Now that we are 3 weeks out from the election of a new UUA President, I thought that I would throw my $0.02 in on the campaign and the candidates.
I endorse 'None Of The Above'. It pains me to do that but it is the right endorsement for me.
I have watched both candidates campaign and (hate to say it) find nothing inspiring in either one of them. When asked direct questions about how they are going to deal with certain things related to the budget and staffing, both deflect. When asked about things related to anti-racism (whatever you feel about the UUA's anti-racism programs, it is a legitimate issue), both deflect. All their answers seem like non-answers.
But most of all, what is driving each of these candidates to run for UUA President? What is their passion? While both Laurel and Peter look to be nice people and I truly believe that both believe that they can and will bring something to the Presidency, in hearing them at different candidate forums neither one of them sounds like they have a driving passion to be President. And I'm sorry, while competence is important, passion is just as important. And I don't see that passion in either Peter or Laurel.
So, while I know that either Laurel or Peter will be the next President of the UUA, my endorsement goes to 'None Of The Above.'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
My thoughts too...
And I don't think I'm all that unique either. A long time UU came back from seeing both of them in Chicago and said "neither said much". I suspect "neithe said much" with plenty of words though.
Yes, I suspect both are fine people and dear souls, but I think my generation brings a little too much baggage to the job. Or maybe there are forces at work in UUA that just make them speak in a code. Sometimes I do get that feeling when I read their sites: they're writing in some code on issues of significance to those with the keys.
America's about to have a whopping discussion about affirmitive action with Judge Sotomayor. I'm not sure what either would say.. in plain language.
IMHO, any talk about "affirmative action" in regards to the Sotomayor nomination should be silenced easily enough if somebody puts her qualifications up against what Thomas' were.
As for the UU presidency, I find the passion you're seeking in Hallman, but YMM (and it sounds like it does) V.
CC
CC... I'm thinking of the debate that will ensue when S gets reversed on the Providence RI firemen's case...
Well at least, so far, no one has complained about having to vote for "the lesser of two evils" as someone did during the last UUA Presidential elections. . . :-)
Can you suggest someone who you would like to see as UUA President even if they are not running? Also do you have any thoughts about my suggestion that Rev. Peter Morales might make a good Executive Vice President of the UUA if he is not elected as President?
Well I guess that those thoughts would be quite redundant now. . . :-)
How about Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman for Executive Vice President of the UUA instead?
Post a Comment