I encourage readers to vote their convictions this November. Rush Limbaugh says that our society runs more off symbolism than it does substance. Unfortunately, facts are not the issue in the eyes of many voters. I pray that most readers view their responsibilities more seriously.
Consider the recent conventions. While I was glad to hear that George W. loves his wife, it is hardly a good reason to vote for him. Then, when Gore gave Tipper a passionate kiss at the Democratic convention, it reportedly help sway public opinion in his favor, seemingly removing inherited concerns about his character.
What can we expect from the more conservative Bush or the more liberal Gore? Make no mistake about it, there is a strong philosophical difference between the two parties and the two candidates.
Consider the environment. Gore would be a disaster. He fancies himself as being knowledgeable and taking a leadership role when in fact his beliefs and actions suggest that he doesn’t understand the underlying issues at all. Members of the forest products industry should be genuinely concerned. Gore recently let it be known that he would try to create a Global Environmental Agency to have the same kind of broad powers over the environment that the World Trade Organization now has over international trade (heaven forbid!). Bush has shown that he is much more pro-business and pro-reality in this whole area.
Which one is more likely to give tax relief, including the death tax? They have made their policies on tax relief well known. Anybody who believes it is wrong to give those with more money a fair share of tax relief obviously doesn’t understand what makes the system function. People who make more already pay more, much more! Most so-called tax loop holes that allowed the “rich” to shelter large amounts of money ceased years ago. People who make money should support the system, that is not questionable. The question is what is fair and what works.
What about health care? Liberal politicians have already shown that they would like to make a massive overhaul of health care, something that one could argue is not their responsibility. It certainly has no constitutional mandate.
What about social security? Gore does not believe you have enough intelligence to invest even a small portion of the money you pay into the system. Is it your money, or does it belong to the federal government? Party differences are pretty clear. George W. wants you to have a chance to be involved. Anybody who believes the stock market is risky simply does not understand that all investment opportunities carry risk, and they are intertwined to a great degree.
Education? Again, George W. wants you to be involved in the choices, while Gore tends to believe that Big Brother knows better. The liberal philosophy is that government should handle the problems, even if the problem is more symbolism than substance. The conservative philosophy leans toward giving people choices and letting them determine how to mold their lives and society’s direction.
I am very concerned that we may not have many more federal elections where common sense has much of a chance. More and more people are being molded by symbolism, fears that are not real, and concerns that are fabricated. The facts are not researched by the mainstream media and put in front of the people. The truth is usually buried in more controversial media that are labeled as extremism by the mass of voters. Which of these alternatives should one believe?
Many people do not know the facts, the truth. And there is little indication that the middle portion of swing voters is likely to become any more informed. They are swayed by the most unimportant, illogical factors. People are apathetic because times have been good. They believe that politicians are self-serving and elections are not that important. America’s apathy may lead to the demise of its freedoms.
Vote your convictions while your convictions can still make a difference. Make it substance, not symbolism.
