Political Ideologues

“Ideologues are the persons who lack the capacity

to see complexity in difficult issues”

I read that quote somewhere and wrote it down. It’s not mine but it certainly expresses my view of the 2010 campaign season and, perhaps, the far fringes of both parties.

There seems, however, to be a louder ideological voice coming from the extreme right this year. Here individuals have plenty to say about what they don’t like. But when you ask them what they would do instead, they are only programmed to repeat simple statements about what’s wrong. They have no plan. They really have no substance to their position, no facts, no options, no proposals. All they have is the total elimination of whatever it is they’re angry about: Social Security, the UN, The Department of Education, etc.

Elimination is a very easy position to take. It does not require any research or even an ounce of understanding of the various policy aspects or public needs or constituent positions.

It’s a very shallow position.

I recently saw a news clip of the Republican Senate candidate in Nevada, Sharron Angle who epitomizes the ideologue definition. When asked by a reporter about her position on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan she replied, “You know, the two wars that we’re in right now is exactly what we’re in.” UH?

The terrifying and sad thing is that some of these ideologues are going to get elected tonight. I can only hope that, once in office, their eyes will be opened to the real complexity of the issues we face as a nation. I hope they will take the time to learn and listen and become aware of all aspects of an issue. Once they have done so, I hope they’ll lend their voices to finding solutions instead of only looking for their next simplistic, unsophisticated sound bite designed to appeal to the uninformed.

A Two-Headed Controversy

As in most controversies, the truth generally lies somewhere in the middle.

Members of the Muslim faith desire to build an edifice for religious worship in a building that will also serve as a community center with recreational facilities, libraries and meeting rooms. The facility is to be constructed near the site where the World Trade Center once stood.

I’ve read enough and watched sufficient news coverage about the New York City Mosque controversy to understand the basics and what I’ve come to understand is that this unfortunate debate has two ugly heads. One, it is a sad, sad indication of group labeling and religious intolerance in our country. Two, it is a powerful example of insensitivity.

As for the first, please people; let’s not forget the critical principles in our country of freedom of religion and private property rights. Being Muslim does not equal being a 9-11 terrorist. This is a religion practiced in every country of the world by kind, thoughtful and caring individuals. If the building permit they seek conforms to local zoning and land use regulations, then they have every right to build it. So stop with the chest-pounding, emotional appeals and condemnation of an entire religion due to the actions of a few radical fringe practitioners.

As for the second, surely there’s a more appropriate place to construct this house of worship and community outreach center. I concur with former Mayor Giuliani speaking on the Today Show on Thursday. They have every right to build this center wherever they please. No question. But if the motive of the Imam who is leading the effort is, as he claims, to bring about healing in the community, wouldn’t it be better to find a location other than this one which seems to be creating nothing but controversy and divisiveness? While he may very well have the right to build it where he desires, I’m concerned his sensitivity meter is a bit out of kilter.

Having the right to do something is not always synonymous with it being the right thing do to.

Maybe if everyone would back down on the rhetoric, Facebook polls, harsh accusations and ugliness, some level of sensitivity might rise to the surface and cooperation might be found.

Otherwise, in my opinion, the terrorists win. They’ve caused us to forget the very principle that formed America in the first place, religious tolerance.

Connecting with Art

Halo Repair by Brian Kershisnik

Used with permission

I'm told if you strike a tuning fork and hold it near another object - like a fine crystal goblet - which happens to vibrate at the same pitch that the vibrations emanating from the tuning fork will eventually cause the goblet to begin vibrating and humming as well. I don't know if it's true. I've never tried. But it sounds true enough.

I believe that's what happens periodically when I look at a certain piece of art which, as the saying goes, "just speaks to me." It doesn't happen a lot, but periodically I see a painting that just rings my bell and I can't shake it for some time. If it's available for purchase and I can afford it, I'll often buy it.

All art generates a wave of emotional energy of some sort for the viewer to absorb. When that energy matches our own, we appreciate the offering. The syncopatic nature of the attraction can rise and fall in varying degrees of enjoyment or disdain. Sometimes art can be pleasant but not necessarily really hit a strong inner-connective chord. If we really don't like a selection we might even make a disparaging comment. But the very next viewer may experience a significant, positive reaction.

It really doesn't matter if it's a painting, drawing, sculpture, dance or music. It doesn't matter if it's classical, traditional, modern, abstract, Cajun or pop. It doesn't matter if it's done in oils, pencil, clay or composed of metallic objects found in the street. Regardless of style, type or medium, art creations generate an energy that resonates with individuals who are tuned to the same inner frequency and since we all operate at a different frequency, each piece of art has it's own audience. It may be a small audience; maybe just a mother. But, out there somewhere, it resonates the soul of someone.

So I never worry about wanting everyone to appreciate the same things I enjoy and I don't wonder what's wrong with me if it seems the entire world is going ga-ga over Lady Gaga. When it comes to art, to each his own.

Mormon Democrat

Soon after moving here in 2000 I wrote this editorial which appeared in the Arizona Republic. If I wrote it today I'd probably express things a bit differently but, it is what it was.
_____________________________________________________

Like oil and water, some things just don’t seem to mesh well.

When I moved here four years ago, I discovered two affiliations in my life were viewed by some as mutually exclusive. They are not.

I am an active, participating member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Mormon. And, I am a Democrat.

I’ve learned many think I’m a rare breed and this education started early.

When looking for a new home for our family, my co-workers assumed “you’ll be living in the East Valley, won’t you?” When I asked why, I was told, “That’s where all the Mormons, especially those involved in politics, live.”

Well, we ended up in Mesa: good schools, great community, wonderful neighbors and friends and a quick commute on the 202. I’ve stopped being baffled by those around me who are sincerely surprised to learn, yes, I’m a Democrat…a moderate Democrat, but a Democrat, nonetheless.

What’s frustrating are the assumptions and labels I wear because of my religious faith and Church membership. People assume I must be a Republican and not just any Republican. If I’m LDS, then I must be a conservative, some might say, right-wing Republican.

Somewhere along the line in Arizona’s political history, being a member of the LDS Church came to identify you and become synonymous with one who supports the entire spectrum of political philosophies treasured by the conservative wing of the Republican Party. Not just those affiliated with public policies associated with issues of a moral nature. But we’re also saddled with conservative positions on a wide variety of issues: environment, tax policy, immigration, the role of government, military spending, welfare and education.

Just because members of the LDS Church are opposed to abortion don’t assume we’re all in lockstep with other planks of the conservative agenda.

The reaction of Governor Napolitano, following her recent trip to Salt Lake City, Utah to visit with LDS Church leaders, highlighted this issue for me again. I’m grateful she made the trip and took the time to find out that being a member of the LDS Church does not automatically define an individual’s position on all issues of public policy. We’re not, as many assume, political robots programmed by our religious beliefs.

The LDS Church stays out of issues of public policy except those it feels strike at the moral fiber of our communities. The Church does not endorse, stake out or proclaim a position on issues regarding water quality, transportation or farm subsidies. There are no Church doctrines dealing with taxes, education or the environment. To be clear, members of the church are encouraged to pay their taxes, get an education and treat the earth with respect and keep it clean. But these are not doctrinal tenets.

A recent campaign ad I read declared that a non-LDS candidate’s efforts to lower taxes constituted “a core LDS value.” Huh? I don’t ever remember being taught that in Sunday School.

To be fair, I’m equally frustrated and, frankly, a bit miffed by LDS candidates who use their Church affiliation as a qualification for office. I think it promotes a "dumbing down" of LDS voters by suggesting a candidate should be elected because of his or her religious affiliation as opposed to doing some homework and learning about a candidate’s position on important questions of public policy and, in some cases, their actual voting records. When I hear someone say they voted for a candidate, “because they’re a member of the Church,” I’m embarrassed for them and wish they had a better answer.

Maybe the fault for this widely held misconception lies with me and other members of the LDS Church who are Democrats. Have we allowed ourselves to be painted into the conservative corner by not speaking out and getting involved in the political process on a wider assortment of political issues? If the only political voices heard from the LDS community are those of LDS elected officials, who embrace a conservative Republican agenda, then, perhaps, we as members of the church deserve the labels we’ve been given. In our effort to “elect good men and women” to public office we’ve become so singularly focused on several key moral issues that we’re now exclusively identified by those issues alone.

Being a Democrat does not mean I support every aspect of the Democratic Party’s national platform. It’s the party’s platform, not my platform. Neither political party holds all truth; I’m not a single party voter nor am I a single issue voter.

Being a Democrat and a member of the Mormon Church is not an un-holy alliance. It’s not oil and water. In fact, there are many natural areas of agreement. As a Christian faith, we have much in common with the efforts and focus of the Democratic Party.

When the religious right had its surge of strength in the early 1980s, I was impressed by an article scolding the Democratic Party for allowing the Republicans to usurp the identifying brand as the party for “righteous Christians.” The writer asked: Wasn’t it Christ who taught us to care for the poor and the needy, to focus our attention on the children around us; to suffer the widow and the homeless and to look after those who could not care for themselves?

As a society and, therefore as a government, this is and always should be our top priority. These concerns should be our truest guide in the public policies we legislate and determine. It’s why I’m a Democrat.

I don’t think I’m alone. I’m pretty sure there are other members of my religious faith who, like me support the Church’s position on moral issues, but are also Democrats. I worry, however, that due to the shrillness of the public debate at times; the impressions given and, thereby, the perceptions confirmed by some LDS elected officials, many like-minded members of the Church may be reluctant to speak out. Or, worse yet, may switch their registration to “fit in.” I hope they won’t but, will instead, open their mouths and speak up.

If they’d asked me, I’d tell them, “It’s okay to be a Mormon...and a Democrat.”

The Grandness of Marriage

Son Matthew and Liz

I attended a wedding today where two friends exchanged sacred vows with one another and I was again reminded of the grandness of marriage and how fortunate we are as individuals to meet and marry someone we love.

Next Saturday, my youngest daughter, Mallory, will be the final child to get married. I am thrilled. Not at the prospect of “losing a daughter,” but at the sheer joy of seeing a child progress and press forward with life.

Each of my children married fabulous companions who compliment and strengthen their own individual natures. Liz is a great mother to our grandson, Topher, and gives our Matthew just enough rope to feel and flex his marvelous individual nature but not quite enough to hang himself. She’s fun to be with, laughs heartily and is a bright spot in any room. Dave is a fabulous husband for daughter, Carly. His patient and kind nature is a perfect fit for Carly’s energy and “get it done” persona. Most of all he adores Carly and makes her feel loved and appreciated.

Mallory is marrying Paul. They’ve been friends since High School, hung out quite a bit, always as pals and buddies. It wasn’t until college life that they looked at each other and kind of said, “hey, maybe we should try a dating environment and see where that leads.” Well they discovered a future path to be traveled together and fell in love. Paul, too, is a great compliment to Mallory. Aside from the fact that he, too, loves baseball as much if not more than I do, he’s also a caring and considerate man who, simply, gets things done. I have no worries about Paul’s ability and determination to make certain that Mallory and any future family will be adequately provided for and protected.

Thank you Paul, Dave and Liz. We’re blessed to have you in our family.

As I say in my “About Me” comments on any site I’m a part of, “I am the husband of my best friend.” I couldn’t do it without Cindy by my side. It’s a companionship that’s endured 32 years. (Wow, doesn’t seem that long.) When I look at my children, I fully understand the eternal role and impact of motherhood. Cindy is an amazing mom.

I’m a much better observer than I am at being introspective so, I’ll leave it to others to comment on how Cindy and I match up. I do know this, however, I can’t imagine a life of happiness and fulfillment without her.

So, here’s to marriage! Mine, my children’s and yours…make it work, press forward and enjoy.

Capital High School

High School was a fabulous time of life for me. I learned a lot but it was rarely from the classroom settings so prescribed and rigid. It was in the relationships I had (both good and bad) with friends mainly and one exceptional teacher.

Jerry Vevig, the Choral Director for many years at Capital High School in Boise, Idaho was my Mr. Holland.

Nearly every positive, emotional connection I feel for my High School days can be directly tied to the hours upon hours I spent in the choral room at Capital. And there were many. I sang in two different choral groups my Junior and Senior years of school and would frequently find myself there during other times as well.

It was like a magnet for me. A place where I felt comfortable, accepted and appreciated. Jerry (I'm older now so I feel comfortable calling him by his first name) was a fine man of high moral character. A great family man who loved his wife and children. He worked hard and had passion for music and in an equal dose, life itself. He was warm and funny. When the music was just right, he smiled broadly and was exuberant in his excitement, praise and thanks to the performers. When it wasn't just right, he forced us to find within ourselves the personal desire to make it as perfect as we could.

As a result of his influence, I went away to college with plans of becoming a High School choir teacher. I wanted to be just like Jerry and have impact on the lives of others...to help them find and be their individual best.

For a variety of reasons, that's not the way things turned out and I've been fortunate to have found other paths where I hope I've been able to help others, particularly young men and women, negotiate life's twists and turns. There's no question, Jerry, inspired me to have that desire and he showed me by example that an adult can impact a young person's life in ways that may not be immediately recognizable to either of them at the time. But, looking back 35 years later, are crystal clear.

So I tip my hat to Jerry Vevig and to all the quality teachers in our communities. You are truly underpaid and under appreciated in my book.

Jerry's still around. I think I owe him a phone call.