Guest Column: ‘Trust me’: Has Obama earned our trust?
By Gregory John Campbell
Here in the United States of Conformity, Americans are taught to trust their leaders. And they should, because a lot’s at stake if they don’t; principally the truth of who they are, and who Americans are.
This need to trust is so ingrained, it’s become a matter of faith to Americans, which enables them to convince themselves of anything, regardless of the facts of reality. Consequently, conspiracy is a dirty word to Americans, because it means to “plot, contrive or scheme”—potentials that undermine faith and trust.
G. Edward Griffin writes that we have two choices in history: 1) all that occurs does so accidentally, implying all present were too ignorant to do anything about it, which is absurd, or 2) “Almost all of history is an unbroken trail of one conspiracy after another. Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception.”
As Mr. Griffin points out, regarding historical events, “Could anything that complex be accomplished by accident? Or would some kind of plan be required?” Why? Because men must know the truth to remain truthful.
Trust me, because, as Mr. Griffin writes, “The reason it is difficult [to accept conspiracies] is that we have been conditioned to laugh at conspiracy theories, and few people will risk pubic ridicule by advocating them.” But if we’re not willing to consider everything, whether fantastic or credible, then we’re already involved in the most fundamental conspiracy of all—against the truth—aren’t we?
The death of Osama bin Laden does nothing to alleviate conspiracy or engender trust, because it does nothing to change the underlying issues, as one commentator speaking of the Middle East said on NPR’s Morning Edition. Why? Because he was “hiding in plain sight.” So are the facts and truth.
In the Old West, when the Marshal shot the “bad guy,” he brought him back to town for all to see. But with Mr. Obama, we’re asked to trust him on this, to prevent any “misunderstanding.” But more importantly, let’s discuss the facts of Mr. Obama’s performance—hiding in plain sight—to see if we should trust his reelection.
Are Americans better off since Mr. Obama’s presidency? No. Is there more transparency in government, “rule of law,” curtailing of corporate control of Congress, ceasing of financial “bail-outs,” growth of the middle class, more jobs, real improvement in health care, ending the “wars,” closing of Git-Mo, ending military tribunals and backing of the enumerated rights of our constitution? No. Do we have “change we can believe in”? Not at all. All we have are Mr. Obama’s talented words and intelligent care, cleverness and capability, which aren’t enough.
In plain sight, Mr. Obama has done nothing to counter the failed policies, programs or plans of his predecessor. He has only expanded them, yet we are still asked to trust him. We are asked to “look forward, not back” as matters of faith and trust, not good governance or truth.
Should we trust Mr. Obama, then? No. He hasn’t earned it. Nor should we any candidate, if we are to expect credible performance from them, not just good intentions or noble promises.
Europeans asked in 2004: “How could 42 million Americans reelect Mr. Bush?” Regimental faith and trust. Should 42 million do the same for Obama in 2012? No.
Don’t trust anyone in government who say’s one thing, but clearly does another, until their actions are better than their words. Demand, expect and vote for more. Until then, we’ll never have a change in government we can believe in—only a change in personality or party—hardly a reliable basis for truthful public service.
Accordingly, choose what your president should embody—faith and trust, or truth in action. Tell them what you want them to be, not them or their party. Trust me.
Gregory John Campbell is a Rockford resident.
 Griffin, G. Edward, The Creature From Jekyll Island, A Second Look at the Federal Reserve, Third Edition, American Media, 1998, Westlake, California, pgs. 130-131.
From the June 1-7, 2011 issue
Print This Article