Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Trial Balloons

Despite our many grumblings about "politics" and "the system", we do have the amazing privilege of voting. So who you like for the OO (Oval Office) in 08? You get to name your (current--subject to change) candidate, and please provide the one or two reasons behind your choice. The hoped-for give-and-take might change some minds or sharpen some convictions!

55 comments:

josenmiami said...

I am leaning heavily toward McCain unless it appears that the conservative wing of the Republican Party will succeed in tying his hands on immigration and Cuba... in that scenario I will probably go over to Obama in the hopes that a different party in power will
a) resolve the 50-year conflict with Cuba;
b) find a REAL solution for the 12 million illegal immigrants and
c) come up some kind of better system for health care insurance (I don't give damn if you think it is socialistic) ...

...oh, and did I mention improve relations with Latin America?

cheers!

Patrick said...

Honestly, I would have liked for Ron Paul to take the office. The federal government is extremely obese, and its nasty fingers are reaching too far into the lives of its constituents. His goal was to return power to the states and make the feds smaller. I think the government is supposed to serve the people, not control them.

It was interesting, too, how he campaigned. He plugged into Facebook, MySpace, the iPhone networks and so on. I know he was just trying to reach the younger crowd. But, it worked.

Michael said...

You will probably have to cut and paste this link. I hope it works. But I thought this was an interseting article on the difference of the leadership style of H. Clinton and B. Obama.

http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/feb2008/ca2008028_331189.htm?link_position=link12

dan said...

I'd have to agree with Patrick and go with Ron Paul. I think that I have never seen a politician with integrity until i learned of Dr. Paul. Even if he had a 0% chance of winning I would still vote for him, every vote helps his message of freedom resound louder.

josenmiami said...

good article Michael... Patrick and Dan, I'll get back to your points.

Here is a selection from the article that Michael mentioned:

"But each candidate is actually putting forth a well-reasoned philosophy of leadership, and their distinct approaches have implications for their respective abilities to deliver on the changes the majority of the nation seems to desire. From the vantage point of a business school professor, what is particularly striking is that the two candidates clearly articulate competing theories of leadership that have been the focus of much scholarly research over the last several decades; what I'll refer to as the "managerial" and "transformational" approaches."

Brian Emmet said...

Good stuff, gents. We all owe Joseph a tip o' the caps and three heart cheers for upgrading our blog by adding links and other cyber-niceties (or -necessities!)

I understand the appeal of Paul, but even if you elected him, he'd be stiffed by our "permanent government." The Prez has both more power than we think, and less. The size of our government increased under both Reagan and Bush and Paul would have significantly less clout and capital than either of them.

Obama honestly scares me: I don't see anything there. First-term senator, and before that...? I wonder if he's not the "Chance the gardener" candidate--anyone ever seen the Peter Sellars movie "Being There"? Both Clinton and Obama would be huge steps backward for the pro-life cause (McCain not much better, but some)and could take the Supreme Court in some unhappy directions. So I land with McCain. Not with huge enthusiasm, but...

josenmiami said...

wow, Bri... you are more conservative than I expected for a nice guy from Boston!

I agree with you about Paul ... I think there might be more to Obama than you give him credit for. You should go and read the article that Michael provided the link to ... he may have the kind of visionary leadership that might bring real change in some areas ...

I'm tired of evaluating candidates on a singular issue of abortion. The Republican party seemed ready to go with a pro-choice candidate in Giuliani this year ...and voting for both of the Bushes and Reagon did nothing to reduce abortion... I personally like McCain.

It seems to me that we are standing on the cusp of generational change...and this was the appeal of both Ron Paul and Obama ... people (especially young people) want some real change not business as usual. Don't know if it is possible, but the desire is there.

It reminds me of 1968 when I was an avid supporter of George McGovern, the anti-war candidate. I was suspicious of Bobby Kenedy trying to jump in on the generational call for change and I think history proved me right: both the Kenedy's were hardened Cold War 'realists' as the documents from the Cuban Missle crisis demonstrates.

So McGovern lost, Kennedy was shot, Humphrey was nominated and we ended up with Nixon. So much for idealism! After that, I left the Democrat party and joined the Socialist Workers Party in Providence R.I.

Brian Emmet said...

Comrade Jose, I was a "member" of SDS... for one meeting! My freshman year at college (1970, egad!), revolution was in the air, and I checked out the local SDS chapter or coven or whatever... BORING. Not that I was a likely recruit...
You know, every single time I've been to any Covenant/FCMC/ACM/whatever event, and people learn I'm from MA, the FIRST QUESTION I am inevitably asked is something like, "How do you guys keep electing Ted Kennedy?!" My kids think I'm a real conservative, too, which is kinda hard on a "child of the 60s"!
I will give BHO the benefit of the doubt and the requisite grains of salt, and I will read the article Michael provided, but I'm going to take some convincing...
But as NT Wright points out the early church didn't so much care how rulers came to power, but they did do all they could to hold them to acount once they came to power. I think we can all live with that!

Brian Emmet said...

Oh, and I've read enough Catholic social thought to really believe that abortion continues to be a, or the, defining issue... not one among many.

Michael said...

I think we are going to have to find a president that doesn't expect America to be all things to all people.
We are going to find our national resources severely tested as we try to deal with terrorism (and two wars), health care, a growing national debt, immigration, and the disintegration of our society.We live in DeKalb, where the most recent university shooting took place.

I am not sure any of them are up to the challenge. I lean toward McCain, but I find that I am more comfortable with him, not that he is the best candidate.

In my mind Hillary points us toward the past (and in many ways so does McCain). Obama is an unknown that scares me (maybe that is a good thing).

As I am writing this Pauls words to Timothy to pray for "all kings and those in authority....." becomes more real.

josenmiami said...

I agree Michael ... although I am fascinated by Obama's ability to generate hope and vision.

Brian, I agree that abortion is a defining moral issue ... I just don't think electing "pro-life" Presidential candidates is going to solve it...based on the last 15 years or so. I think that it is a deeper, more fundamental issue than political. We really need to engage the harvest on a person-to-person level...in other words... rather than wait on a president to change it, we need to change people's hearts.

Besides ... McCain is clearly pro-life ... so, if that is the definin political issue, why all the grouching and criticism from conservatives? You guys who are reluctantly supporting him are going to torpedo him and put Obama into office...

John M. said...

I've been lurking along, but I'll go ahead and throw my hat in the ring.

I will probably vote for McCain when Nov. rolls around. But it won't surprise me if Obama becomes the next president -- and I'm not as afraid of him as others are -- not sure why, just a "gut" sense -- totally subjective. What he has going for him is the dynamic of a true movement whose wave has not begun to crest, and that cuts across most demographics, ethnic and age groups. The phenomenon and the man intrigue me, and I wonder if there is some sort of "destiny" there.

I just read an interesting article in U.S. News, about the viability of a third party in this election year. The author, Douglas Schoen, has written a book about it and obviously would like to be on the inside of it if the right candidate came forward. He thinks that the right candidate would actually have a shot at winning the popular vote, but points out historically the influence that third party candidates have had that exceeds their numbers. So, who knows what yet might happen before we go to the poles in November? If you're interested in the article here's the link:
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/politics/2008/02/01/declaring-independance-why-campaig

John M. said...

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/
politics/2008/02/01/declaring-
independance-why-campaign-consultant-
douglas-schoen-says-its-time-for-a-
third-party.html

Here's the whole link. Sorry.

John

John M. said...

Here are three things that Scot McKnight says we forget during an election year:

We forget our enemy is our brother, our enemy is our sister.

We forget that the church is our focus.

We forget that justice is defined by the Bible.

steve H said...

I'm not satisfied with any of the political options. Thankfully, the kingdom that has come and is coming is not advanced or stopped by any political activity or person. God used Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus as easily as he used Moses and David. It seems to me that we need God's discernment as to which candidate and party would do the least to hinder the mission God has given to his covenant people -- to live the life of the kingdom now and to lead people into the life our king and his kingdom. (That's dangerous, however, since we may need opposition to refocus us fully on our mission.)

"First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth." 1 Tim 2.1-3

"Now concerning brotherly love you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another, for that indeed is what you are doing to all the brothers throughout Macedonia. But we urge you, brothers, to do this more and more, and to aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you, so that you may live properly before outsiders and be dependent on no one." 1 Thess 4.9-12

Brian Emmet said...

Joseph, while I agree that voting for a clearly pro-life candidate does not guarantee pro-life results, I think it is also clear that voting for a prochoice candidate clearly furthers the abortion agenda... unless you want to argue that it's going to be a Nixon-goes-to-China kind of thing. And of course the issue goes far deepr than who's in the OO.
I don't think I'll lose much sleep if it's Obama...but he strikes me as all sizzle and no steak.

steve H said...

If you haven't seen any of the youtube videos from and about Obama's church then you should check some out. Here's one that you might start with: look for "Common at Trinity's New Year's 2008" footage taken at the church's New Year's Eve Party.

Also look at the church website:
http://www.tucc.org/home.htm

I'm not reacting with fear like a lot of conservatives but there is cause for some real caution in my opinion.

josenmiami said...

thanks Steve, I'll check it out.

Brian, so if the pro-life issue is a singular overiding issue as you are saying... why the ambivalence toward McCain? Why are some conservatives saying that they would rather vote for Hilary?

josenmiami said...

ok Steve, I looked at both links. What exactly did you find objectionable? The church web site clearly and unapologetically affirms their commitment to the gospel, as well as to their African roots. I see no problem with that.

The Youtube video shows a festive atmosphere that I think I would have enjoyed participating in.

I’m not sure what the problem is here. What exactly is the cause for real concern that you pick up from the web sites? The fact that he is from black culture?

joseph

Patrick said...

The concerns I've heard from evangelicals is the theory that Obama is going to push for the installment of Sharia Law in the U.S.

I've looked around, but I haven't found anything but rumors that would confirm this.

steve H said...

I wasn't looking to start an argument. I think one can interpret the material in the website and in the videos at least two ways:

1) I hope that what is reflected in these things is indeed simply black culture and black experience seen through the rhetoric of liberation theology -- along with lack of discernment regarding such things as Farrakhan and the Black Muslim agenda. I have long appreciated Tom Skinner (now dead) who used the language of liberation effectively and was clearly committed to the gospel of Jesus. I hope Wright represents something similar although it's hard to tell because of his affiliation with United Church of Christ in which churches can range from somewhat true to the faith all the way to off the wall.

2) Many conservatives think they are seeing and hearing alignment with Farrakhan and that sort of Black Separatist agenda. That strikes fear in many -- and there could be good reason. The youtube video "Jeremiah Wright on Fox" in which Wright refuses to answer any questions from Hannity and Colmes is troubling to me. It's not just whites who are concerned about these matters as is seen in the youtube video "Jeremiah Wright, Obama and the United Church of Christ."

I am not convinced that Wright and the TUCC message is heretical and dangerous. I do see how it can easily be interpreted that way. I recommended checking these things out because they are,and are going to be, part of the debate. Those considering voting for Obama need to seek to understand what, if anything, these materials indicate about the substance behind Obama's message of hope.

steve H said...

One further comment, Joseph, concerning the video from the church New Year's Eve party. Although I tend to "hear" it as cultural and even hyperbole, the "adulation" given to Wright in the rap number makes it understandable that some have called the church a cult or cult-like. We of all people should understand things we did that others misconstrued that way.

Plus the rapper's use of the word "revolution" followed soon after by reference to voting for Obama is bound to trigger fears in many people who do not understand the language of liberation theology and who fear the influence and relationship with Farrakhan and what he represents.

By the way, I have personally met two black brothers in Christ who were living under threat of death from the Black Muslims because they have spoken up against Farrakhan and the Black Muslim agenda. One of them, a pastor of a huge church, was accompanied by a body guard when I met him because of the threats on his life.

Therefore, Wright' admiration and respect for Farrakhan (based on actual statements Wright has made -- for instance in "Trumpet" magazine which is page on the church website) seems to me to be serious cause for concern and as a follower of Jesus I must take this concern into account.

josenmiami said...

neither was I, comrade Steve. Thanks for the additional perspective. I didn't get that from it when I watched it, but I'll look at it again.

If there is any substance to your concerns, then you are making an excellent case for religious right conservatives to forget some of the finer points of conservative ideology and line up enthusiastically behind McCain. If Obama wins the nomination, McCain will have his hands full. He has a much better chance against Clinton, especially if she is perceived as stealing the nomination through back-room political deals..

Patrick, I have seen the rumors you are referring to and they strike me as about as plausible as the extreme left rumors that our current government orchestrated 9/11 in order to get justification for an oil war in Iraq ... conspiracy theories...

final point: Obama may be the best shot the Afro-American community has of electing one of their own in this century -- after about 2050, most of our presidents will have Hispanic surnames and many of them will be women...if blacks are elected they will probably be from Cuba or Puerto Rico... something to look forward to!

don woolley said...

I usually lurk too, but here's what I've been thinking. First, full confession: I voted for Huckabee. I like McCain. I've always ended up voting Republican for national offices.

BUT...I can't help liking Obama. I agree with very few of his policy proposals but then I think about what good has it done to vote the way I have in the past? How different was the world under Clinton? under Bush? under the first Bush? I'm not discounting the huge impact presidents can make, especially in times of crisis or war. But my life isn't fundamentally changed by who is president, nor is the work of the Kingdom. Very few presidents have fundamentally changed the country or the world.

Here's another thing. It kills me that studies have shown that 4 year old black kids think whites are smarter, better (morally), more likely to succeed, etc. etc. (If you've ever seen the interviews of these kids, its gut wrenching). Electing Obama as president would be very important in helping the African American population, and it would help the whole country move significantly forward on this long-running issue of race.

The first I heard of Obama was an article describing his rock star status internationally, particularly in Africa. He has the potential to be a strong leader internationally, and perhaps bring greater change (and yes hope) to the world's most troubled continent.

Given that Republicans, even as the minority party, can keep his most liberal policy proposals in check, could a vote for Obama be rightfully denying myself for the good of others?!

But then, as others have mentioned, there is the abortion issue....

Well, enough ranting. I'm obviously conflicted and confused. :-)

don woolley

josenmiami said...

Hi Dan... I instinctively like him also, for what it is worth. I also like Bush the same way.

Although I am leaning toward McCain, I will repeat my earlier point that democracy requires regular and peaceful alternation of power. Too many years of dominance of either party is not healthy for democracy. I didn't particularly like AL Gore, and I for sure didn't like John Kerry ... I prefer Obama over Clinton ... we survived 8 years of the first Clinton, and Obama seems to me like a better option than the democrats have offered for a while.

One thing I do feel strongly about: whether Obama is elected (it is still not a given that he will receieve the nomination) or McCain ... we need a President who will be a unifier, rather than a polarizer. Both Bill Clinton and George Bush have been polarizing figures... I personally am tired of the political polarization and the mean personal attacks that one hears on talk radio, both right and left. I think it is time for a move to the center. If we have a contest between Obama and McCain...my guess is that Obama will win ... but I will be grateful for a choice between two gentlemen who are willing to reach across the aisle.

John M. said...

Dan, I track with you almost to the letter (I didn't vote for Hucakee, or anyone yet, since I live in KY), but I have had your other thoughts almost to the letter. I wonder how many others like us there are?

Randy R. said...

Hey, guys, I am tracking with Don, whom I am not sure I have met, and you, John. Perhaps, we can think of him (Obama)as the Tiger Woods of the political world! Plus, I would bet that most of you were in the same boat as me, I prayed a LOT more for our President when Bill Clinton was in the oval office then I have for George Bush!

Randy R. said...

Hey, guys, I am tracking with Don, whom I am not sure I have met, and you, John. Perhaps, we can think of him (Obama)as the Tiger Woods of the political world! Plus, I would bet that most of you were in the same boat as me, I prayed a LOT more for our President when Bill Clinton was in the oval office then I have for George Bush!

Randy R. said...

Hey, guys, I am tracking with Don, whom I am not sure I have met, and you, John. Perhaps, we can think of him (Obama)as the Tiger Woods of the political world! Plus, I would bet that most of you were in the same boat as me, I prayed a LOT more for our President when Bill Clinton was in the oval office then I have for George Bush!

josenmiami said...

Personally, for me it is helpful to take a step back from the whole political process and not to take it too seriously. I understand the importance of civic engagement and values, but I find that I need to keep my priority focus on the advancing of the purpose of God in the nations rather than to get too caught up in identifying with a particularly party, embracing political ideology, or thinking to heavily in terms of U.S. national interests.

I love the United States and believe that it is a great country…but who is the next president, whether or not swarms of modern barbarians come flooding across our borders, whether or not we maintain our place of world leadership, or lose it to China is not really that important to me compared with the big picture of God’s love for the whole world.

Although I lean toward McCain, I can live with whoever God allows into that office and pray for them.

don woolley said...

John M. wrote, "I wonder how many others like us there are?"

Hey John, I had lunch with a couple friends on election day here in Mobile, AL. Both voted for Obama, even though they didn't agree with his policy positions and had never voted for a Democrat for national office.

Its a really unusual phenomenon. I think the main driver is the perceived opportunity to move into a completely new stage of history. Rather than beginning a new chapter with a new president, it seems many are ready to start an entirely new book.

Randy, you're right, we haven't met. I'm pastor at Pleasant Valley United Methodist and a group called Jesus Tribe (www.jesustribe.org). Matt Brennan, Michael McCarty, Patrick and Will Currie are good friends.

steve H said...

...a new book?

Am I hearing correctly that any book is better than the present book?

Much of what I'm hearing these days sounds a bit like the 1960s to me -- tear down the old with no clear plan for what and how to rebuild(New Left) or simply drop out of the old and live as an idealized counterculture, our own "brave new world" (Hippies).

As Os Guinness put it, either option left us with "the dust of death." On the other hand, it did produce an environment in which some were ready to seek and to embrace a third way -- the eternal kingdom.

Robert said...

Just touching down to say that I have been following with interest. Funerals, local stuff, national stuff, Anglican stuff and a bad cold have limited my time at the keyboard.

Carry on...

Robert

josenmiami said...

get well Robert.

Steve, I agree with the parallels with the 1960s. I have a book at home called "Generations" by a pair of sociologists (whose name I cannot remember) who have a repeating, 4-generational pattern theory about American history. I read it about 8 years ago, and they were suggesting that the "millennials" (those born in 1980 or after) would be another strong generation, not idealistic like the 1960s, but more civic minded like the WWII generation. In my mind, the surprising strength of Ron Paul and the Obama phenomenom have capitalized on a generational groundswell, combined with a deepening frustration with political gridlock.

Welcome again Dan! I wonder, since Dan introduced himself to Randy, if we should all introduce ourselves to Dan and anyone else who is lurking along, reading our hereies? With Brian's permission of course...

Dan, I am Joseph Holbrook in Miami, FL, missionary and church planter, formerly among Spanish speakers and currently among bi-lingual (Spa.-Eng. amd some Port.) secular young people, primarily in academia, but occasionally in smoky pool halls with loud, raucous 'alternative' music ... happy husband of Debbie and father of 4 (and grandfather of 4). Please to make your acquaintance. You gotta be cool, because you hang out with some cool people!

steve H said...

Dan, I am Steve Humble. I'm a husband, father (3), and grandfather (7) and I'm an elder in a small fellowship in central Kentucky.

Patrick said...

We've got a slight misnomer here. There is one, "Dan," who likes Ron Paul. And another, "Don," who lives here in Mobile.

I'm not sure if you guys were a little confused. Just wanted to clear it up.

josenmiami said...

Patrick, while you are at it, please introduce yourself ... give us a little detail.

Dan (age 21) lives with me in Miami, is a rabid Ron Paul fan and only posted on here once, because I paid him too (just kidding).

Don is a Methodist pastor in Mobile.

Patrick? and William?

josenmiami said...

oops... I just realized that it was me that screwed up the names... Brian? maybe you better take over here.

don woolley said...

I agree that the millenials and Gen X'ers are among those especially ready for change, and I also agree that the 60's are not exactly our model. In fact, I think there is some real resentment among us to the narcisism of that period and its ongoing effects. For me, I am especially frustrated with those effects in the institutional church.

Of course some say, we're the first generation to be less cool than our parents :-)

don in Mobile, (not Dan the rabid Ron Paul fan) lol

Patrick said...

I am a 23 yr old single in Mobile, AL. My goals concern people and the church, or the remodeling of the church, I should say.

We have a rich heritage here and we are learning how to connect with them.

I also want to learn how to make candles.

Brian Emmet said...

This is Brian, greeting you all apolitically from a place that calls itself "one happy island," where my bride and I are on vacation. I'll be 56 in March, married to Kath for 31 years in May, father of three grown and married kids (no gk's yet). I serve Covenant Church in Arlington MA as a pastor, and Covenant School (also in Arlington, MA, how about that) as headmaster. I also serve as the rationalizing counterweight to Joseph's wildness!

That last sentence was a friendly joke. I'm so relaxed, I'm starting to think that Joseph is right about everything!

josenmiami said...

and a very welcome counterweight he is ... it is a dirty job but somebody has to do it!

I got some Clinton and McCain jokes on

http://kickbutthumor.blogspot.com/

I'm still looking for good Obama and Huckabee jokes...

josenmiami said...

Brian, this discussion seems to be winding down, in case you want to change the topic when you get back this week.

By-the-way, I found some information about Evangelical voting trends on an emerging blog:

"40% of Evangelicals say they would support the GOP candidate... The interesting part is that 40% are still undecided. As a comparison, 85% of Evangelicals voted Republican in 2004."

http://nicksmusings.blogspot.com/2008/02/barna-on-2008-election.html

You can access the original poll (from Feb. 4) at Barna's web site:

http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=291

John M. said...

Don, sorry to be tardy in introducing myself. I'm John Meadows living in Lex. Ky. Brian is really relaxed, giving his age! But since our fearless leader did it, I'm 58, been married to Vicki for 37 years this summer, four adult children, three grandkids (highly recommended!). I pastored in the Covenant stream until 1999 when I took a full-time teaching position (Jr. Hi) at Lexington Christian Academy.

You responded to my, "I wonder how many of us there are?", question by relating your dinner conversation. I just read in today's paper an article about dollars donated to the various campaigns state-wide in KY. (Our primary is not until May.) KY is strongly democrat in local and most state-wide elections, but almost always votes Republican in presidential elections (go figure!). Currently in KY fund-raising, Obama is first, Clinton second, Ron Paul third and McCain fourth.

The most interesting story, though, was a Dr. who traditionally votes Republican, who has contributed $900 some to Obama and $800 some to McCain. When asked who he would vote for in a choice between the two, he would go for Obama (go figure!). There are a lot of undecided and conflicted voters out there. The one thing in common that many of them have is that they will vote against Hillary (the Clinton's) no matter what.

Randy R. said...

Introduction:
Randy Reinhardt
Lover of God (~ 35 years)
Lover of Linda ( Married 34 years)
Lover of my children (5, ages, 18 - 29, one married, another engaged, no grandchildren, yet)
Lover of my church family (Senior Pastor, New Heritage Church, Ellicott City Maryland since 1987)
Lover of the brothers (and sisters) of ACM . . . never known anything else!; therefore, 35 years!)
Lover of the unreached peoples of the nations! (That chapter is still being written!)

Randy R. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
josenmiami said...

good intro Randy! You are a lover indeed, a man after my own heart. I just put a bunch of romantic photos of me and Deb on my humor blog with Elvis Presley's "hunka burnin love' song in the background. I will one-up Al Gore and claim that Deb and I invented global warming in 1974 when we started steaming up the planet.

By-the-way, I got the book out about generational issues. The title is "Generations: the History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069", by William Strauss and Neil Howe. It was published in 1991 and I read it in the mid to late 90s... I have been watching the millennial generation (borh in 1982 or after) since then, anticipating some kind of cultural movement. I think the Obama dynamic, and to a lessor extent the Ron Paul factor, has been propelled by the massive generational shift that Howe and Strauss predicted.

One other note: I am disappointed that John McCain is sticking to business as usual on Cuba... although he probably thinks he does not have a choice if he wants to get elected (he will need FL). This is the one issue that would tempt me to vote for Obama. I gotta get down to Cuba to do my disseration research...and it is not going to happen with a Republican in office, sad to say.

Randy R. said...

PS: I forgot to mention that I am 56 years young. Also, I LOVE a good beer, a good cup of coffee, and a romantic evening with my wife, not necessarily in that order!

Brian Emmet said...

I think Randy wins the prize for the best introduction of himself!

Any thoughts/suggestions for a new topic?

josenmiami said...

I agree ...

what about generational change? or generational issues?

steve H said...

Get the generational topic going quick. I speak at a conference this coming weekend -- overall theme "Kingdoms at War" and I am to address generational transfer in that context.

josenmiami said...

hi Steve,

I just arrived at school ...and I will be here most of the day. I have quite a bit of materials on generational issues at home ... a lot of it from the late 90s and early 2000s...

any particular aspect of the generational thing you want to talk about? I could send you some stuff from the book I mentioned earlier ...although it is dated.

John M. said...

Steve and Joseph,
Strauss and Howe also have out a more recent book called Millenials, in which they apply their research to the those who will or have come of age after the year 2000

They draw some very positive conclusions, saying this generation will have more respect for authority, be more socially engaged (ie helping others), and be less anti-institutional and more willing to get involved in renewing existing intstitutions,than baby-boomers or GenXer's.

They call the millinials the next "greatest" generation, as compared to the WW II generation. I'm sure many would not be as effusivly positive as they are, but I have seen some of these patterns during the last twelve years in my students who are all millineals. When I first started teaching my students were closer to Gen-X than Gen-Y.
John M.

John M. said...

Steve,

I recently attended a seminar that our teacher's at LCA did for an in-service. It's called "Passing the Baton". The whole thing was about mentoring and passing the baton to the next generation. Very good stuff, and, sadly, a brand-new concept for at least some of the teachers who were there. (Why are they teaching in a Christian school then...? I guess they had never thought about it...???)

It was conducted by Dr. Jeff Meyers who is connected with Summit and David Nobel, the author of "Understanding the Times".

You might find some good info and resources at Dr. Meyers site:

http://www.passingthebaton.org/

steve H said...

I've been in Ohio the last couple days for Mom's birthday -- and to encourage Dad. It was a worthwhile time.

Thanks for the offers of material. I will look into these -- some of which I have already.

My task this weekend is to show that God's plan for the kingdom is growth and overcoming from generation to generation. I have thought much about the overall topic but I have not thought it through as a significant part of God's strategy "in the war." But its a no-brainer on one level that it is; I just have never considered how to present it in that light.