Kristyne: > I've been nervous about the idea of electing a president that does not > have > a lot of experience. At this point, though, having done more homework, > I've > decided that I do believe the experience issue is not going to be the > deal-breaker I thought it was.
I saw this coming. :) It's like those of us who didn't like McCain at first. Once you listen, you start to hear things you like about the "lesser of two evils". Before you know it he sounds outright palatable! I can relate. > Obama's history is showing him to be a determined individual that does > his > homework so he can come up to speed on issues that are likely to impact > us. Obama's history--at least that part of it that isn't a big blank--is to me rather ominous. His connection to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers is *very* disconcerting, nor has it been denied; and the fact that certain records are being withheld from public view with respect to his relationship with this dangerous individual is even more troubling. Where are the folks who found Jack Ryan's marital records when you need them? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-ayers-thurs-21-aug21, 0,714266.column or http://tinyurl.com/59dul8 ...Oh that's right they're working for Obama... His buddy Rezko is a first-class crook, now convicted -- ordinarily it takes politicians a couple of re-elections to get this cozy with sleazebag fundraisers. But Obama has been linked in early by the Daley machine. His "spiritual mentors" are all steeped in "Black Liberation Theology," which is an ethnocentric version of "Liberation Theology," itself a bastardized form of Marxism that dresses itself up in religion (Catholicism, originally, in order to appeal mainly to Third World "proletariat" in Central and South America). Do your homework on that one; there is nothing Christian about it. The raw anger emanating from the pulpit of Jeremiah Wright/Fr. Phleger; the not-so-hidden anger of the candidate's wife; and his own camouflaged rage, masquerading as "hope for a better future" (in fact, it is a deep conviction in how dreadfully bad America is)--all of this makes the thought of the man as President anathema to my spirit. There is something dark and evil beneath the hood, and it has Jack Squat to do with the fact his skin is black. Personally, I could care less about gender or race---my main concern is the person's ideology. If Bush was "too conservative" (which, frankly, I think is a huge joke--there is in fact very little that is conservative about Dubya, in the final analysis), then Obama is *way* too left-leaning for my taste. > I like knowing that he realized at one point that he was frittering > away his > life, that he lived an austere life at Columbia so that he could > finally get > a decent education, and that his early employers saw a young man that > applied himself. Naked ambition is not enough, nor is it particularly unique. > I'm so sick of good time party boys running the government that I can't > even > describe my level of disgust. None of that will change when/if Obama is elected. If anything, you'll see the rise of the corrupt Daley machine to a national level, and its achievements will amaze you. > > As a 51 year old woman that is bothered by having her experience > discounted > in favor of youthful dreamers, I can see that I was wrong about Obama > the > Dreamer. Yes, he is inexperienced and is promoting 'change' without a > lot of > details. However, I do like the details I've seen so far. I don't like any of the details I'm seeing. "What you do to the least of these..." He is in favor of infanticide (forget abortion, he literally voted against a bill three times that was designed to protect aborted babies who survive the procedure, despite the fact that the neutrality language he said was absent was added to the bill the last time he voted against it). He's a rock-solid socialist when it comes to taxing the hell out of anything that moves, and plucking "objective" numbers that equate to "too much income" out of the penumbra of his colon comes all too easily to him. He hasn't a clue about the real world works (just inflate your tires, and we'll be energy independent before you know it!). And again, his current (not to mention past) associations are troubling on a level I've never seen before. I'm frankly amazed he's so close to the presidency even after knowledge of these facts is out. People appear willing to overlook every ominous fact in order to maintain the illusion that this guy is something new, fresh. It is willful blindness. > Now that I > have > confidence in his ability to hit the ground running I'm ready to sign > on to > the Obama ticket. He'll hit the ground running because the people behind him have an agenda and they know if he's elected they'll have at most 2 years of unimpeded power to do whatever they like. > So what about the other guy? Well, McCain has not been impressing me > lately. > I had thought that because of his deeper resume that he might be a > better > pick even though I don't like a lot of his politics. However, I believe > now > that I cannot overlook his politics. He does not appear to have the > carefully cultivated superior judgment I am looking for in a president. I don't like McCain, though I dislike him less after the Saddleback forum. That was the first "debate" I liked so far this year. Thoughtful, open ended questions---pretty much leaving the candidate to say as much as he wanted without fear of being cut off by the other guy. There should be more such forums. McCain does have a temper and that is troubling. But I think we just haven't seen Obama's yet. Stuff like "McCain doesn't know what he's up against," and "If they bring a knife, we'll bring a gun," hardly are in keeping with his image as someone "above the fray" of bloody partisan politics. > He > appears to be relying more on a shoot from the hip approach and gut > feelings > rather than on good research. We have lived through nearly 8 years of a > president that "decides" without researching, and prior to that we > lived > through 8 years of a president that did in fact research issues. McCain also has a wealth of experience to draw on that allows him to quickly assess the upshot of a problem. Obama has to rationalize his way through every tough problem. He's never really been tested. Obama got elected to the Illinois legislature by using Daley-machine tactics of getting all the other contenders knocked off the ballet, Saddam Hussein style, sans the chopping off of hands. Then he got elected to the Senate by defeating a flawed Republican whose embarrassing marital records were made public inappropriately (and rather suspiciously in terms of timing). He has not been battle tested against a foe on any level, except for Clinton, who is highly overrated and whose downfall was self-inflicted by her own massive sense of entitlement, and somewhat sabotaged by Bill IMHO. > > I think we did a lot better with Clinton and his wonkish personality > that is > prone to well-researched decision making than we have done under the > non-wonkish folks that rely on machismo and 'gut' decision making. I think we did relatively well during the Clinton years because the Republicans ran congress 6 of his 8 years, meaning that there was a lot more compromise on both sides. I also think we didn't do as well as advertised during that time--Enron was brewing on Clinton/Gingrich's watch, and we were oblivious to the Islamic threat. Clinton's foreign adventures planted some of the seeds of what's going on with Russia today (anyone remember Kosovo?), and his administration changed our Iraq policy to one of "regime change" and established the dreaded threat of his WMDs. Conversely, when Republicans had both Congress and the Presidency, they lost all the principles they said they had and governed like drunken sailors, where fiscal responsibility is concerned, and like Russian peacemakers, where fairness to the minority is concerned. Democrats have already under Pelosi shown their willingness to go back on budget-related campaign promises, and shut out minority voices. Just wait till they have a bigger majority! This is my main rationale for choosing McCain: to prevent undivided government, i.e., majority faction. Would I have voted for Kerry with my new-found respect for the concept? I'm not sure; he was also a very troubling candidate. There the concept was continuity of the executive during war, but I could have gone for a moderate Democrat, knowing then what I know now about how badly Dubya would botch his 2nd term. Of course, if it was a choice of having Kerry 2005-2009 so that Obama could have been averted, I suppose I could have voted for Kerry. Hindsight is 20/20. > > I'm ready to put my trust in a young man of promise over an old man of > experience, and I'm surprised at myself for coming to that conclusion. You are just being willfully blind of his astonishing negatives because you seek that for which to hope. I hope you're right because I'm quite convinced Obama will win (the Daley machine will see to it). And the country at the moment deserves it. And when he does, hold on to your wallet, get out your misery-index-meter, and be ready to watch the Hard Left run roughshod all around the world again. It seems to be what we need to experience again to understand the Republic we have lost. Both sides are to blame for the mess we are in, and right now, they are fighting over a corpse like vultures. But each death brings forth new life, eventually, in the big scheme of things. Maybe one day the country will get its act together again, and rediscover liberty and independence. Not holding my breath this election cycle. But I am holding my nose and voting for McCain. :( - Bob > > Kristyne McDaniel > McStyles Software <blocked::http://www.mcstyles.com/> > Shamrock Trails <blocked::http://www.shamrocktrails.com/> Ranch > > Whether you think you can, or you think you can't.... you are right. > -- Henry Ford _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
