No Hans King, you mean the Audacity to Hope!

19.JAN.07

EDITOR: After reading your article I felt it necessary to enlighten you on a few points. First of all, I think you should read Senator Obama’s book before you go around mishandling the phrase. Secondly, you may need more help than a dictionary can give you so I suggest my own excellent English teacher who must have winced every time you used the phrase.

It is sad that partisan politics pops into your head immediately. A cursory glance of the book jacket should have let you know that Sen Obama would not appreciate having his phrase applied in such a manner. The audacity of hope is supposed to allow the individual to transcend party politics.{{more}} The Audacity of Hope is a characteristic that Sen. Obama described as being innate to the American people. The Audacity of Hope means that there is a certain boldness inherent in the hope of the people who survive despite everything done to subjugate them and kill their spirit. So, the slave had the audacity of hope because they refused to let their culture die out against the will of their masters. The person who can stand up and defy a government irrespective of what retribution may be taken against themselves and their families simply because they cannot sit by and allow the wrong thing to occur – they have the Audacity of Hope. A government can never have the audacity of hope because they have the ability to do as they wish. They have the opportunity and power to make this a better place – they don’t have to hope.

The ULP does have some sort of audacity, I agree. They have the Audacity to Hope. They have the audacity to hope that, in your own words “this country can build an international airport at Argyle [while] the NDP says how dare you, you don’t have any money and Argyle is a bad location.” But this doesn’t mean that it’s a good thing.

When the ULP has the audacity to hope that they can go ahead and spend millions of dollars in preparation for building the airport and that they will proceed regardless of what the wind studies say, that is foolishness. If we have an airport and the wind studies are not favourable, do you think the FAA will allow their planes to land here? And then what? Will you then have the audacity to hope that the planes will defy FAA ruling?

You have the audacity to hope that a cross country road will be built and have already spent money on the preliminary phases yet you have not begun the preliminary work of getting the feasibility study done to determine the exact route. On top of this you have not begun to improve and plan for medical and other emergency facilities close to the end point and along the middle of the proposed road. Are you going to have the audacity to hope that no accidents will take place on the road?

I can decide I want to walk down the centre of the road wherever I am and have the audacity to hope I won’t get run over but you think that’s a good idea? Mr. King, your game plan cannot be to roll the dice and shut your eyes and hope everything will be alright. You must have a plan!

Cannot sign one’s name these days