Barackalypse vs. Bushwhacked: half a dozen of one, 6 of the other…

I am soooo tired of the anti-Obama “jokes”; it’s over people so I think you should get over it, but if you insist then I too, am having a bit of a rant.

I don't believe that "But Bush did it too!" is a valid defense of anything. I do, however, believe that it's a perfectly valid response to people whose perception of reality is completely skewed.

Look, I get that you don't like taxes. Personally, I’m not a huge fan of them either; I think they’re too high, but I also think spending is too high. I understand that you oppose many of Obama's proposals. I don’t agree with everything the guy says either so I can empathize to a certain extent; however, I am baffled that you could go through the past 8 years completely care-free, not the least bit worried about the exorbitant deficit spending and obscene expansion of state power going on until now. I suppose that contrary to what I said in my last blog, color does matter. There are some people that only seem to care if there’s a boot squashing a face if it comes in blue instead of red.

So yes, Bush cut your taxes. He did, however, raise the taxes that your children (someone’s children) will pay. In general people claim to care about children, and I’d go so far as to say that given the pro-life stance of the people I am referring to (not that I think there’s anything wrong with that) I’d think you should care about children a lot. Surely you must oppose any policy that basically guarantees that your kids will pay massive taxes to some Chinese creditors, yes?

A tiny recap on the things you either missed while blinking or that simply didn’t faze you enough to even solicit a blink. The Bush administration:

- Borrowed an obscene amount of money to start a war that will bite us and future generations in the ass. (Please note that I retain the utmost respect for members of the armed forces and am grateful for their service).
- Borrowed vast sums for insane domestic security policies.
- Openly instituted a policy of torture, detention without trial and warrantless surveillance.
- Consolidated federal power over public schools.
- Instituted a massive and expensive program of free pills for the elderly.
- Borrowed another ridiculous sum to bail out Wall Street.
- Acquired equity stakes in various banks, basically nationalizing a key industry, the sort of thing that would cause you to pack your bags and move to Argentina if Obama did it.

None of that scared you in the least. You even voted repeatedly for the party doing these things.

You're only scared NOW? Really? Does anyone else recall the Chicken Littleing of Newt Gingrinch in the early 90s? His nonsense is one of the first things I can really remember from the contemporary political sector (admittedly, it was his name that drew my attention). The man said there would be soup kitchen lines, and then we had the longest peacetime economic expansion in our history.

Yes, I am hopeful for a better future, but I am also a bit cynical on it all so that should give you haters hope. I'm predicting that many of Obama's proposals will come to naught, and we'll basically get the status quo that didn't cause you to so much as bat an eyelash anyway.

Oh, except that the bill for this status quo might be paid by you instead of by future voters. The change I wanted never came to fruition either; that’s life.

*sigh* I feel better now. I was just getting so irritated that I had to rant a bit.

De Bait! De Bait!

Wow, a few months ago I was completely jaded and had completely lost all interest in this presidential election; my how the tides have turned! First, there were the VP picks; both of which piqued my interest and renewed some faith in the whole process for me. Now, we have the seasoned Senator actually calling to cancel…er, ahem, I mean, postpone the first of three presidential debates (not to mention the canceling of the VP debate altogether, but I’m not even touching that mess). It’s all crazy right?

Well, I don’t know. In my humble opinion, it might just be genius. Really, if McCain can convince the American public that he is genuinely taking an “above politics” approach then he might just reel in a new crop of supporters; I’m just not sure how many Americans are biting on this tactic. I fear for the old man, that many will view it with complete derision. It’s a lovely sentiment and whatnot, but really I think the majority of Americans want a President that is capable of a little multi-tasking.

Anyway, I know I’ve been a negligent blogger, and I have so much more churning on this one as well as the bailout / economic situation disaster that we’re in; however, I’ve just too much to do in too little of time these days. Ugh, okay, I can’t sign off without saying a little more…It’s unlikely that the calamitous state of our economy is going to improve through hurried legislation. This bailout biz is a train wreck for the general public. Actually, perhaps there’s an even more applicable analogy; it’s a band-aid for a situation that needs a far more in-depth treatment plan. I don’t know about the rest of you (I certainly welcome your thoughts on it all), but I don’t trust such an exorbitant amount of money in so few hands.

I implore everyone to be actively involved in your political choices though. Read the news. Watch the debates (when they happen). Etc. With regard to the bailout I urge you to read a little something from the Campaign for Liberty peeps.

On a friendly note, I also wish you all a fantastic weekend!

Veeping up the mess

Nah, I'm not talking German on house chores, but I am a little late weighing in on the potential VP candidates for this election. So I started this about two and a half weeks ago and just never got around to finishing it, and I don't think that I ever will (lots of work at home and in the office as well as lots of dance practice hours in addition to regular Studio time.) Additionally, let it be noted that I am full-on admitting to being a news and politics slacker since then as I seriously am just so stinking overwhelmed with all else and so disappointed with the prez candidates that I'm a bit apathetic towards it all. That said, I ask that you take into consideration my thoughts are presumably outdated; I'll try to catch up this weekend.

Obama picks? Clark, Biden, Webb
McCain picks? Huckabee, (dare I say) Romney, Pawlenty

Okay, these peeps are not necessarily who I think the boys will choose to veep it up, but they are folks that I think could offer something to their respective tickets.

Clark is smooth, a retired general, a Rhodes scholar with education in Politics, Philosophy & Economics and respect from many for his military service, thus deflecting a bit of the sure-to-come anti-military nonsense that McCain will be hurling at Obama. Additionally he was a huge supporter of Clinton so there's potential for Obama to win some Clinton fans over with Clark. It doesn't hurt that he's a white man since Obama could use a little help in the white male demo.

Personally, I rather liked Biden when he initially threw his hat into the presidential ring, but just like the other two dems I preferred (Gravel and Kucinich) he didn't have a chance. For Obama though he could fill the foreign policy void. Not only does he have the chairmanship of the Senate for Foreign Relations Committee, but he has often been rather outspoken with regard to achieving political reconciliation in Iraq via decentralizing power among the country's warring factions. When it comes to foreign policy, where dems are concerned, Biden is it; the guy knows his stuff. Again, he should be able to help with the white male demo, specifically those ol' Irish-American roots should facilitate a good rapport with the white working class. I haven't heard a lot of buzz on Biden aside from one of my friends mentioning him. I think perhaps, Obama thinks he is lacking the articulation factor, but it's his ability to interact with the working class that makes him appealing. His special little add-in: he teaches a regular seminar on constitutional law (I know a couple of people up for the big title that could maybe use some help in this area.)

Like Clark, Webb would offer some military cred to the ticket. Obama has said that Washington is the problem so Webb's young service in Congress compliments this stance. Again, he too, would help with white voters, specifically rural voters, and would offer the opportunity for Virginia to actually come into play. Of course, because of the Virginia thing I don't think he's a very likely choice as the dems don't want to risk their chance to have two dem Senate seats in VA.

I also have to just make a quick mention of Brian Schweitzer. Although lacking the physical charm of Clark he too, is smooth, a bit of a cowboy that tells it like it is. He spent several years in Saudi Arabia as well as other countries overseas which gives him some credibility on international affairs. He has quite a bit of experience and respect for his work on energy issues.

I know there are some people out there that just won't let the Hillary thing go, but I just don't think for one second that he would pick her, and if he did, he'd be an idiot (I'm not going to waste my time or your's going into detail here.) I know there are also some people that think he should just pick any woman, and that then he would get all of the Hillary supporters behind him. Several people are talking Sebelius. Some have even mentioned MO's own McCaskill. Neither of these is happening either. If anyone is going to sway the female vote by picking a female running mate, it's McCain, and I don't think he'll do it either.

Let's see though…on Huckabee, I don't particularly <3 Huckabee, but the guy is a good speaker. He would definitely make the evangelical population happy, but he would likely disappoint the conservatives rooted in economic and foreign policy. Just like I think Webb will help Obama in VA I think Huckabee would help McCain there as well as in NC and OH.

Romney, again, although his Mormonism is not popular with conservative evangelicals he is still seen as a representative of Christianity so that will help a bit (at least if trying to sway some dems or fence-riders away that are afeared of Obama's satanic Muslim beliefs [rolls eyes].) He has a record of economic crisis management (hey are we in one of those?) He too, has the ability to do well in OH as well as FL and a ton o' those western states (minus Cali.)

Mr. Pawlenty is perhaps McCain's Quayle (yuck), but the good there is that he's young, with an attractive enough family. With the jokes about McCain's age overflowing, a young hockey-playing veep would offer some balance against the young Barack. He's been a big McCain supporter from the get-go, but with strict conservatives that already worry about McCain, I think a Pawlenty choice has the potential to cause further concern as he is often viewed as a bit left-leaning as far Republicans go. He is majorly anti-abortion though and has a following in the blue-collar crowd.

I've heard some mention of McCain being bold enough to pick his dem buddy Lieberman to attempt to procure some dem votes. I really don't think he'd do this. If he did, I don't think he'd see a real reward on the dem side, and he sure as hell would piss the conservatives off with that one. Will he pick a woman? I doubt it but have heard mention of Sarah Palin. She is a major church-going pro-lifer and member of the NRA, but I just don't see it happening. Lastly, I sorta see Portman's name next to McCain's, although he may not be a "big" enough name. In fact, it's his low-level of name recognition that kept him out of my top three list because honestly I think as far as economics go he has more to offer than Romney. He also has the potential to help out in OH and FL. He has worked at the economic, diplomatic, legislative and executive levels. He's younger without being a green newbie in the politics game.

Regardless of whom either gentleman picks to share their respective campaign sign space, I very much agree with something my friend recently wrote

(Veepstakes) and that is that for once the VP candidates are going to really matter. I don't think that I'm the only person out there that's disappointed in our lackluster presidential candidates, and let's face it a VP is only one breath, one heartbeat away from being the next president. I think that we need to care about these candidates as well. Additionally, it's often the case that a VP runs for presidential office down the road. These people have the potential to represent their parties over the course of two decades. Let's hope the boys find a way to balance selection not just by who will help them get elected but also by who will help them successfully govern.

How I Came to Love Ron Paul: The Story of a Self-proclaimed Libertarocrat Turned Republican Supporter…well, at least of one Republican anyway

I've been voting for 10 years now and have only voted outside of the Democratic or Libertarian parties twice. One of those times is irrelevant for this story, and the other is of course, in this election season's primary. What possessed me, the girl that everyone assumes is a hardcore liberal simply because she's the product of lower-middle class, single-parent household and lives as an enviro-friendly vegetarian with two gay best friends and a fondness for diversity and tolerance of it, to vote for a Republican? Well, it all started January 9th, in a simple conversation that I was having to become reacquainted with an old friend. We were exchanging pleasantries when he asked me, rather out of the blue, who I was voting for in the presidential election.

Now, ordinarily I don't care to discuss politics or “hot-button” issues with someone that I want to get along with as I am all-to-aware of my own ability to become aggressive and/or defensive. I recalled this kid as being one of the nicest boys I knew though, it was just on-line, and I was bored at work so I said to myself, "why not?", and acquiesced. My reply was basically that it was still too early for me to say, that I felt, often you don't get to see the best or ugliest until it was closer to election time, that admittedly I hadn't researched enough detail yet to make a final decision and was aware that I needed to get on it, but with that said, I replied that I was leaning toward Obama. Well, little did I know that my friend was/is one of the largest Ron Paul supporters out there, nor did I know what a gift he has for setting you up just take you down. Yep, he baited and I bit; the boy only asks who you're voting for and why so that he may then offer up reasons as to why your choice is not a good one, and that really there is only one sound choice: Ron Paul.

He inquired, "why do you like Obama?" I responded that for starters: 1.) I worked in healthcare and could find things that I liked in his plan and 2.) I liked where he stood in foreign policy with respect to the war in Iraq. I mean, his health plan wasn't nearly as extravagant as Hillary's, and I liked his proposed changes for private companies. He opposed the war and proposed a fairly quick return of troops. I said my friend has a gift right? Here is why I believe that he does: at this point he could have just criticized me, told me why I was wrong, etc., but instead he took more of an, "uh huh, I see," approach and proceeded to explain that there was only one person that he could comfortably and in good conscience vote for because there was only one person that was a true adherent of the Constitution, a pursuant of liberty, freedom....Ron Paul.

Of course, he wanted to know my thoughts on the man, and all I could offer was that I knew very little other than that I thought he was a proponent for homeschooling, something with which I had concerns. A litany of reasons as to why Ron Paul is awesome was delivered quickly, and I found myself promising to research him as a viable option for my vote before deciding on anyone. Never let it be said that I am close-minded because I am always open to research and to learn. Not only did I proceed to read pretty much everything on www.ronpaul2008.com I also looked for newspaper articles and political commentary on the man. I was enthralled with much of what I was reading, as there was quite a bit that I agreed with, and I'm pretty sure my friend knew it was happening as he just continued to nudge more Ron Paul my way. I was coaxed into watching ridiculously long clips from YouTube on the Federal Reserve, from which I was inspired to write a blog that sent my collective group of heavily left-leaning friends into a frenzied mess. Honestly, it threw me a bit off-kilter as well but was welcome as I had been suffering from a bit of apathy toward writing, something I once loved. Never did I expect to actually be wooed by a Republican, but Dr. Paul has his ways.

I bought and read Freedom Under Siege and fell even more smitten with this little Constitutionalist as he truly seems to always stand his ground. It's not Obama's foreign policy or healthcare plans that I agree with; they're Ron Paul's. The man acknowledges our obscene overspending and wants to stop it. He refuses to treat the Constitution as a simple piece of antiquated paper, open to interpret as we see fit. His diligence and strict adherence to his beliefs and to the Constitution move me, and it turns out that he's not so far off from many of the Libertarian ideals that I have often agreed with over the years. He speaks with honesty about limiting a big government that has far overstepped its prescribed role and about restoring our personal freedoms as they were intended to be protected in the first place.

The more Paul I read, the more I liked, and the more of everyone else I read, the more I disliked and identified them as trespassing against the Constitution. With Ron Paul there are no surprises; his policies and future actions are found in one place. Any reluctance or hesitance? You need only look at his voting record. The man does not waiver. What about the rest? Well, they will pander and weave whatever story they think the public is buying. James Madison once said, "Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government." James Madison = founding father and soothsayer ;-) I decided that I no loner want anything to do with this bastardized form of government and that I would seek to only further advance my knowledge of Ron Paul and what he stands for.

I desperately wanted to hear Ron Paul speak, and I wrote the following to my friend in explanation as to why I would very much like to go with him: “I would like to listen (in person) to someone that impresses me with his ability to recognize that not all human problems are capable of solutions (at least not via government solutions), that resists unnecessary government spending (especially given the current state of our economy), that holds a watchful eye over big Washington power, that I can respect for his faith even if I don't fully grasp it and respect even more for what seems to be the ability to know there is a point where religion and politics simply do not mesh, that promotes self-reliance and cultural pluralism and most of all freedom.” Ron Paul did not disappoint; if anything I like him even more. Previous viewings of his speeches and debates had left me wondering just how personable he was and whether or not he was a very good speaker. Concerns were put to rest on Friday night as I listened to him deliver an excellent speech, peppered with humor and filled with a more than personable demeanor. It was an absolute honor and delight to hear him speak and to share in the company of approximately 1500 other impassioned Ron Paul supporters. I thank my friend not only for taking me but for introducing me to someone that is truly the kind of candidate I can support.

What’s not to love about Ron Paul? He favors sound money, non-interventionist foreign policy (keeping our tax dollars here), increased trading and friendly interaction with other nations, personal responsibility, repealed income tax, free market healthcare, small government, personal freedom and so on…:-) I encourage you to consider not only his platform but his level of respectability: he is consistent, and he doesn't take money from criminals like the other three big names in this race as they are all guilty of business with the likes of Soros, PACS and Goldman Sachs.

I believe that he means what he says as voting actions speak louder than any campaign propaganda. An administration headed by Ron Paul would result in a better United States, one much more economically stable and in healthier relationship with the rest of the world. Current administration and our ballot choices take a counterproductive approach that actually leads the United States to be resented and more isolated in the world. I’m tired of it, and I will not vote for someone just because he is the lesser of two evils. I will wear my Ron Paul button. I will help spread his message of freedom and liberty, and I will vote in November the same way I did in February.

The Constitution is the sine qua non to a healthy U.S., and Ron Paul is the only candidate that knows this. In closing I leave you with a commercial whose Haloesque animation I sincerely enjoy in addition to the content as well as some words from Barry Goldwater that seem as though they could just as easily be spoken by Ron Paul today; truly great ideas and principles do not expire:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hK4BzVsAgtY



"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom." - Goldwater

I eagerly await my copy of The Revolution: A Manifesto.