David Michael Bruno

America's Greatest Check and Balance

Any civic-minded American simply must be energized tonight. Granted, some are animated by frustration and others by elation. But if you're not delighted to be an American right now then something is wrong with you.

The victory of Republican Scott Brown to fill the late Ted Kenney's Senate seat in Massachusetts is as vital as politics get on this planet. It is testimony to the health of the country's greatest check and balance.

If you recall from civics class in high school, the United States federal government has three checks and balances, the three branches of government. Executive Branch - the President. Legislative Branch - House of Representatives and Senate. Judicial Branch - Courts, including Supreme Court. But there is another, more powerful check and balance. "We the people of the United States of America."

This is why Nicholas Kristof (whose columns I often appreciate) could have been tweeting from a reading room in the British Library when he said, "With a Brown win, the best health reform option is for the House to pass the exact Senate bill, so it doesn't go back to the Senate." Kristof is living in the wrong country, if he really thinks this is the best course of action. He must not believe in the greatest of the four checks and balances, we the people. With Brown's win, the nation is telling President Obama and the Democratic party to put on the brakes, not to brazenly run a red light.

And do not forget how the greatest check and balance works. Equitably. It sent President George W. Bush away from Washington D.C. with a national sigh of relief. The collective voice of the people of the United States does not discriminate among political parties.

David Brooks was right when he wrote this morning, "Americans are an unusual people, with less deference to central authority and an unparalleled faith in themselves. They seem to want a government that is helpful but not imperious, strong but subordinate."

When a political party gains substantial control in the United States and uses that control as a "mandate," be assured that the people of the United States will react against that party. Bush misunderstood national unity in the wake of 9/11 as a "mandate" to pursue war and restrict liberties. Obama misunderstood the national reaction against the Bush administration's arrogance as a "mandate" to pursue his agenda. Guess what? Americans don't like that. Americans do not tolerate that.

If there is a downside to the fourth and greatest check and balance, it is this. We the people trend toward passivity. The extremely conservative Tea Party movement is a case in point. For example, they complain about national debt, but were they complaining about national debt when Bush was cutting taxes and adding unfunded entitlements? No. Times were good, citizens were passive. Thus we the people sometimes sit idle, helping to bring on the circumstances that will eventually awaken us with fire in our throats. We should be willing to chasten ourselves for this behavior.

There are two circumstances in the course of events that will rouse the American people to powerful action. 1. A threat to our country's freedom and 2. Arrogance by our country's political leaders. Not in every case, but throughout our country's relatively short history, we have not tolerated oppression or imperiousness.

Bonus: If you've made it this far, I'll add a bonus commentary. Presently we are too caught up in the swing from extremely liberal to extremely conservative, back to extremely liberal and so on. The great American political leader of the twenty-first century, if we ever get one, will be the person who awakens Americans, not for a short-term rally in the direction of conservatism or liberalism, but for a longer-term purpose. And that purpose, in my opinion, would be to wake up the American people to the need to reign in the excessively greedy nature of American-style capitalism, which has led to near ruination of our economies, communities, environments, and more.

A Lot of Average

A quick thought. If a lot of average people did lots of average things, it might produce spectacular results.

Voters Are Not Ratings

Some number of years ago I noticed that politicians are acting more and more like yellow-bellied cowards. Case in point, "the major policy speech."

Why is it that whenever an important speech will be delivered the speech's outline, key points, and substantial extracts are presented to the American public before the speech? And why do newspapers "report" these details of the speech with the same dull analysis, "The president's job tonight will be to convince the American people [fill in the blank]."

"that he's serious."

"that he's a credible leader."

"that he's firm on his resolve."

It's as if the substance of a major speech, like a speech about sending tens of thousands more American soldiers to war, isn't the point. It's as if what the people of America want is to be jolted out of a non-thinking, non-participating stupor. And, once awake, the role of the voter is to push one of two buzzers: "Sounds Good" or "I'm Suspicious, But It Doesn't Really Matter" and then get back to watching The Office.

I don't know about you, but I'm tired of being treated like a rating. I'm a voting citizen who feels damn sure he's going to start holding his representatives' feet to the fire.

In Memory of Senator Kennedy

I recognize that I am late on this. Been busy enough to neglect the blog. But now a brief reflection on Senator Kennedy's death.

Being a Californian, I am about as removed from Massachusetts as a citizen of the United States can get. Yet I have thought about Senator Kennedy pretty regularly since the early 1990s. Around that time I attended a Ligonier Ministries conference in San Diego that included a general session presentation by Cal Thomas (this is worth the read), the conservative syndicated columnist. I do not remember all that he said that day, but I do recall his comments about Senator Kennedy.

Cal Thomas spoke of how Senator Kennedy reached out to many conservatives in friendship, even as he remained staunchly opposed to most conservative policies. And Thomas shared how he reached out to Kennedy, giving him a book on Christian faith. Kennedy was spiritually sensitive and a "seeker." Some time later Kennedy approached Thomas and pulled him aside. He said how he'd been reading the book and wanted to talk more. Thomas relayed how they spent years together discussing faith.

Of course none of us know a person's heart in the end. For many Christians it is difficult to reconcile unrelenting support for policies like abortion with a vital Christian faith. So many of us, though, are filled with contradictions. It too is hard to understand how many politically conservative Christians felt at ease viciously attacking Kennedy with slanders that would make the Apostle Paul blush. Cal Thomas told his audience how much those attacks hurt Kennedy and his wife. Kennedy claimed that there was much in his life that he regretted, and he sought forgiveness for his flaws. Unfortunately it was conservative Christians who were most vocal in refusing to forgive and continuing to chasten.

All the reflections I have read on Kennedy's life by conservatives who knew him praise him as an honorable man, a friend, and a person who (especially later in life) lived selflessly. I hope this is what remains of Kennedy's memory, and not the callous jibes by some conservatives. The United States thrives, not when political differences result in unrelenting personal attack, but when everyone, no matter their views, acts like good citizens.

Portraits of Our Economic Meltdown #4 - Does Leadership Matter?

There always is more to a story. I suspect that the life of high-profile politics is full of behind the scenes issues we'll never learn. Yet I cannot help thinking, are our out-of-touch politicians a portrait of our economic meltdown?

First Geithner, and now Daschle. I suspect that the reason the improprieties of these two leaders have come to light is because they are in the limelight.

For a number of reasons, this year I'll have a pretty hefty tax bill. I wonder...maybe I should make a "mistake" on my taxes and, er, just not pay them. Who knows, maybe I'll get a job offer from the government.

Cynicism aside, I feel strongly that a person's mistakes are not an indication they are unfit to serve, lead, whatever. God knows I'd be sitting on a stool twiddling my thumbs, if all my mistakes counted against me. I just wonder, though, if too many of our leaders are out of touch. Seriously, I wonder...