Marianne Williamson in Palos Verdes (May 8)

Finally, I got to meet the self-help guru, author, lecturer, and now Congressional candidate Marianne Williamson in person, not in spirit.


Around the Palos Verdes Library Conference room, Williamson’s flyer with the American flag and stars turning into doves dotted the room. The back table had the usual flyers, handouts, and also copies of The Whole Person magazine. A board at the front of the room captioned "Politics with a conscience" underneath the banner of a flag with doves.

A number of older people attended this forum, including a few ladies who informed me that Williamson was accepting no corporate or special interest money. Her campaign is entirely funded by individuals, plus a big loan to herself. She has the money, since six of her ten books have been best-sellers) Another volunteer volunteered that this campaign was all passion, more than dollars and cents.

When Williamson arrived, hurried and determined, claps and cheers welcomed her spirited entrance. I had read about her enthusiastic following at Brentwood forum a few weeks ago. Now I saw it in the now.

Williamson began by stating her desire to start a new conversation. Despite eighteen candidates running for office, she claimed that there are only two types:

1. Those who perpetuate the status quo -- almost every candidate running for the office

2. Those who want to disrupt the status quo -- herself (presumably)

She then assured the audience that the American people are cool, but the real problem is the collective behavior in Washington DC, where special interests are separating our representatives from the consciousness of We the People.

Democracy, Williamson then told us, has been working fairly well, up to now. In the past, it was all about one person and one vote. Now it’s about one vote as well as one dollar, since it costs so much for anyone to run for office.

First, the federal government is not a democracy, but a republic, one based on checks and balances, the diffusion and frustration of power, as well as an inherent distrust of people power and elitist or monarchical interests: enumerated powers, diffused as much as possible among the states and the people (check out Amendments Nine and Ten in the Bill of Rights if you disagree).

Like many left-leaning populists, Williamson decried the corrupting influence of money in politics, especially from multi-national corporations; the invasions of the NSA, the high incarceration rate because of the War on Drugs. She talked about the dysfunction in Washington, yet never blamed the current occupant in the White House.


Willamson wants voters to be the next generation awaking from slumber to challenge the political status quo in Washington. "American Democracy is a radical idea."

Again, she was radically wrong about the nature of our political system (and human nature, too, but I digress)

She also talked about existential threats against this country and the world, but she wasn't thinking of a radical Iran, but global warming, a mass-produced alarmism which is facing a steady backlash in the media and academia. She supports capitalism, as she should, since she has made a great deal through her books, lecturers, and spiritual advice across the decades. Trade and exchange should be voluntary, not predatory. Fine.

But then she argued that capitalism must have an ethical context. When unfettered by cronyism and government fiat, capitalism works indeed. At this time, however, the free market is not as free as it can be, and Obama's policies have only made it worse. Why did she fail to elaborate on that? Plus there was no mention of Obamacare.

Despite the lingering disagreements and concerns I have about her candidacy, she has made the 33rd Congressional race quite interesting.

Then came question and answer time.

I asked her if the limits on money in politics should include labor unions. She agreed, but referred back to all money, and slammed the multinational corporations with more blame.. Could not agree more. And I am glad she is taking no union money, either.

I challenged her views about global warming, which is trending toward myopic alarmism. She cited the front pages of the LA Times and the New York Times (liberal shills carrying water for President Obama in too many instances)

Then I countered to my concerns about Iran, and the plans to develop nuclear weapons. She defended the United States' use of force in Bosnia during the Clinton Administration as "a humanitarian effort", but condemned the war in Iraq. Williamson also supported President Obama's relaxing of sanctions against Iran.

This kind of universal nice-nice is naive. Iran's prior leaders have called for the destruction of Israel and the removal of the Jews from the region. The Iranian government wants to develop nuclear capabilities, and anyone who rests in the false hopes of Iran's peaceful intentions is deluding himself (and herself)

I hope that more voters will ask real questions rather than get wrapped up in the aura of a spirited Independent whose legacy of self-help books and guru-like content have mesmerized many liberals and left-leaning housewives and wealthy socialites throughout the Santa Monica Bay.