News and comments on Election 2008 >>

Witness in Washington Weekly
April 21, 2008

[4-22-08]

Find helpful information for expressing your views to Congress on:

This very helpful newsletter is published by the Washington Office of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

The 2008 Advocacy Days: Claiming a Vision of True Security is March 7 – 10. Don’t forget to register for Ecumenical Advocacy Days before the cost of registration increases on Feb. 15. Visit  http://www.advocacydays.org to register today. Room rates at the conference hotel will increase on the 11th. Please book them now! Visit the website above for more information.

I use Google’s News service to get a fresh page of news headlines on my laptop every day, updated through the day. I get reports on US and international news, medicine, business, the arts and entertainment (today, yet again, featuring Britney Spears), the PCUSA, and various other topics. This morning’s news provided a trio of stories right next to each other, that I feel compelled to share with you all.

First, the New York Times report headlined:

Web Site Assembles U.S. Prewar Claims

Students of how the Bush administration led the nation into the Iraq war can now go online to browse a comprehensive database of top officials’ statements before the invasion, connecting the dots between hundreds of claims, mostly discredited since then, linking Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda or warning that he possessed forbidden weapons.

The database is online at www.publicintegrity.org.
The rest of the Times' story >>

Bush administration officially called liars over Iraq

And in the column right next to them was the headline for a very long Wall Street Journal article by Norman Podhoretz, one of the leading “neo-con” figures behind Administration policies for invading Iraq, next Iran, and then who knows? He is Editor-at-Large of Commentary magazine. His new book is entitled World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.

His opinion column is titled:

Stopping Iran
Why the case for military action still stands.

Rabbi Jack Moline, The Board Chair of The Interfaith Alliance, offers some cautions on the way legitimate concerns about the faith of presidential candidates are easily being exploited into scurrilous attacks. Those attacks, he says, are often effective because they exploit the bigotry that is still part of our national culture.

One Nation, Many Faiths.
Vote 2008

Bigotry is an ugly word, beyond prejudice and stereotype. So I want to make it clear that I have chosen it purposely, knowing that some people who read this message will be insulted. To be clear again: the insult is intentional.

Religious belief has emerged as a central issue in the campaign for president, though it has been just below the surface for many years in local, state and national contests. As the chair of The Interfaith Alliance and as a congregational rabbi in Virginia, I have a particular interest in this issue. It is right and proper to understand what role deeply-held convictions will play in the decision-making of a candidate for public office. A candidate who makes a point of his or her religious life should be expected to respond to questions about the intersection of public policy and the tenets of a tradition. Virginia's current governor, a devout Catholic, addressed just such questions surrounding the state's death penalty.

Likewise, integrity and credibility ought to be central to public service. While it is not always the case, in the race for president, there is ample evidence in each candidate's record that the men and woman running for the highest office in the land have little to hide. Moreover, what little there may be to hide is almost certain to be ferreted out by responsible journalists and investigators. Recall the failed candidacy of Senator Gary Hart and the resignation of Vice President Spiro Agnew.

A phenomenon that violates both sensibilities while pretending to promote each one has emerged in a campaign that includes a group of candidates whose backgrounds are as diverse as America. Governor Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister, Governor Mitt Romney, a Mormon, and Senator Barack Obama, who is part African and whose father and step-father were Muslim, have been subjected to wild speculations about the extreme nature of their true beliefs and accused publicly of concealing their genuine loyalties. Senator John McCain and Senator Hillary Clinton have been challenged on their "religious credentials." The kernel of accuracy in these public broadsides does not excuse the exaggerations, fabrications and manipulations of the truth within them. They constitute hate crimes and would be treated as such if leveled against you and me in our private lives.

Of greatest concern to The Interfaith Alliance is the fertile soil these attacks have found around the country. From my own vantage point within the Jewish community, I have seen my rabbinic colleagues asking about documents circulated by groups claiming to be disinterested politically that call into question the RELIGIOUS beliefs and identities of the candidates, with the overt purpose of frightening Jewish voters. The candidates, Republican and Democratic alike, have been accused of supporting proselytization from the White House, polygamy, Wahabi-sponsored terrorism, and the eventual disenfranchisement of Jews from the benefits of United States citizenship.

Generally written in breathless style and peppered with quotations from people of renown taken out of context, these attacks are as objectionable to people of conscience as the notorious "Sturmer" of pre-WWII Germany, which caricatured the Jews and "proved" their untrustworthiness and corrosive influence on society.

If you write such material, you are a criminal. If you distribute such material, you are an accomplice. And if you believe such obvious tripe, you are a bigot.

Support the candidate of your choice. Vote as if your life depended on it. Donate time, money and advocacy to the causes you endorse. But the life of the body politic is a dirty enough business as it is. Do not sully it further with sin of bearing false witness.

And now that I have insulted some of you, allow me to insult the rest of you: broadsides like these are being distributed because of the presumption that they will have resonance. Too many in this country have been thoroughly effective at communicating our distrust of Mormons, or Islam or atheists or evangelical Christians, the list goes on. The result is that political operatives sense fertile ground for exploiting our prejudices to their advantage. I ask that if you see similar materials distributed in your communities, let The Interfaith Alliance know so that we are prepared to respond when necessary.

We have some deep self-reflection to undertake. And we have some changes in behavior to consider. As I think about the history of the Jewish community, I recall that we felt secure only when reassured by the first president of the United States that America offers "to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance." Every faith community needs that reassurance. But the standard must be private as well as public.

Sincerely,

The Evangelical Rebellion  [12-24-07]

Chris Hedges, who graduated from Harvard Divinity School and is the author of American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, analyzes the rise of Mike Huckabee’s standing in the Republican primary campaign as showing “a seismic shift in the tactics, ideology and direction of the radical Christian right.”

He continues:

Huckabee may stumble and falter in later primaries, but his right-wing Christian populism is here to stay. Huckabee represents a new and potent force in American politics, and the neocons and corporate elite, who once viewed the yahoos of the Christian right as the useful idiots, are now confronted with the fact that they themselves are the ones who have been taken for a ride. Members of the Christian right, recruited into the Republican Party and manipulated to vote against their own interests around the issues of abortion and family values, are in rebellion. They are taking the party into new, uncharted territory. And they presage, especially with looming economic turmoil, the rise of a mass movement that could demolish what is left of American democracy and set the stage for a Christian fascism.

Why the Democrats could lose in 2008:
Pragmatism is not enough    [12-17-07]

Faith-based progressive groups such as the Network of Spiritual Progressives and Sojourners have been developing political voices proclaiming (in the tradition of the prophets) ridiculously unpragmatic values such as justice and decency and human rights and mutual respect. Now Robert Parry, author of the new book Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, is developing a very similar critique of the current campaigns of the Democratic Party candidates.

Voters want more than a few new (or revived) social programs, he argues. They want a clear reaffirmation of constitutional values and human rights, respect for the values of truth and accountability, and real steps toward peace.

He concludes: “More than anything, many in the Democratic base want to send a message to the Democratic leadership that –regardless of what the professional pollsters might say -- principles do matter to Americans.”

An Overdose of Public Piety     [12-14-07]

Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer criticizes what he considers the excessive use of religious rhetoric in the current campaigns, noting that “there's nothing wrong with having a spirited debate on the place of religion in politics. But the candidates are confusing two arguments. The first, which conservatives are winning, is defending the legitimacy of religion in the public square. The second, which conservatives are bound to lose, is proclaiming the privileged status of religion in political life.”

He begins:

Mitt Romney declares, "Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone." Barack Obama opens his speech at his South Carolina Oprah rally with "Giving all praise and honor to God. Look at the day that the Lord has made." Mike Huckabee explains his surge in the polls thus: "There's only one explanation for it, and it's not a human one. It's the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of 5,000 people."

This campaign is knee-deep in religion, and it's only going to get worse. I'd thought that the limits of professed public piety had already been achieved during the Republican CNN-YouTube debate when some squirrelly looking guy held up a Bible and asked, "Do you believe every word of this book?" – and not one candidate dared reply: None of your damn business.

Are the old appeals losing their fright value?
[11-13-07]

By Berry Craig

Mayfield, KY. -- It was almost election day, and Ernie Fletcher, Kentucky's Republican governor, was way behind in the polls.

Some of the GOP faithful rallied in Lexington, his hometown. They were hungry for rhetorical red meat. They got a big hunk of homophobia.

"Do you want a couple of San Francisco treats, or do you want to reelect Gov. Ernie Fletcher?" the Louisville Courier-Journal Internet blogsite quoted Robbie Rudolph, the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor. Of course, the crowd got the implication: the Democratic ticket is gay.

It isn't.

Rudolph had to know that. But he figured the homosexual innuendo would pay off on election day.

It didn't.

Fletcher and Rudolph lost by almost 184,000 votes.

"I don't think the Three Gs resonate in this state like they did in the past," said Charles Wells, a Kentucky labor and Democratic Party leader. He meant God, guns and gays.

"I think a lot of people have come to realize that they are being duped and manipulated by politicians who use these so called 'values' issues to get elected," Wells said. "Even people of faith understand now that they are being taken advantage of."

The governor-elect is Steve Beshear. The lieutenant governor will be state Sen. Dan Mongiardo. They ran as moderate Democrats, at least by Kentucky standards, polling almost 59 percent of the vote to about 41 percent for their opponents.

Fletcher and Rudolph campaigned as "family values" Christian conservatives. They are for God and guns. They are against gay rights.

Fletcher added a fourth "G," gambling. He doesn't want casinos.

An ex-lay minister, Fletcher must have hoped the Three Gs -- make that Four Gs - would cause voters to forget he is evidently the only Kentucky governor indicted while in office.

The voters remembered.

"The election was clearly a repudiation of Fletcher, who was seriously damaged by a scandal over his administration's hiring abuses in the state merit system," said the Courier-Journal, the state's largest newspaper. "Fletcher refused to testify before a grand jury, was indicted on three misdemeanor counts -- later dismissed -- and pardoned those around him who had been charged."

From start to finish, Fletcher trailed Beshear in every opinion poll. The closer the race got to election day, the harder he ran on God and gays.

A day before Kentuckians went to the polls, the governor ordered a copy of the Ten Commandments "and other historical documents" displayed in the state Capitol in Frankfort. At the same time, the GOP revved up the gay-baiting.

The Fletcher campaign pounced on a state gay and lesbian rights group's endorsement of the Beshear-Mongiardo ticket. State Rep. Stan Lee, the Republican candidate for attorney general, joined Rudolph in branding Beshear and Mongiardo "San Francisco treats," Joe Gerth, a Courier-Journal reporter, wrote on the newspaper's blog.

Lee lost by more than 213,000 votes to Jack Conway, the Democratic winner. Conway got more than 60 percent of the vote to less than 40 percent for Lee.

The state GOP backed up Rudoph and Lee's double-barreled bigotry with a flood of automated "robo calls" linking Beshear to the gay rights group. Gerth got one.

He heard the recorded voice of Pat Boone, the famous 50s crooner who is a conservative Christian and a Republican. "Boone told me that he is concerned about the upcoming governor's race and that I should vote for Ernie Fletcher," Gerth wrote. He quoted Boone: "[Fletcher's] opponent is so ultra-liberal, he has just been enthusiastically endorsed by C-Fair, a prominent gay rights advocacy group. Do you really want Kentucky to become another San Francisco?"

Other Kentucky phones rang with similar robo calls. "For the first time in 20 years the homosexual lobby proudly endorses a candidate for governor, Steve Beshear," the message said. "Beshear is receiving major support from out-of-state gay activists."

The Fletcher campaign denied any connection to these calls, the source of which is still a mystery.

Wells thinks the robo calls -- from Boone and from whomever else -- backfired, further energizing already pumped-up Democrats and possibly causing some moderate Republicans to vote for Beshear, too.

"I know plenty of Republicans who are hanging onto their party affiliation by a thread," claimed a post on BluegrassReport, probably the most widely read Kentucky political blog site. "Pronouncements such as these by Rudolph and Stan 'I am not an extremist' Lee should induce them to sever ties once and for all."

I wouldn't bet the farm that "family values" Republicans like Rudolph and Lee -- and some conservative Democrats -- will stop pandering to Kentuckians' prejudices.

But maybe this election means that most of our citizens don't think bigotry is a "family value." And maybe the next time a Bluegrass State politician is tempted to pander he might ponder "One Term Ern," the Democrats' nickname for Fletcher that came true on election day.

-- Berry Craig is a professor of history at the West Kentucky Community and Technical College in Paducah. He and his wife, Melinda, are members of the Witherspoon Society.

Where have all the leaders gone?   [10-31-07]

Remember Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from death throes? He recently published a book with the title above. Here are a few choice lines:

Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening?

Where the hell is our outrage?

We should be screaming bloody murder.

We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car.

But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course"

Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic. I'll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out!

You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore. The President of the United States is given a free pass to ignore the Constitution, tap our phones, and lead us to war on a pack of lies.

While we're fiddling in Iraq, the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving pom-poms instead of asking hard questions.

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have.
 

These are times that call for leadership.

But when you look around, you've got to ask: "Where have all the leaders gone?" Where are the curious, creative communicators?

Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, competence, and common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point.

Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo.

We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.

Name me one leader who emerged from the crisis of Hurricane Katrina.

Excerpted from Where Have All the Leaders Gone?  Copyright (c) 2007 by Lee Iacocca. All rights reserved

WITNESS IN WASHINGTON WEEKLY

The Washington Office of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

October 22, 2007   [posted here 10-22-07]

This week's issue brings some important messages and helpful resource material:

Ecumenical Advocacy Days 2008:
Claiming a Vision of True Security

[10-16-07]

Last year, nearly 900 participants gathered showing the strong commitment of the ecumenical community to seek justice through effective advocacy on public policy. In 2008, our conference theme: 2008: Claiming a Vision of True Security hopes to encourage broad participation and asks for movement toward a new vision of true human security – one which seeks not only the absence of tension, but the presence of justice (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.).

This new vision is based on a song of praise calling God’s children to trust in him, "Some trust in chariots, and some in horses, but our trust in the name of our God" (Psalm 20:7, New King James Bible). In the language of today, Psalm 20:7 might read: Some trust in violence and take pride in technologies of war, and some in military power, but our trust is in the unfailing love and faithfulness of our saving God. The 2008 Ecumenical Advocacy Days assembly will call upon our government to conceive new visions of security in our homes, our neighborhoods and our world.

The Presbyterian Church (USA) Washington Office has been a sponsor of Ecumenical Advocacy Days since its inception in 2003. Ecumenical Advocacy Days is a movement of the ecumenical Christian community and its recognized partners and allies. The annual gatherings include plenary sessions and workshops organized into eight tracks: Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Latin America, the United States, Global Economic Justice, Environmental Justice, and Global Security issues. Its goal, through worship, theological reflection and opportunities for learning and witness, is to strengthen the Christian voice for a more just and peaceful world and to mobilize for advocacy on a wide variety of U.S. domestic and international policy issues.

For anyone interested in where the American public really stands on the big issues that distinguish progressives from conservatives – including the issues at the forefront of today’s political debates – "The Progressive Majority: Why a Conservative America Is a Myth" offers hard facts and analysis based on decades of data from some of the nation’s most respected and nonpartisan public opinion researchers. This is the evidence that political leaders have a mandate to pursue bold, progressive policies.

This report by the Campaign for America’s Future and Media Matters for America shows that in study after study, solid majorities of Americans take progressive stands on a full spectrum of issues, from bread-and-butter economics to the so-called "values" issues where conservatives claim preeminence.

This past weekend was brightened (or burdened, depending on your point of view) by an important step in the current Presidential campaign. Initiated largely by Jim Wallis of Sojourners, the three leading Democratic candidates – Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards – appeared together on CNN, where each responded to several questions from journalists and religious leaders about the intersection of faith and politics. The stated topic was "Faith, Values and Poverty," reflecting Wallis’ conviction that poverty must be seen as the major issue in this campaign.

So, how did it go?

We bring you comments from Jim Wallis himself, Peter Steinfels of the New York Times, Brian Lewis wrote in the Springfield, MO, News-Leader, and Sister Joan Chittister -- with perhaps the most provocative of the responses.

This weekly bulletin, produced by the Washington Office of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), focuses this week on some issues about which the PC(USA) has stated policies, and which are now wending their way somewhere through the halls of Congress:

• Tell Your Members of Congress to Vote NO on Fast Track Renewal!

• Housing Vouchers: an important support for low-income families

• Stated Clerk's Letter to Congress Opposing Free Trade Agreements

• Clarification of Presbyterian Policy Related to the Supreme Court Ruling on Late Term Abortions

TO: United States Congresspersons

Dear Congresspersons:

I am writing to you on behalf of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to urge you to oppose the current Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) coming before Congress, which include the U.S.-Panama FTA, U.S.-Peru FTA, U.S.-Colombia FTA, and U.S.-Korea FTA. The 216th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.) declared its opposition to free trade agreements negotiated under the current trade model since these agreements fail to adequately protect workers’ rights, human rights, food security, and environmental standards. Nor do they extend to governments and indigenous peoples the ability to regulate corporations to protect the common good.

By Berry Craig    [5-5-07]

I like Naomi Wolf’s books. But if a story posted elsewhere on the Witherspoon
website is an example of how she writes history, she should stick to other topics.
The headline is a grabber: "Fascist America, in 10 easy steps." The story is half-baked.
Wolf claims history proves it takes "10 steps" to turn a democracy into a dictatorship. "... Each of these 10 steps has already been initiated today in the United States by the Bush administration," she added.

Baloney.

Don’t get me wrong. I didn’t vote for the Union-Buster-in-Chief (or his daddy). My candidate in 2000 was Al Gore, whom Wolf worked for.

Wolf’s heart is in the right place. Her head is somewhere else if she thinks "George Bush and his administration are using time-tested tactics to close down an open society."

Bush is not a big fan of the Bill of Rights (except for the Second Amendment).

But that doesn’t make him a Fascist.

Wolf would do well to lay off the "F" word when writing about the president. (There are some good substitutes at www.bartcop.com. "George the Lesser," "Panderer-in-Chief" and "Toxic Texan" are my three favorites, with "Kennebunkport Kowboy" earning an honorable mention.)

History teaches that dictators grab power with bullets. American presidents get the keys to the White House with ballots, admittedly not all of them counted fairly. (Like Wolf, I haven’t forgotten Florida in ’00 and the "Family values means having your little brother steal the election for you" bumper stickers.)

Wolf’s story reminds me of loopy John Birch Society pamphlets somebody used to leave in my hometown post office. They said LBJ was turning America Communist.

More recently, anti-Bill Clinton bumper stickers had the letter "C" in Clinton morphed into a hammer-and-sickle.

Equating Bush with Fascism is just as ridiculous.

I've spent most of my adult life reading, writing and teaching history. History shows that Bush couldn't make us a dictatorship even if he wanted to. Nowhere on earth has a home-grown dictator closed down a long-running democracy like ours.

Before Lenin, Stalin and the Communists, divine right czars ran Russia for centuries. Hitler and the Nazis toppled the Weimar Republic, but it was short-lived. For most of its history, Germany was ruled by Kaisers, kings and Holy Roman emperors.

Mussolini and the Fascists grabbed power from a weak Italian parliament and a king who was less than enamored of democracy.

China wasn’t a democracy before it went Communist. Neither was Cuba, South Vietnam or what became North Korea.

Wolf’s story is filled with dubious historical comparisons. Probably the worst one is where she links the USA Patriot Act, bad as it is, to infamous German legislation that made Hitler dictator.

It took World War II to get rid of Hitler. In 2009, Dubya won't ring the White House with tanks and troops and refuse to go home. He will depart (hopefully succeeded by a candidate Wolf and I will back).

Wolf would do better to compare Bush to Presidents John Adams and Richard Nixon. Like Bush, Adams – dubbed "King John I" by his detractors – and Tricky Dick believed in government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. They also figured anybody who opposed their policies was unpatriotic.

Adams got Congress to pass the Alien and Sedition Acts. It became a crime to criticize the president.

The Alien and Sedition Acts were even worse than the Patriot Act. But they didn’t make Adams a dictator. They cost him his job.

Thomas Jefferson became president in 1801. The Alien and Sedition Acts went away, and the republic got stronger.

Like Adams and Bush, Nixon was obsessed with security. He got the government to spy illegally on Vietnam War protestors – he called them "bums" -- and drew up an "enemies list."

Facing almost certain impeachment and removal from office, Nixon resigned in disgrace. Remember the "Jail to the Chief" buttons?

To be sure, between "King John I" and "George the Lesser," we have had other politicians –Democrats and Republicans -- who trod hard on our liberties.

Attorney Gen. A. Mitchell Palmer trumped up the "Great Red Scare" after World War I. Sen. Joe McCarthy resurrected Red-baiting after World War II.

Neither Palmer nor McCarthy made us a dictatorship. Like Nixon, they made the rogue’s gallery of American history.

My guess is history won’t be kind to Dubya either.

The voters weren’t last November. The Republicans wrapped themselves in Old Glory and implied that a Democratic sweep would be a victory for the terrorists. Republicans love to impugn the patriotism of the loyal – disloyal to Dubya – opposition.

The Democrats retook the House and Senate. Bush admitted the GOP got a "thumping."

I suspect the Patriot Act is on borrowed time.

Anyway, the '06 election was a headline-grabber. Wolf must have missed it, because she wrote, "Right now, only a handful of patriots are trying to hold back the tide of tyranny" in George W. Bush’s America. No doubt, whoever left the John Birchers’ fliers in the post office would have insisted he was a patriot, too, "… trying to hold back the tide of tyranny."

Implying, or saying flat-out, that a conservative like Bush is Fascistic is as asinine as implying, or saying flat out, that a liberal like Wolf is a Communist "fellow traveler" (The Birchers especially liked "fellow traveler" – "Comsymp," too.). Washington under Bush isn't going to become Berlin under Hitler or Rome under Mussolini, not by a long shot.

We are no more goose-stepping toward Fascism under Bush than we were marching toward Communism behind LBJ.

Real Fascists and Communists put pesky scribes like Wolf, union-activist history teachers and religious dissenters like Witherspooners behind barbed wire, or shoot them. Fascists and Communists make sure their guys don't get thumped at the polls.

– Berry Craig is a professor of history at the West Kentucky Community and Technical College in Paducah. He and his wife, Melinda, are members of the Witherspoon Society.

See a contrary point of view from Berry Craig, above.

A recent article in The Guardian/UK advances a harsh word of warning to the people of the United States: that this nation (or at least the current administration) is taking many of the steps toward dictatorship that we have seen before under such rulers as Hitler and Pinochet.

These "ten easy steps" include invoking e a terrifying internal and external enemy; creating a "gulag," a prison system outside the rule of law; developing a "thug caste" of private paramilitary forces, that we now call security contractors; setting up an internal surveillance system; harassing citizens’ groups; engaging in arbitrary detention and release; pressuring key individuals such as academics and civil servants to go along; controlling the media; equating dissent with treason; and suspending the rule of law.

Sound familiar? Yet this is a serious charge, and you may want to read the article and offer your own response. 
Just send a note, to be shared here.

The author, Naomi Wolf, has recently written The End of America: A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot, which will be published by Chelsea Green in September. A political activist, she worked with the Clinton team on his successful 1996 re-election campaign, and for Al Gore’s 2000 election bid. Wolf has written several other books, and is a co-founder of the Woodhull Institute for Ethical Leadership.

Her closing paragraph:

"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands … is the definition of tyranny," wrote James Madison. We still have the choice to stop going down this road; we can stand our ground and fight for our nation, and take up the banner the founders asked us to carry.

For years Jim Wallis of Sojourners has called for a new faith-based approach to politics in which liberals and evangelicals can unite.

Now others, from different perspectives, are saying the same thing.

Jon Basil Utley, associate publisher of The American Conservative, says that some conservatives are becoming more critical of the war. Even if their opposition is rooted in different thinking from that of the liberals who oppose the war (and he notes that many of them, including many Democratic Party leaders, are really not standing against the war), the two sides need each other if they are to have any impact on the growing trend toward Empire. And, he says, they can work together for some goals that both sides value, such as true national security, a return to use of negotiations to settle problems, and avoiding further spread of the war, which would among other things be "bad for business."
His essay is on the Foreign Policy in Focus website >>

And from the Left, John Nichols, Washington correspondent for The Nation, writes of a group of conservatives which is advancing a so-called "American Freedom Agenda," which calls for such radical measures as ending the use of military commissions to prosecute crimes, prohibiting the use of secret evidence or evidence obtained by torture, and ending National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping. (And lots more!)

We received this good note yesterday from Dean Lindsey, a Witherspoon member in Salem, VA

In reference to the recent article "Is it Time for a Presidential Apology?" I would like to mention an outstanding book by Psychiatrist Aaron Lazare called On Apology. It's the kind of book that any preacher could use as the basis for three or four good sermons. Lazare analyzes why we have trouble apologizing and what makes for both good and bad apologies.

For instance, apologies that are conditional, make excuses or shift blame simply cannot hit the mark. Examples would be "I am sorry if my remarks hurt your feelings" or "I am sorry that I hit you, but I thought you were planning to hit me." However, a genuine apology – ordinarily it is simple and to the point – is a completely cleansing and freeing thing both for the person who apologizes and the one who receives the apology.

By Daniel Malotky, Associate Professor of Religion and Philosophy, and Director of Ethics across the Curriculum at Greensboro College.

President Bush has acknowledged on several occasions that mistakes have been made in Iraq. His statements, however, have been framed to present him as a strong leader who is willing to take responsibility for his actions. None of his public remarks has constituted an apology, and he scrupulously avoids any suggestion that the invasion as a whole was a mistake.

In these non-apologies, we confront the tragic gap between the ideal and the real. Repentance is at the heart of the faith this president so publicly espouses; the intersection of spirituality and morality, for Christians, lies in the ironically positioned capacity for admitting one's moral failure. The redemption that the President surely desires is only possible by shedding the sense of his own — and, by extension, America's — inherent righteousness by admitting wrongdoing.

The Federal Budget: a Human Needs Budget?
For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. – Matthew 6:21

[2-21-07]

The Presbyterian Washington Office is posting very helpful analyses of the proposed federal Budget, from the perspective of our church's views on social needs and social justice.  These are being posted as part of the office's Witness in Washington Weekly, with the first section appearing in the February 12, 2007 letter, and the second in the February 19 letter. They are authored by Leslie G. Woods, staff person for Domestic Poverty and Environmental Issues. More articles will be posted in the near future.

The first section offers a general introduction to the budget process, and some of the major issues and concerns.  The second part deals more specifically with funding for hunger and nutrition programs, home energy assistance, and conservation.

America's Holy Warriors   [1-2-07]

Chris Hedges, the former New York Times' Mideast Bureau chief, warns that the radical Christian right is coming dangerously close to its goal of co-opting the country's military and law enforcement.  He begins:

The drive by the Christian right to take control of military chaplaincies, which now sees radical Christians holding roughly 50 percent of chaplaincy appointments in the armed services and service academies, is part of a much larger effort to politicize the military and law enforcement. This effort signals the final and perhaps most deadly stage in the long campaign by the radical Christian right to dismantle America's open society and build a theocratic state. A successful politicization of the military would signal the end of our democracy.

Stories on U.S. politics from 2006 are archived >>

A major
Ghost Ranch event this summer!

July 28 - August 3, 2008

Paths toward Peace and Justice:
Spirituality, Earth-Care, and the Prophetic Word in a time of Violence

More info >>

If you like what you find here,
we hope you'll help us keep this website going ... and growing!

Please consider making a special contribution -- large or small -- to help us continue and improve this service.

Click here to send a gift online, using your credit card, through PayPal.

Or send your check, made out to "Witherspoon Society" and marked "web site," to our Witherspoon  Bookkeeper: