Those were the first words my seventeen-year-old daughter said to me upon learning about Sarah Palin, John McCain's inspired vice presidential selection. It took only moments for her fertile and uncorrupted young mind to grasp the significance of this pick - the more cynical among us will follow in due course.
Senator John S. McCain won the election today. It will be another 67 days before the votes are counted, but this selection eclipses his decision to remain in the Hanoi Hilton, refusing early release, and will go down in history as the most game-changing choice of his political career.
By selecting Governor Palin to serve with him, McCain changed not only the course of the 2008 election, but the course of the nation. Had it been possible to build, from the ground up, the perfect candidate to round out this year's selections, we would have built Sarah Palin.
Americans have been governed nearly to death. Washington no longer represents us - even the best of our politicians comes up terribly short. We are overtaxed, overregulated and overburdened, desperate for change, but feel powerless to correct the situation. Barack Obama painted a dream early in the election cycle...the mere mention of the words "hope" and "change" were enough to get him through the Democratic primaries, despite having no experience, no record and a long history of unsavory relationships and positions. The American electorate knows instinctively that something must be done to change the course of politics in this country, but few pay enough attention to understand the devastating impact Obama's brand of change would bring. No matter - they would take their chances, because anything would be better than the status quo.
Today, John McCain destroyed the status quo, in a very positive way.
Sarah Palin is a woman of exceptional character and remarkable grit. On first glance, she is a somewhat diminutive person, attractive, with a spark in her eye and an air of intelligence. When she speaks, the intelligence shines through in her easy manner and well chosen words. She is obviously comfortable in her own skin, a trait that is far too rare in American women these days. She exudes confidence and ability, and it takes only a few minutes to learn to like her and begin to get a sense of her moral fiber. A lifelong athlete and sportsman, she has borne the strain of the years with a grace most of us could only dream of possessing.
She has a record of wrestling with bears and coming through without a scratch. Non-partisan, but conservative in the best sense of the word, she has shown that she understands not only the true role of government as defined by the founders of this nation, but also the meaning and importance of personal responsibility. Simply put, she "gets" it.
One has the feeling, watching this woman, that what she lacks in foreign policy experience would be more than offset by her patriotism, intuition and love of freedom. It is no stretch to imagine her explaining to the voters that she understands what it will take to cut fuel costs in this country, and that she needs their help - the Democratic Congress must be overturned. Her sincerity, honesty and competence shine like beacons of light in a weary world.
Already, she has energized and unified the Republican base. Her social conservative credentials surpass those of any man - her devotion to a son with Down's syndrome, a son she could easily have chosen not to have, give her credibility that no male could ever match (by contrast, Obama fought for the right to insist such children, should they survive an abortion, be left to die). Her fiscal conservativism is best demonstrated by her refusal of the funds designated for the "Bridge to Nowhere" - the most egregious example of our government's complete disregard for its citizens in the history of the land. When has any politician rejected a 223 million dollar gift from the federal government? It is almost impossible to comprehend in this era of corruption and bloated bureaucracy. She has breathed life into a conservative movement that was thought to have died with Ronald Reagan.
Women will vote for her by the millions. Many (most?) will vote for the wrong reason, simply because she is a woman, but, for once, the end will justify the means. And, perhaps, if we are very fortunate, her stellar example will inspire them to demand more from the next candidate asking for their vote.
In retrospect we will view this day as a turning point in the life of the United States, a day that changed the very rules of the game. For more than two centuries, women in this country have yearned to see one of their own in a position of real power in this country; this year, many thought that it would happen, in the person of Hillary Clinton. Few appreciate now the horrible implications that outcome would have wrought on the longterm success of the country, just as few appreciate now the enormity of the gift we have just been given.
Happy birthday, Senator McCain. And many happy returns.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
A Question of Judgment
It is no secret that Barack Obama lacks the resumé to occupy the Oval Office, but his supporters would have us believe that his experience matters far less than his judgment.
So the discerning abilities of the candidate are to be the measure of the man. Let us not forget that we are being asked to entrust what is arguably the most important, powerful office in the world to the winner of this election. This is not a beauty contest or an American Idol competition. Rather we will, through our votes, empower one individual with the representative voices of three hundred million, and entrust to him a large role in the course of each of those lives, the country, and, in a very real sense, the world. If his judgment is to be the criteria upon which we base our decision, it is entirely reasonable for us to demand that his judgment be impeccable - above critism.
Sometime between 1988 and 1991, Michelle Robinson, then an associate at the Chicago law firm Sidley and Austin, was assigned to mentor a new summer associate, Barack Obama. Subsequent events indicate that their professional relationship blossomed into much more than a summer assignment, as the two were married in October, 1992.
Also employed by Sidley and Austin was Bernadine Dohrn, wife of one William Ayers, both former members of the Weather Underground, a radical left organization responsible for riots, bombings and other acts of uncivil disobediance 1960's and early 1970's. While the exact sequence of events can be known only to the involved parties, it seems reasonable to presume that this business connection was the beginning of a long association between the Obamas and the Ayers.
Bill Ayers, in an article published as recently as, ironically, September 11, 2001, in the New York Times, regrets that he and his associates "didn't do enough" to accomplish their stated goals: ''Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at." One could reasonably argue that befriending such an individual evidenced questionable judgment.
Beginning in 1995, Barack Obama served as the first director of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a $49.2 million initiative intended to improve the quality of education in Chicago's public school system. The Challenge, co-founded by Bill Ayers, was completely unsuccessful in its efforts, showing absolutely no measurable improvement in any aspect of involved students' lives. There is no certain way to determine how closely this failure was linked to the efforts, or judgment, of the initiative's director, but it is certain that his friendship with the unrepentent Ayers continued.
Between the years of 1999 and 2002, Obama, again working with Ayers, served as a director of The Woods Fund, a Chicago nonprofit group which professes to help the disadvantaged. Among the downtrodden the fund found worthy of assistance was the Arab American Action Network, a Chicago Palestinian organization with close ties to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The Woods Fund provided two grants, totalling $75,000, to the AAAN. Surely this is not an example of the discernment Obama's supporters would have us include in our assessment of the candidate?
Ayers and Dohrn proved to be of still more assistance to the young Obama when he first ventured into the world of elected politics, hosting a coming-out party in the mid-1990's to launch his campaign for the Illinois Congress.
At the age of 26, Barack Obama joined the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where he would worship for the next twenty years, speak his marital vows and baptize his children. Styles of worship vary greatly in this country, but the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's brand of theology is far removed from what most of our citizens would label "mainstream." Exciting for the parishioners, perhaps, but hardly acceptable for the more modest majority of the population, particularly the strong racist and anti-American overtones that cannot be ignored. Mr. Obama called Wright his "spiritual mentor." Is Barack a racist? Anti-American? Or did he merely lack the judgment to distance himself from a brand of faith that would obviously offend the vast majority of those he hoped to govern? We cannot know with certainty, but either option fails the shrewdness test.
Just last month, Obama went on a whirlwind world tour, culminating in a speech given before an enormous crowd (assembled for a concert, not his speech, for the record). His preferred venue, the Brandenburg Gate, was deemed inappropriate (by those with better judgment than the candidate?), and he was forced to settle for second best, the Berlin Victory Column. This enormous, phallic-shaped monument was moved to its present location in 1939 by the Nazis, a fact which might give a discriminating candidate pause, but did not dissuade Obama. He addressed the crowd with his usual global focus, calling himself a citizen of the world, and including internationally-populist, anti-American rhetoric: "I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we've struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We've made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions." The wise man might think that this would not be the best way to win friends or influence the American people.
Following this grand tour, Obama was branded a celebrity and "The One" by his political opponents, and his poll numbers began to take a hit. Using his best judgment, he chose to fight this attack by moving his nomination acceptance speech from the convention hall which held a measly 20,000-plus people to the home of the Denver Broncos - capable of seating 75,000-plus. In a further show of his sapience, he erected a stage from which to deliver his next great diatribe - a stage bearing a striking resemblance to a Greek temple, worthy of the Gods. Surely everyone would see that he was just like them, just a very smart, very exceptional, very popular, very nuanced example of the species homo sapiens.
Of course, that was not the response to his grandiose idea - this was:
So the discerning abilities of the candidate are to be the measure of the man. Let us not forget that we are being asked to entrust what is arguably the most important, powerful office in the world to the winner of this election. This is not a beauty contest or an American Idol competition. Rather we will, through our votes, empower one individual with the representative voices of three hundred million, and entrust to him a large role in the course of each of those lives, the country, and, in a very real sense, the world. If his judgment is to be the criteria upon which we base our decision, it is entirely reasonable for us to demand that his judgment be impeccable - above critism.
Sometime between 1988 and 1991, Michelle Robinson, then an associate at the Chicago law firm Sidley and Austin, was assigned to mentor a new summer associate, Barack Obama. Subsequent events indicate that their professional relationship blossomed into much more than a summer assignment, as the two were married in October, 1992.
Also employed by Sidley and Austin was Bernadine Dohrn, wife of one William Ayers, both former members of the Weather Underground, a radical left organization responsible for riots, bombings and other acts of uncivil disobediance 1960's and early 1970's. While the exact sequence of events can be known only to the involved parties, it seems reasonable to presume that this business connection was the beginning of a long association between the Obamas and the Ayers.
Bill Ayers, in an article published as recently as, ironically, September 11, 2001, in the New York Times, regrets that he and his associates "didn't do enough" to accomplish their stated goals: ''Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at." One could reasonably argue that befriending such an individual evidenced questionable judgment.
Beginning in 1995, Barack Obama served as the first director of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a $49.2 million initiative intended to improve the quality of education in Chicago's public school system. The Challenge, co-founded by Bill Ayers, was completely unsuccessful in its efforts, showing absolutely no measurable improvement in any aspect of involved students' lives. There is no certain way to determine how closely this failure was linked to the efforts, or judgment, of the initiative's director, but it is certain that his friendship with the unrepentent Ayers continued.
Between the years of 1999 and 2002, Obama, again working with Ayers, served as a director of The Woods Fund, a Chicago nonprofit group which professes to help the disadvantaged. Among the downtrodden the fund found worthy of assistance was the Arab American Action Network, a Chicago Palestinian organization with close ties to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The Woods Fund provided two grants, totalling $75,000, to the AAAN. Surely this is not an example of the discernment Obama's supporters would have us include in our assessment of the candidate?
Ayers and Dohrn proved to be of still more assistance to the young Obama when he first ventured into the world of elected politics, hosting a coming-out party in the mid-1990's to launch his campaign for the Illinois Congress.
At the age of 26, Barack Obama joined the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where he would worship for the next twenty years, speak his marital vows and baptize his children. Styles of worship vary greatly in this country, but the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's brand of theology is far removed from what most of our citizens would label "mainstream." Exciting for the parishioners, perhaps, but hardly acceptable for the more modest majority of the population, particularly the strong racist and anti-American overtones that cannot be ignored. Mr. Obama called Wright his "spiritual mentor." Is Barack a racist? Anti-American? Or did he merely lack the judgment to distance himself from a brand of faith that would obviously offend the vast majority of those he hoped to govern? We cannot know with certainty, but either option fails the shrewdness test.
Just last month, Obama went on a whirlwind world tour, culminating in a speech given before an enormous crowd (assembled for a concert, not his speech, for the record). His preferred venue, the Brandenburg Gate, was deemed inappropriate (by those with better judgment than the candidate?), and he was forced to settle for second best, the Berlin Victory Column. This enormous, phallic-shaped monument was moved to its present location in 1939 by the Nazis, a fact which might give a discriminating candidate pause, but did not dissuade Obama. He addressed the crowd with his usual global focus, calling himself a citizen of the world, and including internationally-populist, anti-American rhetoric: "I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we've struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We've made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions." The wise man might think that this would not be the best way to win friends or influence the American people.
Following this grand tour, Obama was branded a celebrity and "The One" by his political opponents, and his poll numbers began to take a hit. Using his best judgment, he chose to fight this attack by moving his nomination acceptance speech from the convention hall which held a measly 20,000-plus people to the home of the Denver Broncos - capable of seating 75,000-plus. In a further show of his sapience, he erected a stage from which to deliver his next great diatribe - a stage bearing a striking resemblance to a Greek temple, worthy of the Gods. Surely everyone would see that he was just like them, just a very smart, very exceptional, very popular, very nuanced example of the species homo sapiens.
Of course, that was not the response to his grandiose idea - this was:
The errors in judgment cited here are just a few of the more blatant lapses exhibited by the man who would be President. There are many more, some less serious, others every bit as bad. His obvious willingness to blame America first for most of the problems of the world is deeply troubling, as is his complete lack of understanding of the finer points of foreign policy. Statements regarding renegotiation of NAFTA, an undivided Jerusalem, the need for both Georgia and Russia to step back from agression when Russia invaded its small, democratic neighbor all give us a great deal of insight into the judgment of this man. And to find it sorely lacking.
With the ever-increasing possibility of a reignited Cold War, can we take the chance of electing a Commander In Chief who has openly stated that one of his primary goals is to unilaterally rid the United States of nuclear weapons as a gesture of good will?
Are we as arrogant as the candidate himself? Do we belive that words, just words, can dissuade Russia from conquering its neighbors? Or that rhetoric and understanding can change Iran's mission to eliminate Israel with its "peaceful" nuclear program?
If the world is not willing to allow us to drive our SUV's, why should they embrace our unwillingness to despoil our own pristeen offshore areas with oil rigs?
And, closer to home, if he is truly "one of us," why can he not understand that we work hard for our wages, and, while willing to finance a military to protect our land, homes and families, we object strenuously to having those wages confiscated and distributed to the less industrious in the name of what his judgment leads him to believe is "justice" and "fairness?"
No resumé, no documented instances of showing good judgment. Nothing except hubris and a massively over-inflated ego. The United States simply cannot afford Barack Obama - he's just an empty toga.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
2008: The Year of the Lose-Lose Election
As November nears, it becomes increasingly obvious that whoever wins the American Presidential election this year, Americans themselves will lose.
Should Barack Obama find his bid for the highest office in the land successful, he will be supported by a majority Democratic Congress. The size of the majority is still open for debate, but it seems extremely unlikely in today's political climate that there will be fewer seats controlled by liberals in January than there are now. Should the advances of the left be large, it could well become nearly impossible to prevent them from uniting with their new leader to fully implement their platform. Given Obama's vaguely stated agenda, we can only guess at the proposals and programs he will advance, but certain known facts serve to educate our guess.
Illinois' junior Senator has a circle of friends more suited to a gangster movie than the White House. There is William Ayers, a radical, homegrown terrorist who sought to destroy his own country and, to this day, regrets only that he was not more successful in his efforts. Or the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, whose blatant racism and hatred of everything America stands for are somehow characterized as celebrating the love of Jesus Christ. Syrian-born Antoin Rezko is more reminiscent of The Godfather than a respected business and community leader. And these are only the stars of the Obama show - the other strong political influences in Senator Obama's cast of characters include Saul Alinsky, a radical left-wing revolutionary, Frank Marshall Davis, labor activist and member of the Communist Party, and many others of a similar ilk. These are not the ideological mentors most of us would choose for ourselves or our children - what possible reason could there be to choose them for our President?
The few glimpses of the Obama Doctrine that we have been able to deduce promise higher taxes in the name of fairer distribution of resources - from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. It didn't work when Marx proposed it - a system which removes all incentive to produce never will. He has hinted that he would unilaterally seek to disarm our Nation as a gesture of goodwill to a world which, if we believe what he and his wife tell us, harbors us no good will in return. He has promised to sit down face-to-face with the leaders of nations that are actively seeking our destruction, apparently believing that his rhetorical gifts alone will overcome maniacal religious beliefs and tyrannical pursuit of power. Can't we all just get along?
The list of reasons why it is absolutely unacceptable for this man to be elected to the most powerful office on the planet is long, and has nothing to do with the circumstances of his birth or the color of his skin - as Dr. Martin Luther King might have said, it is the content of his character which renders him untenable.
Surely the American electorate will realize this? The outlook is bleak. Americans, as a people, have become so complacent and uninformed it is nearly criminal. His supporters, more often than not, can give only one reason for their blind worship: change. He promises change. They are investing in him their own responsibilities - he has promised them that he will change the things they don't like. Which things they don't like? All of them, of course. How will he do this? He brings hope and has new ideas. What has he ever done to show that his ideas will change anything in your life for the better? The silence is long...finally, a muttered platitude: Well, he gives such great speeches! Great speeches. Pretty words. Giving the followers a blank canvas on which to paint their most beautiful dreams. Invoking good will in the masses - the same technique he plans to use on those rogue leaders. There's just one problem: the rogue leaders are paying attention and know that there is no substance behind the rhetoric...the ultimate paper tiger, with flowers in his hair. It will be the downfall of this and many other countries should this vacuous man emerge victorious.
However, even if he loses, our country still cannot win. Few are excited about John McCain as a President, but those of us who are paying attention know that there is absolutely no comparison in how he would govern. We would likely spend four years fighting bitterly against policies that are anathema to many of our strongest beliefs. We will win some of those fights, and lose others, some of which may be costly. But, in our hearts, we know that Senator McCain will always fight for the sovereignty of our Nation and would give his own life to protect her citizens. While we cannot exactly regard this as a complete win, neither can we call it a total loss. We can be confident that we would not have socialized medicine or massive taxes for the producers with generous gifts for the indolent, and our military would remain strong and able to furnish us the protection which is, after all, the first responsibility of our government.
So why is this still a loss?
For the last eight years, our citizenry has been deeply divided politically, in no small part due to the bitterly contested 2000 election. While every measure has shown, in retrospect, that the election was correctly settled, millions of our citizens, nearly all left-leaning, still regard it as an illegitimate election. They remain deeply wounded by this perceived injustice, and every controversial decision made by the Bush administration has, in their view, been wrong to the point of pure evil. This hatred and sense of injustice has grown in these people, feeding their almost living, breathing, desire for...change.
So desperate have they become that they have lost whatever critical thinking skills they may have once possessed. There is no amount of hard evidence that can penetrate the aura of the chosen one who will lead them out of their misery. They will follow him blindly, without regard for the reality that he will bring to their lives, because it is life's blood to them - finally, after all these years of personal suffering, there is hope! He is Prince Charming, the Messiah, even Santa Claus, come to fulfill their long oppressed dreams.
Were he to win, their illusions would quickly be dashed. The reality of his failing policies would snowball within a few months after his inauguration, making it impossible for them to continue to believe and leaving them hollow and disappointed as they watched their country decline.
But should he lose...
If he is beaten, they will never know the bullet they dodged. They will never realize how narrowly the free country that allows their dissidence escaped a course that would leave us with much less liberty, immeasurably less strength and greatly diminished dignity and pride.
All they will see is the imagined prejudice of those who voted against their Savior. The facts which the thinking can see without having them come to pass will never be in the grasp of these desperate souls. The pain they have carried for eight years will intensify to a peak heretofore unknown. They will resent the blindness of their fellow citizens and mourn the loss of the utopia they envisioned with all the passion of a bereaved lover. The split in our political soul, as a Nation, will be more deeply reft than ever before. The racial divide will be intensified to a level not seen in our lifetimes, if ever, for there will be no convincing the bereaved that their loss was not due to pigmentation.
This is a terrible year for our great America, perhaps the worst in her illustrious history. It is difficult at this moment to see how we can ever overcome the rift that will result on November 4th, regardless of the outcome of the vote.
Should Barack Obama find his bid for the highest office in the land successful, he will be supported by a majority Democratic Congress. The size of the majority is still open for debate, but it seems extremely unlikely in today's political climate that there will be fewer seats controlled by liberals in January than there are now. Should the advances of the left be large, it could well become nearly impossible to prevent them from uniting with their new leader to fully implement their platform. Given Obama's vaguely stated agenda, we can only guess at the proposals and programs he will advance, but certain known facts serve to educate our guess.
Illinois' junior Senator has a circle of friends more suited to a gangster movie than the White House. There is William Ayers, a radical, homegrown terrorist who sought to destroy his own country and, to this day, regrets only that he was not more successful in his efforts. Or the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, whose blatant racism and hatred of everything America stands for are somehow characterized as celebrating the love of Jesus Christ. Syrian-born Antoin Rezko is more reminiscent of The Godfather than a respected business and community leader. And these are only the stars of the Obama show - the other strong political influences in Senator Obama's cast of characters include Saul Alinsky, a radical left-wing revolutionary, Frank Marshall Davis, labor activist and member of the Communist Party, and many others of a similar ilk. These are not the ideological mentors most of us would choose for ourselves or our children - what possible reason could there be to choose them for our President?
The few glimpses of the Obama Doctrine that we have been able to deduce promise higher taxes in the name of fairer distribution of resources - from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. It didn't work when Marx proposed it - a system which removes all incentive to produce never will. He has hinted that he would unilaterally seek to disarm our Nation as a gesture of goodwill to a world which, if we believe what he and his wife tell us, harbors us no good will in return. He has promised to sit down face-to-face with the leaders of nations that are actively seeking our destruction, apparently believing that his rhetorical gifts alone will overcome maniacal religious beliefs and tyrannical pursuit of power. Can't we all just get along?
The list of reasons why it is absolutely unacceptable for this man to be elected to the most powerful office on the planet is long, and has nothing to do with the circumstances of his birth or the color of his skin - as Dr. Martin Luther King might have said, it is the content of his character which renders him untenable.
Surely the American electorate will realize this? The outlook is bleak. Americans, as a people, have become so complacent and uninformed it is nearly criminal. His supporters, more often than not, can give only one reason for their blind worship: change. He promises change. They are investing in him their own responsibilities - he has promised them that he will change the things they don't like. Which things they don't like? All of them, of course. How will he do this? He brings hope and has new ideas. What has he ever done to show that his ideas will change anything in your life for the better? The silence is long...finally, a muttered platitude: Well, he gives such great speeches! Great speeches. Pretty words. Giving the followers a blank canvas on which to paint their most beautiful dreams. Invoking good will in the masses - the same technique he plans to use on those rogue leaders. There's just one problem: the rogue leaders are paying attention and know that there is no substance behind the rhetoric...the ultimate paper tiger, with flowers in his hair. It will be the downfall of this and many other countries should this vacuous man emerge victorious.
However, even if he loses, our country still cannot win. Few are excited about John McCain as a President, but those of us who are paying attention know that there is absolutely no comparison in how he would govern. We would likely spend four years fighting bitterly against policies that are anathema to many of our strongest beliefs. We will win some of those fights, and lose others, some of which may be costly. But, in our hearts, we know that Senator McCain will always fight for the sovereignty of our Nation and would give his own life to protect her citizens. While we cannot exactly regard this as a complete win, neither can we call it a total loss. We can be confident that we would not have socialized medicine or massive taxes for the producers with generous gifts for the indolent, and our military would remain strong and able to furnish us the protection which is, after all, the first responsibility of our government.
So why is this still a loss?
For the last eight years, our citizenry has been deeply divided politically, in no small part due to the bitterly contested 2000 election. While every measure has shown, in retrospect, that the election was correctly settled, millions of our citizens, nearly all left-leaning, still regard it as an illegitimate election. They remain deeply wounded by this perceived injustice, and every controversial decision made by the Bush administration has, in their view, been wrong to the point of pure evil. This hatred and sense of injustice has grown in these people, feeding their almost living, breathing, desire for...change.
So desperate have they become that they have lost whatever critical thinking skills they may have once possessed. There is no amount of hard evidence that can penetrate the aura of the chosen one who will lead them out of their misery. They will follow him blindly, without regard for the reality that he will bring to their lives, because it is life's blood to them - finally, after all these years of personal suffering, there is hope! He is Prince Charming, the Messiah, even Santa Claus, come to fulfill their long oppressed dreams.
Were he to win, their illusions would quickly be dashed. The reality of his failing policies would snowball within a few months after his inauguration, making it impossible for them to continue to believe and leaving them hollow and disappointed as they watched their country decline.
But should he lose...
If he is beaten, they will never know the bullet they dodged. They will never realize how narrowly the free country that allows their dissidence escaped a course that would leave us with much less liberty, immeasurably less strength and greatly diminished dignity and pride.
All they will see is the imagined prejudice of those who voted against their Savior. The facts which the thinking can see without having them come to pass will never be in the grasp of these desperate souls. The pain they have carried for eight years will intensify to a peak heretofore unknown. They will resent the blindness of their fellow citizens and mourn the loss of the utopia they envisioned with all the passion of a bereaved lover. The split in our political soul, as a Nation, will be more deeply reft than ever before. The racial divide will be intensified to a level not seen in our lifetimes, if ever, for there will be no convincing the bereaved that their loss was not due to pigmentation.
This is a terrible year for our great America, perhaps the worst in her illustrious history. It is difficult at this moment to see how we can ever overcome the rift that will result on November 4th, regardless of the outcome of the vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)