Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Who are You Gonna Vote For?


Who are you gonna vote for, or even vote in the coming presidential election? I've been doing quite a bit of stewing over this dilemma, considering the quality of the candidates from a conservative point of view. Fred Thompson seemed to be the answer – at least he was close to what “we” as conservatives wanted. Yeah, there were a few discrepancies. He did vote for McCain Feingold, an unpardonable act for us right wingers. Then, he tweaked our hopes by getting in the race too late with too little, blowing supporter's money in the process. If he wasn't sincere, why the hell didn't he stick it out? Maybe he is a candidate for the future, but he did burn a few bridges in this campaign.

No matter. It is shaping up to be McCain vs Obama. Perhaps Shrillery can make a comeback, but that really doesn't improve our choices. While McCain seems to be supporting the war in Iraq, his support of open borders pretty well negates any security advantage we gain in Iraq. He is a supporter of big, expensive government – not the fiscally responsible candidate we yearn for. He has proven he is no supporter of the Constitution. He's already sold out the First Amendment, and while he seems to support the Second, I don't trust him. He is willing to sacrifice our nation's sovereignty with open borders. He does not support universal health care, but I don't really trust him on this, either. His willingness to “reach across the aisle” to some of our most socialistic senators gives me the willies. Probably the only saving grace he has is that he is a Republican – even if he is a RINO. It is possible that fellow Republicans in Congress can hold his feet to the fire on important issues the public is against, but our politicos seem to be “damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.” Like the immigration issue. That seems to be about it in favor of a vote for McCain. Kim DuToit says we shouldn't waste our vote either by staying home or writing in another candidate. He says it can be compared to a strategic retreat – we hole up and pressure our Congressmen for the issues we want to go our way. Giving in to the Democrats with both Houses and the Presidency means far more significant losses. We can only expect incremental improvements, and this holding action may mean incremental losses. Rachel Lucas gives us an analogy comparing living with the possible candidates to dog bites. If McCain wins, it would be like being bitten three times a day, but if Hillary or Obama win, it would be like being bitten seven or eight times a day. We have the choice of the frequency of dog bites, but not the choice of avoiding them altogether. The issue of Supreme Court appointees rears it's head here as well. W was forced to pick “more favorable” candidates by the Republican Congress (re: Harriet Meiers). A Democratic Presidency allied with a Democratic Congress would surely mean a liberal swing in the Court.

Then we have a different point of view from others. Tam and RobertaX feel that we are fools if we vote for McCain, because that only reinforces the apparent contempt for the conservative side of the party. A vote for McCain only insures we will have more of the same in the future. As for shouldering the blame of “wasting” a vote by writing in another candidate Serenity calls BS. She says she is not responsible for how other people vote and she has the right (which she certainly earned – she's ex-military) to vote for who or how she wants to. The people on this side of the issue feel that we won't go down the drain in four years, because the Republicans will be energized and willing to do the “right” thing. Sooner or later, the Republican Party will come around to our way of thinking. If they don't, they'll continue to have their asses handed to them come election time. Besides, the Democratic majority in Congress can't seem to get their act together well enough to bring the legislation we conservatives fear now, even if W may or may not veto it. And, Serenity points out McCain has sold us out already vis-a-vis health care and the border - unbelievable as it may seem, the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act of 2005 contained a provision giving insurance companies the right to help devise a plan for extending US health care to Mexico. Their hatred of McCain prevents them from voting for him.

Then there is a third view – that we are screwed already. Say Uncle says:

No, not guns (we’re winning that), those other things.
I mean, us small government, individualist, small l libertarian, whatever buzzword you want to use, sorts. It’s true. You see, I want less .gov influence in, well, everything. Your average American is the exact opposite. They want Free Federal Moneytm for pork projects in their district, they want free health care, they want social security, they actually think the $600 rebate they’re getting in a couple months is a good thing, they want the .gov to write a big check and bail out their mortgage company, they want a puppy, they want to suckle at the .gov tit. It’s true. Deal with it. We’re the minority and that is that. Put on your big boy pants and deal with it.

(snip)

And that is the future unless Americans get off their collective ass and do something about it. But they won’t, American Idol is on. You see, a government that can do all of that stuff mentioned way up in the first paragraph is too big. And it will bring more of the nanny state. There are thousands of surveillance cameras and police armed with machine guns that look more like soldiers than Officer Friendly in our big cities. Governments are banning or trying to ban transfat, smoking, restaurants from serving fat people, and anything that is not made out of soft foam rubber. For your safety, of course. Police are routinely raiding the wrong houses, or raiding based on scant evidence (like your power usage for a particular month) and killing innocent people over drugs. Police routinely are caught beating the crap out of someone, and there are never adequate consequences for that. We lost Kelo. Your property is only yours until the .gov says they want it. They can tap your phones, read your email, and have all your financial information. And no one is doing anything about it except a few guys discussing it on the internet.


All true, no doubt.

What are we to do? Do we throw up our hands and give up? Do we yearn and work for a “reset button?” Do we go on and vote for McCain, holding our noses in contempt? Or, do we go to the polls, vote for our choices in the regional elections and give the Republicans the bird?

Hhrrmm. This whole issue reminds me of a Christian and an Atheist arguing about whether God exists or not. It is a matter of faith. Some of the major players in this internet maelstrom are atheists or agnostics, and might blow a gasket if their views are said to be based on faith.

After all, all of these decisions are based on learned discussions, examinations of histories, voting records, clear records of candidates stand on issues and whatever sort of scientific proof one could ask for. “It is the only logical course of action” as Mr. Spock would say.

But no one, no matter the logic, can see the future.

All we have is our hopes that our actions can control the future in a way we find advantageous. If we could see the future and the consequences of our actions, then choosing would be simple. We might just become a people ruled by logic rather than emotions. But then again, that idea would require responsibility for our decisions, rather than completely selfish choices. The electorate as it exists right here and now is concerned with selfish choices.

So, what am I gonna do? Right now, and this could change at any moment – I'm leaning toward getting bitten a few times a day less and considering this a holding or retreat action. I do not have faith that Democratic control over two of the three branches will continue to be ineffective, plus I have faith that they will control the third yet again. I think perhaps Hillary might be the lesser of two evils considering Barack Obama. While both are committed socialists, I have faith that Hillary would support the war “better” than Barack, and her administration would be hamstrung by the Clinton propensity for scandal. Perhaps Obama is an empty cipher that would prove ineffective, but I fear the possibility of his being effective more.

I don't have faith that letting the Donks win will bring the Republicans back to our way of thinking before any major damage is done. I fear the Donks might be in power for far longer than four or eight years. I also fear that many of the Democratic proposals might be met with enthusiasm by McCain, but I have faith that my Congress critters can keep him honest. Actually, I trust Roberts and Moran – Brownback, not so much. He is an open borders critter, flip flops not withstanding. I also trust that here in Red State Central, my vote isn't gonna count for much anyways – McCain will carry Kansas no matter who gets my vote. He might even stop in to campaign in KC or Wichita, and not ignore us completely. Maybe he'll stop in Topeka, just to piss of Kathleen Sebelius (D), Governor. Probably not, since he is a uniter, not a divider.

So, this is the tenuous position I've taken. This offer may expire at any time without notice. Your mileage may vary. You just better watch yourself, McCain, or I'll not vote for you. Yeah, that will show him.

5 comments:

Tim said...

There are no candidates to vote for. I give up! This two party system does not work anymore. We need a good independent but there are no good ones there that have a chance in hell either. This would be a good time for Chuck Norris to run! I would vote for him! Run as an Independent Chuck! I doubt that I will waste my time going to the polls this year. I won't be responsible one way or another for screwing this country up with my vote. I plan on standing back and watching it go down the crapper while I stockpile ammo. You had better do the same!

Anonymous said...

If Hillary loses the primaries, I will then vote for McCain. Obama scares me. I have to vote with my conscious and I can't vote for Obama.

threecollie said...

I always vote, but in elections at the national level I never get to vote for anyone I actually like. It is a terrible dilemma and one that far too many of us face. At the local level around here we write in a lot, but that would be useless in a presidential election

Bob said...

I'm with you on the three bites per day candidate. And, by the way, this is far and away the best post I have read on the 2008 elections.

Mo K said...

Yeah, for me this is the crappiest year of choices ever for POTUS. (I wasn't old enough to vote in a general election until 1984.) I could get behind Fred, then Mitt.

I was one of those who said "No way!" could I vote for McCain. One of my pals got her son a "I'd rather be waterboarded than vote for McCain" T-shirt at the CPAC.

*sigh*

I guess I'll probably end up holding my nose and voting for him, but I sure hope he chooses a conservative running mate. I would probably cry tears of joy if he chose Gingrich, but I know that's a pipe dream. Especially after that Freudian slip of his last week.
:-/