Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Here's the thing...

I have gotten 2 emails today that have irked me a little. If I may share them and perhaps dispel some myths. That aside though, I think most of my readers are relatively open minded folks already and wouldn't have fallen for this crap anyway...

OK, email number 1 came from Glenn Beck - I think I've shared my opinions on him before. I like his comedy, but not so much when he gets political. Anyway, he's touring right now and was chatting with someone whom he described as a left-wing goof ball - Ken Altshuler from WGAN in Maine. The focal point of his comments was that they had actually agreed on something.

I think there is a lot more common ground between people of different view points than we have been led to believe, so I though I would check out the transcript. I found this gem on why he would not support Obama.

ALTSHULER: He is an unknown quantity. He has done very little votes, he has stood for very little positions. He talks in platitudes. He talked in hope and change without substance. So we don't know who he is. In addition to that, we do know some things about who he surrounds himself with. There's a reverend named Reverend Wright who is a racist. This is his spiritual advisor. He has a wife who by my point of view is militant, is angry. And I believe the people running his campaign who will run the government if he's elected have a hidden agenda. I'm not sure what it is but I don't think I like it.

So Glenn and Ken then agree that until Obama has established a solid voting record he can't run as president because we don't know who he is.

8 years ago George Bush ran on a platform as a conservative. Apparently he came in with a solid conservative record and was supposed to be the next Ronald Reagan. Instead we got a weak leader with no balls who managed to get us into a major war based on lies and completely trashed our economy, and don't even get me started on the national debt and his complete disregard for our nations sovereignty.

With the past 8 years of someone with a solid record, I think I'm ready to take a chance on Obama. He and I could not be more different on policies, I'm pretty libertarian and he very clearly and openly a socialist. But he seems sick of a government run by lobbyists and other special interest groups, and quite frankly so am I.

The second email came from a guy whom I have called out on emails a couple of times. He's a nice guy, but gets caught up in conservative emails scams. The first was about the Golden Compass and how it was a tool of the Devil to convert children to Atheism. I think you all know my opinion on that... The second was on Obama wanting to change the national anthem to "I'd like to teach the world to sing"

Today was another Obama email, depicting Obama in front of a "White House" sign, saying "Well that has got to go!" Below is the following, under an ACLU logo with the Islamic crescent in place of the C.

I'm not impressed with the ACLU right now, but mainly that because they allowed the violation of rights for the FLDS polygamists in Texas, but they do serve an important role.

Anyway, so below that was the following:

The the bible - remember when I was sworn as a senator - I used the Quran. Then the flag - Remember I won't salute it. Then the pledge of allegiance - Remember I won't say it. Ready for a change? Vote deomocratic!

And yes that last word was misspelled in the email - some red neck from down south obviously hasn't figured out how to use spell check.

The thing that bugs me most is the lying. I'm not going to refute that whole thing, but if any of it concerns you, please check out the this article on snopes.

This year I think I may be getting a two for one on my presidential vote. I will not be voting republican, that's for damn sure. I refuse to vote for a party that nominates liars and war-mongers.

I'd really like to see a libertarian president like Ron Paul, or possible Bob Barr. Paul won't be on the ballot, but Barr might. I don't know much about him, but he has changed his views a lot in recent years, and many of his changes seem to be in line with the way my opinions have changed and developed as well.

If I and many others vote for Barr, it will in effect, help split the conservative vote and usher in the first African American president. This way I don't have to vote for someone with socialist policies, but I help elect someone who wants to change politics as usual.


  1. My good man, you're a breath of fresh air. Even though reading on a dark background makes my eyeballs water. I'm with you with the lying and the warmongering. It's not so much the conservative polices I have a problem with, because I'm conservative on some issues and liberal on others, and libertarian on yet others. But it's the bullshit that is overwhelming. And whatever happened to small government (i.e., don't tell people they can't marry, or can't have abortions, let them choose for themselves!) and fiscal conservatism? Don't get me started.

  2. Thanks E!

    From someone as well educated and well informed as yourself that means a lot.

    I think the freedom and small government crowd only support those things if it agree with what they want.

  3. So Glenn and Ken then agree that until Obama has established a solid voting record he can't run as president because we don't know who he is.

    No. He can run for president until he's blue in the face. Ken would rather vote for somebody he knows something about and who has an established record.

    Obama has said a lot of things about what he thinks and what he'd do. But the man is a politician, and being handsome and articulate doesn't exempt him from what every politician does every day- B.S.

    With Obama, we have nothing to go on but the rhetoric. That's what scares Ken.

    What scares me is that there are so many people out there willing to vote for Obama simply because A) He seems like he's not a sell-out, or B) because they want to be part of electing the first African-American president.

    Choosing a presidential candidate based on his skin color- gee, how progressive is that?

  4. You know what I like about you d. sirmize...? You make me think about my arguments.

    I would agree that voting for a man purely on the color of his skin is definitely not a good way to go. With that said though, I do think it is exciting that the US has gotten to the point where the color of a mans skin will not preclude him from following his dreams.

    My main point with Ken and Glenn was that they seemed willing to dismiss him, purely because he doesn't have much of a voting record. While I would admit that that is important, the current president does not seem to have performed as we would have expected him to, based on his record prior to being elected.

    Perhaps just as bad as voting for a man because of the color of his skin, would be voting for him purely because of his party affiliation, or because of those he associates with.

    My impression of Obama has come from watching speeches he has given and looking at the platform he is standing on.

    I do like that he does not want to take money from lobbyists and special interest groups. I think that in and of itself says a lot.

    I like to that even though he presents idea which I personally do not like, he presents sound arguments and is willing to consider both sides of an issue. He is a gifted speaker and I think he would make an excellent leader.

    That said however, his views are predominantly socialist, something which I definitely disagree with.

    I would rather have a socialist who is upfront about his intentions, that someone who claims to be a conservative, and yet presides of unprecented government growth and spending.

    The point I had in my head as I wrote that posting was that I wish we could look at candidates based on their plans for the country and ability to lead.

    I think a solid argument about the pro's and con's of Obama's platform and McCains platform would be a great way to find out more about them and serve as a way to educate the public.

    Instead we seem to be missing the issues.

    I think what bugged me most about the email I mentioned was that it didn't even touch on the issues, it just used blatant lies to try and influence public opinion on Mr Obama.

    I say, lets discuss Socialism and it's pro's and con's. Lets here what Mr Obama would like to try and implement. Let's find out what Mr. McCain would like to introduce. How he feels about Socialism and what he would propose instead.

    Lets debate over issues when it comes to our next president and not about lies, fear mongering and misinformation.

    When that is all said and done though, while the president does set the tone for the country, he does not hold all the responsibility for what happens. Senators and Congressman should share in that, and I think we have been let down by them as well.

    Both you and E referred to BS and I know I was definitely thinking it too. At the end of the day, there is just far to much of it going on.

  5. The point I had in my head as I wrote that posting was that I wish we could look at candidates based on their plans for the country and ability to lead.

    I think a solid argument about the pro's and con's of Obama's platform and McCains platform would be a great way to find out more about them and serve as a way to educate the public.

    Exactly. Absolutely agreed. What do they stand for, what have they advocated and done in the past, and what do their respective political worldviews mean for the country.

    Believe me, I'd love to get to the meat of issues. I respect somebody who votes for a candidate on actual issues, divorced of emotion. The Lefties voting for Obama because they want a socialist president? Good on them.

    Personally, I can't see any good reason to vote for McCain, other than the idea of a Dem-controlled congress paired with a Dem executive scares the crap out of me.

    I like Obama personally. I really do. He's the guy I'm deep down dying to root for. But for me it has to come down to the issues.

    So enough with the email scams and media smears. I'm ready for honest debate.