Yesterday I went for a drive by myself and searched the Saturday afternoon radio for some intelligent conversation. I am not into college football. Whole sections of XM radio were off the air for "reprogramming". And local FM playlists bore me. Finally I fell upon Mike McConnel. In general I like his voice and style. He did his job he got me thinking. Spectrum-wise, I would say he is slightly right of center - like me - a logical libertarian. He strikes me as a talk-show host who I would agree with and listen to.
But he had a position that bothered me. He feels that we anti-Obama* voters have hijacked the Republican Party - not for good end. HE referred to us as "hillbillies, not necessarily from the hills". His position is that we already know all we need to or are going to about Obama. And that we should let it drop, and concentrate on Democrat vs. Republican policy.
But where is it written that it is an either or thing?
The search for the real Obama is not really a search. It is a proclamation. Things are not what they seem. When even John McCain tells us an obvious untruth "I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States", we are confused. We are certain of nothing because the things we see and hear do not add up.
We are being called paranoid, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. We do have something to worry about. Is he the Manchurian candidate?
I have seen nothing that makes me believe that Obama's associations were bad judgment. I believe they were and are conscious decisions not made in a vacuum. They are who he is. His call for unspecified change is still unenumerated after all this time. And I do not believe Obama's lack of candor even in things as trivial as his birth is coincidental. He is withholding what he does not want us to see. McConnel says "two biographies and you say you do not know him?" I reply YES! I have only seen what he wants me to see and no more.
And now McCain's comments at his own rally make me wonder if he is part of the conspiracy too. He is the most liberal of Republican Senators. Does he really want to win to keep this a country of sovereign individuals or just to win (since both he and Obama would see this as a country where the people are assets of the government)? Does he (McCain)have the same goal of changing this to a Socialist Country? Would they both have their fingers crossed when they swear to uphold the Constitution?
We are about to send to Washington the most Liberal President ever. We are going to equip him with a veto-proof House of Representatives, not that that matters in his case; a filibuster-proof Senate and at least one Justice of the Supreme Court. Isn't is right that we should be concerned about who he is as much as what he says he is?
*As opposed to pro-McCain voters.