Why I'm going to vote for Obama...

[mijan]

I've pretty much decided, for certain, that I'm going to vote for Obama.  I'll go through some of my reasons:

1. I could have potentially considered McCain... several years ago.  He used to be a moderate, and tended to work across party lines for the right causes.  Sadly, as time rolled on, he began pandering to the Religious Right more and more, and voting party lines with Georgie W.  His gut instinct to pick Lieberman would have impressed moderates everywhere, and then Obama would have had a real political fight on his hands.  However, McIdiot picked Palin.

Palin wants to outlaw ALL abortions, except in cases where both the mother and "child" will die (ie. ectopic pregnancy).  She wants Creationism to be taught in schools.  She believes that homosexuals should be treated like second-class citizens.  (To her SLIGHT credit, she did veto a bill that would have banned state agencies from allowing same-sex partners to purchase health benefits through the state-employed partner, but she says she only did it because if she hadn't, she would have violated her oath of office.)  Oh, and I should mention her connections with dominionist, neo-fundamentalist Christian sects.  (They're the psycho type of Christians who should scare even the normal Christians.  Look for references to her pastor, Mike Rose, and other Assemblies of God people.  Please read through that last link.  If you don't know about these people, YOU SHOULD.)  Additionally, she's a moron who thinks that Founding Fathers wrote the Pledge of Alliegence.  In fact, she might even believe that Alaskans aren't really Americans, or shouldn't be.  Oh, and her 17-year old daughter is PREGNANT, but she wants abstinence-only sex-ed taught in schools.  Fucking moron. 

So, not that I'd have voted for McCain anyway, but if any of you had been considering it before... maybe you should reconsider.

2. Barr.  No way in hell.  Just a tiny bit of background research beyond his stances on the major issues, and I discovered a majorly flawed candidate.  As a Representative, Bob Barr actively promoted a bill to have Wicca banned on military bases because it wasn't a real religion.  He considers Wicca to be one of the causes of youth violence found in adult culture.  On abortion, he's consistantly voted against a woman's right to control her body and reproductive functions.  His record on women's rights and gay rights is abominable.  Actually, he flip-flopped.  In 1999, he voted to ban gays from adopting, but in 2008, he "criticized" efforts to restrict the rights of homosexuals.  Makes me wonder.

Also, on religion in schools:

• Voted YES on vouchers for private & parochial schools. (Nov 1997)
• Let schools display the words "God Bless America". (Oct 2001)
• Supports requiring schools to allow prayer. (Jan 2001)
• Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer. (May 1997)

Overall, he's been absolutely inconsistent over the course of his time in public office:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Bob_Barr.htm
I can't trust him as far as I could throw him.  Although I'm more of a Libertarian by nature, this guy isn't someone for whom I could vote.


Given all the options, Obama is the only viable choice for someone with my perspectives about civil rights, liberties, and what America should be.  I don't agree with him on every tiny detail, but there's nothing with which I strongly disagree.  I don't know a lot about Joe Biden, but nothing I've seen so far has sent up red flags.

So, yes, it's official for me:

OBAMA '08

Comments

[gmonkey42.livejournal.com]

YAAAAY! Obama supporter high-five!

ETA: I hadn't read that bit on Barr before posting; wow, he calls himself a Libertarian? That's the problem I have with Libertarian politicians (that and I agree more with the Democrats on economic policy): so many of them turn out to be right-wing, not really what I think of as Libertarian at all.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Barr is NOT a Libertarian, according to what I see a Libertarian as being. He's a right-wing nut under the guise of Libertarianism.

I wish we'd had an Obama-Clinton ticket, but this works. I hope he asks Clinton to be an advisor, but I think she'll keep working within the Senate.

[miraba.livejournal.com]

Sadly, a lot of Libertarians are like that.

[wiser-9.livejournal.com]

Well, to be fair, Barr only recently had a change of heart and turned Libertarian. The logic behind his nomination, is as thus (I suppose): He functioned as your typical Republican--as reflected in his policy decisions, and more prominently, in the sense that he had lead the charge of impeachment against Clinton in the late 90's. Because of this, Republicans are fond of him, despite the fact that he turned Libertarian not too long ago. I suppose the idea is that since Barr has procured some visibility, this'll draw attention to the Libertarian party.

Doesn't mean I have sympathy for the man, or that I'm voting for him, however. :/

[scarah2.livejournal.com]

Yeah Palin is a hot mess. And since McCain is so old now, it's entirely likely she could end up president if he's elected.

[multiclassgeek.livejournal.com]

A better choice, IMO

But failing that, Obama is fine, too.

Let's just hope the Rabid Clinton Fanbois/girls learn how to Suck It Up And Deal, rather than BAWWWWWWWWWWing endlessly, and condemning America (and the rest of the world) to four more years of Republicanism (and the Stealth Dominionism that comes with it) because they're protest-voting for McCain.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Well, I had preferred Clinton over Obama, mostly due to experience, but the simple fact that Obama has held up SO WELL under such extreme scrutiny and pressure PROVES that he's got enough experience, intelligence, and poise to handle it. Besides, his platforms are the same as Hillary's in most cases, even if his specific plans occasionally differ a tiny bit.

I like your better choice alternative, but I was sorely tempted to vote for Harry Potter.

[multiclassgeek.livejournal.com]

Don't you have to be Born in the USA to be Prez? As I understood, it's one of the reasons Ah-Nuld hasn't been tapped to run for the White House (the other being that the GOP can't trust him to stay on-message).


But I'd vote for Harry. Or Snape. Or Hagrid. Hell, some of the ideas that the Dominionists would be pushing via McCain and Parr make Grindlewald seem positively moderate...

[mijan.livejournal.com]

*snicker-giggle*

Yes, you have to be born in the USA to be President. But remember, even Palin might not consider Alaska to really be part of the USA, and the restrictions on Presidency apply to the position of VP, too. So... *shrugs*

[lunalovegoddess.livejournal.com]

I plan to vote Weebl/Bob 08, because a vote for Weebl is a vote for more pie...

Oddly enough, on the Born in the USA subject, I'm halfway through writing an alternate universe Hawaii, in which the niece of Queen Liliuokalani was able to successfully convince U.S. Presidents Benjamin Harrison and later Grover Cleveland to restore the Hawaiian monarchy in the late 1890's before her death.
If you like alternative universe Alaska, MaryJanice Davidson's Royal series involves Alaskan monarchs.

[multiclassgeek.livejournal.com]

Vote for more pie? I'd go for that.

Unless, of course, the alternative was a vote for More Cowbell

re: Royals - Provided it's not an AU Alaska which owes more to Margaret Atwood's Gilead (which is the sort of Alaska that Palin's Dominionist supporters would like), we should be fine.

[lunalovegoddess.livejournal.com]

Oh, you'd like these Alaskan monarchs, then... If Alaska never became the 49th state, but instead was ruled by a smart-aleck, potty-mouthed king who'd rather be fishing and his famously eccentric royal family, its people would be independent and down-to-earth. Alexander Baranov is the kind of guy who loves to take the piss out of people, and is intrigued by women with moxie. He especially values independent thinking and questioning of authority, even his own to some degree. (Doesn't mean that you're off the hook, but he loves a good debate, practically lives for a chance to throw down.)
His Alaska is, like, the anti-Gilead.

"In 1863, an America embroiled in a Civil War failed to buy Alaska. Instead, Alaska led by the Baranovs broke free from Russia. A kingdom was declared with a Baranov sitting on the throne. Over a century later, King Alexander II sneaks out of the palace masquerading as a sea captain. He meets marooned American Christina Krabbe, who explains how she beat up her boss for groping her and is now out of work. Because the girl has got spunk, Al decides that she is the perfect person to marry his oldest son, Prince David and would make the ideal Queen for Alaska..." Now he just has to convince her.

If one of his daughters got knocked up, he wouldn't be hiding it... he'd be daring someone to make a fuss about it. His attitude is basically, "Who cares what the Biblethumpers on their high and mighty soapboxes think? They can kiss my royal red ass. It's not their goddamn kid... And while we are on the subject, their kids ain't the sharpest pencils in the box, neither. You know it's all that inbreeding. Fuck 'em all, right up the ass; I do what I want. And right now, I want to track down our waitress and give her a very big tip... *grin*" And he'd tell it to their self-righteous faces, word-for-word, because he doesn't hold with bullshit. He'd be the kind of dad who threatens the suitor with a shovel to treat his little girl right and then takes him out for a beer to celebrate.

[elizardbits.livejournal.com]

The comments on that creationism link remind me a lot of high school, where we did actually have that as part of our curricula. We had an awesome section on "world religions (both real & fictional) and their creation MYTHS," which was easily the most interesting thing about junior year. I think we spent about 12 seconds on christian-based creationism, because no one was particularly interested. (We eventually moved on to Nietzsche and Kirkegaard and it was all existential darkness from there on.)

But yeah, I really really REALLY doubt that this is the kind of creationism teaching that Palin or any other Republican has in mind. Because, you know, it has Actual Educational Value, and dares to consider other (gasp!) viewpoints than the fundie christian one.

As for her daughter's pregnancy, I think this thread describes the hypocrisy very well.


ETA: Oh, and I should mention her connections with dominionist, neo-fundamentalist Christian sects.

Don't know if you noticed or not, but the link on "connections" is an autodownload of a pdf, which may freak some e-paranoid people (me!) out.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Sorry, the PDF version is the only one I could find. It just a church flier. No associated viruses. I checked. It's the flier from her church, and shows her involvement. You don't have to click it. It's there if you want.

[elizardbits.livejournal.com]

LOL. I was all "OMG JESUSVIRUS!" There was much flailing.

[abovethestars.livejournal.com]

her daughter is pregnant!!! yes that whole abstinence education worked really well! wow.

oh and I realized why I hadn't seen the post you asked me about. You haven't friended me!!! *bops you on the head*

I had so much fun Saturday! *hugs you*

[mijan.livejournal.com]

ACK! I hadn't realized that I hadn't friended you! *flails* It's done! I'm adding you to my "short-list", too. :D

*hugs back* I had fun on Saturday, too. And you MUST come over more often!

[daddybear716.livejournal.com]

Well at least now I don't have to have that long sit down talk with you the day after the wedding. I was concerned...

The inherent problem, which I remember seeing a local editorial on right after George W. won the 2nd term, is Democrats want the perfect candidate. The potential candidate must fulfill each and every one of their personal requirements or they are: voting Green Party, Libertarian, not voting at all. While the Republican Party supports whichever yahoo that is propped up in the platform.

I was a Clinton supporter, now I'm an Obama supporter. From what I am hearing Hillary will be a part of his cabinet, possibly Attorney General. I'm also not counting her out for 2012. We need change desperately in this country and McCain/Palin is not going to bring that about.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

I've said all along that I was probably going to vote for Obama. I just try to be an educated voter who checks out all the possibilities before making a final decision, even if the other possibilities are highly unlikely. I grew up in New Hampshire where people meet all the candidates and really DO take an objective look at all the possibilities.

Like I said, I was probably going to vote for Obama anyway, but I wanted to be fair. Now, I know that the only thing fair for our country is to vote Obama. Our nation needs him.

[miraba.livejournal.com]

Actually, I would prefer to see her remain in the Senate, where she'll be able to help push through Obama's reforms. Bill should be the one in Obama's cabinet or in some foreign affairs position. I'd love to see Al Gore take a position, but I worry that he would decline.

Obama '08

[tsuj.livejournal.com]

Oh frabjous day! Calloo callay!

I knew you'd come around eventually. *grins*

I've been an Obama-ite all along. I think history has taught us that "experience" isn't all it's cracked up to be.

I thought his speech at the DNC was phenomenal, showing that he is smart enough, tough enough and interested in representing all Americans.

I'm furious at the insulting choice McCain's folks made for VP. If they wanted to try to get the jilted Hillaryites, they could have at least chosen an Elizabeth Dole or sommat like that. This poor scapegoat is the anti-Hillary. Sadly, she'll get the nutcase voters for sure, cause she may be just a woman, but at least she's not black. :P

I'm also Happy at the choice, because I think that, despite the fact that the masses are asses, people wouldn't want her to be "a heartbeat away from the presidency."

And while he's not the Messiah that his party claims him to be, Obama will win by continuing to show how competent he is, and by recruiting new voters. Both the youth vote and the votes of the disenfranchised who previously did not bother to vote could put his over the top.

And another thing -- Whoops!

Ouch.

*just fell off soapbox*

[regicidaldwarf.livejournal.com]

I know it's not the most admirable thing, but I'm not really involved in politics much. I knew enough about the platforms to know that I was going to be voting Democrat, but I don't watch/read the news on anything resembling a daily or even weekly basis.

However, I saw Obama's speech at the DNC, and was honestly, truly inspired. And I'm proud that I get to vote for him in November. ^^

Obama '08!

[naughtyinred.livejournal.com]

Buh-da-buh-bah-buh... I'm loving it.

Let's get the little "what we're supposed to say" part of this rant over. I respect Palin's supporting her daughter through this pregnancy and I wish them well.

Now that I've said that... the woman is a hot mess, McCain's turned his candidacy into a hot mess by choosing her, the RNC is being fucked over by a hurricane on the Gulf Coast (I'm not loving the damage, but I'm giggling at the timing) and I'm loving every second of The Perfect Storm of Republican Implosion 2008 (c).

re: Palin

[lunalovegoddess.livejournal.com]

You should hear the rumors flying about, that she did not give birth in April... that the child actually is her daughter's. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223
If you scroll down a bit, there's mention of how Palin reported that she'd begun leaking amniotic fluid at 4am and began having contractions, but decided to give her luncheon speech in Dallas anyway, and then (instead of going to a local hospital) flew eight hours back to Alaska and passed over a hospital that treats high-risk pregnancies in favor of one near her hometown, arriving around midnight. The kicker: her daughter had been out of school for close to eight months due to "infectious mononucleosis". Whether or not these allegations are true, the thought of a pro-life politician choosing to cover up her daughter's teen pregnancy gives one pause... If Palin actually did give birth as she said, then it was extremely stupid to fly in her eighth month, leaking fluid, and carrying a special needs baby.

Re: Palin

[lunalovegoddess.livejournal.com]

*reads the article you mentioned* Ah, so they released the information about Bristol to combat these rumors... got it.

Re: Palin

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Yep, and they're outright SAYING SO. Nobody is going to be able to trust a word this woman says. Seriously.

[annulvapore.livejournal.com]

Not that I disagree at all with your conclusions, but one thing:

Isn't Wicca NOT a religion, technically and definitionally? I don't think it should be banned (for seemingly obvious reasons) but I have always taught and been taught that it was more specifically a belief structure.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

What's a religion? A system of beliefs with a centralized creed? Wicca has that. Just because it doesn't have a hierarchy of leaders doesn't mean it isn't a religion.

[twilightsorcery.livejournal.com]

Yay. :)

It's pretty cool to see your reasoning, especially since you're coming from a libertarian perspective. (I'm voting for Obama because the only politician as liberal as me is Dennis Kucinich.) I'll have to mention your points to my libertarian friends who are still on the fence.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

See, I don't even technically call myself "Libertarian". I like the party's principles, but the party doesn't seem to have candidates who actually align with those principles effectively. To me, "Libertarian" means small government, responsible fiscal policy, NOT being the world's police, and keeping the government OUT of people's private business while still ensuring that ALL citizens experience the full freedoms and civil liberties granted in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

I consider myself to be a Constitutional Moderate. Today, that roughly translates into "screaming liberal", according to most neo-cons. Today, the Democrat fiscal policies are more responsible than the Republican fiscal policies. (Who sunk us deeper into debt than any other administration in the history of our country?) I think our government is in place to maintain the nation's infrastructure, provide help during emergencies, ensure our security (without going overboard!), provide educational facilities and services, administer nationalized medical care, and to enforce laws that protect the safety, rights, property, and civil liberties of all Americans. I don't think they have the right to dictate my morality as long as I'm not hurting anyone else. I don't think they have the right to tell me what to do with my own body or my romantic life. I don't think they have the right to tap my phone line or invade my home without a warrant, regardless of what some jerk in Afghanistan did. And I don't think they have the right to tax the life out of me.

With the exception of national medical care, that's a strictly Libertarian perspective. I include national medical care because other countries have proved that it WORKS, and that it provides the most/best available medical services to all citizens for the LEAST money. It's financially responsible for our nation, and for our citizens. That's why I now include it in the list of services I think even a Libertarian-style government should provide - because it just makes sense.

Right now, the Democrats are the only ones who seem to have any inclination to reinstate our citizens' right to privacy (4th Amendment) and ditch any part of the unconstitutional Patriot Act. They're the only ones who seem inclined to guarantee equal religious freedom for all. And they seem LESS inclined to engineer deals for large corporations that their friends own.

So... as a Constitutional Moderate screaming liberal/Libertarian-esque person, there's my perspective. Feel free to share. :)

[twilightsorcery.livejournal.com]

See, this is why libertarians are awesome. :)

My ideal two-party system would be libertarians (the real ones, who believe in personal freedom and fiscal responsibility) and socialists/liberals. Socialists are good for pushing things like financial relief for the poor, health care, safety regulations, and rights for workers -- and libertarians are the best people in the world to ensure that personal freedom is protected and that any government programs can actually be paid for (and needless ones never get implemented).

Oh, and nobody would be insisting that the government owns people's bodies. But that's just me, the feminist, pro-gay, left wing lunatic in the corner.

I don't think they have the right to dictate my morality as long as I'm not hurting anyone else. I don't think they have the right to tell me what to do with my own body or my romantic life. I don't think they have the right to tap my phone line or invade my home without a warrant, regardless of what some jerk in Afghanistan did. And I don't think they have the right to tax the life out of me.

YES, THIS.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Hehehe...

Mijan for President, 2016!

[twilightsorcery.livejournal.com]

:) I'd vote for you. Well, unless Dennis Kucinich ran against you.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

LOL. He could campaign for me. :D

[firebird157.livejournal.com]

Socialists are also very good at taxing the life out of you. Trust me on this I live in the UK I would know. (And I'm somewhat left wing but this is getting silly).

[twilightsorcery.livejournal.com]

Well, yes. That's why I would like libertarians to keep them in line.