Showing posts with label 2008 Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2008 Elections. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

What a difference a year makes

Heading in to the primary season last year I would have never guessed how this election process has turned out. I thought Romney would win the Republican ticket and that Clinton was a solid lock for the Democrats. Of course, this is why I am not a political analyst, and why I don't gamble.

Twelve months ago I wasn't even registered to vote. My view of the American political system was jaded, cynical, and bordered on a frustrated feeling of complete hopeless and powerlessness that lead to a strict stance of indifference. Two elections have come and gone since I was of legal age to vote. I had no part in either of them. I was a proud political conscientious objector. My indifference was my voice to the government. I was an educated non-voter; I followed the debates, the issues, and all of the different policies. Yet, I was never inspired to be politically active; I never felt as if there was a reason to exercise my right to vote or that my views would be heard.

All of that changed this year. As this political maelstrom that we call the race for the White House has grown larger and larger - sucking in various politicians' careers, American integrity, ethical behavior, and billions of dollars - I decided to register to vote. This was the first race that was interesting, inspiring, and made me feel as if I should be involved since I turned 18. Bush v. Gore? Bush v. Kerry? Boring. Uninspiring. Continued hopelessness.

This country is at a vital turning point. In 27 days, the people of this country will tell the coming generations what America truly stands for in the 21st century. At least, this is what the media tells me on a daily basis. I do believe this election is paramount, but not just because there will be a female vice-president or a minority president in the White House on Inauguration Day.

When Barack Obama and John McCain were selected to represent their respective parties I actually felt that no matter who won, America would have a strong, bright, respectable, and ethical man in the White House to lead us through the next four years. I may be a "secular progressive". I may have caucused for Obama. But if Clinton had won the nomination, I may have voted for McCain. Not because I believe Hillary isn't capable, but because I despised the campaign she ran. My dismissal of the American political system is rooted in my hatred for misleading and false ads, politicians that stir the racial-religious-social prejudice pot, empty campaign promises and platitudes, and self-interested politicians. Certainly a candidates stance on the economy, foreign policy, and domestic policy will guide my vote; however, for me the "big issues" are just as important as whether or not I respect the candidate.

I am a proud American. I am proud of this country's core beliefs. I am proud of what we have accomplished in this country, especially over the last 100 years. In turn, I want to be proud of the elected leaders of this country. I want to be proud of the actions of my fellow Americans. Lately, I have pride in neither. The mob-mentality of American voters over the last month has been abhorrent. The character assassinations and manipulations of social prejudices during the race for the White House has been repugnant.

On November 4th, 2008, we will be choosing more than just an elected official. We will be choosing more than just whether or not a Republican or Democrat sits in the Oval Office. We will be choosing whether or not, we as Americans, will tolerant our leaders to be elected via unethical and socially divisive politicking. I firmly believe that when your back is to the wall, your true character surfaces. Over the last couple of weeks each ticket has its back against the wall. The finish line is insight, time to dig deep and find the strength to sprint. Both campaigns have flip-flopped - which honestly is better than being too stubborn to admit you're wrong or acknowledge that society and solutions are in constant flux - both campaigns have pointed fingers, and both have used misleading statements to woo voters. Neither side's hands will be clean when they take office; however, it is John McCain that I have lost respect for, not Obama.

John McCain ran in 2000 as the reformer; the Maverick; the man who wasn't afraid to stand up to the Republican base even if meant he was unpopular. He stuck to his morals, his values, and it probably cost him the party domination. I can respect that. He fought for his country abroad and in Washington. I can respect that. In February, when the Clinton-machine was throwing mud and shit as fast as it could at Obama, and the right-wing media used Obama's middle name in a clear attempt to foment prejudice McCain denounced Bill Cunningham's "Barack Hussein Obama" mantra. I can respect that. Hell, I can vote for a man like that, even if he means "four more years of Bush in office" - and I foster extreme dislike for Bush, the Neo-Cons, and the Bush Doctrine. McCain's "Country First" slogan seemed real. Yet, today, I am left asking what happened to that John McCain?

In the last week he has had multiple opportunities to take the high ground, and failed to do so. When someone shouted "terrorist" at his rally he should have denounced the defamatory comment then and there on national TV. The use of Obama's middle name is a much more subtle reference to extremists and "evil"; yet, McCain quickly killed it. Where is that John McCain now? Multiple reports of derogatory comments by supporters at McCain/Palin rallies have been reported; even the possibility of a death threat - it doesn't matter if it's a real threat or not - was screamed at a rally in Clearwater, Florida. Accusations of treason have been lobbed at Obama. These are serious and frightening events. A person that values "Country First" and promises "Change is coming" should squash this uneducated, juvenile, bigoted, and odious behavior quickly and decisively. Instead, McCain's ads and silence only galvanizes and condones the bigots, the extremists, and the hate-mongers. What kind of America is he putting first? Does he want to be in the White House so badly that he is willing to ride the votes of people that believe Obama is the Antichrist, a black who doesn't know his place, or an Arab terrorist secretly plotting to give the United States over to his Muslim cabal?

I used to have a lot of respect for John McCain. I embraced his nomination instead of another puppet of the Christian Right; however, I was embracing the bipartisan John McCain circa 2000. The McCain that challenged Bush, the established Republicans, the Neo-Cons, the Christian Right, and stuck to his own beliefs over the clear desires of his party base. I was embracing the John McCain that confronted unfounded accusations and dirty political games head-on. A real Maverick would have told the Christian Right to get lost and would have nominated Lieberman instead of Palin. A real Maverick would tell his supporters that if they are voting for him solely because he's white, that he doesn't want their vote. A real Maverick would take the high road even if it's a harder and ultimately a losing road to the White House. A real Maverick values his own ethics and morals over political office. A real Maverick would accept losing if it meant that he was still respected. A real Maverick wouldn't want to win if it meant he was guilty of character assassination and galvanizing uneducated bigot rhetoric. A real Maverick brings positive change of reform through his actions and not just paying the lip-service to the idea through a campaign of platitudes and promises.

I wanted so hard to believe that McCain v. Obama would be different. I wanted so hard to believe America was ready to usher in a new era of open-mindedness and tolerance - that we truly are the greatest nation on Earth. I would have really enjoyed a race between McCain circa 2000 and Obama. I would have really enjoyed having to toil with who to vote for in my first time in the booth. I would have really enjoyed being proud of both candidates. I would have enjoyed believing that politicians do care about "Country First" instead of themselves and their cash flow. I would have really enjoyed seeing America change for the better. I really wish I still had "Hope" that "Change is coming."

Originally posted at: The Podium
Published in the Daily Iowan.

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

Giulani's Post Debate Statement

After the Republican debate, Republican presidential candiate Rudy Giulani said - to paraphrase - that all he heard at the Democratic debate was a push to go back to the 1990s and forget about the threat of the terrorists to the United States.

1) I'm sure that the Democratic candiates plan to completely ignore the war in Iraq and the threat to national security created by that war and jihadi Islamists and terrorist groups. I think I remember that answer in the Democratic debate... Wolf: "Please raise your hand if your administration's policy regarding the war in Iraq will be to just completely ignore it and act like it never happened." ::every hand goes up::

2) If the reason that Giulani believes that the Democrats want to roll back policy blindly to 1990s is because they mentioned the Democratic heydays of the '90s, then Mr. Giulani, it seems to me you are proposing sometime much worse. At every possible moment you invoke the memory and presidency of Reagan. According to your theory, that must mean that you want to roll back to the 1980's. Not only would that push the threat of terror from the Middle East and jihadi Islamists further from our mind, it would be a complete shift in policy. Instead of fighting the War on Terror by targeting Islamists we would fund and support their campaign against current world powers. Given that we are currently in a unipole situation, it seems that Giulani's invocation of Reagan only means that Giulani must want to the Islamists to defeat the United States. At least that is what it would mean if we were to follow his statement and reasoning to its logical end.


LATER ADDITION:

Ronald Reagan Proclamation 5034 - Afghanistan Day, 21 March, 1983

Excerpt:
The tragedy of Afghanistan continues as the valiant and courageous Afghan freedom fighters persevere in standing up against the brutal power of the Soviet invasion and occupation. The Afghan people are struggling to reclaim their freedom, which was taken from them when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December of 1979.

In this three-year period the Soviet Union has been unable to subjugate Afghanistan. The Soviet forces are pitted against an extraordinary people who, in their determination to preserve the character of their ancient land, have organized an effective and still spreading country-wide resistance. The resistance of the Afghan freedom fighters is an example to all the world of the invincibility of the ideals we in this country hold most dear, the ideals of freedom and independence.(emphasis added)


If you read the proclamation it isn't very hard to just replace "Afghanistan" with "Iraq", "Soviet Union" with "America", and "Afghan freedom fighters" with "Iraqi insurgents". If we weren't the occupying force in Iraq, it's not unfathomable that President Bush would issues a statement in the spirit of Reagan's Proclamation 5034.

This proclamation only further evinces that Mr. Giulani's comment was nothing more than sophomoric politicking. But then the great Ronald Reagan knew all and was infallible, right? At least that is the myth the Republicans aim to push.