| Politics 08 |  Email me SiteMap |
| Norm's Soapbox- My corner of Hyde Park |
It is quite apparent that this is a very significant election with stark contrast in approaches. Each side has difficulty understanding how the other side can take that position. I can't give you any strong concrete arguments for Obama for that remains in the realm of the potential. Again this time the strongest concrete arguments are against, be it McCain or the California ballot propositions.
Obama has shown that he can talk to friend and foe without taking the gratuitous shot, no matter how tempting which shows confidence, competence, and self control. He was President of the Harvard Law Review, 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, State Senator, United States Senator representing 13 million people, which shows some stability.
McCain does give many concrete examples why he is a poor choice. A very consistent supporter of deregulation and opponent of government involvement in business, even after the savings and loan failures under Regan, he opposed regulation of Wall Street and called for privatizing Social Security. He has stated he does not understand finances. By way of proof, he tried to defend Keating, and claims the investigation exonerated him, but it only found him not criminally culpable, a dupe of a criminal that took advantage of inadequate regulation of savings and loans. He has no repudiated his support of Bush's call to privatize Social Security. He has stated a belief in Regan's trickle down economics when the rich got richer and wages shrank and the poor got poorer. He has claimed he is a maverick while adopting many of the Republican Party's and Bush's policies, including the tax cut for the rich that he had originally called "unconscionable". He has repeatedly accused Obama of doing anything to get elected, when he has pursued negative tactics he promised he would never allow, and picked a running mate who has less experience representing voters that the man he calls inadequately experienced. He claims Ayers, a professor who served on the same charities board as Obama, is significant. He does not see the significance of his defense of Keating's savings and loan fraud, nor his running mate's marriage to secessionist, which Obama has not brought into the contest in spite of their greater relevance due to those being active choices to associate and support. He believes that being a good soldier means he is a good leader, and remains angry about loosing in Vietnam. He supported invading a nation for fraudulent reasons, and persists in the lie that it was about al-Qaida.
I see hope in Obama, am encouraged that he stood against invading Iraq,
and am very thankful that Social Security did not get privatized as
McCain advocated, for we would be in far worse shape. I see disaster in
the potential effect of McCain.
Propositions in California have a history of emotional campaigns for poorly or deceptively written propositions. This crop is not an exception. Only 8 is easy to understand, and is reprehensible as it seeks to eliminate some rights in support of the religious values of some groups. The old, basic rules apply: If it has a name emotionally attached to it, it's a bad idea; if it does a lot of things, it will create a problem; bonds will have to be paid for.