HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Sept. 9, 2004 It has become increasingly striking in American society how the fundamental expectations of our leaders have changed as our nation has aged. There was a time when we voted leaders into power on their ability to address issues with knowledge guided by reason and common sense. We admired those who led using a sense of moral clarity and purpose. When John F. Kennedy stood up to the fomrer Soviet Union and the advance of a threat just a few miles from our shore, he did so with conviction and the nation and free world appreciated it. When Franklin Roosevelt implemented his "New Deal," he did so with a clear sense of purpose and confidence. Despite the largely unneeded socialistic precedent established, the nation's people needed a shot of confidence, which was provided. When Ronald Reagan saw the deceit of Communism posing a threat to worldwide freedom while casting a psychological pall over society, he identified the problem, called it what it was ("evil empire") and addressed the issue head-on, despite the wailings and pleas from the Leftward among us. Of course, in the 2000's we still hear those wailing and pleas, and they have become even more shrill and partisan. We are fortunate, once again, to have a leader who does not let the empty rhetoric determine the direction of the United States or the protection of its future. George W. Bush has indeed led with his conscience, identified a problem, called it by name and is attempting to resolve the issue. This man has had the audacity to follow up his words with action when Evil did not respond to a last request. Bush has had the gall to remain steadfast against an ocean current of negative reporting and unrelenting political pressure. The problem in this is there is a building sense that we, the people of the United States, may no longer hold the same appreciation for the confident, unrelenting leader that we once did. It seems there are more of us who expect our president to bow down to the demands of other heads of state, many of whom often have their own interests at heart. We are now supposed to be concerned about how the rest of the world views us and our government, even as our soldiers fight and die for world freedom. (A recent worldwide poll reveals the "global community" overall is staunchly against re-electing our current president and this is gleefully reported in the mainstream media across the country.) How interesting it is that citizens of countries, who likely would not even enjoy the right to vote in their own nations if it were not for the United States, would not vote for President Bush if they could. We appear to want a president to be a follower instead of a leader. We want someone who will make the popular decisions as opposed the the unpopular and necessary ones. The problem is that "popular" wisdom is often an oxymoron and leadership based soley upon public opinion can come at a steep cost. In fact it did on September 11, 2001. ------------ About the author: Ed Abraham is a concerned citizen living in flyover country, U.S.A., who happens to be truly disgusted by the loss of common sense in our society and is doing all he can to try to reinstall it. Email: eabra@myway.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
