Deciphering the “Bump”
Posted by: Ryan Sanders on April 22, 2008 Hot Issues •
Stephen Colbert, the personality of The Colbert Report on Comedy Central, the man that brought the world the Best-Selling book I AM AMERICA (And So Can You!), the Ben & Jerry’s Americone Dream, and the word truthiness to our dictionaries, has put himself on the map for comedy and politics. Yes, Colbert has succeeded in making politics fun, or at least he has made an art out of poking fun at and with political pundits.
Colbert appears to be the epitomy of non-partisan politics, or rather, should I say, partisan. He equally sides and calls out both Democrats and Republicans. You might remember what Colbert termed the “Colbert bump” a couple of years back. Perhaps you watched as Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee appeared on The Colbert Report multiple times and preceded to go from fifth in the primary’s to second in the process. Was it the “bump” or simply astute campaigning?
If you’ve never watched a show of the Report, take notice of this article from LiveScience. Andrea Thompson, staff writer for LiveScience points out that there is some truth to the “Colbert bump,” whereby guests see a boost in popularity or notoriety by simply appearing on the show. In advance of the Pennsylvania primary, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama made appearances on “The Colbert Report” recently.
When folks such as James Fowler, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego studies the evidence; rest assured, there is something to the phenomenon. Make no mistake about it, before the presidential campaign is over, the person that we will call president will have more than likely traveled through The Colbert Report on his or her way to the White House.
When voters stand at the booth to vote in November, it’s ludicrous, but ultimately plausible, that some voters will cast a ballot by how familiar the candidate is to him or her. Please, I’m begging you, do not vote this way. Watch all The Colbert Report episodes you want; but please, take time to do some research on each candidate. I don’t care if John McCain co-host with Colbert for the remainder of the season, please understand why you are voting the way you are voting.
First Thessalonians 5:21 says, “… but test all things. Hold on to what is good.” Don’t let the “Colbert bump” turn into the “Colbert dump”, as Stephen might call it.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Knowing the Why Behind the What
Posted by: Kaylan Christopher on April 21, 2008 Biblical Values •
Just last week, I was talking to a friend about some hot topics that plague our society. We talked about these issues in relation to the upcoming presidential election. As we hashed out our opinions on each topic, she stopped and revealed her embarrassment for lacking defenses regarding certain topics.
It reminded me of what Peter wrote in his first letter: “Set apart the Messiah as Lord in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you. However, do this with gentleness and respect, keeping your conscience clear” (1 Peter 3:14-16).
Do you know what you believe? You may have developed your own opinions on certain topics, but do you have a biblical defense for them? I told my friend that if she has even the slightest question about her beliefs, then she should go to God’s Word. And even after that, she should make sure all of her opinions are in line with what God says in the Bible.
There is no black and white when it comes to deciding what you believe about some issues. People broadcast so many different opinions, that it seems most choose to ride the fence in the gray area instead, which can cause confusion.
All of the candidates in this year’s election believe different things—and some even ride the fence. You could pick and choose from each one what you agree with and what you don’t, but you’ll never find the perfect candidate who believes exactly as you do.
The most important decision you can make this election year is to vote biblical values. Your first job is to put God first, arm yourself with the Truth, and approach each issue with “gentleness and respect” as Jesus would.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Primaries & Doldrums
Posted by: Brent James on April 18, 2008 Hot Issues •
The Mississippi Primary on March 11 didn’t do much in the way of deciding who will be the Democrat’s presidential nominee, but that’s nothing new in this election season. As expected, both candidates will most likely arrive at the finish line in somewhat of a stalemate. That isn’t to say one might not have a decided advantage. But advantages are like the wind being quite hard to keep. In Mississippi, Barak Obama won 61% to Clinton’s 37%. The delegates went 19 and 14, respectively.
Looking at the results, it is most interesting to see how few voted and of those who did vote, how many of them chose to write-in other candidates, apparently dissatisfied with the current national choices. While the percentages of those preferring other candidates was small, they do provide a glimpse into what is becoming a rather unusual election.
Some Christian leaders remain steadfast that all believers have a spiritual-moral duty (civic duty perhaps being easier to prove) to cast a vote in November. Others are not so inclined, strongly proclaiming our currently slate of candidates (on both sides of the aisle) unacceptable.
One thing we do know, the remaining primaries are just as unlikely to provide a distanced frontrunner. The pressure is on Clinton to win all of the upcoming contests in order to legitimize her claims that she is the one to lead us. Only thing is, the numbers aren’t there. Coupled with the way delegates are apportioned to the Democrat contest winners, there is no way to overcome Obama’s lead. They will be delivered to the convention floor with options in the works. And there are still the superdelegates, of which Hillary’s commanding lead has shrunk to 34. Of the 795 total, only around 330 remain uncommitted.
The Pennsylvania Primary, coming up next week on April 22, in the latest Zogby poll has it: Clinton 45%, Obama 44%, with 12% still wandering. The effect of Wednesday’s debate is unlikely to change those results.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup?
Posted by: Brent James on April 17, 2008 Hot Issues •
Who do you trust in the race to the White House? Right now, it’s not necessary that you trust anyone as this contest has more than six months left. I used to think it was excruciating to watch a mile race, that is, until I became a miler. Then, it seemed fast.
Polls are amusing, but not particularly reliable over any period. There are simply too many variables – and those change daily. Any number of mishaps or minor revelations could erupt into a feeding frenzy, dropping a candidate’s numbers overnight. As we have seen.
In February, a general election Rasmussen poll showed McCain losing to both Democrats by a few points. Pew Research indicated similar findings. By March, Zogby was reporting a stronger McCain beating the Democrats by fewer than 10 points. That same month, Gallup reported Hillary and Obama each beating McCain by similar margins. There were some likely reasons, however. Into the mix went Obama’s Pastorgate, Hilllary’s Bosnia sniper story and the Obama remarks attacked as “elitist” by McCain and Hillary. Shakeup and take some more polls.
The most recent Zogby, Rasmussen, and Gallup polls show strong similarities for the general election results. Separated by a hair’s breadth, in order, are Obama, McCain, and Clinton. Even the electoral math, based on the individual state contests, has Obama winning 280 delegates to McCain’s 258.
Depending on where you stand, this could be encouraging or discouraging, but don’t count on these numbers staying the same. There’s just too much time left and too much money left to spend. My only wish in all this is that the billion dollars that will have been spent campaigning would’ve been given to support Christian outreach the world over.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Organized Movement
Posted by: Ryan Sanders on April 16, 2008 Hot Issues •
Today was no different than must days. I made time to read on the Internet news and blogs on things that interested me. One thing stood out. Like most days, a thinker challenges me. One such thinker that happens to blog. You may know him, his name is Seth Godin. Although I’ve never met him, I know that I like him. I like him because he challenges me to think. Not only does he challenge me to think, but he also challenges me to think bigger and differently than the status quo.
Today, he asked his readers an important question, a question that we all should ask ourselves. He wrote, “What happens when we organize?” While the spring season is upon us, he wasn’t necessarily speaking of the traditional time for cleaning as much as he was pointing toward the idea of organizing people around an idea.
As he pointed out, “Most power occurs because one side is better organized than the other”. Generally, as Godin clarifies, “Labor is usually less well organized than management, criminals are usually less well organized than the police and customers are always less well organized than producers.” He continues by making the claim that one person can make a complaint to a company and have nothing change. Add 10 people or 100 people, and suddenly, things begin to change. New rules begin to take shape.
The last sentence of his post reads, “The system doesn’t know what to do with a movement.” Dictionary.com defines the noun “movement” this way, “a change of position or location … a progressive development of ideas toward a particular conclusion … a principal division or section of a sonata, symphony, or the like … motion; rhythm; time; tempo.” It’s interesting to ponder movement with regard to music for a moment. Yet what if we organized our ideas politically? What would be our most important issues? If we could design a movement such that, 10 people or 100 people in a given community or state not only knew biblical values, but those same, informed people also voted their values?
Then, we’d change the system … for the better. Now, get let’s get out of the garage and start organizing!
(1) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Voter Generation Gap
Posted by: Kaylan Christopher on April 10, 2008 Biblical Values •
My grandma’s music is not my music today. My granddad’s paycheck didn’t look like the paycheck I get every two weeks. And their political party choice may not match mine. Times sure have changed.
There is definitely a generational gap in how we do things. But one thing we do share and connect on is our values—because we believe in what the timeless truth of God’s Word has to say about our culture’s hot topics.
A Gallup Poll recently stated that approximately 6 in 10 Americans say religion is very important in their lives, while 26% say religion is fairly important and only 16% say it is not very important at all.
Religious times sure have changed since my grandparents were my age. My grandmother used to tell me how good times were when she was growing up. I remember her detailing the time she and her family drove to California.
During their journey, they stopped on the side of the road one night to sleep out in the open air. The next night they randomly knocked on the door of a stranger in a town along the way to rest their heads. And throughout the trip, they picked up several hitchhikers to offer a helping hand because it was the right thing to do.
This would never happen today. Yes, times have changed—especially in our belief system, morals, and religious values in America.
Gallup said: “The percentage of Americans who reported that religion was very important in their lives was slightly lower between 1978 and 1989, but was significantly higher in surveys conducted in 1965 and 1952.”
Statistics aside, with each passing year our country seems to move more toward the idea that religion is less important. No wonder our culture is dying morally.
It is our job as believers to help make the right decisions when choosing which way our country should go. It’s time to stand up and speak out about what is truth according to God’s Word. A great place to do this is at the polls this year.
You don’t have to get out and vote like your grandma did. But you can get out and vote for morals and values according to God’s Word.
(1) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Cowboy Boots and Common Folk
Posted by: Ryan Sanders on April 9, 2008 Hot Issues •
Think you’re ready to make your own bid for the presidency?
Before you say yes, think on this. While I’m no strategist for a political party, for several years now I’ve been interested in what it takes to live and make decisions in the White House in the District of Columbia. If you were a fan like I was of the television series The West Wing, you got a taste of what is necessary to become president.
In the car the other day, I flipped on the radio. I didn’t listen long until an interesting piece came on the air regarding what the next person to make it to the White House would have to do in each state across the nation.
We’ve all seen candidates’ apparel, when in Rhode Island, they don the ‘Rhode Island’ sweater. In Texas, you’ll notice cowboy boots or hats worn by the candidate. With this idea is the attempt to appeal to the common man or woman. Yes, whether you’re from Yale or Harvard, the candidate must get down and visit the ‘commoners’ from time to time.
With Pennsylvania coming up in the Democratic campaign, candidates have had to renew their zeal for all things Philly. Obama made a remark about having goat cheese with his Philly-cheese steak, a big cultural no-no apparently. And Clinton, while confident in her bowling skills after Obama’s run of gutter balls days earlier, was also sure to get the Rocky metaphors out as good as any candidate.
It’s not that all of this is bad. I think the next president should be able to appeal to the common person. Who doesn’t want to be able to sit down with the president and be able to talk with him or her, and be comfortable doing so?
Here’s my question, how would you do it? Would you be as overt or a little less up front than the current candidates? The fact is, you can watch all The West Wing episodes, as I have, and still have only a touch of an idea of what the candidates are going through in attempting to appeal to EVERYONE.
This is no small task; and unless something changes, Clinton, McCain, or Obama will be our next president. Let’s pray for all three of them today. I think I have my vote ready. But the fact is, I don’t want any of the three remaining candidates, to be wearing cowboy boots with the wrong motives. As Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 10:33, “Just as I also try to please all people in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many” (HCSB).
I want the next president, at the very least, to be genuine, not seeking their own profit. This will be difficult for them to live out, but refreshing for us to see. We’ll need to keep watching and watch closely. My point is, cowboy boots are cool and very fashionable. What other reasons are there to wear them?
(3) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Moral Fabric
Posted by: Kaylan Christopher on April 8, 2008 Biblical Values •
My grandmother was a fantastic quilt-maker. My parents, brother, and I have a collection of at least 8-10 quilts made by her hands that are scattered between us.
I have used one of these quilts over time excessively—dragging it around, washing it, allowing my dog to trample all over it, washing it again, and so on. As a result, after almost 20 years of use, it is extremely worn, thin, and falling apart at the seams.
If I protected it and taken better care of it throughout the years, then it would definitely be in much better shape—maybe even like new.
The same is true of the moral fabric in our country. Over the years, we’ve neglected to protect this area of moral and sexual purity in the lives of our families, schools, and government.
Time and again, we’ve seen leaders in government fall prey to the temptation of sexual immorality. Because our leaders have set this sort of example for the rest of our nation and have in some way influenced others that this issue is not important, we have become weak and torn in this area.
We have become numb to the provocative nature of what is produced on our televisions and movie screens. We have become numb to the explicit lyrics that come through our speakers. We have become numb to the sexual sin that is now widely accepted throughout our country.
Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley once said, “If America is to decline, it will not be because of military overstretch nor the trade balance, Japanese management secrets, or even the federal deficit. If a decline is underway, it’s a moral one.”
First Timothy 4:12 tells us that we should be examples in our speech, conduct, love, faith, and purity. And 1 Corinthians 6:18 says, “Flee from sexual immorality!”
This election year, let’s remember what God’s Word says about this issue and vote for our biblical values. Remember the sanctity of sexual purity as God intends.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
All the Candidates’ Faith
Posted by: K.D. Hastings on April 4, 2008 Biblical Values •
In the run-up to Election Day 2008, is there a value in voters having some sort of religiosity meter to help them decide whom to support?
Does it matter if a candidate wears his or her faith on their shoulder? Can we discern if such pronouncements are genuine or only carefully calculated campaign-speak?
E.J. Dionne Jr., an op-ed columist with the Washington Post, wrote in his June 30, 2006 column: “Many Democrats discovered God in the 2004 exit polls.”
Both Democratic candidates have what has been described as significant faith components to the campaign. The party is committed to attracting at least some of the right-leaning evangelicals who helped usher George W. Bush into the White House—twice.
While the Senator from Illinois works to untangle himself from some of the now-public and strikingly racist comments made by his faith leader, it does not diminish the fact that, perhaps more than any other candidate, he has placed his faith at the center of this campaign.
Addressing his denomination’s convention last June, the senator said: “My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I go out and do the Lord’s work.”
The senator from New York has gone public with a faith she indicates she has practiced quietly for years. While her husband was president, she was an active participant in a D.C. women’s prayer group.
A story in the Christian Science Monitor claims that soon after Bush was reelected, Clinton said it was “a mistake for the Democrats not to engage evangelical Christians on their own turf – essentially ceding the vote to President Bush.”
Oddly enough, it is the Republican’s presumptive nominee that is quiet about his faith. Some commentators have speculated the senator from Arizona is a “throwback to an earlier generation when such matters were kept personal.”
When asked In an interview about his faith, the senator said, “I think it’s something between me and my creator. It’s primarily a private issue rather than a public one.”
Most candidates and their staffs search for ways to gain the support of different segments of society. Their campaign pitch changes dependent on the group to which they are speaking—union members, farmers, or college students, for example.
There is no harm in blending politics and religion, that is, until religion becomes the victim and is bruised in the pairing. The same concern exists for politics (the state.)
Yet should an individual’s particular faith be a criterion by which voters determine which candidate to support? It was clear that the candidacy of the former governor of Massachusetts was torpedoed primarily by his faith.
Or should voters instead examine how the candidates’ faith impacts their policy positions, i.e., how they put feet to their faith, such as their view on the preciousness of human life at all ages and stages? It seems the Bible is quite clear on that matter.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
An Infallible Guide on the Road to the White House
Posted by: K.D. Hastings on March 25, 2008 Featured Article •
Before my family left town on a short trip during spring break, I purchased a GPS unit to help guide us on our way.
While the particular unit I bought is regarded as a low-end unit, it was well rated by consumers and included the feature I wanted most—text-to-speech. The female voice, while poorly enunciating many words, gave us confidence as we navigated unfamiliar streets.
Now at home where I know the roads, the unit is simply a curiosity. With no remorse or fear, I disobey the unit’s calls to turn left in ½ mile and willfully ignore its chastising tone as it tells me to “make a legal U-turn.”
Yet if you are in an unfamiliar area, a GPS unit can be quite handy. And as long as your inputs are accurate, the GPS unit provides an accurate route.
On our jaunt to the beach, we discovered the unit was not infallible. Searching its database of “points of interest,” we asked it to direct us to the closest Wal-Mart. We dutifully followed its commands, impressed by its knowledge and the certainty of its tone. It was only when we made a turn and noted signs welcoming us to a state park that we began to seriously doubt the unit. Then when only a few feet into the park the GPS unit announced, “You have arrived,” we knew the machine was not to be fully trusted.
The little machine was thoroughly convinced our car was in the parking lot of a Super Wal-Mart; we knew we were entering Gulf Shores State Park.
As it turned out, the discount store was about a half mile behind us. The unit told us to turn left when we should have turned right.
We make decisions about what route to take everyday and most of them have nothing to do with turning right or left and going straight on the highway. During 2008, all of us who are of voting age will have the opportunity to make a decision on who should represent us in Congress and who should take up residence in the White House.
Just as I do with my GPS, beware where you place your confidence. During the Cold War, President Ronald Reagan said of the Soviets, “Trust, but verify.” It is sage advice for us as we consider our options on Election Day.
Until that day, we will continue to be bombarded by messages—from the candidates and their surrogates—on the issues. Shifting through the chaff and making a decision on who has earned your vote in any contested political race is difficult. A sure foundation for this task is biblical precepts. Looking to your faith-informed convictions is a ready and reliable aid in determining who gets your support.
That’s values-based voting. Fulfilling your civic duty in this way means you ignore party labels and turn aside personal desires to vote for a candidate simply because they will benefit you economically. It involves weighing each candidate’s stance on the issues with the Bible’s perspective on the issue, as much as possible. Your values can give you needed direction.
I’ve learned I can’t completely trust my nifty but fallible GPS device. I can, however, completely trust God’s revealed Word as a guidepost in making my Election Day decisions.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
