Ella Rydzewski, click here
to update your web pages on AuthorsDen.
Blogs by Ella Rydzewski
AN INDEPENDENT LOOKS AT THE ELECTION 9/5/2016 12:46:49 PM
BETWEEN A ROCK AND HARD PLACE What will happen to America after the election? Does it matter who wins? Will it make any difference? Most of us would probably say it won’t make a lot of difference, because both candidates have to deal with Congress. In spite of one candidate’s promise to make changes happen fast, we know that’s next to impossible, so our fears maybe groundless. After all we are afraid of drastic changes; better to go with the familiar even if it’s hurting us. Like the proverb of the crab in lukewarm water, he doesn’t notice it getting hotter.
Most of my Christian friends are concerned with religious liberty. I can’t begin to know which would be best. On one side there is the threat of anti-Christian sentiments, and they are increasing. If we question the existence of evil, one should read the responses to a review I did on-line of Doug Axe’s book on creation entitled UNBELIEVABLE.
But is religious liberty safe in the hands of a vocal populace and national leaders striving for a “Christian Nation” at the expense of non-Christians? We had that in the Dark Ages. Unconverted Christians can be as deadly as extreme adherents of any religion.
With the focus on freedom yet obedience to civil laws, I am going to look at both candidates. We cannot have a nation without law. It has to have a stable foundation, individual responsibility, and respect for one another.
Both candidates have certain pros and cons and character flaws.
Clinton: She has experience in the White house and as Secretary of State. She knows how things are run. She claims a background of work for impoverished people and compassion for others. She seems safe by not making drastic changes. We can go on as we have been living but at perhaps a lower level. Though her husband’s term may have triggered some negatives for the future, he had a generally positive presidency and she will depend on him to a degree.
CHARACTER FLAWS: HC has a history of scandal going back decades, as does her husband; some still unresolved. She lacks a grasp on truth and seems to prevaricate in a planned way. There is a shadow over her foundation FBI reports call her judgment extremely poor. This is obvious in other decisions not just with e-mails. There appears to be a lack of concern for laws and morality by both Clintons. Would her leadership undermine the integrity of the country and subtly influence dishonesty? Would her administration feed corruption and make us a more lawless nation yet highly regulated by government in whatever way they felt important? Would this affect liberty of conscience?
Trump: Not long ago this celebrity bombastically jumped into the scene of American politics. He appealed to middle-class, working people who felt left out by higher taxes and growing regulations. Many were blue-collar workers who knew what they were talking about. They resented being called racist should they disagree with the president. They were and are angry. They hated PC and responded to Trump’s bluntness. He said what they were thinking. But he carried it too far by generalizing illegal immigrants. The PC people couldn’t believe their ears and will never forget his faux pas.
His brashness continued until he won the primaries. But memories don’t die. There is nothing he can do right now. His rational proposals can’t erase the words. His needed reforms get mocked. He has reaped the thorns of his “I’ll-give-it-back” philosophy of meeting criticism.
In spite of a limited vocabulary (everything is amazing or a disaster), he stands for needed changes in urban areas, education, jobs, military spending, and less regulation and government interference. This appears to be a road to more freedom for Americans in deciding their futures with more opportunities, building responsibility, and self-esteem for the marginalized.
CHARACTER FLAWS: The candidate reminds me of a classic case of ADHD—an often brilliant person who can solve problems but sometimes speaks inappropriately. His willingness to take risks works in business, but how will it work in a global world? We need toughness, but there is a line. Our leaders cannot insult other leaders without consequences (think Cruz). He tells us he will use counselors and the best experts, and that can make the difference.
In the past he has been soft on societal issues as SS marriage and abortion. I think we will see compromises such as freedom to marry decided by states and limited qualifications for abortions. Meanwhile religious liberty would be recognized for individuals.
In spite of Democratic rhetoric, he is not racist, and his life and those who know him prove this. They also see him as generous.
What influence would such a character have on the country? Would we want Trump’s kind of criticism and insult to become popular while we are trying to eradicate bullying in the schools? I think many of us would be looking back at PC with nostalgia. Nevertheless, he may hold the best solutions for our problems. But it is up to us to narrow the racial and political divide that has widened in the past eight years. We must come together or we will fall together.
