Saturday, October 18, 2008

America's Attachment to the Idea of Change is the Perilous "Will o' The Wisp" That's Confounding Voter's Perceptions

America’s Attachment to the Idea

of Change is the Perilous

“Will o’ The Wisp” That’s

Confounding Voter’s Perceptions

The phrase will o’ the wisp has be used to describe one, metaphorically speaking, who is holding so tightly to a goal that they doggedly follow any hints of it, oblivious to what lies unnoticed right under their noses. One of many descriptors is the image of a peasant farmer following a lantern light off in the distance, held by a mythical creature, whereupon the farmer winds up deep in the marsh. The farmer’s focus on the light is such that he becomes unaware of his surroundings; and waiting in the darkness, the consequences of blindly following the creature’s light stand ready to appear.

This is what seems to be happening in the 2008 Presidential election. Many voters are so attached to the idea of “change” or “change from” that they are not noticing information that is critical for sound decision making concerning their votes. It’s the information that gives hints of what consequences lay in the darkness and for the future. For these voters, the election is about solely about change; and therefore, thoroughly analyzing new information as it comes available is not necessary. “Change” is the goal, the lantern light, the treasure and they can see it just there.

This year Sen. Obama has been ordained by the media as the only way to that goal. Normally most voters would be constantly reviewing and searching for information about an unknown candidate; but not this year. Normally the media would be diligently searching for information that would give voters a glimpse of a unknown candidate’s character; but not this year. Unfortunately, the media has relinquished their traditional role as the source of reliable (true) information this year. This year, the media has assumed the role of advocate and protector. (Consider what has happened when an average citizen confronted Sen. Obama. The media immediately circled the wagons and brought their resources to bear in an effort to destroy Joe the Plumber’s credibility.)

When it comes to recognizing truth, I believe half of what I see and very, very little of what I read. With today’s media so clearly taking sides regarding this election and regarding most issues, what I read must be scrutinized to discover what facts are facts, what’s the real context, what facts are omitted, where opinion is stated as fact, what is implied as fact, what is credible, what is the author’s bias. As a voter, I’m not willing to blindly follow a party’s or a newscaster’s version of truth. It’s difficult and time consuming work. The critical questions for me are: Am I as fully informed as I can be? Am I putting my country first and my own self-interests second?

Regarding Sen. Obama, instead of providing real information for voters to use to judge Senator Obama’s character, intentions, believes, and actions; the media continues to feed voters a ‘fairy tale’ that paints the Senator as new, pure, wise, a messiah, the bringer of Hope and Change. I know the media won’t like this, but they ARE the peasant farmer blindly following the mythical creature who carries the lantern into the marsh because they too have lost their objectivity.

I can’t just blame the media for this phenomenon. It IS the responsibility of every voter to investigate and try to find out as much as they can about the candidates. The will o’ the wisp is the mantra of “change” this year. Change is the goal for voters. I do agree that Sen. Obama will bring the most change if he is elected; however, the change he brings has the possibility of seriously damaging America’s economy and future. Regrettably, many voters appear to be looking for a type of change that changes how much they can take from the government. The federal budget ballooning, the degradation of the concept of personal responsibility, the effect on others as the economy sputters doesn’t seem to matter to those who would vote on the basis of what they might get. These voters are not considering what consequences might be in the darkness on the marsh.

Obama’s wanting to “spread the wealth around” is textbook socialist economic policy. It does have a strong appeal to those Americans who would rather take from others and not earn for themselves. Unfortunately, it does seem as though American is becoming a “what’s in it for me” country. History has shown us over and over that raising taxes on businesses and those who create jobs (especially during an economic downturn) results in less revenue for government, less growth in the economy, fewer jobs being created, less incentive to take risks that lead to innovative solutions for problems. Why would we want to go there? Senator Obama’s change would not result in any betterment of the situations of American families. Obama’s change would result in a further slowing of our economy and the concurrent lost of jobs and benefits. The “what’s in it for me” voters would be cutting off their noses to spite their faces.

When I pull the lever on Election Day, I will be fully aware of what voting means. It means that I have tried to best of my abilities to ascertain who my selectee is, what they believe, where they will take the country, what their character is, and what will be the likely consequences if my candidate prevails. In the end, I believe that America will deserve the consequences of this election, good and bad. If America, an informed America, wants to go down the road of socialism with an inexperienced, minimally vetted candidate; so be it. I however will not voluntarily be on board for such a journey.

If voters and the media were not so intoxicated by the idea of change, change they have to have, they would likely be paying attention to all of the skeletons in Sen. Obama’s closet.

They would be looking closely at Sen. Obama’s past associations with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Pastor Michael Pfleger, Bernadine Dorn, Minister Louis Farrakhan, and William Ayers. They would be looking into Sen. Obama’s connection to ACORN, the organization that is up to its ears in voter fraud. They would be looking into Sen. Obama’s connections to the crisis in the U.S. financial system through the actions, policies and political contributions regarding Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. They would be looking into the allegations of Larry Sinclair, who says that he and Sen. Obama used cocaine and engaged in consensual sex in 1999. They would be looking into allegations concerning Sen. Obama’s campaign’s involvement with censorship and intimidation against those who oppose Sen. Obama – (Stanley Kurtz for example). They would be looking into Sen. Obama’s extreme views concerning abortion, some would say infanticide. They would be looking into the allegations set forth in Berg v. Obama that challenge whether Sen. Obama is even eligible to hold the Office of President of the United States. They would be looking into the allegations that Sen. Obama violated the Logan Act during his last trip to Iraq and during the elections in Kenya that left more than a thousand people dead.

In conclusion, it is my belief that this is the most important election in my lifetime. It will hurt me deeply if America is destroyed by such a naïve and short sighted phenomenon as is the “Will o’ the Wisp” that the bumper sticker of “Change We Can Believe In” has set in motion.