The World of Grandpa Don.

I have avoided the subject of politics on this web site. Maybe it is because I don't wish to alienate any of my friends or relatives. However, I have delved deeply into many other "sensitive" subjects and my political beliefs should not be sacrosanct.

To start with, my politics are based upon my religious beliefs. Some would say that you must separate the two but my religious beliefs are what governs (or should govern) my every action and thought.

I have no strong and firm party affiliation and so I suppose I would be considered an Independent although my leanings seem to be more to the Republican side at the present time. In the coming 2008 presidential election I will most likely cast my vote for John McCain. I believe him to be knowledgeable and trustworthy and find him to be most in tune with my views. I  also agree more with the Republican view on the important issues of the day. I do not agree with everything he or his party advocates but  it would be amazing if I did. I do not trust Hillary Clinton any more than her husband. I feel she is (they are) divisive and manipulating. That's too bad because a female president could be good for this country. I do not trust Barack Obama. Although sincere, I think him to be a bit naive and lacking a clear understanding of the overall situation. It is too bad because a black president would probably be good for the country. In addition, I do not agree with the Democratic stand on many issues at this time.

I say we would benefit by having a female or black president just because having either, if qualified in every other respect, would go to prove that they could do the job as well as a white male. (Having had a Catholic president demonstrated that his being president would not result in the Pope running our country as many had feared.)

As for the parties ... those who define them for us tend to be rather extreme in their views. C. S. Lewis warns against taking the extreme position as it leads to fanaticism which in turn clouds the judgment.

The Democrats would define the Republican party as being pro-big business at the expense of the so-called working man. As such, Republicans are seen as war mongers and ruthless in their need for profits, suppressing all those in their way. The Republican view of Democrats is that they verge on being communists, although it is not popular to say that now. As such the Democrats are seen as those who would confiscate the wealth of those who have it and redistribute it to those who didn't earn it. Both these views are extreme, neither group is as bad as they are depicted, nor as good, or faultless as they themselves may claim.

The fact is that the economy can not exist without profitable companies which employ workers who, in turn, purchase the products and services of those companies. Another fact is that companies are not non-human entities, but in fact, run by people just like you and I and the problems occur when some individuals allow greed to impair their moral judgment.  The situation is further clouded by the fact that we now have a global economy and what happens in one area of the globe effects and in turn is dependent upon every other part of the world. This effects our political problems and makes them increasingly more difficult. In addition. my church urges sharing my God given gifts with those less fortunate. We are to be compassionate and this includes the considering of the plight of those who were born in other countries. I do not believe all men are equal but at the same time differences do not equate to inferiority but simply diversity, a much need commodity, and I believe all should have equal opportunity. God did not just create Americans and He certainly did not limit "His people" to the economic class, race or ethnicity to which I belong. You see, this is where we get into our religious beliefs. I reiterate ... although different, not equal, we deserve to be treated equally in respect and opportunity.

There, of course. are many more issues. Fortunately, no matter what the candidate claims he will do, regardless of which office it is to which he or she aspires, our system of government dictates that he or she must have the cooperation of many other elected office holders and without the agreement of many others the most incompetent or corrupt will be powerless to take us in some irrational direction very long. (The extremist will of course disagree with this assumption on my part.) The reality of it is that we have survived poor and even bad presidents of both parties which would seem to support my opinion regarding an individual/s power.

As far as the situation in Iraq is concerned I feel that our initial decision may have been an error. However, at this point  it would be irresponsible on our part to abandon the Iranian people (and the world)  to deal with the extremist factions that will prevail if we suddenly leave. It is our duty to act responsibly now that we have assumed the role that we have. Announcing a date of withdrawal would be tantamount to announcing the date of surrender and the worst part is that it is not ourselves that we are surrendering but the people we originally intended to help. That is sacrificial cowardice, the shunning of duty albeit a reluctant duty.

I feel that a person who actually wants to run for high office is either idealistic with a large ego or a selfish egotist of the highest order. I know a man, successful in local politics, who was elected to the Illinois House of Representatives. After several months, he resigned his office because he could not bring himself to abandon his principles to make the compromises necessary to pursue his objectives. The selfish egotist will have his ego fed with the power of office and will be corrupted in the process, held in check only by the limitations imposed upon him by law and fear of retribution. The idealist will struggle to keep his ego in check and learn to work within the system to some extent in order to accomplish anything. My friend who resigned discovered "the game" and decided he could not play.

In any case, I  defer to Mr. Lewis and will try my best not to be an extremist in the matter of politics (or anything else). I have been known to vote for various parties on the local, state and national level. My conscience will be my guide and my conscience is greatly directed by my religious and moral beliefs. I have found myself in the past wishing I had voted for someone, glad I did, or wishing I hadn't. We survived the bad ones, ride along with the do-nothings, and thrived with the really good ones. Life goes on and we do the best with what we have.

I would vote for Jesus if He was running but he would not want the job so I have to find someone who is most like Him. Were do I find a candidate who is pro-life, (and that includes all ages as well as anti- death penalty), in favor of strict control of weapons, in favor of fair taxes - knowing that we have a duty to support our government including the nation's infrastructure, services - and reasonable provisions for social welfare, ... a person who seeks justice for all ... even those who he does not represent?   Of course we can take heart in the fact that most people are more capable than we judge them to be. That coupled with the checks and balances built into the system give cause to be more optimistic about those whom we deem to be less qualified for office.

The recent HBO series on the life of John Adams recounts the fact that he and Thomas Jefferson had widely diverse views on the government of this nation but acknowledging that, they became the best of friends knowing that each sincerely had the welfare of the country as their motivation. I hope we all could share that and wish for more men like them.

I pray for leaders in this and every other nation who work for peace and justice for all. I also pray for those who should. 

Don Plefka
04/20/2008