unastronaut*

Feet on the ground – head in the clouds.

“We don’t know much about this guy” is a lie about Obama

leave a comment »

Tonight on MSNBC’s Verdict with Dan Abrams, Tony Blankley, a former speechwriter for the Reagan administration concluded the media is addressing the Reverend Wright circus properly.  He feels that because we’re on the cusp of potentially electing the first black president — and since we don’t know much about him — we must consider things like Reverend Wright before we cast a vote for Obama.  

Earlier in the show John Kerry is asked a question about Wright, his answer was clear and in direct opposition to the spin Blankley gives.  Kerry says “let this go” and that the media is focused on the past instead of the future of major issues concerning Americans.  As a concerned American, I agree.  It’s been frequently discussed in this blog as I feel the media is reporting it through such a narrow, pre-spun way it is necessary to at least make sure more of the information is out there.  

[On the same episode of Verdict, the ‘Why America Hates Washington’ segment was about the military contracts inadvertantly funding the recently-raided polygamist sect near El Dorado, TX.  Sexual abuse has now been revealed among boys as well as the still underage girls who are pregnant with their third or forth child.  I had reported on this earlier in April, and I probably found it on Digg.]

Tony Blankley, and many others in the media need to understand the “we don’t know much about this man” charade is all bullshit and many Americans have already called you on this. 

Personal Memoirs

Each candidate has written a book or two. Barack Obama has written two books about his life, his upbringing, his beliefs, race and ambitions.  John McCain has written six-plus books, primarily on his family memoirs of his Admiral father and grandfather. He’s also written about Middle East politics, Afghanistan, courage and air bag safety. Hillary Clinton has written memoirs and children’s books.

Landmark Legislation

Barack Obama is responsible for the same number of pieces of passed landmark legislation (2) in his two years as Senator Clinton during her four years in the Senate.  The only current bill any of the three remaining candidates were actually co-sponsoring was the earmark moratorium, which all three have co-sponsored.

Committee Work

Hillary Clinton serves on these committees:

  • Armed Services
  • Environment and Public Works
  • Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
  • Special Committee on Aging

Barack Obama also serves on four committees:

  • Foreign Relations
  • Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
  • Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
  • Veterans’ Affairs

Commander-in-Chief/Executive Experience

People claim Senator Obama isn’t experienced enough to be Commander-in Chief, where I’d say Sen. McCain’s record looks the most personal, but his experience wasn’t in leadership — like his father and grandfather, both admirals.  When compared to Senator Clinton, Obama has served on both the Foreign Relations and Homeland Security committees, while Hillary Clinton serves on the Armed Services committee.  

Committee work is not true executive experience, but it is a political arena in which speaking requires you have a good question for whomever is being deposed, a recommendation on a piece of legislation, or just a generally good idea.  As far as previous experience is concerned, none of the candidates have actually served as leadership executives.  If that were the primary factor in voter’s minds, we’d have polls indicating Mitt Romney is leading at this point.  We might have already elected Ret. General Wesley Clark in 2004.

Voting on Issues

Each candidate has voted on a spectrum of issues, and even Senator Obama has voted on all of the issues currently facing our nation having been in the Senate (even if only for two years).  Sen. McCain has weighed in on having a federal holiday in memory of Martin Luther King, Jr.  He evidently got it wrong the first time, so he had to spend time apologizing this year on the campaign trail.  I’d really rather not use that as a reason to vote against McCain, but rather see why voting over a long period of time doesn’t mean much, other than the fact that one current issue has one candidate standing alone.

War in Iraq/Distraction from Afghanistan

Only Senator Barack Obama was against the war from the beginning.  We were lied to by the Bush administration and a news media eager to do the government’s dirty work disseminating propaganda.  There were no weapons of mass destruction.  There were not operating extremist cells in Iraq, because Saddam was never liked by radical and fundamental Islamists like bin Laden.  Iraq and Iran balanced each other and kept each other in check for years.

Interventionism vs. Non-interventionism

Anyone who felt what President Reagan did made you safer, or the policy of not invading Iraq of the first Bush administration actually was better international use of military force as a protective measure only should feel swindled by this war.  I know it’s too late to bring back those lost, it’s too late to undo everything we’ve done, but we have rid the world of one dictator, who had an established rule in a time where information traveled more slowly.  

Today we have faster flow of information, and a better network of international peacekeeping forces who could actually intervene if there were a legitimate threat coming from the region.  This is why the concept of a nation policing the globe should be obsolete.  This is why we must not stay.  Let them find their own Founding Fathers, let them express the Iraqi Dream.

Unwrapping Media Spin

When pundits say “we don’t know much about him” they are just lying and getting away with it.  Nobody points out that these people are living their lives every day in the public eye.  Everything they have done in the past is available through Google, and anything they’ve said has probably hit YouTube.  Each candidate has written books, given votes and taken stances.  The question is, which direction do you choose for the nation?

Do we go with the veteran ex-maverick who has turned to pandering to his base, or aligning with them on issues on which he has no familiarity?  He is either getting bad advise or losing his grip to some degree.  A lot of my final impression of John McCain’s candidacy rides on who he chooses for a running mate.  I’m not fond of the values of his wife — like stealing prescription medication from her non-profit charity — and the fact that they claim to be for the working man having never been in that position since the two have been married (she’s a Budweiser heiress).  I also recognize these are only fringe issues, and some shady people in personal life were extraordinarily great leaders in public life.  

I just know Sen. McCain will have to rely on people for anything economy related, which just so happens to be the most pressing issue to Americans today.  I we had instituted the draft (which we would probably have to do if we somehow picked a fight with Iran) then the war would actually be the most pressing issue to the most Americans.  Sen. McCain knows about the military, but he has also aligned to the actions of the Bush administration, which is reprehensible considering the quagmire we needlessly created.

Do we go with the more socially-rooted candidate in Hillary Clinton, whose prime causes include universal health care and the war, having voted to authorize the war in the first place.  On the issue of health care I think requires a private-public solution, removing employers from the decision-making process of which plan to buy.  If employers aren’t required to cover employees, they can pay them more, which allows employees to take the money previously paid for the same services out on to the open market.  Do this with 150 million workers at once and you will create something beautiful within the market — equilibrium.  Everyone shopping, looking for the best deal.  Multiple providers, looking to be the best business.  Let American ingenuity solve the problem if Congress can’t.

That inadequacy in Congress should end after a President who sends recommendations to Congress then vetos the bills they finally send him, saying they didn’t sent him something he could work with (after 535 people found a way to decide).  We should learn our lesson that the president shouldn’t be “the Decider” but “the Listener”.  Someone who speaks for the people.  If we were truffula trees, we’d want a Lorax. 

______________________

 
Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem. -former President Ronald Reagan

Sources:  votesmart.org, congress.org

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: