Who I'm Not voting for in the 2024 Presidential Election and Why not.

 The U.S. Presidential election is a week away, and I wanted to explain how I am voting in it. This is not an endorsement; I don't expect anyone to vote like I am. However, I do feel that I am making a logical and sensible decision, given the choices before me.  

If you were not aware, the election is between Democratic candidate Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. In the state of Illinois, where I reside, one other candidate is also listed on the ballot.

I have quite a bit of history when it comes to voting in elections.  I turned 18 in 1982 and voted officially in that election and voted in my first Presidential election in 1984.  Before that, I had voted in 2 mock elections, one in 1976 at Grove Jr. High School where I  voted for Gerald Ford over Jimmy Carter, and one in 1980  at Elk Grove High School where I voted for Carter over Ronald Reagan.  Incidentally, I voted for Carter for the same reason I voted against Carter: I thought that the incumbent candidate needed more time to complete their work.  On both these occasions my views were in the minority. 

My procedures for choosing who to vote for have evolved since those mock elections days.  I take the responsibility to vote very seriously.  Initially, I try to pick between the majority party candidates, and if neither stands out to me as the best choice I may vote for an independent or write-in candidate. I believe one time, four years ago, when I found no candidate worthy of my vote,  I just skipped down to the next race in the election.

The first thing I try to determine is whether the candidates are credible.  That is to say are they believable?  Will they do what they say they are going to do?  It may surprise some people that this is the first thing that I try to determine.  Why not look at what the candidates say they believe and vote on the one I agree with the most?  Why not? Because, if the candidate is not credible it doesn't matter whether I agree with what they are saying if I don't believe they can or will do it.  

Among the two major party candidates, there is only one credible candidate and that is Vice President Harris.  When I read the issues page of her website I believed her when she said these are the issues that are important to her. So, she is credible in that regard.  

Unfortunately, there is very little that Donald Trump says that I believe.  To me, he is not a credible candidate.  He says that he won the last election, In fact, 3 minutes into his Jan 6th, 2020 speech at the Capitol Mall, he stated "We won this election, and we won it in a landslide".  This was never a credible statement.  Trump has been creating a false narrative since he first declared in 2015 that he was seeking high office and that the only way he could lose is if other people cheated. So naturally when he lost the election it was because of massive fraud. 

There are very few things that Trump has said that I have believed.  Most of his few credible statements are not positive.  He said recently that if reelected he will consider arresting his opposition.  As scary as that image is and how undemocratic it seems, I can totally believe that he would consider that.  When he was caught on a hot mike saying he wanted to force himself on women, I found that credible.  Morally reprehensible, yet credible.  When as President, he maligned the countries that were sending us the most immigrants, I truly believed that he could be so mean-spirited and uncaring.  Unfortunately, all those statements match to what has already been revealed by his character. When he makes positive claims, his character, and his history of previously false claims, make it virtually impossible for me to believe a word he says.  

This is why when he claimed to be pro-life when running in 2016 I did not believe him.  When he actually did appoint conservative judges and justices I was surprised.  Those appointments did lead to Roe vs. Wade being overturned in 2022. So you might think that I would now find Trump credible at least on this issue.  No, Trump has backpedaled on his abortion views for the 2024 election and so I can't find him credible on that issue either.  I chalk it up more to political expediency than anything else.  

In most Presidential elections since I started voting in 1984 there have been (in my opinion)  2 major party credible candidates running against each other.  The only exceptions are the aforementioned Donald Trump and Bill Clinton.  In Clinton's case, I never found him to be a trustworthy candidate.  

If there are 2 credible candidates I don't then try to decide who's more credible.  I decide who's more worthy of my vote.  Only credible candidates are worthy of anyone's vote, and then I am free to decide from who's left.  

The Republican Party has done the country a great disservice over the last 3 election cycles by not putting a credible candidate on the Presidential ballot,  Fortunately for them, most voters look for a candidate who purports to match their views first and then judge the character of that candidate.  This puts the voter in a difficult situation by looking for candidates who agree with them they open themselves up to be maneuvered by master operators like Clinton and Trump.  

In 1992, it seemed like the Republicans saw Clinton for who he was, but the Democrats failed to grasp that. They were enamored with the idea of putting the first Democrat in the White House since Carter won in '76.  In 2016 despite a field of credible Republican candidates, the Republicans reimagined themselves in the worst possible way picking a bully who could win and make populist gains at the risk of the party's soul.  

I think it might be easy to think that if there is only one credible candidate that is the candidate you should vote for. But this has simply not been true for me.   I could have gladly supported Joe Biden years ago when he was a Pro-Life Democrat, especially over Trump.   Biden decided to believe that a Pro-Life Democrat could not elect his President and changed his stance so he could get the job he always wanted.  Biden abandoned his beliefs for the expediency of office for the same motives that the Republicans abandoned their integrity to embrace Trump.  In the 2016 and 2020 elections, this put me in quite a pickle.  I didn't believe that anyone should vote for Trump and I could not bring myself to vote for Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden. While I found both these candidates credible, my conscience would not let me support them.

People would tell me you must choose the lesser of two evils.  I would say why should I choose evil?   Also, if I had to choose the lesser of two evils in those elections it would not have been Trump.  I'm not even sure that Trump would ever admit that he was the lesser of two anything. "People are always telling me Don you're so evil.  Frankly, If I was going to be evil I'd be amazing at it."

Adam Kizinger made an impassioned speech at the 2024 DNC urging his fellow Republicans to vote for Harris in the election,  It is tempting but the truth is that the 2024 election has me in the same pickle. I won't consider Trump and when I do consider Harris, I can't get past her pro-choice positions.  It's frustrating because I would have gladly supported someone like Nikki Haley or Kizinger and will probably end up writing one of their names on my ballot.  I'm not picky, I just want to be able to choose between two credible candidates and the Republican party keeps on robbing me of that opportunity.  

Thoughts on the Jimmy Carter Legacy on his 100th birthday.

  Jimmy Carter did not define the American Presidency.  It could well be argued that he defined the American Post Presidency.

To call Carter's 1  term tumultuous is to over-inflate the word tumult, it is better to refer to it as crisis-plagued. He inherited an energy crisis from Ford and left Reagan with a hostage crisis. In between these crises, He had to deal with a Russian invasion of Afghanistan that led to an Olympic Boycott and broker a peace agreement in the Middle East. I  highly recommend this article by Robert A. Strong for a synopsis of his presidency.

When Carter ended his 4 year residency in the White House in early 1981 he was 56 years old. That's 4 years younger than I am now.  This I believe is when his true legacy began.  Since leaving the White House, he started The Carter Center,  a global human rights organization, he has been a highly visible and highly productive volunteer of Habitat for Humanity, a prolific author, and a mediator and critic in Presidential politics.  He is the only U.S. President to win the Nobel Prize for accomplishments after his time as President.

Along with his work with Habitat for Humanity, the two accomplishments of Cater that I resonate the most with are his ability to speak his mind on divisive issues and his work as a rotating Sunday School teacher at his church in Plains Georgia.  An example of the first is a few years back when he tried to convince the Democratic Party to change their stance on abortion because it was causing so many voters who would otherwise vote for Democrats to either not vote or support Republicans.  

Jimmy Carter is not my favorite President, but he has long been my favorite former President.  When you look at his life as a whole, he may well be the most accomplished President we have ever had,  I find it fitting that he is the only President so far to live 100 years.  Next time I am enjoying boiled peanuts I will think about the Georgia peanut farmer who became an American icon.

10 Things I'd Like To See The Republican Party Do No That The Election Is Over

 My former pastor and fellow blogger Lindy Scott mentioned in a recent post, a list of upcoming posts that he would be addressing in his blog. One of those was about the future of the Republican Party. This reminded me that there are some specific areas that I would like to see the GOP address going forward now that the transition to a Biden Presidency has begun.

These issues are as follows ...

Abortion

I've heard it said that Donald Trump has been the most pro-life president this country has ever had. I am not sure if this statement has any merit, but for my present purpose the veracity of the statement need not come into play.

Abortion, in my mind, is one of the most critical issues of my lifetime. I am against abortion but I must admit that those on the other side of the issue have been very effective labelling it as a reproductive rights issue rather than a pro-choice issue. The bottom line is it is a human rights issue and it should be addressed as one. I would like to see Republicans (and Democrats for that matter) stand up for all life particularly for those like the human fetus who cannot defend themselves.

During the past election season, I viewed commercial after commercial where Republicans (and some Democrats like Illinois Congressman Dan Lipinski) were lambasted for their extreme views on abortion.

Click here to see one such ad against Lipinski.

Their "extreme" views were that abortion should be ended and that our tax dollars shouldn't fund abortion. These views are not extreme and need to be talked about in the light of day.

I would like to see Republicans not only stand strong against abortion but also lead the discussion on how to solve this problem. Many people align themselves with the Republican party because of this issue. So far, I don't believe they haven't gotten very much return on their investment.

Racial Reconciliation

It is often said that perception is reality. I think I can argue effectively for or against that statement. That is probably from my debate background. For now, let's just concede that it's a true statement. Lets review some perceptions for a moment.

Donald Trump has often been perceived as a racist. The Republican Party, it has been argued, has become the Donald Trump party. So if both those perceptions are in fact, reality does it follow that the Republican Party is racist?

I fervently hope not. But this perception is very real to many and I am certain this perception precluded many people from voting for Republicans in general and Trump in particular when they may have been more inclined to vote for them if these perceptions didn't exist.

Republicans need to show an immediate conciliatory approach to race relations in this country. Something I learned in my over 20 years in customer service is that its okay for me to apologize for something that isn't my fault. Slavery wasn't my fault. But I am sorry about it. It was a horrible practice to strip people from their homes and exploit, humiliate, and subjugate them. It is a shameful part of our history and it's even more shameful that we are still so divided racially in this country. It is just as shameful that so many people are ignorant of or tone deaf to these inequalities.

Republicans need to be on the leading edge of promoting racial harmony. The first step would be found in embracing the problem, even if the problem is just a perception. Changing the perception of the party to accepting people of all races rather than being perceived as a party of racists would be an important step in the right direction.

COVID 19

President elect Biden credits his victory in some part to making Trump's handling of Covid a major issue of the election. Republicans need to work with Biden and the Democrats as much as they can in stopping the spread of Covid. There is no logical reason why this should not be a bi-partisan slam dunk of an issue.

I think that Republicans do need to stand up and make sure that aborted fetal tissues are not used in potential co-vid vaccines. They need to be pro-actively seeking out scientific solutions that don't endanger any vulnerable populations including the unborn.

Distancing from Donald Trump

Speaking of covid, the Republicans need to begin socially and politically distancing themselves from the soon to be erstwhile president. There needs to be an almost Costanzalike mantra in any Republican politician asking what Trump would do, and then doing the opposite.

An example of this would be, if you find yourself speaking at a press conference and you are asked by a reporter what you would tell the millions of Americans who are scared. You probably don't want to go with "I'd tell them you're a bad reporter."

Click here to see the exchange I'm referring to.

Another thing I learned in customer service is that apologizing for someone else is nowhere near as effective as solving the person's problem. Solving the problem by employing a different approach than the way it was originally mishandled is more effective than just an apology on its own. Republicans going forward by handling issues in a way not reminiscent of Trump will go a long way in making the party a more viable choice for others in the future.

Establish a Platform

The Republicans chose not to have a platfrom at the 2020 Trump infomercial convention. This was a mistake. Their alternative was even worse. In the document the RNC did provide they stated that

RESOLVED, That the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President’s America-first agenda;
RESOLVED, That the 2020 Republican National Convention will adjourn without adopting a new platform until the 2024 Republican National Convention;

Resolution Regarding The Republican Party Platform 2020

Some readers may have bristled when I said a few paragraphs ago that there was a perception that the Republican Party had become the Donald Trump Party. When a document designed to show your party's guiding principles says your party's mission is to enthusiastically support your President's agenda, it's hard not to get that perception.

Adherence to this document means now that President Trump is on his way out of office, the plan for next 4 years is to enthusiastically support the agenda of a former one term president who lost both the popular and electoral vote? As far as plans go, this is not a great one.

The party needs to redefine itself and represent that redefinition to the public.

Address Gun Violence

One of the hallmarks of a two-party system is that each party addresses issues in their own way. This is good and can be very effective. However, I believe that the gun issue is one that keeps many people from voting Republican or at least from feeling good about it. Guns may not kill people but they are part of the equation. Republicans need to realize that the gun lobby is never going to support Democrats. They can afford to pass laws that protect citizens better without infringing on their 2nd amendment rights. It's hard to argue that women don't have rights over their own bodies but everyone has rights to all manners of weapons. It's easier to argue that both parties should limit their rights that could deny other people life.

Widen Base

The Republicans need to take steps in the next 4 years to widen their base. Again, I think a concilatory approach is what is needed here. I think the Republican party can be a party of inclusion by showing that they can meet the needs of their constituents. I think by making some of the changes I have listed here a priority in the future they can add to their base without losing their historic identity.

Reform Immigration Compassionately

There are few places where walking back Trump rhetoric and actions is more important than immigration. Immigration is an important issue in this country. It is not going to get solved in a tweet or a debate. It is one of those issues that I believe needs to be solved on a bi-partisan basis. The reason why I say this is because otherwise it will just change from election to election depending on which party is in power. If Republicans want to build a multi racial base, they can do so by helping Democrats solve immigration permanently.

Reestablish Sound Foreign Policy

I know very little about foreign policy. What I do know is that Donald Trump's approach was far different than the historical Republican approach. I believe the foreign policies of Trump should be abandoned and the old approach brought back.

Appeal to Independents.

I don't think most Americans are 100% red or 100% blue, I think we are red, white and blue. Republicans living in a post Trump society should go forward trying to craft their message in a way that independents and the undecided can relate with. They should listen to their constituencies and meet needs and embrace change.

Now, none of these 10 things talk about free market capitalism or small government or many of the other Republican fundamentals. Other peoples' lists may look totally different than mine. In fact, some peoples' items might be opposites of the ones on my list. But that's okay, I think the most important aspect of this exercise was not the examination of the Republican Party but the examination of my values to see how the political parties line up to them. I also have a list of things I'd like to see the Democrats do in a Biden administration.

At the beginning of this post I mentioned how Lindy Scott ended his most recent post talking about other posts he is working on. I'd like to do the same.

Other subjects I would like to address in the future would be ...

Sizing up the 16 other Republican Primary candidates in 2016 for a run in 2024.

Why Bipartisanship is so important in the early days of the Biden Presidency.

Why a Trump 2024 candidacy would be a step in the wrong direction.

Those are just the political ones, I also have several chili recipes I'd like to spill the beans about.

An Open Letter to Alyssa Milano

 Dear Ms. Milano,

I am writing to you and to an extent all the signatories of your recent open Letter regarding HB 481 to Georgia Governor Kemp and Speaker Ralston and to anyone else who reads it, but ostensibly, I am writing to you.

First of all. let me begin by saying by saying how I appreciate how passionate and articulate you are. I really do commend you that you took a stand on an issue that you are passionate about and related it to your current work situation. I appreciate how you gathered like minded people in the same situation to express your opinions. Expressing social and political concern is everyone's responsibility and I for one am glad to see you doing it, regardless of whether I share your concerns or not.

In this world we live in our opinions can often be expressed in hashtags. #HBIsBadforBusiness seems to express yours. I take a differing view. If I had to express myself hashtagedly, I might say #HBisGood4Babies. The bill ,which I hope Governor Kemp signs into law, protects unborn babies at the point that their heartbeat can be recognized. In my mind this shows them to be something different than a part of the mother, to be disposed anyway she sees fit. We may well fundamentally disagree on this point, However a distinct heartbeat is more than adequate medical evidence to make me think that my view is the correct one.

My Dad used to say to me my right to wave my fists in the air ended squarely at his nose. This is how I feel about abortion and reproductive rights. A woman's reproductive right ends squarely at that cute little babies nose. A fetus with a heartbeat is a far cry from a mass of cells invading a woman's body. 2 years ago my wife had a mass of cells invading her body. Since it was my wife, my opinion was get those nasty cells out of her body anyway you can. Now, my wife wasn't pregnant, she had breast cancer and her cancerous cells certainly did not have any chance of ever becoming viable on their own or having their own functioning beating heart.

Ms. Milano, I would not be surprised at all if some of those disagreeing with your and your fellow signatories opinion might propose boycotting your artistic endeavors. I think that's a bad idea. As strongly as I feel about these issues this does not mean that anyone who disagrees with me needs to be punished economically. I certainly wish you the best in all your endeavors. I hope you in time can come along to my way of thinking that it is babies that need your protection and eloquent defense much more than reproductive freedom ever did,

Dave Roller

A non-sexy start to blogging A to Z

 as in Abstinence

Sunday April 1, 2012

Hi.  My name is Dave aka Home School Dad or HSD.  You can just call me HS or D.  Whatever floats your boat.

This is my first installment of Blogging A to Z.  For 26 of the next 31 days I will be blogging in alphabetical order.  This is a pretty big to do at the blogosphere;click here to go to the main blogging A to Z page.  Some participating blogs are having a theme intertwined to their A to Z posts.  Not this cat. I am going to stick to what this blog does best, randomness.Some posts may be meaty, even controversial, while others will be whimsical and still others will  be boring.  (Don't believe me?  Stop by tomorrow.) 

Today's word is abstinence.  Abstinence as defined by the Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (10th Edition) means voluntary forbearance  especially from  indulgence of an appetite or craving  or from eating some foods.  This is a fine definition but not the one most people think of when they hear the word.  Most people think of abstaining from sex, specifically from abstaining from sex prior to marriage.  This is the meaning I am referring to.

Abstinence has become a bit of a dirty word in our modern age. In our society, sex is regarded as a rite of passage into adulthood.  Those who want to promote abstinence are often ridiculed, belittled or at least labeled impractical.

But when you think about it, abstinence is immensely practical.  Let's think about abstinence in how it pertains to one of the most divisive topics, I can think of, Following the Cubs or White Sox  Abortion.

Abortion is so divisive, that  the language describing it varies depending on which side of the issue you are on. Those who favor abortion,  speak of a woman's right to choose  and are labeled pro-choice.  Those against abortion use terms like sanctity of life and are labeled pro-life.  These are misnomers if ever there were misnomers.  Most so called "pro choicers" that I know hold life to be very dear.  Many are passionate against war or the death penalty because they hold life so dear.  Nor are prolifers really anti choice.  They want to see women with unwanted pregnancies "choose" to come to term and make "choices" that will benefit themselves, their child, and in many cases married couples unable to have their own children.

So what do you need to have an abortion?  You need to be pregnant.  And what do you need to be pregnant?  You need to have sex. So abstinence is a very practical way to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country and thus the amount of abortions.

Abstinence is practical  in terms of birth control,  preventing disease, even in promoting self esteem.  If you only have sexual relations with one person in your lifetime, there is little chance of suffering by comparison.  It is practical in addressing sexual education for the next generation.This, we did it, they're going to do it, let's have them be safe about it approach is about as effective as the let them figure it own on their own, we did approach.  My kids have been told early on that sex is for marriage only.  Amy and I also have the testimony of our own abstinence during our friendship and courtship to back up our words.

So some of you are probably saying practical schmactical promoting abstinence in this day and age won't work when premarital sex is rampant.   I'd say part of the reason why it's rampant is because of this false idea that abstinence is impractical.  I mean that argument is certainly on the menu at Bob's House of Self Fulfilling Prophecies.

Resistance to abstinence and acceptance of abortion are both built on the faulty assumption that our bodies are ours alone and we can do with them what we want as long as no one (except a fetus) gets hurt.

The truth is that our bodies are a gift from God who created us. God fashioned Adam out of the dust of the world he had made days earlier.  He didn't stop with Adam.   He made Eve from Adam as Adam slept.  After that He instituted marriage and procreation. After that he called it a week.  I think one of the reasons why Biblical creation is regarded as faith or fantasy rather than science or history is to ignore this idea that our bodies our not are own. 

Abstinence prior to marriage is key to building a healthy, happy marriage.  Self-control is possible with the help of God,who according to 2 Peter 1:3  has given us everything we need for life and godliness. I'm not saying abstinence is easy, many good things aren't.  I'm saying that abstinence is worth while.  I'll share more of mine and Amy's experiences with abstinence in later posts.

So that's A.  Come back tomorrow for a boring post. 

As a Former Fetus . . .

Fits me to a T

My life in T-Shirts

It's been a while since I posted about about some of the t-shirts I've worn that best speak to who I am/was/will be. 

Today's shirts goes back more than 20 years to my college daze.

I used to frequent our local Christian book store and buy lots of cassettes and c.d.s as well as books.  He had a pretty good t-shirt selection.  Most Christian T-shirts at the time were parodies of popular secular t-shirts.  Those were so not me.  So I generally stuck with Christian Music shirts or the occasional bible verse shirt.  Until one day I met the shirt that really spoke my mind.  It said as a former fetus I oppose abortion.  This was written inside a picture of a fetus's foot print.  On the back it had several foot prints in different stages of life. 

I loved that shirt and wore it as often as I could. 

Of all the times I ever wore that shirt, only one time did someone say it offended them.  It was never my intention to offend, just to express my opinion.  I asked that person if any part of the shirt was untrue? Technically, I formerly was a fetus.  Truthfully, I do oppose abortion.  Since aborted fetuses never gain the opportunity to weigh in on  the abortion debate, as a former fetus I felt the need to say I liked staying around. 

Not sure what ever became of the shirt.  Some twenty years later, I am sure I've outgrown it.  I just haven't outgrown the sentiment. 

My name is Dave, and I approve this message.

It is just a few days before the midterm elections and even a guy like me who doesn't watch broadcast t.v. and only reads the Sunday paper periodically (It's a periodical, so it's okay.) can be overwhelmed with political messages. Between the print ads I receive in my mail, the phone calls, and radio ads I am besieged with election opinions. I received 8 pieces of mail today, 7 political ads and a circular for Bath and Body Works. If Plumeria were to run for office, I would consider voting for it.

Political advertising turn me off because they are so often negative. Their is also a general absence of talking about the positive things of your of your own candidacy. I received a letter today from a candidate who wanted to complain about the falsehoods and smear techniques his opponent was using against him. The thing is the letter did not really tell me anything good about the candidate or even defend him self against the purported slander. He did however take time to attack his opponent and ask me for money.

My son has even noticed all the negative campaigning. While listening an attack ad the Illinois Republican Senatorial Candidate was running against his democratic opponent. My son just commented, He should just say "My opponent is good, but I'm better."

Many of the mailers I receive comment on the misspending on of those in power. They also comment on the great economic problems in our country and specifically our. state. It got me to wondering how much less debt we would be in if there was a way to use all the money spent on political advertising could actually be used in running the country. Call me crazy.

Like many voters I have pet issues that are more important to me than others. Both candidates for my state representative have come and visited me at house this year and I have told them both that as a home schooling parent like that Illinois has very few requirement for Home Education. I have encouraged them that to keep me happy they should keep it that way. I am also pro-life, anti-abortion, anti-choice, whatever you want to call it. It bothers me that neither of the aforementioned candidates agree with me on that particular subject. That particular race
has no other candidates so I will have to choose on other criteria. This is unfortunate as the pro-life issue is usually the deal breaker with me.

In the Senate race my son was commenting on, neither the Republican or Democratic opponent are pro-life; I have decided to back the Libertarian candidate, who is. I received a phone call Saturday asking if I would be voting Republican in the gubernatorial and U.S. Senate and House elections. I explained that I was backing the Republican in the governors race and the House race but explained why I was going Libertarian in the Senate race. The caller responded "that's too bad.". Being a total smart aleck I asked if it was too bad that was voting for 2 Republicans, or if it was too bad I was voting my conscience for Senator. She said that she knew the Republican candidate for Senator and I should vote for him. I reexplained my reasoning in not supporting a pro-choice candidate when there was a pro-life one on the ballot. Her response was that a vote for the Libertarian was really a vote for the Democrat. Our call ended soon after that. What I didn't tell her (not because I'm not a smart aleck, but only because I didn't think of it) was okay I'll vote for the Democrat then.

So those are some political thoughts that have been simmering over the past few weeks. I'll be back tomorrow to talk about religion.

Next Time: Who's Fiddling on the Roof First

addressing the President

In planning my 1 year blog-o-versary which takes place later this week, my mind has become a virtual university of blogging theory. I am reviewing what worked in the past year and what didn't. What new ideas I have for the blog and what old ones never quite materialized. One idea I had has to do with the fact that many people in the blog-o-verse talk about hot topics. Chasing headlines has not been what I did here in year 1. In fact, I have been thinking for a while that blogging about cold topics would be nice .

The problem however is that some hot topics are cyclical and even though one issue had cooled considerably by this summer, in early fall it reached another boiling point. What I am referring to is President Obama speaking to students. The students I was planning on writing about was the Notre Dame graduating class of 2009. However, on the day after Labor Day, Obama addressed school children and was met with controversy, once again.


I decided I would wait a few more months and let the memory of the angst that preceded the latter speech die down. Like the Cold Topics idea, I have also wanted to have a segment in this blog called "Dave handles the tough issues". Now this may not seem like a tough issue to you, but in a moment you will see why it is one to me. It has to do with my relatives.

The University of Notre Dame invited President Obama to address the graduating class of 2009 and to receive an honorary degree. Many people were in an uproar because of the obvious disparity between their views on many issues, specifically those on abortion.


It may seem that this is a tough issue because of the divisive nature of the abortion debate. What really makes it hard for me is that issue seems to pit Notre Dame against President Obama. This is where my relatives come in.


My Mother is the biggest Notre Dame fanatic in the universe. So much so that Lou Holtz thinks she needs to tone it down. My Dad and sister both went to Notre Dame (that's how they met) but she takes it much more seriously than those 2 combined. If I am planning some party for my kids (2 of which had the gall to be born during football season), I check the ND website for the football schedule before sending her an invitation. If you don't believe that? look at my folks cars replete with Notre Dame banners, and vanity plates.


Speaking of cars, let's speak of my my Mother in Law. A nice Irish lass herself. Whose families hail from the lands of Cork and Kerry thus her maiden name of Corkery. Unlike, my mother, my MIL has actually lived at Notre Dame, when my FIL attended grad school there. But Golden Domer paraphernalia does not hang off her car, what does is the 2008 Election slogan: Hope. Not Fear. Obama 2008.


My mother in law loves Obama and my mother loves Notre Dame. So How do I tight rope this issue to make sure that my family has places to dine on the Holidays? I will tread gently, beginning by telling you my opinions before I watched Obama address the graduates and then some thoughts after watching it.


I do not agree with Obama's views on abortion. I have not voted for him in some part because of these views. I have written him and shared my opinions on the issue with him. However, I agree with Notre Dame inviting him to speak. I would gladly have President Obama address my children (which is why my children "attended" his speech to grade school students via the internet in September.) He is my president, not because I want him to be, but because God ordained it. I have enough respect for the position to know even being in the audience to hear him say things I disagree with would be a great honor.


Now as for the speech, now that I have viewed it. (Here is a link if you have not and desire to do so). I feel that I benefited from listening to hearing him speak at Notre Dame. Here is the President of the United States admitting to making changes in campaign policy due to the heartfelt letter of someone who disagreed with him. Here is a staunch supporter of abortion advocating less pregnancies and more adoptions. Perhaps he was just telling them what he wanted them to hear, it wouldn't be the first time a politician that. I think when you can have any sort of agreement from both sides of a divisive issue that this is a good thing.



Now quickly on to his address to students to kick off this 09-10 school l year. I was shocked at all the negative attention it received. While I disagreed with the stir the Notre Dame invite garnered, I at least understood it. This school flap, I did not get. Imagine this conversation:





A: I have an idea let's impeach the president.


B: Why should we do that? What high crimes and misdemeanors has he done?


A: He spoke to school children? What did he tell them, deface public property, slaughter sheep dogs, root for the White Sox?


B: No, stay in school.


Now, I understand that there was some objections to the teaching points that his staffers wrote for his speech. I also understand that the context of those questions was much easier for me to understand once I saw the speech.

Almost one year into the Obama presidency there may be legitimate reasons for his detractors and even his supporters to be concerned. His advisers may need to get him a new dictionary because it doesn't seem he understood the meaning of the word stimulus. He had only the support of his party on health care reform after portraying himself as a unifier. I am sure that many other people could you tell you what they think is wrong with the Obama Presidency, I am just saying speaking to students should not be on that list.

Next Time: The New Year in Review

A Letter from the President

This past February ago I posted about some letters and pictures our family sent to President Obama.

A few months ago the kids got a reply. It was typed on a postcard sized piece of good stock paper signed by the president and with the White House Seal embossed on top.

It states:

Thank you for your recent note, and for sharing your thoughts with me. Your kind words echo the messages of millions of American who have welcomed me and my family to the White House with an outpouring of goodwill.

On January 20th, Americans spoke with one voice, choosing hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. Our nation faces serious challenges, but we will overcome them if our imagination is joined to common purpose.

Now is our time to work together, reaffirm our enduring spirit, and choose our better history. With your help, we will renew our Nation's promise to carry forth the great gift of freedom to future generations, as our forebeara have delivered it to us.

Sure, it's a good letter but not exactly what you would expect as a response to 3-9 years olds who sent pictures like this . . .

And asked questions like "Do your daughter's have Webkinz?"

The kids liked it though and Charlie has it safely tucked away in his room with the rest of his treasures.

At the same time the kids were writing their letters, I was writing the president one of my own. I wrote of my genuine gladness that an African American was elected President. I talked a little of our mutual love for the White Sox, but mainly I told him candidly but respectfully why I had not voted for him in either his Senatorial or Presidential campaigns. I told him of my concern for the unborn and my hope for the possible repeal of Roe V Wade. I urged him to change his stances on abortion.

Because of how the kid's letter was responded to, I expected no response to my own letter. Indeed several months had passed since the kids received their letter, and I had almost forgotten about my own letter when I received a hand addressed letter from the White House on July 31st

My letter dated 7/28/09:

Dear Friend:

Thank you for taking the time to share your views on abortion. This is a heart-wrenching issue and I appreciate your input and thoughts.

I am committed to making my Administration the most open and transparent in history, and part of delivering on that promise is hearing from people like you. I take seriously your opinions and respect your point of view on this issue. Please know that your concerns will be on my mind in the days ahead.

Thank you again for writing. I encourage you to visit WhiteHouse.Gov to learn more about my Administration or to contact me in the future.

Sincerely

Barack Obama (signed)

I was genuinely moved that The Office of The President of the United States took time to respond to a concern that I had. I understand that President Obama himself is far too busy to attend to my letter himself. I could tell that the majority of this letter was pre-formatted. I can also see that it's a text book example of a non-response response to the issues I brought forward.

I have struggled for the last 1/2 hour to write a conclusion to this piece. I could wax eloquent of the democratic process where I have the freedom to write a dissenting view to the most powerful person in my country and receive thanks rather than censure. I could make a spiritual tie-in to how writing a letter to the President is like but so much less a privilege than the ability to talk directly to the Executive Officer of the Universe. I could encourage families to send letters and pictures to their elected officials thanking them for their service and communicating their needs and concerns. Since I am not quite sure how to accomplish any of those, I will instead just tell you what I have in store for next time.

Next Time: A few thoughts about movies.

Remembering Millard

Millard Posthuma 1916 -2009

Heaven centered living provides own eulogy.

I have recently discovered that there is a new blog carnival for Christian men. When I think of Christian men, I think of Dr. Millard Posthuma. So I am going to submit this post to the innaugural edition of the carnival. If they accept it instead of reading this sentence you will see a link to their carnival.

I first met Millard Posthuma at a prayer meeting on my university campus in 1990. Until he started attending regularly, I, at 24, was the oldest person at the meetings. Millard, then 74, changed all that. The retired surgeon was the father in law of our campus group's faculty advisor.

I remember one of the first conversations I had with Millard. I recognized his last name and asked him if he was related to Dan Posthuma who produced contemporary Christian music albums (Margaret Becker, Julie Miller among others.) It turns out that he was Dan's father. I followed that up with some question of how he must be proud to have such a famous son. His response was that he was very glad that all his children loved Jesus and were following Him.

Now, please don't imagine that comment coming as a rebuke. It was said with the same graciousness he said everything with. I am not sure that I have ever met as kind of a person before or since I met Millard. He was a regular at our prayer meetings and often attended and many times sang at our weekly meetings.

He was also the most active man in his seventies I ever met. He had a spry step and was involved in a plethora of activities: Rotary, Gideons, Pro Life rallies, etc. Anyone who has the caricature of an anti-abortion protester as a hate spewing unmerciful hypocrite in their mind, has never heard Millard present the Pro Life message. He gently stood up for the unborn fetus and used his medical background to provide evidence of where conception begins.

Millard had a great deal of influence on people my age. A friend 5 years my senior became involved in the Rotary because of Millard's leading. Another friend 5 years my junior had him as a groomsman in his wedding. A twenty two year old with a 76 year old groomsman! After I graduated in 1992 I spent two years as a missionary in Russia. Millard sent me a an encouraging letter while I was there mentioning meeting Russians when he was in WWII.

Most of all, I remember Millard loved his wife. He was always so tender and protective of her. I never heard him say one disparaging word about her. If you talked to Millard for 5 minutes, you would know 3 things about him 1: Jesus was his Savior, 2: He loved his wife and 3: He was genuinely interested in you.

When I was a younger man I read many books about dating, love, and marriage. One thing I read that stuck with me was: don't visit friends and relatives on your honeymoon. When Amy and I married in 1998 we honeymooned in the Smoky Mountains. We flew from Chicago to Louisville, Ky and drove to the Smokies. On the last day of our honeymoon we spent the day with Millard and Trudy in Louisville, where they had recently moved to. It was one piece of advice I am so glad I ignored. We had a wonderful visit, the couple married 1 week and the other married 57 years. It also turned out to be the last time we would see Millard alive. I found out a few weeks ago that he had passed away on May 31, 2009.

There is so much I would like you to know about Millard. I could start with his obituary, there are some things that I didn't even know. I knew he was in WWII but I had no idea that he was seriously injured in the Battle of the Bulge. Near the end of his life, Millard started blogging, he only posted three times but one of his posts was so Millard that I wanted to share it here:

A New President !! 11/04/08

A new president? Yes. and he will be receiving our prayers for God's guidance We asked for God to be incontrol in the election, and We trust that He was. Now we owe him our prayerful support. http://mposthumablog.blogspot.com/2008/11/new-president-110408.html

Millard in his unassuming way could so quickly get to the heart of a matter. The same precision God gave him with a scalpel was also evident in his communication.

In a way Millard speaks even though dead. His life speaks volumes and I'd like to leave you with the sound of his voice as featured in a Gaither and Friends album a few years back entitled appropriately enough: Heaven. (He is on the second to the last cut.) I guess there are advantages to having a son in the music industry.

Goodbye Millard, we miss you and look forward to singing with you again in Heaven.

For more of Six Word Saturday go to Show My Face dot com.

Next Time: The Century Mark.