I had a friend give me a copy of the book “The Tyranny of Clichés: How liberals cheat in the war of ideas.”
Don Chalmers, Paul Howell, Beth Miller, Carl Harper, Larry Naranjo, Linda Allison, Donna Tillman, Dan Foley, Tim Lewis, Craig Brandt, Jason Harper and the rest of their cabal all wasted no time busting out clichés in order to manhandle this election.
First, it was “for the children,” now it’s to “protect the sanctity of the voters.” We’re supposed to believe that a vote that was made before the housing bubble burst, before the economy tanked, before unemployment skyrocketed, is the only voice of the voter that should be protected. These are the so-called intellectuals, so let’s see if their argument holds any water, because a well-reasoned, logical argument is universally applicable.
Let’s say you take out a 30-year mortgage. You’re approved because you have a steady job, good income and good payment history. Then five years into this mortgage your employer takes a hit, cuts your pay and benefits, and you’re stuck with a house payment you cannot afford. So you go back to the bank to try and re-finance, or in other words, renegotiate the terms of your original mortgage agreement to something more affordable so that you keep your house while utilizing the excess money to pay other bills.
Could you imagine the banker telling you, “We sympathize with your situation, but you aren’t in any sort of crisis, and we want to protect the sanctity of your original agreement by not letting you refinance.”
Bankers can’t get away with this usually, because there would be public outrage. But call yourself an institution of higher education and suddenly these fallacies work. It’s ironic that their only defense is actually anti-intellectual.
The reality is that these people are scared. They have no faith in the electorate as they say, because if they did, they wouldn’t be telling you how to vote in order to protect your voice. They want you to believe that voters don’t have the rightful authority to change their minds and renegotiate the terms of an agreement in order to make everything work with what we’ve got. The money that we are renegotiating over belongs to the taxpayers — and that’s not a cliché, that’s a fact.
So here’s my message to Rio Rancho taxpayers.
The sanctity of the democratic process means that you have the power to decide what the government does with your money. And that means that you have the rightful authority to change your mind. UNM is a multi-billion- dollar corporation that owns the politicians, but they don’t own you.
If any governing official wants to protect the sanctity of the voice of the voter who may have suffered foreclosure, unemployment, and now lives paycheck to paycheck, then it is absolutely right for this issue to go back to the voters, to hear their voice again.
I trust them. Do you?
(Rio Rancho City Councilor Mark Scott represents District 4.)