Conservative is Not a Bad Word -- but neither is Liberal

Sometime ago, our Sunday School class was privileged to have Steve Rader as a teacher for a 10-week course about balance.  Steve presents himself as a cool, even-tempered man, settled and at peace.  I cannot help but believe this is no facade.   Perhaps when I grow up I will be so.  During our Sunday School time Steve shared with us Biblical texts relative to balance in various aspects of daily living.   Many times I was convicted, but more importantly inspired to clean up my life's clutter (stuff that keeps one and balance apart).  So what does balance have to do with the turmoil of our day?  I'm glad you asked.

Have you noticed how extreme political positions are these days???  Democrats bashing Republicans.  Republicans bashing Democrats.    Conservatives bashing liberals.  Liberals bashing Conservatives.   I find it hard to believe that most folks identify with one party or the other to the point that they become card-carrying members.  Is it possible that one group is all right and the other all wrong?   I don't think so.  

The problem with party politics is that the lumping of a large group of people together who share common desires and opinions on many, but not all  issues.  A cursory review of the GOP platform with regard to the positions of five of its pre-convention presidential candidates, shows that there was agreement on 1) the war in Iraq, 2) the war in Pakistan, and 3) the Patriot Act.   Other issues -- including several aspects of aborton, embryonic stem cell research and gun control, did not have undivided support.  On the other side of the aisle (you know, the one that everyone claims they want to reach across), folks are at odds with various planks in the Democratic platform as well. 

My contention is this:   For any one to subscribe to one party's platform or the other short-changes oneself.  Do anyone of us agree with the unanimous will of any group???  Unless we're talking about followers of Jesus, I cannot see how that is possible.  (Come to think of it, we Christians even mess that up by putting our own opinions and proclivities in the way of His teachings.)

Several months ago, on a time-wasting road trip to Victoria (Texas), I was told that my vote is wasted because I do not vote along party lines.   The guy told me that the "party" was the only vehicle by which things get done.  If that is true, why is it so important to reach across the aisle?

My point is this:   The party who has control gets to push its agenda, which may or may not be good for the whole of the country.   Also, neither party is all good, and neither is all bad (although personally I think that both stink [insert other "s" word here if you'd like].   Think about it:  if you mark your ballot for the entire Democratic party, you will be voting for folks other than Barack Obama.  Do you really think Congressional District 18 needs two more years of Shelia Jackson Lee???  I hardly think so.  It galls me that she is so smugly secure in her position and unlike other Congressional Representatives (for instance, former Congressman Kenneth Bentsen and current Congressment Al Green), her office personnel spend time complaining about the number of her constituents rather than listening to the concerns of those constituents.  If folks weren't more interested in when I lost my virginity or bounced my first check, I would run against her.   And how about Harold Dutton (Texas House of Representatives, District 141)?  He has no opposition.   There's something wrong with that.  Even though he cannot be defeated I don't plan on dialing him up on the ballot.  

On a good note, voting a straight Democratic ticket, assuming the Dems will prevail, would rid our courts of some folks who, like Jackson-Lee and Dutton, ought to find some other pursuit, like other former judges who now have lucrative mediation practices.  For instance, it would be nice to never have to start a motion with "To the Honorable Sharolyn Wood" -- or "To the Honorable Joseph 'Tad' Halbach"-- or "To the Honorable Mark Davidson" ever again.  On the other hand, that is not an endorsement of their opponents, or any of the other candidates who have jumped on the Democratic bandwagon, hoping to ride on to victory with the Democratic presidential candidate.  (This does not include Jaclanel Moore McFarland, to whom much respect is due.  A vote for her would not be wasted.)  

Of course for every plus there is a minus -- for balance.  The downside of voting a straight Democratic ticket is, if the Dems prevail, we would lose some really good, competent folks who wear the Republican label, especially judges.   There really ought to be a better way to elect judges.  I digress (as usual).

So, my question to you is this:  will you take the easy way out and vote a straight ticket?  Or will you weigh the good and not-good of each candidate to determine which one you, not "the party" -- but the one you believe will be best for the job?  

I urge you to strive for balance.