Here's Part 2 of my 14 reasons why I'm voting for Obama in November. You can scroll down to read Reasons 1-7.
#8: Obama recognizes that the key to reducing abortions isn't to repeal Roe v. Wade, but to work to increase education and contraception use and adoptions. I'm pro-life when it comes to abortion, but I think making abortion illegal will not reduce the number of aborted babies. That number will stay the same, only more potential mothers will die trying to end their own pregnancies in back rooms or on their own. When we say we're pro-life, does it apply only to the aborted babies? Are we willing to save them but lose the moms? Are we so pro-life that we'll personally adopt the unwanted babies that don't get aborted? I'm not hearing any Christians ask or answer those questions while they wave the "Repeal Roe vs. Wade" signs. I personally hate abortion, but I don't see making it illegal as something that's helpful at this point. The issue is way more complex than that. Don't change the law. Change the thinking. And continue working to reduce the number of abortions.
#9: Obama is smart. Way smarter than me. I don't want a president I could drink a beer with (as was often cited as a reason to vote for Bush). I don't want a regular person having the job of President, and I don't pretend that a regular person would be a good president. I personally would make a horrible president. No, I want a president who is smarter and much more capable than me, and Obama is definitely that. McCain is smarter than me, too. And considerably tougher. But every single time I hear Obama speak -- whether to a crowd or to a single reporter -- I am impressed by his logic and the complexity of his thoughts. Whether or not he's so intelligent he gets bogged down by uncertainties and contingencies remains to be seen, but we've seen what happens when a president goes with his "gut" rather than his intellect. It's not good.
#10: Obama is offering real, thoughtful solutions to the issues our country is dealing with, from economics and fuel dependency to terrorism. McCain, in picking Palin -- who wasn't his first choice by a long shot (she's on record as having disagreed with two of his main selling points: the surge and climate change) -- is pandering to the religious culture warriors, and putting their culture war front and center in his administration. And I'm a religious person with cultural concerns, but the biggest problem our country has these days isn't defending traditional marriage. We have much greater things to tackle. (And you know what? Two years ago, McCain would have said exactly the same thing.)
#11: Obama appeals to and practices unity, while the McCain campaign continues to move further along the line of divisiveness. (And further away from the bridge-building "maverick" McCain used to be.) It's been suggested that he's doing it only to get elected, and he'll move back to the center once he becomes president. I guess that's, um, a positive thing (eventually), but how much time will he have to spend repairing the damage? And what does it say about voters if we're OK with this?
#12: Obama is right about Afghanistan. He was originally against the Iraq War on the basis that we hadn't finished another war yet -- the one in Afghanistan with the intent to find Osama bin Laden. Seven years after 9/11, we still don't have bin Laden. That's incredible to me, the rough terrain of Afghanistan and Pakistan notwithstanding. I appreciate that Obama continues to say that we aren't doing enough to pressure Pakistan on this issue -- he's been saying this since last summer -- and I completely agree (see below). And since Obama first raised the issue and gave it traction, McCain has started talking about pursuing bin Laden "to the gates of hell." But he's only come around on this recently. Why did he wait seven years to make this a priority? Why wasn't it important to him before?
#13: Obama is increasingly right about foreign policy in general. First, I'll admit he was wrong about the surge, and that was a big wrong. But consider the other places he's been right. Not just about the question of whether we should have gone to war with Iraq in the first place, but about the need to shift troops to Afghanistan (way before Bush decided to do it); the need to take on Al-Qaeda in Pakistan even without Pakistan's approval (which McCain ridiculed as "naive" but which the Bush administration is now doing...will McCain now denounce Bush as "naive," too?); the need to develop a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq (which Bush is now discussing). People have questions about Obama's leadership and experience when it comes to foreign policy, but so far he's been right most of the time -- and the Bush administration is giving credence to this by slowly implementing the things he has suggested.
#14: Obama's energy plan to ween the U.S. off its dependence on foreign oil -- placing great emphasis on the development of alternative energy sources -- makes far more sense than the inexplicable "Drill, Baby, Drill" cries coming out of the McCain/Palin rallies. I'm not against offshore drilling, but I'm against drilling being the single most important answer to the question of energy dependence. It's not the solution, it is not going to solve our oil problem, and I don't want to focus on it to the point that we forget to pursue alternative energy sources. That's where the future is, and that's where our money and creativity need to be channeled. Granted, some look at drilling as a short-term solution while we pursue other answers, but it's hardly even short-term: even if we already had the refineries in place and started drilling right this moment, it would be years before the oil actually began to flow. And the resulting product would hardly decrease gas prices at all. If we're going to invest money in reducing our oil dependence, the place to spend the money is not on new wells, but on alternative energy. It's a long-term solution, it leads to more jobs, it's better for the environment, and it's by far the more thoughtful and revolutionary approach.
Here's the deal: Neither candidate is perfect, and Obama has definitely made some statements along the way that have disappointed me. But McCain has disappointed me at every turn. Other than his ad during the DNC, I haven't heard anything at all from his campaign that gives me a reason to vote for him.
Say what you will about his liberalness or classic Democrat platform, but Obama's politics represent for me a third way, not attached to traditionally blue or red ideologies but to what works in a practical sense. Of course, one time I thought the same about George Bush and his compassionate conservatism, which is why I voted for him in 2000. I was wrong. And about a year ago, I thought the same about John McCain, for whom I was once hoping to vote. Turns out I was wrong on that one, too.
So I could totally be wrong on Obama. We'll see. But at this point, he has my vote.
--------
Agree? Disagree? What are your reasons for or against?
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
14 Reasons I Like Obama (Part 2)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Some additional thoughts here on these items. It's great that we can have a courteous discourse on these issues. I'm glad our generation is talking about this stuff rather than the junk about Obama really being a Muslim (which I agree is ridiculous).
#8: Obama recognizes that the key to reducing abortions...You ask if Christians would be willing to adopt these unwanted babies. You and I both know loving couples that for whatever reason cannot conceive. Thousands if not millions are just waiting for a baby to come available for adoption.
#11: Obama appeals to and practices unity...This is the guy who has THE MOST LIBERAL voting record in the U.S Senate? With fervent support from MoveOn and DailyKos, I don't see that as bridging any divides in our nation today.
#14: Obama's energy plan...You take issue with the drill-only crowd, but there really isn't one. Being a charter member, all we want is to drill now, while also developing alternative sources. Put absolutely every solution on the table and leave no stone unturned.
@Chuck: Thanks for chiming in. I was hoping you would...
Interesting thoughts Jason. I guess I'll give you more of my view from a more Liberertarian/States Rights view point. I'll also disclose that if Bob Barr weren't so far out there on not using our troops on foreign soil I would probably be voting for him. I honestly think we need a real third party option, but I disagree with you and don't see Obama as that option. I think he's more of the same but hasn't had a chance to prove it yet other than his voting record which in some ways speaks for itself - to me. I respect McCain for his "maverickness" too, but don't agree with him on much of the big stuff other than foreign policy. I do however believe he has the experience, knowledge, and willingness to deal with Russia diplomatically which, in my opinion, will be the biggest issue over the next few years. It may be played out through Iran and Iraq as it was in the late 70s early 80s, but, more on that in a minute.
First, I wish you would expand on what you see as Obama's new economic plans because I haven't heard or read anything new he has proposed. I have seen that he's either listening to advisors and saying the right thing or learning and has dropped his proposed Long Term Cap Gains rate down from 35% to 20%. Either way it's still an increase.
I personally favor a Flat tax or possibly the Fair Tax. Huckabee and Bob Barr both have supported the Fair Tax so I respect them for differing from the status quo. I also think health insurance, welfare programs, etc. should be returned to those closest to the problems; not run by the federal government because health care is vastly different in Alaska and New York. If that means higher state, county, or city taxes in areas where those things are more of an issue then that's fine because I believe those closest to a problem should be those to fix the problems, not a government in DC that may be thousands of miles away from the problems. Return to the ideals of the founders and have a Federal Government primarily to solve disputes between states and provide for a strong National Defense.
A lot of what I've read does make Obama seem like a "Protectionist" -his positions on NAFTA and trade with China. History has shown protectionism doesn't work. If we had a hint more of protectionism right now we would truly be looking at another Depression. There are even Republicans for protectionism, Lyndsey Graham for example, and it's sad how little they remember Economics and History.
Lastly on this, it has been the policies of Congress that have us in the current economic mess we are in. First, they have allowed predatory lending practices from credit card companies and encouraged the use of home equity in establishing "wealth" since the mid to late 90s. As this appeared to work; Congress openly encouraged everyone to become home owners, achieve the American Dream by buying the biggest home you can't afford and we'll guarantee you'll get the loan. How big of a loan could you have gotten through the FHA program with 0-3% down, I'll assure you it was more than you could afford if you were practical about it. I began seeing trends in the late 90s where people were taking home equity loans to invest in the market. Many people lost their shirt but the real estate bubble was just beginning so it didn't hurt too much. Interest rates began dropping in 2001 so people began taking out 2nd home equity loans or consolidating the first mortgage and home equity loan in a cash out refi to pay off credit cards and cars. Interest rates kept dropping and people would do another cash out refi. The investment banks weren't complaining because they were able to package these loans as Alt-A and sell them to foreign investors. As long as Fannie and Freddie, overseen by Congress not the President, were willing to "guarantee" the loans this was a good racket for everyone. So, in my opinion this is Congress' fault - not the fault of Clinton or Bush who were President when this trend began. Neither Obama or McCain were speaking out against it as members of Congress though. What could McCain say he was somewhat caught up in the S&L scandal of the 80s...
Abortion is wrong period. Roe v. Wade is the law though and unless it's changed it should be followed; and it's not currently followed as originally ruled upon. I don't think anyone on picket lines on either side of the issue do any real good except for their own self-righteousness.... I do believe each state should have more of a choice in how Roe v. Wade is followed, especially when it comes to educating the mother/parents of the unborn child, parental notification, etc. None of this was established in Roe V. Wade and each state should be able to decide how to pursue it. Each state could choose how to implement their education policies either through private or non-profits. None of it's illegal but would all be challenged by groups on both sides. It becomes an issue though when the states use Federal money to pay for state programs - return the primary power of taxation to the states and you fix the problem.
Foreign Policy. First, I want to say that I honestly believe President Bush knew/knows things about Al-queda and Iraq that we won't know for years if ever. Maybe I'm one of the few buying this still but I do believe it. I also think history will show that President Bush did more to stop terrorism on US soil no matter the cost which will be huge in the future. I do personally wish we would have finished or shored up Afghanistan more before we went into Iraq, but again I do believe there were and are things going on there of which we may never be aware. The other reason we are still in Iraq and will be for some time to come, no matter who the next President is, is due to Russia and Iran. Iraq is our buffer and we can't do without it. You'll either have to do your own research here or ask me and I'll send you some stuff.
I'm going to disagree that Obama will change our perception of the US and the US government much. It may on the surface for a year or two but much of the foreign press is still controlled by their governments. As soon as Obama does or says something they don't like, particularly in the Middle East, I believe he will be portrayed as someones puppet (big oil, corporate America, whoever) and will be ridiculed more for having a foreign sounding name and appearance which will weaken the image of the US more than another "old white guy". Additionally, I'm not sure he can come across or actually be tough enough to stand up to Vladimir Putin. Putin is still in charge of Russia for all intents and purposes. As I said earlier Russia will be the biggest issue our next President faces in the years to come and I believe McCain can stand toe to toe with him better than Obama.
Due to my belief that foreign policy issues in relation to Russia over the next few years will be the biggest challenge the USA faces I will vote for McCain. If it weren't for that I would more than likely vote for Barr.
You may have already touched on this but if I say I'm pro-life, does that mean I stand for life in Iraq as well? Why have people told me I'm wrong to stand for the innocent that have died because we are trying to "smoke someone out of his whole"? If I stand for life, it means those who die because of the emotional decisions our leaders made and also the emotional decisions those mothers make as well.
Well said! I was waiting for reasons 8-14 before I commented because I figured they would be the more 'solid' reasons than 1-7 and it looks like I was right (in my opinion at least). I've struggled back and forth on who I'd vote for, not-so-secretly leaning toward Obama, but feeling pressured to vote for McCain because of my friends and co-workers (I work at a Baptist church). No one blatantly pressures me, but it's the conversations and open support for McCain on almost all sides.
Anyway—in the end I'm 99.9% sure I'm voting for Obama for most of the reasons you outlined. I most heartily agree with number eight. In addition to what you wrote, after reading McCain's ideas and 'plans' for abortion, it looks to me like things will just stay the same. He won't seek a constitutional ban on it, but will work to have an anti-abortion justice put on the Supreme Court's bench. What are the chances of him not only getting the chance to nominate a new justice, but to get an anti-abortion justice approved? The Senate is a democrat majority, so there's no way they'd get approved. So the bottom line is that things will stay the same. So why not elect a president that will work to lessen the number of abortions?
I could keep going, but I believe you've covered the subject well enough. I'll end with this: The republicans had control of Congress and the White House for eight years and Congress for longer than that—and the government is bigger and more domineering than ever. So if we're going to be stuck in a cycle of an ever-increasing national government, I would personally prefer one that is more concerned about people than republicans have shown themselves to be during the last 20 or so years.
Well this is all interesting to read. But I'll be honest, I don't read this blog for politics. Let's get back to good ol' classic Jason Boyett, eh?
All of your reasons really have no substance, just like Obama's platform. Not trying to be rude at all... but what specific things do you agree with him about? What is his specific economic plan that you like? If he gets elected he will move our country toward a socialist government. That scares me. I love capitalism and smaller government. As a country, so many individuals are reliant on the government to fix their problems. The government was never designed to be a charity or a fix all. It has overstepped its boundaries. I think Palin understands this and actually practices that.
I don't want a president who goes overseas and tells the rest of the world how disappointed he is with our country. I want a proud president who represents our country with pride. The world is not voting for our president, we are.
Obama views a baby as an inconvenience, and has been quoted as saying he would not want his daughter to be punished if she were to get pregnant out of wedlock. Excuse me... but where is the personal responsibility anymore? I know things would be rough if Roe v. Wade were overturned, but to say that you don't want mothers to die because they are getting back alley abortions is absurd.
Obama has never outlined any policies or reform. He has made empty promises where the government (ultimately tax payers) foot the bill. I don't think Obama is evil. I don't hate him or even wish anything bad to happen to him. But, he is so liberal and would take our country in a terrible direction. It is scary to know that his personality and smooth talk have won you and others over.
A few comments based on the comments:
@Matt: Thanks for jumping in. There's no way I could even start to respond to your thoughts and ideas, because to be honest, they're way over my head. That's why I was an English major, not an economics and political science guy like you. (Though I agree that a flat tax seems like a good idea, except for those living near the poverty line.) I can't vote for Bob Barr, though, because his mustache gives me the creeps.
@rickyg: I didn't touch on it, but I do agree with your point. If you're going to be pro-life, then stand for life in every arena. Make it a universal position covering poverty, health care, war and disease in addition to unborn babies. This is one place I think the Republican party (and even many Christians) have lost their way.
@randomdtd: Thanks for your last point. I almost went there, but thought the posts were already too long. I hoped someone would make that point in the comments. Good job.
@travis: I agree. I'm usually not that into politics (this will never become a political blog) but I thought it was time to lay out my cards. Now that I've done so, we can return to things of real consequence -- like breakdancing Christian singing groups.
@kate: Sorry to give you ideas without substance. I was laying out 14 things I like. Had I filled them with a bunch of numbers and facts and policy, readers like Travis would have left for good. So I stuck with some generalities. But that doesn't matter, because you nailed it: all those facts and figures are meaningless to me...because Obama talks pretty. For the last four presidential elections I have based my vote only on the smoothness of the candidates speeches: Clinton in 1992, Clinton again in 1996, no one in 2000, no one in 2004. This year I intended to write-in vote for Don LaFontaine, the movie-trailer voiceover guy. But he died.
Amen, brotha. And by brotha, I'm referring to Travis... who happens to be my actual brother.
But for the record, I agree with the posts of andersontheology.com.
Post a Comment