I don't like John McCain. I'm sure he's a fine man, and I certainly appreciate his sacrifice in the name of our country, but his politics in the last few years have really rubbed me the right way. Here are a few examples just off the top of my head. I'm uncomfortable with his record on illegal aliens. I really don't like that he wants to close the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and bring the enemy combatants into the U.S. where they'll receive Constitutional rights. I think his opinion on human's contribution to Global Warming is politically motivated. I also think he's a little gruff and his administration leaves something to be desired.
But I think I have no choice but to vote for him. I've asked a number of people why I should for Obama and to paraphrase the two recurring answers I get, he's not George Bush and he makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I really need to know that answer to my question because there are a number of things about Barack Obama I just can't get past.
Burn Out
15 years ago
Posts
9 comments:
If that doesn't get you a comment or two, I'll be plenty suprised. I'd love to offer my own two bits, but really my vote for Obama comes more out of my dislike for McCain, and my belief that the Republican party has lost it's mind.
My recomendation? Vote Cthulu. Why choose the lesser evil?
I just feel that when I listen to Obama I am going back in time and am living in the book of mormon times. remember corihor, remember how he impressed the people with the warm fuzzies. remember he told them exactly what they wanted to hear. remember how everyone was tricked/blinded by what they knew was right. i agree with not really liking either candidate but i do feel that obama is going to be a pawn just as corihor was. so bottom line, Don't be Corihored! it was nice chatting...check out our blog...theevanitestribe.blogspot.com
I lost all confidence in McCain when he thought Sarah Palin was a good choice for VP. It may buy him a few votes but it does not make me feel good about future decisions he might be faced with not to mention that Palin is in no way qualified to be President.
So, anyone that votes for Obama needs to understand that they are voting for someone that not only supports late term abortion, which is cruel in the eyes of even most pro-choice activists, but he also voted against a law in Illinois that guaranteed life saving medical attention to babies that survived these late term abortion attempts. The alternative? According to the testimony of nurses in Illinois hospitals, babies are left to die in suppply closets, and trash cans, to name a few places. Still warm and fuzzy? McCain may not be the ideal, but it will be him or Obama, and I am not willing to trust this nation to a man that would subject a baby to that brutality for any reason.
You have to look beyond a single issue such as abortion. Although, the subject is important I am more concerned about our President being able to make well thought out decisions. And, have someone there that will be able to provide him with valuable insight and ideas. SP does not bring that to the table which far outweighs the issue of Roe v. Wade.
No, I don't have to look past a single issue such as abortion. I have done my time in research over half of my life studying this issue in depth, and have more than earned the right to make statements like that. Do you know how late term abortions are performed? If not, I suggest you find out before you judge my position. And beyond that, even the NARAL does NOT support Obama in his decision to vote against the measure that I previously referenced. That is huge.
If Obama will not protect our children, the most vulnerable of us all, what else is he willing to ignore, or even promote to the detriment of the safety of our children. The issue at hand reaches far beyond roe v wade and speaks to the personality of the man who may be our president.
And really, do you think that voting that measure down was well thought out? Really? Only 15 of 435 representatives voted against that. The issue is beyond important. I think it is important to note that roe v wade is NOT threatened by this measure despite what Obama would have you think in justifying his position.
It is important to remember that addressing a legal bill is a very sticky thing. It is my understanding (limited) that Obama opposed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act when it was in the Illinois senat because it was not specific enough, and may have been construed to go against Roe vs. Wade (which, weather you support or not, would need to be adressed directly, nad not counter-ruled by another peice of legislation).
It does NOT necessarily mean that he wants those babies born alive to die. It does not even necessarily mean that he supports abortion. What it does mean, is that as a legislator, he had a problem with it (not to mention, he voted 'Present', effectivly saying just that... he neither opposed nor supported, unable or unwilling to do either)
As a side note, it later went on to the congress with a modification that took care of the issues mentioned above, and passed. Obama has stated that he would have supported it in it's revised form.
As for the rest of that... yes, you can vote on a single issue. People do, all the time. We do not, generally, consider them 'good' voters, but sometimes a voter considers an issue so Morally weighted that it overshadows every other single aspect of a public figure's credentials. That is just one of the side effects (good or bad) of a democracy.
While Roe vs. Wade seems like a nice excuse for his irresponsible vote, Roe vs. Wade did not address what to do with a child that survives an abortion. Roe vs. Wade addressed a woman's autonomy and her right to choose an abortion. While the measure Barack Obama voted on addressed an entirely different human life being that of the baby that survived the mother's attempt to kill it. Once that baby is outside of the mother, it is no longer a part of the mother. Meaning Roe vs. Wade has nothing to do with this measure. It's a weak attempt to make an excuse. And even if that excuse were valid, the man still condones sucking the brain out of a nine month old fetus and crushing its skull. You really want to trust out nation to that?
Look, about five-percent of the country isn't sure how they feel about abortion and no one's likely to change their mind. That's why this issue hasn't gone anywhere in 30 years. This isn't about abortion. The question is what do we do with the children who survive an abortion.
A person with character has an opinion on that. You don't get to show up and say "Present" for that conversation. And that does speak to someone's character.
America isn't easy. This is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad because its going to try to take. There will always be someone there to keep you in the place where they think you ought to be. Capitalism is that way. Socialism is that way. It's up to the individual to say, I have an voice. I have an opinion, and damn it I'm gonna use it!
I don't care the Obama didn't vote to confirm an assistant undersecretary to the Secretary of the Interior. I'm not sure I would have set my alarm clock for that one either, but the people of his district (and then his state) hired him to do a job. A tough job. A job that's worth doing and doing well. A job reserved for the leaders of our communities, the best we should be able to offer. This time he wasn't even on the wrong side. This egocentric empty suit couldn't even bother to have an opinion on whether a doctor should be required to provide medical attention to a living person who will die without medical attention.
Character does count. And his character doesn't count for much. Someone who wants to be President of the United State of America better damn well stand up and make their voice heard from one side of their stewardship to the other. Be right. Be wrong. But don't just be present.
Post a Comment