Truth is in the Eyes of the Electorate. By Luis F. Brizuela Cruz
Truth is in the Eyes of the Electorate
By Luis F. Brizuela Cruz
It was during those years of the Clinton Mirage, the President with the sensuous cry in his voice and the permanent virus of infidelity in his gut. In retrospect, I remember that within a very short time after his election he was proclaimed and acclaimed as the “First Black President”, a label which may have been deemed offensive in other eras. Yet, the appellative sat well with the protagonist and the infatuated masses, black and white, at a time when openness and liberalism were in vogue. In fact, it may have been the acceptance of the Clinton’s celebrity personality and his antics that catapulted this Son of Arkansas to a second term and a place of reverence in the adoring eyes of a new kind of American electorate.
This new type of electorate would be one willing to forgive and –more significantly- forget all that which would have been shameful and destructive in previous epochs. In the name of full flesh liberalism, the condescending masses would grant all sorts of immunity to leaders and politicians on the left, where there was –by the implicit definition of the cause- fewer moral boundaries to safeguard and more rights and entitlements to vocalize. The United States of America were transforming and there would just be one more irregular pause of clumsy civility and patriotism before the vast majority of the country would embrace a populist, unscrupulous and unconcerned, socialist agenda to last for several generations. This bump on the road of American liberalism would have more to do with the worst terrorist attack against our nation than with the actual vision and mentality of our citizens. The horrific acts against our country, our effusive display of patriotism and unity and the conservative president who presided over this period in our history would all soon be forgotten by an increasing liberal majority.
It then became just a matter of the election of the leader who would epitomize and encapsulate all the visions and desires of a proliferating liberal electorate. His words would be written in stone, even if they were repetitive and hollow, contradicting and incoherent. What mattered to the mesmerized and indulgent masses was that the sound bites of the new leader had a populist ring to them and contained promises of life with less rigor and more entitlement. Any other leader with an opposing message would be criticized and ridiculed, although his message would be universal, traditional and impregnated with common sense.
As Barack Hussein Obama gave his fifth populist State of the Union Address, slightly modifying the style of his rhetoric, yet conveying the same paternalistic and incapacitating agenda, the terminally ill conservative side of America clung to the words of hope and restoration put out by Marco Rubio, the United States Senator from Florida, who was entrusted by his beleaguered party to respond to the President’s speech. It occurred to me that in the America of a not so distant past a politician like Rubio, son of Cuban immigrants, would have exemplified the vision of our conservative, diversified, self-reliant and aspiring nation. Yet, his ethical, comprehensive, bilingual response to the Illusionist in Chief’s demagoguery would be the target of mockery by the main stream liberal media and the misguided public.
Back in 1996, as the Lying Sage of the Democrat (not democratic) Party, William Jefferson Clinton became reelected by an adoring majority of American voters, who were enjoying the fictitious financial bonanza created by the Internet Bubble of the decade of the nineties and willing to ignore –and at times admired and identified with Bill’s misdeeds- another sage I knew from my neighborhood uttered some words that still resound in my ears: “Son, the course of the nation is not dictated by the individual or individuals elected to public office. Technically and constitutionally those leaders can be changed from time to time. The real problem lies within the voters in a democracy like ours. The electorate is much, much harder to change. In a decaying society it may be almost impossible”.
All Rights Reserved