Who you vote for for President is your own business but also a personal responsibility.
But WHY you vote for a particular candidate is key. And HOW you come to that conclusion.
Reasons like: "I just like the man", "He seems to be doing a good job" are as common as they are telling because they clearly show there that the individual was not really vetted by their constituent.
EMOTION is the element used in this kind of decision.
Emotion, to some people, trumps reasoning simply because they say so (see my earlier blog on why people think the way they do). It is because they have spent enough time rationalizing and therefore THIS IS THE ANSWER, THIS IS MY CONCLUSION. It is right because I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO MAKE UP MY MIND.
When questioned about their decision, they likely get defensive. In MY experience, every single person could not ever give me a policy stance on a particular candidate, state or local.They just liked the guy, or gave me deer in the headlights looks.
While every candidate routinely goes through their party's or campaign vetting process, some vetting is not as comprehensive. Take for instance the vetting of Sarah Palin for Vice President. Believe what you will, a look back now shows she was not prepared for this kind of office given the multiple gaffes and opportunities she missed to add value to her being the VP choice. Instead, she chose to dismiss the media. Followers quickly sided with her.
But they don't know WHY? They just made an emotional decision.
How about the tax situation with Mitt Romney? While running for governor 10 years ago, it was discovered that he did not reside in Massachusetts as he had claimed, but that he lived in Utah and later admitted as much. This came up during a vetting process and enhanced with further scrutiny by a persistent press.
Ultimately, the vetting process established that Mr. Romney indeed did not live in Massachusetts long enough to qualify to run for governor. But somehow he won the election.
The common response: "Well, that's because the media is biased".
No, it isn't. A person who decides on who to vote for in this fashion isn't qualified to say this. They have not done their homework on the subject. There is no substance, just emotion. They are just saying what everyone else is saying because everyone is saying it. Why? Well, they don't know...
If a person had substance and proof that the media (and we are talking about thousands of people here) was biased, then it could be argued.
However, I am here to tell you. some media outlets clearly show their colors. But it's not the common characterization that Fox News is to Republicans as MSNBC is to Democrats. Generally, the facts are clear on one network. The other misleads, mis-reports, makes up stories. What is astounding to me and many people is that their followers believe every single word. And we know better simply because the facts are loud and clear. Disagree all you want.
This sounds familiar. It happens with religion too.
TV news and talk radio is not the only place where people are misled and simply lied to by bombastic figures.
So, "I just like the Man (or Woman)" doesn't cut it folks. Then we wonder why we have so much trouble with our elected officials, particularly in Washington.
We need to learn how to vet this very important department of our lives just as we would if we were vetting a babysitter, or a neighborhood, school, church, people, when moving in to a new house.
People will say to me that they don't know enough about politics to join in a discussion or to know enough about the candidates.
Wrong.
It's GOVERNMENT. This is where you start. Politics comes later. First you learn the game, THEN you learn about the teams, then you learn about how THEY play the game.
Learn/know what the office the candidate seeks, does.
Learn/know that candidate's background.
Learn/know that candidate's position on policy.
Understand the policy or the issues.
Too hard?
Then, you have failed. And by failing this very important thing we do along with our other important things, this one is just guesswork at best, emotion for others or just blind faith as a politician once said.
Winston Churchill once said: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
Funny and true.
You mustn't fail at this. You don't need to know enough to spar with another at dinner or at a gathering. Too many times people don't discuss religion and politics is REALLY because someone doesn't want to lose an argument. Just learn as much as you can. This is too important a decision for you to make just based on emotion.
If you have the facts, then you never lose. The person on the other side of you may disagree, but they don't have the facts. They are talking themselves and those around them that THEY are right and YOU are WRONG.
Without facts, you can't convince anyone but yourself and ultitely you wind up hurting yourself. When done in numbers, this can have life changing consequences.
Car salesmen know this is one of many of your disadvantages going into a deal. They know what you don't know.
Many times you will do your car or house or big ticket item research based ON WHAT THEY'RE TELLING YOU. You aren't asking about things not covered. Sales people count on that.
ALWAYS listen to everything a person says, especially WHAT'S NOT BEING SAID.
This is why you should ASK QUESTIONS...about everything. Let people know you don't tolerate being kept in the dark.
Just about every one of WOFF's members vetted the "church" or Jane with emotion, blindly going through without enough to know what it entails.
Many at WOFF have doubts. And the numbers of doubters are increasing. I can tell by the number of hits I get on this blog as well as the staggering growth in readership in just one year.
Many people are quietly vetting from afar (South Africa, Finland, Sweden, Norway, South Korea, Brazil), finding the facts and deciding on their own. Others come here to see facts for themselves, member and non member and family members and government, etc.
Many come here for the "in your face" message I share with you, my many friends.
Good for all of you.
So folks, don't just"like the guy (or gal)", know what you're getting into.
A little logic, a little faith (in yourself, hey God is on YOUR side), and a whole lot of love, will set you free.
ASK QUESTIONS. DON'T SETTLE FOR ANY ANSWER. SETTLE ONLY FOR THE TRUTH.
WOFF is a culture where asking questions and or doubting may land you in the "Fourth Building". (and if you wind up there, simply refuse. If they take your phone away, call the police and file a report. If they keep you against your will, CALL THE POLICE....and finally, if you made the decision to leave and they somehow find a way to get you back, leave again..and this time don't let them find you) Faith Freedom Fund 828-286-2361.
There is no justification for punishing you if you have made up your mind to leave WOFF. Freedom to think and or change your mind is still sacred in this country, AND IS PROTECTED. If you are in the process of leaving, you have made up your mind and they have made up their mind to be angry at you and treat you accordingly. Lines have been drawn and there's no going back for either of you. Once done is done.
The WOFF culture is not set up to have it's members freely interact with the community or member's relatives.
It's all about control. Just listen to WHAT'S NOT BEING SAID. Jane controls the message.
WOFF cannot defend their practice if this free type of interaction with the outside was allowed into their environment (as it is in other churches and religions).
So, WOFF leadership tells it's membership WE (meaning WW, and I just howl every time this leaks out) and the MEDIA and THEIR FAMILIES are TELLING LIES AND TWISTING THE TRUTH, so we cannot trust them. Just like the network and pundits who lie to their viewers/listeners.
Yeah, it's brainwashing alright. How do I back that up? Look at the WOFF Waiver and look at the "while mind control may be used..."part of the waiver. That's brainwashing.
WOFF handlers control all media about Jane and media.
Does this mean WOFF is laying low? Yes. Well, sort of. This blog has changed that.
WW has learned that some of the local media is clearly indifferent and dismissive of WOFF when coverage has been discussed. News Directors and Assignment Desk people only want something to scream at them before it get's noticed. Some of them are lazy and set in their ways (you know who you are) and want the most obvious and shocking and compelling and ...you get the idea, stuff that's easy to pick.
Some of the kids on local Television, (they're just babies) don't know enough about the world despite having gone to college, to cover a story with any depth other than to gather as many facts as possible and then assemble them into a one minute, thirty second package without knowing to ask what wasn't covered in a person's statement, release or pool coverage. In other words, they didn't listen to what wasn't said.
Some will. They're the ones who yell the questions after the main news conference, as depicted in many movies. And those few greatly skilled journalists in the area, are the exception. You know who you are!
The truth will come out sooner or later. Some of us already know it.
-WOFFWATCHER
