The Iowa Caucuses
Posted in Government/Politics, Religion on January 5th, 2008 by Chip GibbonsI’ve been trying to refrain from writing about the election. We’re just not going to be able to get away from it for the next 10 months and probably for a long time thereafter, so there’s not a lot for me to say that isn’t going to be said by somebody else.
But today it is rainy and cold and the power is out at my house and I’m at a coffee shop. So I’ll say one thing about the Obama Huckabee victories in Iowa.
Both Obama and Huckabee are playing the role of pastors, offering to lead the flock. Huckabee wears his religion like a boy scout proud of his new badge. While Obama is more subtle, he still speaks like a preacher who is claiming the “moral authority” required to lead out country out of its current state. This is from an 1995 Obama profile:
“We have no shortage of moral fervor,” said Obama. “We have some wonderful preachers in town–preachers who continue to inspire me–preachers who are magnificent at articulating a vision of the world as it should be. In every church on Sunday in the African-American community we have this moral fervor; we have energy to burn.
“But as soon as church lets out, the energy dissipates. We must find ways to channel all this energy into community building. The biggest failure of the civil rights movement was in failing to translate this energy, this moral fervor, into creating lasting institutions and organizational structures.”
The fact that both of them would win over candidates with far more experience says something about the emotional state of our country these days. Seven years of Bush have left many people feeling disconnected, empty, and lacking a clear purpose. It is unclear to many at this point why we got into Iraq, why we’re still there and how we’re going to get out. There are also many domestic issues that leave people feeling helpless and insecure.
Voters want somebody to comfort them, and for many, a candidate who can project the image of compassion and moral authority has a strong emotional appeal, even if the candidate has no claim on either attribute. The important thing is the image and what they symbolize.
It’s as if they want a church, to be part of a cared-for flock, just as much or more than they want a new president.
What I find particularly interesting about Obama’s victory over Clinton in Iowa is that she’s vying to be the first woman president and he’s vying to be the first black president. The Democratic voters in Iowa chose a black man with almost no experience that would qualify him to be President of the United States (read his 1995 profile) over a woman who is one of the most qualified candidates running for the office. I disagree with both of them on most issues so I’m just looking at their number of years in government and foreign affairs. Obama, if he is elected president, will have jumped from community organizing to the U.S. Senate to the White House in record time! He will have pulled off something more akin to a coup rather than an orderly rise to the top.
There is no question that our country needs to make some major changes, and it’s clear that the voters want it. Now that Obama has turned “change” into the winning mantra, all the other candidates are talking about it. Ironically, the one candidate who represents real change from the status quo and who, unlike Obama and Clinton or any other candidate, has a long voting record that demonstrates his commitment to change, is Ron Paul, who came in fifth in the Republican straw poll in Iowa.
I say that not because I’m supporting Paul, but because his candidacy continues to raise the important questions in this election. It would seem that if voters really want change as opposed to just talk about change, a lot more would be supporting Paul. He continues to break fundraising records. If only he could turn that into votes I guarantee the country would see big changes, if that’s what they really want.