Jessica makes her case

A while back I had an idea. I thought it would be interesting to hear from a Christian that's supporting McCain and one that's supporting Obama. I tried to find two people of roughly the same age, church affiliation, background, etc. to make the positive case for their candidate without trashing the other. I tried for two weeks to find a McCain supporter with the time or inclination to participate, but I wasn't successful. Soooo, though I'd prefer to have both sides represented, I think my sister in Christ who took the time to write this essay deserves to be heard. Without further ado here's Jessica making the case for Barack Obama.

Stephen,

Thanks again for asking me to share my views on Senator Obama. I am writing this in a period of campaign “disenchantment,” and let me explain why. One, I have grown tired of the campaign – and have moved past my “honeymoon phase” with Obama – having followed it obsessively since the primaries began. Two, I have grown tired of the low point to which the campaign has sunk. I hope that Obama will rise above the lies and attacks (although I know he needs to confront them) to square himself back on the issues. And three, I have grown tired of having to defend my faith while defending my support of Obama.

Recently, a McCain supporter sputtered the following question at me in disbelief: “But…as a Christian…you don’t have any problem supporting Obama?” My answer then, and my answer now, is no. I am a registered Democrat, but I don’t consider myself to be blue or red. Yes, you can follow Jesus and not vote for a Republican. Based on what I have seen and read in the news, neither party perfectly mirrors the Christian faith. Let it be known that my hope is found in the Kingdom, and not in a president, a party, or a country.

Let me begin by saying that Obama has almost single-handedly invigorated a level of interest in politics like I have never seen before. Some call him a dreamer, an idealist…but I like that. One of the most refreshing things for me about Obama is that he hasn’t been in Washington for decades, like Senator McCain. (Even the McCain campaign has cited this as a plus for Governor Palin.) I am not overly concerned with experience, an argument that has been going back and forth since Clinton was in the race, and has again been revived with the introduction of Palin.

Consider the following point from Nicholas Kristof from the New York Times: “It might seem obvious that long service in Washington is the best preparation for the White House, but on the contrary, one lesson of American history is that length of experience in national politics is an extremely poor predictor of presidential success. Looking at the 19 presidents since 1900, three of the greatest were among those with the fewest years in electoral politics. Teddy Roosevelt had been a governor for two years and vice president for six months; Woodrow Wilson, a governor for just two years; and Franklin Roosevelt, a governor for four years. None ever served in Congress.”

Some would argue that the Bush administration has been one of the most experienced administrations in this nation's history, but they've dug us into a deep, dark hole. For me, qualification trumps experience. I would prefer to have a president with judgment, insight, character, and competence over one with lots of experience and nothing else. One great example of Obama’s sound judgment is this: He is the only candidate who originally voted against the Iraq war. He realized that it was a distraction from the real focus – Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan – and that there was no reasonable basis for invading that country.

If Obama's primary campaign is any indication of how effectively he will run the White House, he gets my vote twice over. He ran an intelligent, strategic, and efficient primary campaign. He has raised historical amounts of money, and has not gone into debt. This, by the way, is the polar opposite of President Bush’s spending habits, and a sore point for Senator Clinton, who had to loan herself $5 million to continue campaigning. This guy is smart – on many levels – and it shows in the way he campaigns, raises money at record levels, and has inspired average citizens to get involved in this election process.

In a time when President Bush and Americans in general are sorely disliked around the world, I want a president who will work to heal our relationships with other countries and restore our image overseas. According to a BBC World Service poll, 22,000 people in 22 countries were polled to find out who they would prefer as our next president. All 22 countries preferred Obama over McCain. In addition to Obama’s own culturally diverse heritage, he has lived overseas, which means he has real cross-cultural experience to bring to the table. Again, I quote Kristof: “Our most serious mistakes in foreign policy, from Vietnam to Iraq, have been a blindness to other people’s nationalism and an inability to see ourselves as others see us. Mr. Obama seems to have absorbed an intuitive sensitivity to that problem. For starters, he understood back in 2002 that American troops would not be greeted in Iraq with flowers.”

I appreciate that Obama wants to talk with leaders from other countries – yes, even enemies – and not ignore them. He wants to talk and not just blindly and stubbornly exercise military power. A friend of mine once reflected, "Because of his background, family and extensive travel, Obama offers us an opportunity to build bridges with the international community that our current president has laughed at and burned. In a global, increasingly fragile economy, we need those bridges."

On the same note, I also want a president who will work to heal divisions within this country. Obama has an enormous cross-party appeal that I haven’t seen with other candidates. A few months ago, after he finished a speech aired on C-SPAN, the network opened its phone lines to callers. It had three numbers to call, one for each major party (Democrat, Republican, and Independent). I was stunned that almost all of the Republican and Independent callers didn’t call in to tear Obama apart, but to express their support for him. One man said that he had voted Republican all his life, but would be voting for Obama in November. It says something when a political figure can appeal so strongly to people from other parties.

Regarding his character, Obama strikes me as being as grounded and real as you can get – not to mention eloquent, classy, inspiring, and even-tempered. The “elitist” argument going around has no credibility for me. He was raised by a single mother and his grandparents, his father wasn’t in the picture, and he just paid off his college loans two years ago. His life story is one with which many in this country can relate. On the flip side, I don’t think McCain really gets where most Americans are in life because he is in a completely different category. There is nothing wrong with wealth, but it is a bit alarming when you can’t remember how many houses you own.

God wants us to love him with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength. I believe he wants us to examine all the facts, ignore the smears, and dig for the truth. After months of scrutinizing the campaign, the debates, the conventions, and the commentary; visiting factcheck.org to debunk rumors; and reading Obama’s “Blueprint for Change” that outlines his plan and his record, I have made what I believe to be a thoughtful and intelligent choice. I look forward to seeing Senator Obama become President Obama after the general election is over!

Don't waste your retirement

The present financial crisis is causing anguish for a lot of people. I was talking to a friend this weekend who's legitimately concerned about losing the modest investment income he needs to support his family of four. Having said that, it occurred to me while listening to the alarming reports on NPR this morning that God may use this situation to wean American Christians away from extra-Biblical ideas about financial security, investment and retirement. I'm preaching to myself here too. What do I mean? I'll let John Piper explain.

Consider a story from the February 1998 edition of Reader’s Digest, which tells about a couple who “took early retirement from their jobs in the Northeast five years ago when he was 59 and she was 51. Now they live in Punta Gorda, Florida, where they cruise on their 30 foot trawler, play softball and collect shells.” At first, when I read it I thought it might be a joke. A spoof on the American Dream. But it wasn’t. Tragically, this was the dream: Come to the end of your life—your one and only precious, God-given life—and let the last great work of your life, before you give an account to your Creator, be this: playing softball and collecting shells. Picture them before Christ at the great day of judgment: “Look, Lord. See my shells.” That is a tragedy. And people today are spending billions of dollars to persuade you to embrace that tragic dream. Over against that, I put my protest: Don’t buy it. Don’t waste your life.

John Piper, Don't Waste Your Life

More in this video:

Tri-unity

And that passage in Gregory of Nazianzus vastly delights me: "I cannot think on the one without quickly being encircled by the splendor of the three; nor can I discern the three without being straightway carried back to the one." Let us not, then, be led to imagine a trinity of persons that keeps our thoughts distracted and does not at once lead them back to that unity. Indeed, the words "Father", "Son", and "Spirit" imply a real distinction--let no one think that these titles, whereby God is variously designated from his works, are empty--but a distinction, not a division.

John Calvin, Institutes 1.13.17

Paul Newman (26 January 1925 - 26 September 2008)

He had class.

Photo by Sam Taylor-Wood

Round one to the sheriff

Putting on my objective hat, I think McCain won last night's debate by a nose. But maybe that's just because I found his performance so entertaining. I burst out laughing at his remark about Putin: "I looked into his eyes and saw three letters...K-G-B". What a great line! I thought Obama started out shakily, even looking a bit rattled at times, but he got stronger as the night wore on and came on strong at the end. I think Obama has a bit of a problem though trying to link McCain to Bush/the last 8 years/etc. because McCain truly isn't the typical Republican. He's right when he says he never won "Miss Congeniality" (shouldn't it be Mr.?) in the Senate. Remember a few short months ago the entire Republican political/media establishment was doing all it could to keep McCain from being the nominee. I suspect if McCain becomes President he'll tick off conservatives as often as he ticks off liberals.

One thing that drives me nuts is their ongoing debate over the Iraq war, because I think they're both partly right and partly wrong. McCain is absolutely right that the surge strategy of Gen. Petraeus is working, and to set a date certain for withdrawal of troops would risk losing the gains we've made. Yes, we must withdraw on our own terms with honor and victory -- "pyrrhic victory" though it may be. But Obama is right that the original decision to invade Iraq was a colossal blunder that distracted us from the front lines of the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I won't rehearse all the reasons given back in 2002 to go into Iraq, but I believe history has shown and will continue to show they were false and misleading. Worst of all, we didn't count the cost. Bush, Rumsfeld, et al. thought it would be quick and easy -- a tragic miscalculation in my view.

So Obama correctly says we shouldn't have grabbed hold of this particular tiger's tail in the first place, and McCain rightly says that once you've grabbed it you better hold on for dear life until the tiger's dead.

Bailout blues

All week we've been hearing that this 700 billion dollar bailout being debated in Washington is inevitable and necessary to avert an economic meltdown. But what if it isn't? One economist begs to differ. He makes a lot of sense.

Listen here

Dimitri Tiomkin: composer of background music

Studio-Era Hollywood had a distinctly Central and Eastern European character. Scores of talented writers, musicians and actors fled the bloody upheavals that convulsed Europe for the promise of a better life in America. Most headed for New York and it's many opportunities to find work. Some of the more intrepid headed west to the mythic land where names like Warner, Zanuck and Selznick held sway and folks from places with funny names had found fame and fortune. Where Lazar Meir from Minsk could become Louis B. Mayer, titan of the motion picture industry.

Dimitri Zinovich Tiomkin was born 1894 in the village of Kremenchuk in the Ukraine. His odyssey took him first to the hallowed halls of St. Petersburg Conservatory -- where he rubbed elbows with Prokofiev and Glazunov -- then to Berlin, Paris, New York, finally arriving in Hollywood in 1929. This was only two years after Warner Bros. broke the sound barrier with their "talking picture" The Jazz Singer. The young composer fell in love with the novel idea of composing music for film soundtracks ("background music" he wasn't too proud to say), but it wasn't until 1937 that his career took off after a chance meeting with director Frank Capra. The two hit it off and began a long, fruitful partnership -- including Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) and It's a Wonderful Life (1947).

Dimitri Tiomkin was a favorite of Alfred Hitchcock too, scoring four of his films (only Bernard Hermann scored more). I've been watching Dial M for Murder Hitch's glossy 1954 mystery thriller for Warners starring Ray Milland and Grace Kelly. Tiomkin's score is a masterful example of underscoring that calls attention to itself sparingly -- for example in the first reveal of Kelly which is accompanied by one of his most soaring themes (you can listen to it here). Some of today's film composers would do well to study his unobtrusive style. Scan Tiomkin's long list of credits and you'll see the majority are Westerns, including two I've discussed this month -- High Noon (with it's oddly effective opening title song featuring Tex Ritter) and Rio Bravo. Tiomkin never shed his thick Russian accent, but his name is forever identified with this genre that's as American as apple pie. Quite a journey. Quite a life.


Dimitri Tiomkin:

Dialogue, of course, is of primary importance in determining the genre of background music. It entails problems that must be overcome, and can be overcome only by certain musical techniques. It is difficult for a layman to realise that speaking voices have astonishing variation in pitch and timbre. It may seem incredible, but many actor's voices, however pleasant in themselves, and regardless of pitch, are incompatible with certain instruments. Clarinets, for instance, get in the way of some voices and magnificently complement others. Further, clarinets may be alien to the spirit of a play, or the characterisation of a part.

Some actors have voices that are easy to write for. Actors like John Wayne impose almost no burdens on the composer. Wayne's voice happily happens to have a pitch and timbre that fits almost any instrumentation. Jimmie Stewart is another actor for whom it is a delight to write music. Paradoxically, his speaking voice is not "musical." But it has a slightly nasal quality and occasionally "cracks" in a way that is easy to complement. Jean Arthur's voice is somewhat similar.

The "crack" in Miss Arthur's and Mr. Stewart's voices is one of those strangely appealing imperfections, like a single strand of rebellious hair on an otherwise impeccable moonlit coiffure. But don't pursue this appeal of imperfect voices too far, or you'll run into Andy Devine. Jean Arthur and James Stewart also illustrate another point; utilising music to "soften" a face, or to give it qualities it does not have inherently. This is not necessary with Stewart or Arthur because both have faces that reflect great sincerity. (Frank Capra, with whom I have had the pleasure of working on a number of pictures, once pointed out to me that unless a player has the sort of face that bespeaks sincerity he is not likely ever to become a great star.) The camera is a merciless, analytical instrument. Even after every artifice of lighting and make-up, the close-up can be cruelly revealing. The composer, by providing pleasant melodic music, can direct attention from what the make-up artist could not hide. And in doing so the composer is surprisingly successful.

To comprehend fully what music does for movies, one should see a picture before the music is added, and again after it has been scored. Not only are all the dramatic effects heightened, but in many instances the faces, voices, and even the personalities of the players are altered by the music.

Dimitri Tiomkin (Copyright 1961 by the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures, Inc.)

Happy birthday Mr. Faulkner

"My own experience has been that the tools I need for my trade are paper, tobacco, food, and a little whiskey."

Making the books

Thus it is written

Luke 24:44-48 shows Jesus giving the Apostles a lesson in interpreting scripture and preaching, or if you want to get fancy, a lesson in hermeneutics and homiletics. Keep in mind that the Scriptures for the disciples was our Old Testament. Jesus claims to be the primary subject and fulfillment of what was written in "the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms." Wow! He then goes on to explain their singular mission (and our's) as proclaiming and bearing witness to "these things".

This month I've read through Isaiah from beginning to end...a first. It's a staggering, mind-boggling (insert your own superlative) book of the Bible. Reading it has made Jesus much more real to me. It's given me a bigger view of the triune God (Father, Son and Spirit are all in it's pages), a bigger view of wrath & judgment, grace & mercy, the horror of sin/idolatry, the wonder of forgiveness, the atoning work of Christ, world missions, the Kingdom (both it's "already" and "not-yet" aspects), hope & Heaven. It's all there. In technicolor. The imagery is, well, inspired.

Read Isaiah and you'll probably come across things that sound familiar. That's because the Apostles, especially John, were constantly quoting or alluding to Isaiah. Where did the New Testament writers get their warrant to do this? Were they hijacking the Jewish scriptures? No, they were simply doing what their risen Lord had taught them. "Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, 'Thus it is written...'"

May our minds be opened.

A birthday of note - Trane turns 82

John Coltrane has often been called a "searching" musician. His literally wailing sound--spearing, sharp and resonant creates what might be best described as an ominous atmosphere that seems to suggest (from a purely emotional standpoint) a kind of intense probing into things far off, unknown and mysterious. Admittedly such a description is valid only in a personal way but "searching" remains applicable to Trane in view of actual fact. He is constantly seeking out new ways to extend his form of expression--practicing continually, listening to what other people are doing, adding, rejecting, assimilating--molding a voice that is already one of the most important in modern jazz.

Robert Levin (1957)


Was there ever so gentle a man who impelled people to scream?

Nat Hentoff (1997)