By John W. Lillpop
Barack Obama has gained front-runner status in the Democrat Party and rock-star fame elsewhere based on his promise to deliver change, change, and more change.
The great unanswered question is, "change from what to what?"
Simply promising to bring "unity and hope" to America is not quite specific enough, although it sounds terrific and makes for great media sound bites and self-promoting political ads.
But what exactly does it mean? Hope for whom, and at whose expense?
For example, would an Obama administration decide that Caucasians and Asians have too much wealth, while Hispanics and African-Americans have too little? Would Obama work to enrich Hispanics, including illegal aliens, and African-Americans at the expense of white and yellow Americans?
What programs does Obama specifically propose? At what cost to the U.S. treasury? At what cost to American sovereignty, defense, homeland security, and the federal debt?
If America is really as fractured as Obama contends, radical, rather than modest, change will be required.
So how will an inexperienced African-American with the most socialist voting record in the U.S. Senate be able to force Republicans, independents, and more conservative Democrats to go along with radical changes?
A charismatic smile and a JFK-like persona may drive hysterical women to tears and fainting, but can charisma and a wink win the day against Islamofacism and terrorism?
Sound bites that make the evening news at NBC, and fill Michelle Obama with naive pride, are not likely to have much impact on the floor of the Senate or House of Representatives when it comes to dealing with social security, America's neglected infrastructure, and the soaring national debt.
Being "clean and articulate" may help a candidate draw huge crowds of adoring fans at campaign stops in South Carolina, but will count for little when it comes to relieving America's dependence on middle eastern oil, currently selling for $100 a barrel and rising.
Without question, Barack Obama is far more likable, warm, and engaging than Hillary Clinton. But that is true with about 300 million other Americans as well, most of whom are not qualified to be president!
Change simply for the sake of change is simple-minded folly!
Before electing any individual to the "most powerful office in the world" based on his or her promise to deliver change, voters need to determine if the promised changes are positive and achievable.
