Lynch Pen : Effects for unity are terribly conflicting
Posted on Wednesday, July 9, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/tnebc/Editorial/4744/
How can one help but be confused with the current efforts of the Democratic Party to bring about “ unity” ? This is not intended to criticize the party, and I am definitely in favor of unity everywhere as long as principle is not comprised. However, during the extended primary campaign, some of the remarks aimed at the winner, by the loser, indicate to a bystander that there are ideological differences that are going to be difficult to overcome. The two Democratic candidates can campaign together in Unity, N. H., all they want, my desire is for something meaningful to come out about promises and how they will be paid for out of recession / inflation affected taxes since Obama might be our next president.
Many of the things that probable Democratic candidate Barack Obama has proposed sound true to his pledge “ Change we (or you ) can believe in. ” Certainly our nation can use some changes at the highest levels of political / business leadership. The current administration has failed us in national and international levels and the effects of the weakened dollar and the impact of the war in Iraq will be a factor in our economy for years beyond Bush’s term in office. This “ carryover effect ” will be true for the next president regardless of his party affiliation.
One of the things that is alarming to me but may not be new in party political circles at the national level, is the idea of the losing primary candidate expecting the winning primary candidate to help pay off the loser’s campaign debt. At last count, Senator Obama’s campaign contributions were nearing $ 300 million. That same report did not list what he had spent. Senator Clinton’s campaign, however, was reported to have a deficit of $ 22 million and $ 9 million of it a loan from her to the campaign. If this is correct, and the Clinton organization is going to stress the “ help us retire our campaign debt and we’ll help you win in November ” theme, it sounds more like they are buying unity than actually drawing the party together to bring the Democrats into the White House.
If I had contributed to Sen. Obama’s campaign and thought that any part of it might be used to pay off the Clinton debt — I would be most unhappy. Certainly the National Democratic Party has millions, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars, at its disposal and that comes from the very wealthy donors who might not care what is done in the name of party unity. However, the small donors who apparently are the primary source of the funds for the Obama campaign might not be excited to pay off Sen. Clinton’s personal debt. I certainly wouldn’t !!!
Probably the party switching at our local level has made me more aware of the influence — perceived or actual — of the label Democrat or Republican. Because we have had so many Democrats switch party affiliations for the purpose of seeking a county elected office as a Republican, the true meaning of the party label has been lost. A good manager, a dedicated servant of people, a person of proven character should be the criteria for our vote, but we have proven repeatedly that it is not always so. How then can I, as a life-long Republican, leaning toward the independent, conservative, side of the Republican Party, not be impressed with a Democrat who fills that criteria when one presents oneself to run for an office ?
You and I are constantly being bombarded by “ information ” (or infommercials from the national parties ) telling us what will befall our nation if we elect the other party’s candidate. And, when you listen closely to the “ political sages, ” it is very difficult to tell which side they actually represent. Maybe the long campaign has led us to the point where the two-party circles overlap so much no one knows where they begin and end.
What I do know at this point, I hope no one sends me another e-mail questioning Sen. Obama’s spiritual sincerity without giving equal time to the facts of Sen. McCain’s spiritual life. The spiritual life of my president is important to me personally and it does affect how I vote — but some of the garbage has made the rounds of the email circuit to the point that it is counter productive for the sender. Actual church affiliation is not as meaningful to me as how the candidates demonstrate their belief and at the point I think we need to research that information on our own if it is important to us.