Election Choice 2008

It has always been my intent that this blog be politically objective and as non-partisan as possible. Sometimes that is hard to do when discussion has to confront the actions of an individual. In those instances, I have tried to focus my commentary on the ethical and/or spiritual principles illustrated by those actions.

Tonight, I have to confront that same delicate dilemma. But there is a very important, if not critical, presidential election coming up in two weeks. Perhaps not THE most important election in our history as some have inappropriately called it (think Washington, our first; Lincoln on the eve of our country’s attempted dissolution; FDR on the eve of WW II). But certainly critically important in setting tone, priorities and directions for the next four to eight years after the disaster of the last eight.

So what should guide us when we enter the voting booth and try to make that important choice? Health care delivery is in desperate need of wholesale surgery. Our educational system needs a major re-schooling in how we communicate knowledge and inspire learning in students of all ages. The financial industry requires new insurance policies against greed and folly. Alternative energy solutions need a jump-start. Our overall economic environment needs to find a new delicate balance between regulation and control without stifling the incredible creativity of American entrepreneurs already waiting in the wings with new innovations. Ending our “first-strike” war and its attendant runaway unfunded costs while still enhancing our national security must be accomplished SOON.

Yes, these topics are all very important issues for voters these days. They are the principal grist of speeches and debates and position papers being thrown at the public in a never-ending stream each day. Yet as important as they are at this particular moment, I do not believe that they are the fundamentals on which our votes should turn. They are today’s alarms. Tomorrow, there will be others screaming for attention. And next month others still. Our 1-day vote has to therefore turn on a longer view of more fundamental criteria. And for these I would suggest the following as the truly critical needs for our country:

The first fundamental need is to restore our Rule of Law. In the past eight years, our Constitution has been trampled by politicalization, partisanship, prejudice over process, secretive decisions, official disinformation and factual distortion, and the loss of individual freedoms tending to a new “guilty until proven innocent.” Our Constitution and the laws derived from that are what keep our system of governing whole. Losing that framework sends the country ever closer to spinning out of control. The litany of specifics and examples is too numerous to list here, but has fed a steady stream of news reports to an increasingly fearful and cynical public. Restoration of governmental respect for law and its impartial administration is a first-order priority.

The second critical need is to reclaim our role as a True World Leader that we squandered after the special opportunity presented to us after 9-11. Ending the unilaterally-acting bully that we have become, lecturing the world on its conduct while ignoring the shortcomings of our own. In spite of all the difficulties we read about every day, the world is in fact poised to do some great things IF brought together in concerted actions without demonizing and finger-pointing each other. Without separating us into two absolute good guy/bad guy demarcations. And without insisting that every country and every people think the same, act the same, govern the same. This will only happen with fresh thinking about world views, conciliatory and respectful interactions with all peoples, embodying humility instead of arrogance, and providing the leadership of quiet demonstration of our values instead of empty rhetoric about values not truly lived.

The third critical need is to provide Competence in Governing. Winning elections may be a necessary first step to governing, but the supposed purpose in winning is to enable one to then govern competently and fairly across the broadest sweep of the many conflicting constituencies and positions of the American people. After 8 years of mediocre performance delivering critical needs, after 8 years of legislative stalemate or pandering to one narrow constituency, after 8 years of financial irresponsibility by both parties, talented competent people with technical skills for their jobs along with big-minded thinking (instead of small-minded parochialism) is necessary. “Shaking things up” is NOT what is needed; things have already been shaken up so badly they are completely broken. We need to put all of Washington’s Humpty-Dumpty parts back together again in a way that they work together as a whole, not instigate more fighting and arguing and shouting. This rebuilding will not happen with someone who continually criticizes and cannot deliver his own base party; one cannot claim bipartisan leadership if he cannot even show effective leadership of his own partisan party.

These are the three key criteria. Put these cornerstone changes of attitude and method into place, and all the detailed issues that will certainly come and go will have a chance to be properly resolved. Without those cornerstones, it will be more of the same that we have already experienced.

When I look at these two completely distinctive candidates, only one appears to have a chance to achieve these changes. We do not need a twin set of would-be mavericks to “kick butts” in Washington, we need a person who can listen to all sides and find a workable middle ground that moves us forward. We do not need a shoot-from-the-hip impulsiveness, we need a thoughtfulness that thinks through actions to their probable conclusions. Given two candidates neither of which comes from an executive/administrator background, we can only look at how each has run his campaign for clues as to how he might govern; only one has demonstrated a well-managed campaign across the country for the duration of this campaign using innovative 21st-century techniques while surrounded by top-quality advisors that have stayed steady yet adaptable and responsive to events throughout. Only one has shown the capacity to look at old issues from a new perspective. In these times, we do not need a person with a legendary temper and petulance, qualities that are now on full public display.

For this important election, it is as much about repudiating where we have been as it is about talking an informed risk in casting a hope for tomorrow. One candidate is simply from a past time, a different era, and time has moved on. It is time this country moves on with the other candidate. The resume may be shorter, but it is the RIGHT resume. It is the resume of Barack Obama.