A lot of my friends are supporting Hillary Clinton for President. A lot of my friends are supporting Bernie Sanders for President. Many have been presenting good reasons to support their candidate. I like both candidates and would be glad to vote for both of them.
Some of my friends have been pointing out flaws with the person they are not supporting. I see plenty of flaws with both candidates. There is only one candidate I’ve ever voted for whose political beliefs seemed to perfectly align with my own, and some might even question that. I am, of course, talking about when I voted for myself when I’ve run for various offices.
I believe that Hillary is likely to win tomorrow, and my vote and my blog post are unlikely to change that. Even if she doesn’t win Connecticut tomorrow, I expect she’ll go on to receive the nomination.
So, by voting for Bernie in the primary, and Hillary in the general, I will end up getting to vote for both of them.
Another aspect of the election is that as a progressive, I would like to see an idealist elected. I believe Bernie is close to my views both as a progressive and as an idealist. As an idealist, I will vote for Bernie in the primary. Some have suggested that Clinton would be more effective as President. She knows how to play the game, get things done. She’s the practical choice. I’m not sure that the first woman president will have much better luck in dealing with obstructionists than the first black president has, so this argument doesn’t carry as much weight with me as it might with others. However, I will admit that Hillary is probably the stronger practical choice. I expect to make a practical choice in the general election.
So, how do we get the most progressive candidate elected president? We vote for the idealistic progressive candidate in the primary so that when the practical choice runs in November and hopefully becomes president in January, she will know that she needs to answer to both the left and the right.
Yes, I’m asking you, the people I know online, on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google+ and other places. How does racism impact your life? Share your thoughts in response to the blog post, in comments on Facebook, in retweets etc. Listen to what others are saying. Feel free to ask clarifying questions.
Please try to refrain from attacking other people or their opinions. Let’s keep the discussion as open as possible, no matter how uncomfortable it might feel. If you are feeling really bold, ask a question like this, in your own way, to your friends, whether you do it face to face, one on one, or online to a large group.
Later, I’ll provide some context for this question, but I don’t what my context to shape your response.
How does racism impact your life?
I take a moment after a beautiful Easter Sunday morning worship service to read the news.
The Easter egg chaos took place in a neighboring town, so I read the news with particular interest. The story was about what you would expect. Lax security at a large Easter egg hunt because you shouldn’t really need security at an Easter egg hunt, right?
Yes. It made me sad that some people’s greed and self-centeredness destroyed an event meant to bring joy to children. Yet what was more depressing was the comments.
Conservatives are blaming liberals and vice versa. Democrats and blaming Republicans and vice versa. Religious people are blaming the irreligious and vice versa.
It seems as if there are too problems, one is the rampant self centeredness. Call it greed, call it entitlement, call it whatever you want, it is about people trying to get what they can at the expense of those around them. Yet this is fed by perhaps a greater problem, the “it’s not my fault” problem. It is always the other that is the problem. Republicans. Democrats. Immigrants. People of Color. White people. Gay people. Straight people. Whatever you aren’t.
As I think of this, one of the songs we sang during Holy Week came to mind.
Who was the guilty? Who brought this upon thee?
Alas, my treason, Jesus, hath undone thee!
'Twas I, Lord Jesus, I it was denied thee;
I crucified thee.
In 2012, I ran for State Representative in the 114th Assembly District in Connecticut, which covers Woodbridge and parts of Orange and Derby. My opponent was the incumbent State Representative, Themis Klarides. I ran, not because I disliked Themis or thought her a bad person. I ran because I believed the voters deserved a respectful discussion about the issues our state faces. I believed that the voters deserved a choice in who they would vote for. I didn’t believe that Rep. Klarides was particularly effective as a state legislator or a leader and I disagreed with her on various important issues.
Themis easily won re-election against this relatively unknown candidate, but when asked the outcome of the election, I always told people I won. I won, not by being elected, but by having a respectful discussion, by getting voters thinking about the issues, and by giving them a choice.
Two years ago, I ran again. It was a last minute decision, because no one else was stepping up to run. I had become a fellow with the CT Health Foundation and I spoke often about racial health disparities. In a predominantly Caucasian district this wasn’t an issue that resonated with a lot of voters, but I got a lot of people thinking about an issue they hadn’t considered before. Like in 2012, I won by getting people thinking about the issues.
Here we are in 2016, and people are starting to ask me if I will run again. I am still trying to decide. People who regularly read my blog know that my primary focus right now is if I’m called to pursue a different office. I am seeking discernment on whether I’m called to become an ordained Episcopal priest. This has me leaning towards not running for State Representative this year.
Yet a few days ago, The House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church issued A Word to the Church
In a country still living under the shadow of the lynching tree, we are troubled by the violent forces being released by this season’s political rhetoric. Americans are turning against their neighbors, particularly those on the margins of society. They seek to secure their own safety and security at the expense of others. There is legitimate reason to fear where this rhetoric and the actions arising from it might take us.
They appear to have been careful about naming any specific candidate, as I have generally tried to be.
The United Church of Christ echoed this in their statement
The leadership of the United Church of Christ, concerned with the political rhetoric aimed at the marginalized people of society in this election cycle, spoke out in support for and solidarity with a Holy Week statement released by The Episcopal Church. The UCC national officers and Council of Conference Ministers, in testimony to the ecumenical relationship between the two churches, expressed gratitude to The Episcopal Church for "the courage to speak, and for granting us the kindness of joining them in this statement."
With all of these things on my heart, I read the Op-Ed by Colin McEnroe in The Hartford Courant today, CT Republicans Must Denounce Donald Trump
On Wednesday, the candidate broke new ground. He threatened his own party and the city of Cleveland with violence if he doesn't get his way.
Trump told CNN that, if he arrives at the Republican National Convention with a substantial delegate lead but something short of the requisite 1,237, "you'd get riots" if he were not automatically anointed as nominee.
McEnroe goes on to write
We have some good Republican leaders here in Connecticut. It's time for them to speak, with the primary five weeks away. "I'm staying neutral" doesn't wash anymore. Mark Boughton, J.R. Romano, Themis Klarides, Len Fasano, Joe Markley, Rob Kane, John Kissel, Toni Boucher, Kevin Witkos. You're good people. I know many of you. Maybe it's time to assemble in one place for a press conference to tell Trump what he can expect, in the form of delegates, from our state.
I hope someone will step up to the plate and run against Themis this year. I hope Themis will show the courage and leadership to take up Colin’s challenge. Meanwhile, I will continue to seek what God is calling me to, including exploring the best ways of bringing love of our neighbors back into our political discourse.
In a Facebook group of Episcopalians, the discussion of politics has come up, and I started to write a comment, which is probably better as a blog post.
I struggle to find the right words for this time and space, perhaps because of my particularly perspective in this discussion. Two years ago, I was seeking political office, as a candidate for State Representative. I had run for the same office two years earlier, and my wife ran for State Rep back in 2004.
Now, I am seeking a different office as a discernment committee explores whether I am called to become an Episcopal priest.
I struggle to find the right balance between separation of church and state, and a "both and" approach to living out our Baptismal vows.
I remember realizing during the 2014 campaign that I needed to say, at least to myself quietly, Psalm 19:14 before each political speech. "Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer."
How well are the various candidates making their words acceptable in God’s sight? Two articles have come up that caught my attention.
Ian Markam, Dean and President of Virginia Theological Seminary wrote this opinion piece: Denying the Imago Dei: The triumph of Donald Trump
"Trump is wrong because intemperate language against women, immigrants, the disabled, and Muslims is an act of sin. Our civic discourse should always be elevated. "
The Christian Post wrote Donald Trump Is a Scam. Evangelical Voters Should Back Away
"Trump claims to be a Christian, yet says he has never asked for forgiveness.
While God, in His wondrous creativity, has drawn people to Himself through the saving grace of Jesus Christ in many different ways, there are certain non-negotiable actions needed to become a Christian: One must repent of their sins and follow Christ as Lord and Savior. Trump doesn't talk this way, even when urged to.
Further, his words and actions do not demonstrate the "fruit of the spirit.""
I think these are important things to think about in terms of every candidate. What are the fruits of their spirits? Are they honoring the Imago Dei?
People are comparing 2016 to 1968. Others are hoping it will be more like 1964 or that the Republican convention will be like 1920.
People are talking about the good old days when broadcast journalism had anchors like Walter Cronkite, Harry Reasoner, and John Chancellor. They are questioning rhetoric of taking America back or making America great again, as code words for racism.
I believe we need better journalism, and it starts with each one of us. We need to reject political coverage that reduces discourse to a reality television show. We need to seek detailed news, and well reasoned political commentators. We need to realize that we are the government, and we need to be involved to bring respect back to our political discourse.
Perhaps most importantly, we need to pray for our country, that it not be driven by hubris, but by humility, and love for everyone created in the image of God.