The Democratic candidates for president, and their surrogates, will be visiting Washington in the next few days, hoping to capture the hearts of the party apparatchiks, and the votes of the Democratic caucuses. Some of our local journalists may have a chance to ask them some questions. (Possible exception: Barack Obama, who has not been eager to talk to reporters. It isn't hard to understand why.)
All of these campaigners are adults. (Even Bill Clinton, who often acts as if he were sixteen years old.) All of them, to the best of my knowledge, are sane. Those two facts mean that it is fair to hold them responsible for what they have done — or not done — and said. It may seem silly to mention something this obvious, but I have grown accustomed to stories by local journalists who do not seem to believe that Democratic politicians can be held responsible for for what they have done, or not done.
(Need an example? Look at the coverage of the great storm of 2006. It is clear that Governor Gregoire did little during or after the storm, and that King County Executive Ron Sims did nothing. But I can't recall a single story, or editorial, that blamed either official for their failures.
Now for the help. It is legitimate to ask Barack Obama what he has accomplished. It is legitimate to ask him what executive experience he has. It is legitimate to ask him about his membership in a church that some have called racist. (For the record, I doubt that Obama actually believes in the doctrines of that church. Most likely, he joined the church for political advantage, just as John Kerry has kept a formal membership in the Catholic church.) It is legitimate to ask him what he means — if anything — by some of his more gaseous oratory. And so on.
Similarly, it is legitimate to ask Hillary Clinton what she learned from Chinagate, the worst scandal of the last thirty years, and perhaps the worst of the 20th century. (Joel Connelly would be a good person to ask that question, since he failed to do so during the 1996 campaign.) It is legitimate to ask her a more general, philosophical question: Are there any areas, other than abortion, that government should stay out of, any limits at all to the scope of government? It is legitimate to ask her about all those dubious business connections that her spouse has, such as this one. It is legitimate to ask her what executive experience she has. And, so on.
Finally, it is legitimate to ask both candidates (and their surrogates) this question: President Bush and Senator McCain favored the surge in Iraq. You opposed it. It is succeeding, by any reasonable measure. Were you wrong? (Hint to our local journalists: Yes, Clinton and Obama were wrong, even though that fact may not have reached your newsroom.) Neither is likely to admit having been wrong, but their answers are likely to be revealing even so.
What I urging our local journalists to do is to commit journalism — even if the subjects are Democratic politicians.
Posted by Jim Miller at February 07, 2008 12:52 PM | Email ThisJournalists are dime a dozen so the pols don't have to go begging for interviews.
Posted by: swatter on February 7, 2008 01:19 PMJim: He was a member of the church before he ran for office and regularly attends. As for doctrines, the UCC is pretty bland as a demonmination. They believe the Westminster Catechism like other Reformed offspring churchs, the Apostles Creed, and one or two modern (60's) documents. They are also congregational in model and therefore the individual church's choose Pastors and there isn't as much oversight as say with Presbyterian Churchs (another Reformed/Calvinist off-shoot). Members are not required to abide by their Pastor's personal issues. The only requirement for membership is to profess that Jesus is their Lord and Savior and they will support the church, which is more open than say Presbyterians who also add in their membership requirements that members abide by the government and confessions of the church (i.e., Book of Order and Book of Confessions).
Having grown up UCC, I can state that as far as denominations it is by far the most liberal of denominations and has strayed in areas where others have not wanted to go (like allowing gay marriages), but its main focus has been on living the social gospel (e.g., care for the poor, sick, downtrodden, etc.). It may be too liberal for my tastes, but it doesn't mean its core beliefs are outside of the Reformed/Protestant tradition. You have Southern Baptists at one end of the Protestant spectrum and UCC is basically at the other end.
Posted by: tc on February 7, 2008 01:32 PMI agree that the UCC is pretty bland as a denomination -- and one of its predecessors, the Congregational church, was pretty bland when I attended it as a kid. But Obama's church is not at all bland, as you can see from their own statements, which I link to.
As for joining the church before he ran for office, that just shows -- if my theory about his beliefs is correct -- that he is a politician with a little foresight. Nothing unusual in that; Bill Clinton, for example, started building his political card file when he was in his teens.
Posted by: Jim Miller on February 7, 2008 01:58 PMYour right buddie. NO-one cas steal 500 + FBI files like Hillary can. She is the real expert when it comes to that. O-and don't forget. "I can't remember" Yeah that was great too! LOL
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on February 7, 2008 02:21 PMWorst scandal of the 20th Century: A case can certainly be made for the hostile takeover of fat 'Crat Party by the Hsu-Trie-Riady-Loral axis of evil, but the scandal gold medal must still go to the Hiss cabal of the 1930s and 1940s. McCarthy (Joe, not Gene) was mostly right about the New Deal and Fair Deal being subsidiaries of the Comintern. M. Stanton Evans' book, Blacklisted by History, is astonishing even for those of us who thought we knew too much about the FDR/HST era to be astonished.
Posted by: AUH2O on February 7, 2008 02:35 PMBoxers or Briefs?
I don't then even Bill knows for sure....
Posted by: CrazyFool on February 7, 2008 02:39 PM"If Hillary is elected president, I predict more incidents with female interns."
And they won't be from Bill...
Posted by: Doc-T on February 7, 2008 03:10 PMPerhaps too much is made of this, for airheads who've learned all their 'facts' by watching TV and believing in the tooth fairy. But some of us voters, in evaluating a candidate for Chief EXECUTIVE, will consider that experience to be near the top of the list of that candidate's qualifications. If candidate lacks executive experience, this voter says 'unqualified' and looks for a better candidate.
That certainly goes for both the Democrats remaining in the race.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on February 7, 2008 04:04 PMNow this should be down right funny.
"Right Duffman"
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on February 7, 2008 04:26 PMDo it, you guys...commit journalism. I totally would do it if I had this weekend free.
Posted by: Cydney on February 7, 2008 05:46 PMWhile this was probably a tongue in cheek comment, I suspect that a lot of Hillary and Obama supporters actually feel this way. To that extent it should probably be addressed.
I have been in my chosen field for over 15 years. While my previous business and management experience helped when I moved in to the field, it was not a complete substitute for experience IN the field. In a complex, technical field you NEED personal experience in order to have the wisdom and judgment to be able to have even a chance of making consistently good decisions. That is why you hire a chief executive. There is so much more to it than being smart, surrounding yourself with smart folks, and delegating well.
Looking back, I KNOW I didn't know squat for the first 5 years on the job. Years 5 - 10 I was competent. Only in the last few years have I really become good at it. I've seen a lot of peers and competitors come and go, but I have never seen a newbie who was ready for the big time in less than a decade.
That is a large part of why I find both Hillary and Obama so frightening. Neither one of them have ever done anything that would remotely qualify them to be the chief executive of the country or the commander in chief of our armed forces. Being the wife of a pilot does not qualify someone to fly a plane. Nor does a desire to change the course of the plane. If the D's win in November we are likely to experience a hell of a crash.
Hairy
Posted by: Hairy Buddah on February 7, 2008 07:36 PMThey are really gonna feel your pain.
Posted by: GS on February 7, 2008 09:13 PM"After the 1993 WTC bombing, what did you do to reduce the threat of worldwide terrorism?"
She claims she should get "life credit" for sitting around the White House. Well, let's hear exactly what she did during those 8 long years...
On their mission page, it is very much in line with other mainstream church's. There appears to be nothing the would restrict membership. Given the UCC's openness in membership and outright goal to promote equality through out its churches, I don't believe the church would be restrictive in membership.
About the only thing that can be said (of the Church) is that it is focused on the Black Community, which should be good given its location. The more churches and other non-government organizations can do to help the community the less the effort falls upon the government.
Posted by: tc on February 8, 2008 07:39 AM1. After 9/11, she worked diligently to secure funds to recover and rebuild. She fought to provide compensation to families of the victims, small businesses and front line workers at Ground Zero and improve homeland security.
2. In her work on the Senate Armed Services Committee, she has been working to see that our military has the necessary resources. She has visited Iraq and Afghanistan to learn first hand the challenges are combat forces are facing.
3. Hillary passed legislation to track the health status of our troops so that conditions like Gulf War Syndrome would not be misdiagnosed.
4. She is an original sponsor of legislation to expand health benefits to members of the National Guard and Reserves.
5. She has introduced legislation to tie the Congressional salary increases to increase in the minimum wage.
6. She has supported a variety of middle-class tax cuts: marriage penalty tax, property tax relief, reduction of the Alternative Minimum Tax
7. She passed legislation to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program.
8. She has championed legislation to bring broadband internet access to rural America which helps support the economic growth of the community.
9. She continues to strengthen the Children's Health Insurance Program which she developed to help low income and working families.
10. She has authored legislation that has been enacted to improve the quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs.
11. She has sponsored legislation in the global fight against HIV/AIDS
12. She has passed legislation that will bring more qualified teachers into the classroom
13. She is one of the original sponsors of the Prevention First Act to increase access to family planning.
14. She introduced the Count Every Vote Act in 2005
I could go on, but suffice it to say, Hillary's hard work has touched all of our lives.
Thank you, Hillary