If only Michael Steele and other republican leaders would stop cowarding down to Rush, they could begin reforming and repairing this party that once stood for equality, freedom, justice, and affirmative action (a long time ago). Conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter (and all of Fox News) exist because they are a reflection of the subtle racism and sexism that exist throughout our country. I wonder if a third more moderate party might eventually split the republican party in two leaving behind their extreme conservative counterparts. I’ve always believed that the 2 party system hasn’t worked, and a strong third party might be just what this country needs. Flow with me on this, what do you think?
Rush Limbaugh… Need I say more!
Posted byDrew G. I. Hart, PhDPosted inChurch, Dominant Culture, Life, Politics, UncategorizedTags:Politics
Published by Drew G. I. Hart, PhD
Drew G. I. Hart is a theology professor in the Biblical & Religious Studies department at Messiah College with ten years of pastoral experience. Hart majored in Biblical Studies at Messiah College as an undergraduate student, he attained his M.Div. with an urban concentration from Missio Seminary in Philadelphia, and he received his Ph.D. in theology and ethics from Lutheran Theological Seminary-Philadelphia. Drew was born and raised in Norristown, Pa and has lived extensively in Philadelphia and Harrisburg, PA as well. Dr. Hart’s dissertation research explored how Christian discipleship, as framed by Black theologies and contemporary Anabaptist theologies, gesture the Church towards untangling the forces of white supremacy and the inertia of western Christendom which have plagued its witness in society for too long. As two traditions that emerged from the underside of violent and oppressive western Christian societies, he found Black theology and Anabaptism each repeatedly turning to the particularity of Jesus in the gospel narratives. From that arises an ethic of solidarity with the oppressed and pursuing liberation in Black theology and an ethic of radical peacemaking and ecclesial nonconformity in the Anabaptist tradition. Each challenge the violent and oppressive logics of mainstream western Christianity and salvage the call to follow the way of Christ. Together in dialogue they deepen our analysis of the churches failures and the need for Jesus-shaped repentance. His work beyond teaching and writing has included pastoring in Harrisburg and Philadelphia, working for an inner-city afterschool program for black and brown middle school boys, delivering lectures and leading anti-racism workshops, collaborating with local faith-based organizers and activists in his city, and doing a broad range of public theology. He is also a co-leader for a local Harrisburg faith-based relational network called FREE Together which has collaborated with POWER Interfaith, MILPA, the Shut Down Berks Detention Center movement, and a little with the Poor People’s Campaign. Trouble I’ve Seen: Changing the Way the Church Views Racism by Drew Hart, has received great reviews by Publisher’s Weekly and Englewood Review of Books. Endorsing this resource, Shane Claiborne said, “This book is a gift from the heart of one of the sharpest young theologians in the United States. Hold it carefully, and allow it to transform you--and our blood-stained streets.” As a text, Trouble I’ve Seen utilizes personal and everyday stories, Jesus-shaped theological ethics, and anti-racism frameworks to transform the church’s understanding and social witness. Trouble I’ve Seen focuses on white supremacy as an overarching framework for understanding racism, with careful attention to its systemic and socializing dimensions. However, unlike sociology textbooks on the subject Dr. Hart also considers the subversive vocation of Jesus and the nonviolent yet revolutionary implications his life ought to have for his followers today. His newest book project is entitled Who Will Be a Witness?: Igniting Activism for God’s Justice, Love, and Deliverance and will be published September 1, 2020. Who Will Be A Witness? invites the church to liberate its centuries long captivity to supremacist practices, and to expand its restricted political imagination in view of Jesus’ messianic reign. The book guides disciples of Jesus into joining God’s delivering presence through scriptural reasoning, historical reflection, practical theology for congregational life, social change theory, and the Christian call to love our neighbor. It is written for congregations, leaders, and students that understand that pursuing God’s justice goes way beyond waiting around for electoral seasons to come around. It is about the ongoing vocation of the Church right now, at the grassroots level, seeking after the wellbeing of their neighbors through faithful, strategic, and concrete action. Drew recently joined the Inverse Podcast team serving as a cohost along with Australian peace activist Jarrod Mckenna. Together they interview interesting people and explore how scripture can turn our ethical imagination and the violent and unjust systems of our world upside-down, which contrasts with interpreting the Bible as a tool for the status quo. Dr. Drew Hart was the recipient of bcmPEACE’s 2017 Peacemaker Award, a 2019 W.E.B. Dubois Award from a Disciples of Christ congregation, and in October 2019, Dr. Hart was chosen as Elizabethtown College’s 2019 Peace Fellow. Each award recognized him for his local and national justice work and public theology. You can find Drew Hart on Twitter and Facebook, or you can catch him as he travels and speaks regularly across the country to colleges, conferences, and churches. Drew and Renee, and their three boys (Micah, Dietrich, and Vincent) live in Harrisburg, PA and attend Harrisburg First Church of the Brethren. View more posts
Drew G. I. Hart 
I think a blend between the Christian value elements of the republican and the Christian value elements of the Democratic party would make a wonderful third party. However, God is not bound by any party and calls his prophetic people to speak outside of parties at all times, encouraging (and helping by action) or criticizing (and challenging by action). Because the world we live in is fallen and corrupt with power, a political theocracy is not the model for national government on this side of eternity.
I definitely agree with that!!! But I really do wonder what the odds are of a third party ever emerging in our country??? The two party machine is pretty strong, I am not sure it would ever succeed, despite it being a healthy thing. But I am with you, at the end of the day, we God’s people must live as separate and distinct people that speak and embody a more faithful and different alternative to that of which we see in politics and other areas of life.
Others would say: “Ketih Olbermann…need I say more?”
It makes not sense to be so partisan. Take a ong hard look at the merits of what both kinds of people have to say and you’ll come away with a new understanding of things.
The first commenter is right: ultimately things that are man-made have fatal flaws because God’s handiwork is not present.
I challenge you to take six months and do some reading and listening to the other side and challenge yourself to try to engage with the material and see whether or not it has merits.
I have and I can tell you that sometimes liberals are dead right and other times they are dead wrong and the same goes for conservatives.
A Christians we have a different perspective however and we must not forge that.
The only way anyone could see something coming from Keith Olbermann’s mouth as being worthy of consideration is because they stand that far to the “EXTREME” left. And we know what the extreme left believe and how racist they are and have always been… How they push for more financial aide for the killing of the unborn through abortion (knowing that it affects more blacks than most any other race)… How they fight fiercely to maintain a failed school system (further hurting the poor and minorities in the inner cities)… How they demand that welfare be expanded so that more people can be enslaved by it and therefore controlled (again, the poor getting the shaft)…
Need I say more???
Come, let us reason together….
You betray yourself when you speak as you do of Rush Limbaugh – you have never actually listened to him otherwise you would never accuse him of being a racist or a sexist.
I agree with Trinidad, you need to be able to commit yourself to listen to that which you are already needlessly prejudiced against. 6 months is not a bad start. You just might find out how much wisdom and truth is there. There is no shame in accepting truth where ever you can find it. It is to the glory of God to conceal a matter and to the glory of man to seek it out”.
“If you are 20 and not a liberal, you have no heart.
But
If you are 40 and not a conservative, you have no brain.”
Churchill, I believe.
I must have a heart!!! However, I actually grew up most of my life conservative evangelical, and it was not till the latter half of college that i began to question the assumptions I once held as true. While I would never have defended Rush Limbaugh, because I honestly do have problems with him, I did overall, defend conservative ideology. Many of my peers and mentors had conservative slants as well. So the notion that I am the one that needs to engage the other side seems a bit ludicrous. I got to the point that I am at through painful soul searching, asking tough questions, ad much internal debate. How many years did you openly explore the other side looking to learn truth?
Truth is, I am not a true conservative or liberal… liberals think I am conservative, and conservatives think I am liberal. Check my library, and you will see I have read and engaged all kinds of different people with all kinds of perspectives. Freestyle Theology, is all about engaging in dialogue… which means both listening as talking. If you read my actually blog post carefully, I am calling for something “NEW”. And was actually hoping that moderate republicans could be the ones to start it. I think I am the only one presenting not falling into preordained ideology, despite the attacks against me. I prefer dialogue much more than argument, I prefer listening much more than shouting, and I prefer mutual progress and growth over division and stunted communal maturity. I rarely “delete” comments that disagree with me, which would be easy… because I really do want open and honest dialogue, but sometimes I am not sure how much those who differ (on both sides) really want to engage in that discipline. I guess everyone is used to arguing and attacking it’s hard to stop.