmatic, short-term solution. What is he thinking? Second, this solution doesn't address the real problem: Our addiction to oil. We need to end our addiction to oil - not find more ways to feed it. There is not enough oil in America or the world to solve our energy problems. Energy transformation is the key. The answer is in alternative, renewable energy sources, which are so much better for our environment. This approach will be challenging at first. But long-term, it will end our dependence on foreign oil, cleanse our atmosphere from global warming polluting carbon, and create millions of new jobs.

McCain continues to show his lack of leadership and ideas when it comes to protecting the environment, ending our addiction to oil and investing in alternative energy. The Democrats have put forward an aggressive plan to invest in renewable resources, but the GOP has done nothing. It is going to take a lot of sacrifice to change our energy dependence. It is going to take bold leadership and we can not afford to wait any longer. The religious community needs to become the tipping point on this issue and demand change on this critical issue. All of this is now within our grasp if we make the deeply biblical commitment to be good stewards of God's creation.

Gore Endorses Obama

2008-06-17T13:51:00.005-04:00

I cast my first vote for President in the 2000 Presidential Election. Al Gore has the distinction as being the first candidate for Presidential to get my vote, once in the Primary and once in the General Election. I was a young college liberal who recognized that the distinctions between a progressive agenda and conservative agenda meant using Government as a tool to protect and assist the poor and oppressed rather than big corporations and the wealthy. An agenda that recognized the strength of diversity versus the staleness of elitism. An agenda that sought to move our society forward towards liberty for all rather than and a place to legislate morality. As a Christian I couldn't image voting any differently than for a Progressive agenda. If not for the Butterfly Ballot in Palm Beach County, Florida, or the thousands of African Americans in Florida who were turned away at the polls because their names falsely showed up on the convicted felon list, Gore would have been our President. His speech last night in Detroit endorsing Obama reminded me of how unfortunate we were that he lost to Bush in 2000.

GREEN: The New Red, White, and Blue

2008-06-11T18:08:00.016-04:00

Credit my title to a Time Magazine article I came across.

We realize that solving great challenges across the globe require more than just Governmental involvement. It requires personal responsibility, a deeper compassion and a committed engagement in the world. So, while we don't expect Government to solve all our problems, we do expect Government to play a role and do their part. Each Generation faces its great challenges which require solutions and sacrifices from individuals, the private sector and our government. Our fore fathers fought for our liberty and created the greatest democracy in the world, and 100 years later fought a war to keep our nation together and give slaves their freedom. Our Great-Great Grandparents constructed railroads that connected America and invented machinery that made our lives easier and created jobs for millions. Our Great Grandparents eradicated polio and gave women the right to vote. Our Grandparents overcame the Great Depression, established a safety net for the elderly and overcame Tyranny in World War 2. Our parents walked on the moon, waged a non-violent war against segregation and discrimination in the land of opportunity, and created innovative ways to communicate through the Internet super highway.

Now it is our turn and we are faced with a similarly momentous challenge: global climate change. Our grandchildren will define our generation by how we act today on this issue. The US produces a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases each year, 6.1 billion tons of carbon emissions, which is causing the Earth to warm at an accelerated rate. The consequences are disastrous including changing weather patterns, exploitation of the marginalized and a shrinking coast line. The Bush Administration and many conservatives have stubbornly made it clear that they do not intend to do a whole lot about it, especially not with Governmental action. Our failure to act has resulted in a rapid degradation of our earth, which we depend upon for our life and sustenance. Degradation that can be attributed to our personal subservience to our market values (money) and our addiction to materialistic consumerism and wasteful use of the world's resources (I am definitely one to blame on all these fronts). I don't mean to say that capitalism and our way of life is on face-value evil, it's help bring restoration to millions in poverty. I only mean to suggest that our respect for God's creation should not be at the expense of these addictions.

The biblical narrative tells us that the earth is God's creation, given to us as a gift not as a possession. God retains ownership and control of creation and as Genesis 1:28 puts it: We are to be responsible for fish in the sea, birds in the air, for every living thing that moves on the face of the Earth. Jim Wallis writes in "The Great Awakening", God's vocation is Creator and our vocation is to be stewards of God's creation. Being green is indeed spiritual. Wallis argues that environmental irresponsibility on the part of humans is close to idolatry, replacing the Creator's role with our own arrogant and short-sighted domination over the Earth rather than our stewardship. I agree with this argument.

Solving global climate change requires immediate action. Last week the Democratic Congress finally launched landmark legislation to reduce America's carbon emissions. This legislation has garnered solid support across the political spectrum and among many corporations like General Electric. The Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act calls for reducing greenhouse gas emissions 18% by 2020, and nearly 70% by 2050, using a cap-and-trade system that steadily reduces the amount of CO2 that industry is allowed to emit. It contains climate change by putting a charge on carbon emissions. Companies would no longer be able to poison our air at the current rates without paying a price. The economic incentives would cause companies to be falling over themselves to reduce their carbon footprint. If one industry can not reduce their emissions they would have to purchase credits from other industries who have reduced their CO2 footprint. Some Conservatives and the Bush Administration are against this bill because they point to it's huge price tag, it's drag on the economy, and argue that reductions should be voluntary not mandatory. Come on, voluntary, as long as the sky is free, renewable energy will never be an option over carbon emitting fossil fuels. So, despite enjoying bi-partisan support (54 out of 100 Senators support the measure) the minority Senate Republicans blocked the landmark bill from moving forward by evoking the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to overcome. Republicans did everything they could to derail the bill, including a parliamentary maneuver that caused the entire 419 page bill to be read out loud. That took 9 hours. Yet another reason to support a Progressive for Senate and House of Representatives.

The need to do something about global warming is obvious. And it's also pretty clear that the public understands the need for change and is ready to embrace it. What is missing is the political will, especially by conservatives in Congress, to put the urgency of protecting the Earth and our environment over the money in our pockets. I know times are tough, and the cap-and-trade system will hit our wallets, absorbing 2%-3% of our GDP a year. But the price of not acting is enormous.

OBAMA

2008-06-04T22:13:00.005-04:00

Last night was truly a historic event. After 151 days, 56 primaries and caucuses, and 8 Democratic candidates (remember Mike Gravel), The Democratic Party has chosen Barack Obama as the first African American Presidential Nominee in the history of our nation. A man who, if successful, will usher in a generational change in power in this country. As the nomination ends I am feeling very nostalgic. This has been a strange and wild ride and it's also been pretty exciting overall. When this campaign started, Hillary Clinton was expected to win easily and quickly in a boring campaign because of her superior money, organization, and positive name brand. I never imagined Obama could pull off a political upset.

For me, the fascination (some have described it as a man crush) with Obama began on July 27, 2005 when Obama delivered an electrifying speech to the 2004 Democratic Convention to nominate John Kerry. I became an Obama supporter when I heard him deliver these words:

For alongside our famous individualism, there’s another ingredient in the American saga. A belief that we’re all connected as one people. If there is a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that matters to me, even if it’s not my child. If there’s a senior citizen somewhere who can’t pay for their prescription drugs, and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it’s not my grandparent. If there’s an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It is that fundamental belief, I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper that makes this country work. It’s what allows us to pursue our individual dreams and yet still come together as one American family:
E pluribus unum. Out of many, one.
With this speech, Barack Obama changed everything. He helped restore faith in our American Political System and offered a new vision. A vision that saw the divisive politics of gays, guns and God as only a distraction from what we should really expect and demand from our leaders. These words serve to incite all that is good within us--a living portrayal of our purpose in life. They challenge us to re-prioritize our values and re-shape our worldview. Shifting from attitudes and policies that erect walls around us--walls made up of apathy, judgement, and fear; to living with a passion for personal relationships and community responsibility.

We need a President to lead America into a new direction where our policies are shaped with the understanding that we can't subsidize the poor, rather we should empower and instill within them the tools needed to lift themselves out of poverty. And that we need for the Government to partner with us as individuals and as a civic society in providing these tools, and ensuring equality and justice for the oppressed. We need a President that understands we need a more humane and effective health care system based on the principle that health should be a human right and not a commodity for sale, and that wealth should never dictate one's ability to treat and heal from diseases and illnesses. A President that understands war only serves to escalate global conflicts over culture, religion and power. A President that understands we are called to be stewards and protectors of God's creation, and that money, profit and our addiction to consumerism are NEVER an excuse for the degradation of God's creation. A President that understands poverty is not okay in a land of so many luxuries, wealth and comforts. These are a few of the many examples of the leadership qualities I believe are best embodied within Barack Obama.

The General Election season has officially begun. I must admit as a political junkie this has been one of the most entertaining 6 months, and I expect the next 5 to be just as entertaining.

Poverty Part 1 - Invite the Misfits

2008-05-29T20:34:00.010-04:00

We live in the richest nation in the history of the world, with choices, comforts and luxuries that go far beyond the dreams of most people in the world. Yet the truth is, every morning in America 37 million people wake up in poverty, including 13 million children. There are 47 million people without health insurance and 13 1/2 million people are called "food insecure," meaning they live with the constant difficulty of finding enough food for all their family members. These numbers must become more than just statistics to us, because poverty is a horrific tragedy, which we as people of faith are called to work tirelessly to overcome. We must make poverty personal.

Why should it be personal and not just statistics? Because ultimately what's killing people across the globe isn't malnutrition or malaria, but indifference and apathy, which arises out of our lack of relationship, and our inexperience in walking and engaging in poor communities. I can hear people now, It's tragic over there in Africa, it really is, but we've got our own problems that we have to solve first, high gas prices, a slumping economy, the threat of terrorism, my in-laws (not mine, they're great), those damn Hispanics taking our jobs (does your skin crawl when you hear that? Mine too). But I can tell you, with the deepest of convictions--nobody who has talked to Steve Cook and Scott Hofert about their trip to Malawi last month, or seen the pictures of them holding the hands of a starving African child could ever be dismissive or indifferent about the desperation across the globe. Sitting in 1-hour rush hour traffic won't seem so bad, having to wait an hour to eat dinner at the Olive Garden just isn't that big of a deal anymore.

I think the best example of how we should approach the poor and overcoming poverty is illustrated in a dinner Jesus has with some Religious leaders (I call these guys the Religious Right). He really flips things upside down as usual. In Luke 14: "One time when Jesus went for a meal with the Religious leaders, noticing how each tried to elbow into the place of honor,he said, The next time you put on a dinner, don't just invite your friends and family and rich neighbors, the kind of people who will return the favor, invite some people who never get invited out, the misfits from the wrong side of the tracks, the poor, crippled, the lame and the blind. You'll be - and experience - a blessing. They won't be able to return the favor, but oh how it will be returned at the resurrection of God's people."

Do you notice how Jesus didn't tell us to question why they are poor or crippled, what country they originated from, or if their conditions are the result of bad choices and irresponsibility. No, he commanded us to invite the dissolute to the welcome table with no conditions. Most biblical narratives about overcoming poverty have to do with inclusion and bringing people into community and relationship. Why? Because God understands that apathy and indifference is what allows poverty to persist, not the lack of food, water or medicine. Think about it, God wants us to get to know the poor and crippled, who they are, and what's going on in their lives. This will lay the foundation for a new community in which everyone gets changed. It will change our understanding of who poor people are, what they need, and how the rest of us need to change including our values and our systems. Jim Wallis sums this up in his book, The Great Awakening, "Lack of relationship leads to lack of understanding, which creates stereotypes, myths, excuses and passivity."

This has always been hard for me. But I stepped out of my box a couple months ago. I was in Raleigh eating Sushi with some of my friends. We left the restaurant to head over to a neighboring bar and outside there was an older African-American gentleman who was asking patrons for some money so he could get a hotel for the night. My initial response was to rush past him to avoid the annoying solicitation. But I stopped and I met Calvin. I asked him where he was from and about how his day was going. He told me he was waiting to get his pay check the next day and was only $32 short to pay for a night in the hotel. I told him I didn't have any cash on me, but I would be thinking about him. I asked him where he was from and told him I hoped he could find a place to stay that night. I told him I really enjoyed speaking with him. Calvin looked at me with just a little bit more dignity in his eyes and said he really appreciates that I took the time to talk to him. Calvin could tell I wasn't judging him. I didn't assume he was less of a person just because I had just enjoyed a big meal and drinks while he suffered outside in the cold waiting for his next pay check. I believe this was much more empowering than just giving him money. I really believe I made Calvin's night a little bit better. To just ignore and judge him is cruel abandonment (the conservative way), to give him money is only making Calvin more dependent and vitually maintaining poverty (the liberal way). We need a third way - Relationship. On a much larger scale, one person at at time, this could really change lives.

TGIF - A Mental Health Break

2008-05-23T16:50:00.003-04:00

No politics, religion, or election news. Just some K.D. Lang singing Leonard Cohen's astonishing "Halleluja."

Berryhill Elementary School

2008-05-20T14:55:00.003-04:00

http://www.charlotte.com/408/story/631717.html

Here is a link to a story in the Charlotte Observer about Jess' school - Berryhill Elementary. I'm so proud of Jess and the work that her school does for high-risk students living in poverty. The teachers there are so dedictated and go beyond the call of duty to perform services for a part of Charlotte that is underserved in so many ways. If you come across a teacher in your daily walk, please take the time to thank them for their tireless work in making our society a better place to live.

Gay Rights - Separate but Equal?

2008-05-19T16:47:00.011-04:00

I've been wanting to write about this topic for a while and have finally found the words to convey my feelings:

Last week the California Supreme Court overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, making California the second state where gay and lesbian residents can marry. The court held that “an individual’s sexual orientation, like a person’s race or gender, does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights.” This was a good day for American Democracy and for the dignity of millions of American citizens. Right now same-sex couples are denied 1,138 rights enjoyed by heterosexual couples (according to US Govt Accountability Office). A recent Gallup Poll found that the country is split 47% / 47% on whether homosexual relationships are morally acceptable, with high unacceptable numbers coming from the South and from older Americans. But, indeed the California Supreme Court is no stranger to moving ahead of public sentiment. In 1947 the court became the first in the country to strike down the anti-miscegenation laws, recognizing that interracial bans on marriage violated the 14thAmendment of the Constitution.

Some argue that civil unions will provide same-sex couples with the same rights as heterosexual marriages, but that marriage is a sacred union and should be reserved for one man and one woman. Sounds a lot like the separate but equal argument to me. Haven't we already settled that debate. For me the principle of equal rights is ensuring the dignity of same-sex relationships are respected and the meaning of their deepest emotions are valued on the same level as heterosexual marriages. I believe the US Constitution requires and guarantees this level of equality. Simply providing same-sex couples with the rights afforded under civil unions creates a second class citizenry. When African-Americans refused to sit at the back of the bus in the Jim Crow South, it wasn't because walking a few extra steps was a material deprivation, but because it said to the world that they were second-class citizens. A law that denies a group of citizens equal access to a public institution serves no other purpose than to declare that group to be lesser. And this is why it is nonsense to say same-sex couples can enjoy equality before the law while they are barred from taking their place in one of the most fundamental institutions in American life--Marriage. An institution recognized and certified by the State, as well as the church.

Obviously the Religious Right has trumpeted their strong opposition to a homosexual relations, claiming God ordained marriage to be between a man and a women, and to allow gay marriage, or even civil unions between homosexual partners, is to encourage willful disobedience to God's will. While I acknowledge their full right to hold this belief, and for some churches to not accept same-sex couples, I do not share this view with the Religious Right. I believe strongly that God is present in the relationships of committed same-sex couples, and has blessed their relationship with the same love, opportunities and promises he bestows upon my relationship with my wife. Some of my Christian friends question this view. However, my reassurance is not shaken by old Hebrew scripture, but reconfirmed by the image of God's love in the faces, hearts and life commitments of the same-sex relationships I have witnessed within my core group of friends and family members.

Most same-sex couples, especially those of faith, desire to be married for the same reason as heterosexuals: to make a commitment with the one they love in front of their God, family, friends and faith community, and to enter into a relationship recognized, ordained and blessed by their God. If they find a faith community that agrees their relationship is blessed by God, the State should not deny that fundamental right.

Obama's fictional "White Problem" & Republican's Real "Bush" Problem

2008-05-14T19:39:00.010-04:00

There are two stories that emerged from last night's elections. First, Obama was defeated substantially in West Virginia where few considered to be a battleground state until Clinton declared it so last week. And secondly, the Republicans lost a third-straight special congressional election, this time in MS-01, a solid GOP seat where Bush received 62% of the vote in 2004. What is the more significant news story? The former was expected and does nothing to change the delegate math or narrative, but the latter is disastrous news for Republicans looking to prevent another November election night sweep that occurred in 2006 when Democrats gained 31 house seats and Republicans picked up none. Until Bush is out of office, this trend will continue. So while Obama still has some work to do with rural Appalachia white voters, the Republican Party’s poor brand and its voters’ lack of enthusiasm right now tell us a WHOLE lot more about the overall political climate than last night’s West Virginia results do. Republicans have a Bush problem they can't seem to shake. Possibly because their policies continue on the same destructive, obstructive, counter-productive path.

Speaking of rural Appalachia white voters, Obama hasn't exactly been winning over the hearts and minds of white Democrats in West Virginia and the rest of Appalachia. But this doesn't signify that Obama has a "race problem" and can not attract white voters. Instead of looking at the exit polls, we need to start looking at the results from the primaries and caucus for an idea of where Obama's strengths and challenges lie, specifically the significant white support he received in rural Idaho, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, North Dakota, and suburban Colorado and Wisconsin. Obama doesn't have a white working class problem, he has a white rural Appalachia problem. And that problem may just be that Clinton enjoys strong support in this region. Until the campaign turned more contentious over the last few months, most Clinton voters, according to the polls, were fine with supporting Obama. I don't think recent polls that show Clinton supporters unwilling to support Obama are a good indicator of how they will vote in November. One thing for sure is that Obama's appeal is not limited to African-Americans and higher-income, highly-educated whites. To illustrate this point, I ran across these really cool pre-West Virginia maps, which highlight the counties where each candidate has won with 65%+ of the vote. Obama on the left and Clinton on the right:

It would be great if pundits and politicos would recognize and acknowledge that race doesn't appear to have been much of a hindrance for Obama in the Democratic primaries, except, it appears, in Appalachia and in some regions where descendants of Appalachian migrants settled, such as the Ozarks (Clinton home state) and Oklahoma. Obama doesn't appear to have much of a problem with white voters. But it seems quite likely Appalachia has a bit of an Obama problem.

What will prove to be very intriguing is how the recent Edwards endorsement and eventual Clinton endorsement will help to ease this voter disconnect. I'll tackle in future posts what this will mean in individual states come the McCain vs. Obama general election.

Burma - A Race Against Time

2008-05-10T13:29:00.005-04:00

I've been trying to follow the devastating situation in Myanmar (Burma), a country of about 55 million people located in southeast Asia between India, China and Thailand. As most know, on May 3, 2008, the powerful Cyclone Nargis struck the densely populated, rice-farming, Irrawaddy delta. The storm flooded nearly 2000 villages, with recent reports suggesting 120,000 people are dead or missing with 1.7 million people displaced. The U.N. estimates that more than 1 million people are homeless and thousands of children left orphaned.

The Burmese are used to bad news. The person who should be their prime minister, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning, pro-democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi, has been under house detention or in prison off and on for 18 years. The brutal 500,000 soldier military junta has repeatedly proved that it has no intention of relaxing its iron-fisted rule, ruling their people by fear, denying a whole nation its most basic human rights. The people of Burma overwhelmingly rejected military rule yet the military continues to refuse to transfer power to Burma's democratically elected leaders.

The junta generals are so corrupt and hell-bent on keeping the country on lock-down, that they didn't even have an early-warning system in place to warn the citizens of the impending storm. I read an AFP news article in which Indian Meteorological Department spokesman B.P. Yadav said his department had warned the Burmese authorities of the coming cyclone. According to Yadav, "Forty-eight hours before Nargis struck, we indicated its point of crossing [landfall], its severity and all related issues to Myanmarese agencies."

Of course the horror of this situation does not end there. Not only did the criminal junta fail to warn the citizens of the approaching storm, but we have seen the regime continue their corrupt behavior, approving only $5 million for aid, even though the government receives 2.7 billion a year from oil revenue.

Perhaps the most disconcerting news for the millions struggling in the area is the obstruction by the regime, which continues to hamper the relief effort by delaying visas for aid workers. A delay motivated by the regimes intent to keep its people from coming into contact with foreign workers. However, time is of the essence, early estimates indicate 20% of children in the delta region are suffering from diarrhea. There were reports of families wading through water searching for loved ones amongst the corpses, further spreading disease. The regime must stop blocking the relief effort, 1.7 million people in flooded areas are having to cope with this disaster alone. Millions of dollars have already been pledged for relief if only it can be delivered directly to those who need it. That, it seems clear, will take some blend of cajoling of and pressure on the junta to save their own people. The international community cannot stand by and let this happen. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon must go to Burma and insist that aid teams have unrestricted access immediately.

Two good sites to visit for information about the situation are Democratic Voice on Burma and Campaigning for Human Rights and Democracy in Burma. The latter contains a short list of organizations accepting donations for cyclone relief.

People sit at the flooded roadside, four days after the devastating cyclone Nargis, at the outskirts of the capital Yangon, Myanmar

Behold The End is Near

2008-05-08T22:05:00.012-04:00

Don't worry the title does not represent a post predicting the end of the world and the return of Jesus. I'm of course talking about the Democratic nomination.

Ever since Obama's 11-state run in February and Clinton's failure to make up any significant ground during the VT, OH, TX, RI (VOTR) primaries on March 3, many of us have argued that the delegate math made Obama's lead insurmountable. Clinton was unable to win over any of Obama's demographic support and failed to put together the mounting victories she needed to match Obama's February winning streak and convince super delegates that Obama was unelectable. Despite the reality of the math, it took a while for this point to penetrate the national media. Math is rather boring compared to the drama of "the candidate on the ropes," "comeback kid," "Obama's failure to issue a knock out blow" and of course the zany, sidekick character played by a fiery, unpredictable, wacky Rev. Wright. Nevertheless, Tuesday's results made it clear that Clinton's run for the nomination is coming to an end. The reality of the math has penetrated the national media narrative as never before. As Tim Russert said early Wednesday morning as the results came in, "We now know who the Democratic nominee is going to be." A very bold statement from the national news media.

Fundamentally, nothing has really changed. The delegate lead and popular vote margin are basically the same as before Pennsylvania and neither Obama nor Clinton made any movement with regards to ciphering base support from each other. Nonetheless, the campaign is coming to and end because not only is the math against Clinton, but the opportunity for her to shift the momentum and change the game has ended. Clinton is faced with a scenario where she would have to win 75% of the remaining pledged and super delegates, and this is true only if the Michigan and Florida delegates are seated in her favor. Clinton just isn't going to put together a string of victories like that. She can't overtake Obama's lead unless there is a mammoth scandal or breakdown in the Obama campaign that causes all the super delegates to deflect and support Clinton. To use an annoying football analogy, Clinton had the ball, down by 10, with 2-minutes left, but failed to make a series of completions to remain in the game. Tuesday night the ball was turned over on downs and Obama simply has to take a knee and let the clock run out to end the game. (That was an awesome sports analogy).

So here is what I hope to see moving forward:

Clinton certainly has no obligation to drop out. In fact a gracious exit on her part, rather than a forced exit by super delegates before the primary season ends is preferred. Clinton is still up big in West Virginia and Kentucky, and to avoid the awkwardness of Obama losing a state despite being the sole candidate and presumptive nominee, it is probably best for the party if Clinton stays in the race until Obama has officially won the nomination. However, Clinton and her strategist must come to the reality that Obama's nomination is inevitable and discontinue all negative attacks against Obama. The Clinton campaign must change their tone towards attacking McCain and finding a way to convince her base support that Obama is capable of leading this nation. Clinton can play a huge role in coalescing the party behind Obama.

The Obama campaign needs to shift gears and focus on putting together their general election strategy and operation. One of the greatest benefits of the long, drawn out fight for the nomination was the great ground organizations laid in states like Wisconsin, Virginia, Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Indiana. Over 1.25 Million Indianans voted Tuesday for Clinton or Obama in the Democratic Primary. In 2004, John Kerry received only 969,000 votes in Indiana...in the general election. Anyone who thinks Democrats are not fired up about taking back the White House, simply isn't paying attention. The long, drawn-out, spirited race for the Democratic nomination has helped get voters mobilized in states typically not involved in the nomination process. This will pay dividends in November in swing states.

Obama must start focusing on defining McCain. Ever since Texas and Ohio, Obama has not been successful in defining and setting the tone of the campaign. He has had to respond to attacks about his patriotism, religion, pastor, electability, and experience. Politics 101 - You can't win elections unless you successfully define your opponent. The Obama campaign and progressive organizations need to make a concerted effort to change the tone of the debate, so its not about responding to attacks on Obama's character, values and experience, but focus on his message of change and hope and defining McCain as 4-more years, a continuation of Bush policies, specifically with regards to his support of the Iraq war, economic ignorance and failure to tackle hard issues like health care, education and the environment. That is the formula for victory in November.

God's Party

2008-05-05T16:54:00.006-04:00

I read something pretty cool this weekend that I wanted to share with everyone. Here's my attempt to summarize:

Jesus often compared the Kingdom of God to parties, feasts and banquets - a street party to which everybody is invited. I believe God invites people to leave their workaholism and rate race, loneliness and isolation and come to a party, to leave their exclusive parties and join inclusive parties celebrating goodness and love of God. To stop fighting or complaining or hating or competing and join a party. I came across a true story told by Tony Campolo that I think illustrates the inclusivity of God's Party.

Tony was in another time zone and couldn't sleep, so well after midnight he wandered down to a doughnut shop where, it turned out, local hookers also came at the end of a night of turning tricks. There he overheard a conversation between two hookers. One named Agnes, said, "You know what? Tomorrow is my birthday. I'm gonna be 39." Her friend said "So what d'ya want from me, a birthday party? Huh? You want me to get a cake and sing happy birthday to you?" Agnes replied, "Aw, come on, why do you have to be so mean? I'm just saying its my birthday. I don't want anything from you. I mean, why should I have a birthday party? I've never had a birthday party in my whole life. Why should I have one now?"

When they left, Tony got an idea. He asked the shop owner if Agnes came in every night, and when he replied that she did, Tony invited him into a surprise birthday for Agnes. The shop owner's wife even got involved. Together they arranged for a cake, candles and typical party decorations for Agnes, who was, to Tony a complete stranger, and to the shop owner, just another patron. The next night when she came in, they shouted, "Surprise," and Agnes couldn't believe her eyes. The doughnut shop patrons sang, and she began to cry so hard she could barely blow out the candles. When the time came to cut the cake, she asked if they'd mind if she didn't cut it, if she could bring it home--just to keep it for a while and savor the moment. So she left, carrying her cake like a treasure.

Tony led the guests in a prayer for Agnes, after which the shop owner told Tony he didn't realize Tony was a preacher. He asked what kind of church Tony came from, and Tony replied, "I belong to a church that throws birthday parties for prostitutes at 3:30 in the morning." The shop owner said, "No you don't. There ain't no church like that."

I feel fortunate that Watershed is a church like that.

What are our attitudes towards those that have made bad decisions in life. Are we inclusive with our acts of kindness, or are these acts conditional upon what choices people have made that are in need?

KEEPINGBrothers Primary Endorsements

2008-04-30T16:30:00.015-04:00

Most people have no idea who to vote for as they work down the ballot. So I thought I'd list my endorsements for Tuesday's Democratic Ballot. Just to be transparent, I read about many of these candidates in The Independent and got a lot of my talking points from there after double checking on other websites.

President:
BARACK OBAMA - I've written extensively about my support for Obama. While I believe Clinton would be an admirable candidate. She's smart, tough and capable of leading and tackling the range of difficult issues facing our nation. However, her vote to authorize the war in Iraq coupled with Obama's ability to rise above politics and unite America made my decision to support Obama easy. I like Obama not only because my alignment with him on his policy ideas – repealing Bush’s tax cuts for wealthy, closing corporate loop holes, addressing our environment, making health care affordable and available for all Americans, repealing no child left behind (Bush's counterproductive education plan), and renegotiating NAFTA to protect the environment, American workers and acknowledge we are in a global economy. However, I also like Obama (specifically over Clinton) because of his proven judgment (he was right on Iraq when so many were wrong), political courage and hopeful vision for America. He has an unmatched ability to motivate and mobilize millions of Americans eager for change. I really believe that he transcends politics more than any candidate in recent history. He is challenging us to lift ourselves out of the ugliness that consumes Washington, where the heart of the argument and common good matters more than the political points scored. His recent stance on the gas tax is a great example of this political courage. He is running on what is best to put America on a new path.

US Senate:
JIM NEAL - Neal is the underdog candidate against Kay Hagan for the nomination to challenge Elizabeth Dole. Let's put it on the table - Neal is openly gay. Unfortunately, that may hurt his chances in NC. But lets be honest, on the issues Neal is the clear progressive choice. Neal opposed the US Invasion of Iraq, supports universal health care, is against capital punishment, wants to scrap No Child Left Behind (Bush's counterproductive education system), end Bush's irresponsible tax cuts for the wealthy, advocates conservation in his energy plan in addition to alternative-source energy. I have to admit the more moderate Kay Hagan stands a better chance at defeating Dole, but the country would sure benefit from Neal if NC could every tilt more progressive.

US Congressional District:
Raleigh-District 13: BRAD MILLER - One of the rising stars in NC (actually he's been around a while). I was real sorry to see he didn't run for Senate. I think we may see him challenge Richard Burr in 2010. He has an opponent but should have no problems winning.

Charlotte-District 9: Harry Taylor - I had to dig into the candidate websites to make a call here. Taylor is running against Ross Overby. On the issues, Taylor is much more dedicated to ending the war in Iraq, and advocates that we are all accountable for each other. A worldview I advocate. Plus Harry Taylor has the endorsement of the Labor Council, State NOW endorsement, and Progressive Democrats of America, a national organization.

Governor:
BEV PERDUE - This was a hard decision. I have been completely turned off by the negative campaign both candidates have been running. Both are rich, middle-of-the-road Democrats, who are entrenched in the political system. My decision broke for Perdue because of her work on the state's Health and Wellness Trust Fund, work to keep NC Military Bases from closing, reputation as a hard worker and endorsement by the state teachers' association.

Lieutenant Governor:
DAN BESSE- There are two progressives running for Lt. Governor, Dan Besse and Hampton Dellinger. Either choice would be good for NC, but Besse's work on Environmental Issues was the deciding factor. I believe Dellinger, the "good-looking candidate" is better equiped to influence policy, and would eventually make a better Governor. However, as Lt. Governor he would have little influence, so I'm going with Besse's long history of fighting for education, health care, mass transit and especially the environment.

Auditor:
BETH WOOD - Wood is a Certified Public Accountant whose career in state government makes her more qualified than her opponent Fred Aikens.

Insurance Commissioner:
WAYNE GOODWIN - This is the man who will be passing regulation down on my industry. Our retiring commissioner J. Long has groomed Goodwin to take over and I like Goodwin's promise to be a consumer advocate who will defend the agency's authority to se rates for auto insurance. Insurers have a right to profit, but since auto insurance is mandatory for drivers, such profits are properly subject to regulation.

Commissioner of Labor:
MARY FANT DONNAN - I'd miss seeing Cherie Berry's name on all the elevators in NC, but Donnan has the endorsment of the AFL-CIO and brings a strong record of public service. She served 7 years as an aide and director of policy research under former Labor Commissioner Harry Payne. I believe this makes her qualified. This is a very important position. We want to make our workplaces safe across NC manufacturing facilities and construction job sites.

Superintendent of Education:
EDDIE DAVIS - Long time Durham teacher with 30-plus year commitment to serving disadvantaged and minority students, and 8 years on the State Board of Education. This position has very limited power.

Treasure:
JANET COWELL - Review of her record indicates NC State Senator Cowell has the integrity and financial know-how needed to make prudent investments with the $78 billion of retirement funds on behalf of Gov't workers and teachers. Cowell, holds an MBA, speaks Chinese, and was a member of the Sierra Clib and progressive in over-hauling the city's waste management programs to improve recycling. She's a leader on environmental issues pushing for legislation while in the Senate requiring gov't buildings to be energy efficent.

NC Court of Appeals:
JAMES A. (Jim) Wynn
KRISTIN RUTH (Definitely not John Tyson)

Obama Rally

2008-04-29T18:54:00.004-04:00

Thanks to my good friend, and strong conservative, David Crotts, I attended an Obama rally Monday night in Chapel Hill, NC. I was able to make my way to floor level and was standing 3 rows back from the stage. It was awesome and I even got to shake hands with Obama after he spoke. Obama's speech included the normal talking points about making health insurance affordable for all, ending the war in Iraq, changing Washington and raising above politics. However, I thought the best point he made was his response to McCain's proposal for a Gas Tax holiday over the summer. Obama pointed out that the tax holiday would save Americans an average of $25-$30 over the 3 month summer "tax holiday", enough for 1/2 a tank of gas. At the same time no explanation to replace the highway trust fund to rebuild roads and bridges, where American's will sit longer in construction zone traffic wasting more gas. That's McCain's big solution. Obama pointed out that we need more leadership and ideas than that. McCain's solution is more quick fix solutions that sound good but will make no real difference. I love Obama for having the political courage to stand against this, unlike Clinton.

Unfortunately I forgot both my carmera and phone during the rally. But I gave the person standing next to me my email, so hopefully I'll receive some photos to post.

UPDATE: Some comments by economists supporting Obama's position:

This Reuters article cites Bush's former chariman of the Council of Economics advisors, economics professors, think tank wonks and Paul Krugman, all agreeing that the Gas Tax proposal sucks eggs. When you have Krugman and former Bush officials agreeing on something, it must truly be bad.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A gas tax holiday proposed by U.S. presidential hopefuls John McCain and Hillary Clinton is viewed as a bad idea by many economists and has drawn unexpected support for Clinton rival Barack Obama, who also is opposed.

"Score one for Obama," wrote Greg Mankiw, a former chairman of President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. "In light of the side effects associated with driving ... gasoline taxes should be higher than they are, not lower."

Economists said that since refineries cannot increase their supply of gasoline in the space of a few summer months, lower prices will just boost demand and the benefits will flow to oil companies, not consumers. "You are just going to push up the price of gas by almost the size of the tax cut," said Eric Toder, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center in Washington.

Small Government or Big Government

2008-04-28T13:35:00.005-04:00

Clearly the answer to this endless left-right debate is neither small or big government, but rather effective, smart and good government. I have many debates with my friends about the same question that our founding fathers debated at our nation's creation. The disagreement between conservatives and progressives, as well as the Religious Right and Progressive Evangelicals like myself, is not whether the poor, the outcast and the oppressed need our assistance, rather the argument is what role the government should play in lifting people out of these conditions.

As a Progressive Evangelical, I believe that all three sectors of a society: the private sector (market, corporations), the public sector (government) and civil society (charitable organizations, faith communities), need to be functioning together for a healthy society that protects and ensures the well-being of all segments of our society. Jim Wallis describes this relationship in his book The Great Awakening as a three-legged stool, with each sector playing a crucial and equal role in ensuring the balance of our society. If one sector gets too powerful and the others too weak the stool losses its balance and society is in danger of falling over. No doubt all three sectors of our society deserve criticism for how they respond to the well-being of our society, including a personal reflection on my own choices and actions. However, this post will address what we, as a faith community, should demand of our government. Because, all to often, in the face of inadequate or wasteful government, we make the mistake of calling for the end of government involvement instead of calling for more efficient government.

With the marriage of the Religious Right and the Conservative Republican Party, Christians have accepted a weak government role in society at the expense of much needed practical assistance that only the public sector can provide. As Christians, we must not demand that our faith control governmental policies, but we must act as a conscience and hold our government accountable for upholding justice, ensuring equality and protecting all God's children (including those at home and abroad) and our environment.

A great example of this was the response to Hurricane Katrina. Many people of faith, saw the government's response as a moral failing. Some chose to see this incompetent response as another example of why government should be less involved in societal issues and retreat to a more limited role. However, what we saw in New Orleans is how religious communities exploded onto the scene to give much needed basic assistance to the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. These communities were able to show more compassion and greater effectiveness than many governmental agencies, which were exposed for incompetence. However, while faith communities and charitable agencies can bring relief, they can't rebuilt levees, nor can they ensure adequate property insurance coverage for those living in high risk areas. The partnership of the government is also required to ensure fair, affordable housing.

All the budgets of charitable organizations and faith communities put together are not enough to provide the necessary poverty relief at home, not to mention abroad. Churches can not provide health care for 47 million Americans who can't afford it, nor can they ensure enough affordable housing to working families, or provide social security for the elderly or a social safety net for children, disabled or handicapped. Nor can faith communities ensure that all people regardless of their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, etc. have an equal standing in the public and private sector. Faith communities and the private sector can mobilize resources including food, clothing and medicine for third world communities experiencing extreme poverty, but government is required to negotiate with impoverished countries so that the logistics of transportation and delivery of aid, including the building of ports and protection, can be assured. Faith communities can partner on these issues, but can not accomplish with out government involvement, both logistically, structurally and financially. Furthermore, in a free market society only the private sector and labor movements assure adequate and fair employment, but the government is required to establish the necessary regulation, like guaranteed minimum wage, product safety, work place standards, and emission and disposal regulation, that ensures the health and equality of workers, consumers AND our environment over the bottom line profits that drive the private sector.

The life and work of faith communities are not meant to replace the role of government, but they are to offer an example of compassion and justice and demand the same of our government policies. I am in the process of reading The Great Awakening by Jim Wallis and Red Letter Christians by Tony Campolo (at the recommendations of Steve Cook). Both books provide a guide to faith and politics and illustrate what response faith communities should consider when responding to the serious issues facing us as a nation, including poverty, the environment, widening economic gap, social justice and equality, immigration, crime and war (specifically the War in Iraq). I look forward to diving into these issues and posting my comments as we approach the election in November.

Delegate Update

2008-04-24T13:21:00.010-04:00

Pennsylvania Analysis: After over a month of campaigning and millions of dollars spent, Obama was able to cut a 25pt Clinton lead in one of the most Pro-Clinton states, at least demographically, down to a 9.2 % pt lead, which despite the reports by MSNBC and CNN, is under the so called double digit threshold. The Pennsylvania pledged delegate count is 82-73, with three remaining to be allocated. That is a 9 delegate advantage for Clinton. Furthermore, Obama announced he picked up the endorsement of two superdelegates (A. Ostergard from NE and OK Gov. Brad Henry) and Clinton announced one (TN Rep. John Tanner).

Obama leads by 157 in the pledged delegate count: 1,490-1,333
Clinton holds a 263-239 superdelegate lead.
Obama leads by 133 overall: 1,729-1,596.
Obama's popular vote: 14,447,556
Clinton's popular vote: 13,965,192
Obama + 482,364

The math is still on Obama's side and it's hard to image a scenario where Clinton takes either the Popular vote lead or the pledged delegate lead after all primaries have been concluded. The uncommitted superdelegates will be faced with a decision where voting for Clinton is to overrule the electorate in terms of popular vote, pledged delegates and states won. The only curve ball in all of this is the Michigan-Florida situation.

So where do things go from here. It's no surprise that the nomination will remain close. Recent polls from NC show Obama with a comfortable 10 pt lead. Clinton's recent good press and intake of money, should prevent Obama from expanding this lead in NC much over the 10-12 pt margin, and may allow her to cut into his lead by a few pts. Indiana is proving to be a close race with neither candidate expected to win by more than a 5pt margin. Recent polls have Obama up 5 pts, but we will see how Clinton's win in PA effects those numbers. Moving forward from there, Clinton will score some press with wins out of West Virginia and Kentucky, but Obama should finish strong with wins out of Oregon, South Dakota and Montana.

The truth is barring a scandal of huge proportions you could go to sleep tonight and wake up June 3 with little changed. Obama will still be up by 125 or so pledged delegates and 500,000 or so popular votes. I predict after June 3 you will see superdelegates convene and finalize the nomination. With Clinton needing to win about 75% of the remaining supers, I don't see a way for her to capture the nomination. The question will be whether Clinton accepts this, concedes and comes out strong for Obama, or insists on waiting for the convention where she will continue to try and persuade superdelegates to change their minds before Denver in August.

Watershed and a plug for Steve Cook

2008-04-23T17:57:00.008-04:00

This is a post I made last week on MySpace:

As many of you know, Jess and I have been attending a contemporary church in uptown Charlotte called Watershed Charlotte. My history with Christianity has been a little shaky. I grew to detest my childhood religion, which I saw as the source of past attitudes of bigotry, exclusivity and a simplistic, black and white worldview. However, my wife and I received an invitation to attend Watershed in January 2007, and I must admit my initial intentions were to satisfy Jess' desire to find a church that fulfilled her spirit. However, I quickly grew to realizing that Watershed was a place that cut out the religion and politics and concentrated solely on building better relationships with God, our environment and each other. In essence, Watershed was a place that focused on spreading the kingdom of God. I've learned that Christianity is best defined by a relationship with Christ and with others. I realized that it was okay for me to believe that God was active in my life and that his intention was never for me to learn what NOT to do, or for me to win converts over to Christianity so they can go to heaven, rather I was to live a life that showed love, compassion, equality, respect, and dignity for others. That is my purpose on this earth. And the best and only way to do that is to engage and enter into relationships with others. These relationships will not only put me in the position to lift up others, but to be lifted up myself.

Watershed has also been an opportunity for me to put my political and social views to action. In the past these views were too often defined by talk and opinion and not enough action. I believed so strongly in social justice, equality and lifting people out of life's depression, but I often retreated to my own corner of comforts, including materialism and apathy. Many people from Watershed have been an influence on me, but one person that has been a living example of how we can spread God's Kingdom is Steve Cook. My first impression of Steve Cook was this unconventional, alternative, guitar-playing guy with these funky earrings. Steve began speaking about his interest in social justice and I partnered with him on the Charlotte Torch Rally, which brought awareness to the genocide in Darfur, Sudan.

Steve and our co-pastor Scott have made plans to go to Malawi, Africa next week to undertake a fact-finding mission on how members of Watershed can be ambassadors of hope in 2009 for one of the most troubles parts of the world. After learning that one in six people in the country have the HIV/AIDS virus, Steve decided that we must do more than just feel pity for these innocent victims. We need to make a concerted effort to provide food, clean water and life-sustaining medicine. Jess and I are really looking forward to being a part of their efforts next year when we return.

With that said, I wanted to take the opportunity to plug my friend Steve's blog. You can go to http://www.stevorevo.com to learn more about the issues that Steve is involved.

The conversation begins.

2008-04-22T22:28:00.017-04:00

Finally! I am officially a blogger. Over the last six months I've been posting on my MySpace blog my analysis of the 2008 Presidential Election, specifically on the Obama/Clinton campaigns for the Democratic Nomination. However, I wanted to go a little deeper, sharing my faith journey, and how my worldview is deeply rooted in my faith. For the longest time I've been a strong advocate of keeping faith completely separate from politics. However, the more I engage my faith and study American Politics, the more I learn that my political leanings are completely shaped by my values, and my values are completely shaped by my faith. Therefore, faith and politics are completely connected. So, while I still believe that our Government should never be beholden to one Religion or faith system, I have come to acknowledge that I am a Progressive precisely because of my faith in the Kingdom of God and the teachings of Jesus. And as believers, we must recognize that many social movements in American society have been rooted in faith.

I believe that both faith and a progressive political system serve as an undergirding for much needed societal transformation. As I educate myself, I intend to raise awareness of the great challenges we face in this world: social injustice, poverty, sexual trafficking, genocide, war, violence, environmental degradation, HIV/AIDS, economic disparity, and so on. I once read that social transformation never comes without a personal transformation. As important as education, policy ideas and issues are, social change requires something deeper. I am convinced that faith can provide the fire, passion, strength, commitment, perseverance and hope necessary for social movements to succeed and change politics. Neither the people nor the church can create societal transformation on our own. Therefore, a partnership with the political system and the American Government is required. This is the major difference between progressives like myself and conservatives. However, I believe historical precedence suggests that a partnership is required for social transformation. Never has the success and requirement of a personal-faith-government relationship been more evident than in the campaign to end slavery in both America and Britain, victory over Apartheid in South Africa, Gandhi's nonviolent liberation of India, the overthrow of communism in Poland and the 1960s American Civil Rights Movement. All these movements were rooted in faith and took a collective effort to make change real for millions of Americans who were being left behind and stripped of their God given dignity. I believe my commitment to Christ requires social action. We face similar challenges in today's world and I look forward to discussing how faith and progressive politics can serve as an undergirding for solving these global crisis.