| 11.02.08|
Obama: Still Not A Screen Test
On February 23, 2007, in my fourth post for the LBPOST.com, I wrote “Not A Screen Test,” in which I criticized the media for — at that point in the campaign — covering Obama as a movie star and not as a candidate for the most powerful position on earth. About the coverage I wrote the media was “denying voters the opportunity to judge Obama on his merits and ideas and ideology.” Now, twenty months later, I realize that the media was doing exactly what the Obama campaign wanted the media to do: cover the man for his aura, his presence and his charisma and avoid allowing the voters to see his ideas and ideology. And it has worked, how well we will know either late Tuesday night — if the network news anchors are able to not disclose poll results until all polls are closed — or sometime Wednesday morning, or — if the election is as close as 2000 — perhaps sometime next month.
In my travels around our city, interacting with friends, business contacts, and neighbors I recognize I am always in the minority in not supporting Obama’s campaign to become President. I also know that rarely am I answered when I ask, “how will your life improve under an Obama presidency rather than a McCain presidency?” Or, “can you tell me two or three significant accomplishments for which Obama has been primarily responsible?” Or “what ‘change’ will Obama bring to Washington?” Rarely am I answered directly to my question, rather I receive vague mumbles and then rhetoric against George Bush — who I remind them is not running for President.
I have done a lot of writing over the years, for this website, letters to the editor, entries for my mortgage blog, articles for publications, but I cannot remember an assignment that has been as difficult for me to express myself as this one; because I do not know where to begin and when to end on why I cannot in any way support Barak Obama for President of the United States.
One version of this post I wrote was very detailed about the power of the President to make judicial appointments to the Federal Courts, including the Supreme Court. Another version went through the major issues of foreign policy, healthcare, economics and perhaps the biggest single party rule in Washington D.C. with the extremely liberal Obama joining almost equally liberal Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Harry Reid, Majority Leader of the Senate, to form a ruling troika that will turn our country’s governance sharply to the left. Yet another version drilled into various sectors of Long Beach that would suffer under Obama’s economic policies — most notably the ability to attract new businesses to Pine Avenue under tax policies that severely harm small businesses. The most recent version discussed how in putting together this post I have come to realize how many people I know who are die-hard Obama supporters that are public employees. Individuals who have secure jobs and benefits and do not know the risk faced by me and tens of thousands of others in the Long Beach area, and tens of millions of Americans across the country who own small businesses and know the pressures of making payroll and employment decisions when times are tough and government is asking for more. People who would benefit under the expansion of government under Obama without sharing the risk the rest of us will be taking in keeping our businesses open.
Finally I have arrived at this version. Using the principals of integrity, freedom, personal responsibility and accountability as my guide I see no way I can vote for Obama rather than John McCain. Even using these as my guide I feel so frustrated as where to start, knowing the O-bubble environment in which it will be read that I think, “why even bother?” And the only reason I bother is part cathartic and partly hoping that somewhere in a state that is not a guaranteed win for Obama, like California is, someone may read it and decide to vote McCain.
One aspect of the Obama campaign that rankles me, and most McCain supporters I know, is the incredible double standard that has been prevalent from the beginning. It starts and ends with the media which has become the primary public relations spokesman for Obama. I will hear from the liberals who think the Los Angeles Times is centrist and the New York Times reports only the news in an unbiased fashion — but even the media admits that the media has been biased and pulling for Obama. The amount of negative stories about McCain and especially Sarah Palin and the complete void of almost any negative news about Obama and his running mate Joe Biden have been staggering. Yet McCain is accused of the “politics of division” and “ugly campaigning” for stating facts about Obama’s relationships, facts about Obama’s voting record and facts about his complete lack of experience in government and elsewhere.
Where is the integrity in a campaign stump speech from Obama that states he will “end the politics of division in our country,” yet derides much of America as people who “cling to the guns and their religion?” Where is the integrity in a man who at the beginning of the campaign against McCain accused much of the country, myself included, of being racist stating they will “say I don’t look like other Presidents on our money,” implying Republicans would use race as an issue in the campaign. Where is the integrity in a man who knows that his opponent — when hearing certain jeers and statements at his rallies — has stopped and stood up for Obama; yet Obama stays silent when his supporters and spokesmen have impugned the reputations of McCain and Palin. This is the politics of unity?
Let’s talk about Joe the Plumber. A man who went to see a man who might be President, found himself in front of the candidate and asked a perfectly legitimate question about Obama’s tax policies. Obama’s answer showed America that he believes in income redistribution, essentially massive welfare payments. Yet the media never questioned Obama about what he meant, instead they attacked the innocent Joe doing a more thorough background check on him than they have yet to do on Obama.
The attack on Joe the Plumber and anyone else who is not in Obama’s camp causes me to wonder what will happen to our freedoms under an Obama administration. Democrats and the far left have screamed about the erosion of rights under President Bush, please tell me one where you have been personally affected. Under Obama, with the Democratic control of Congress, there is a high certainty that freedom of the press and speech will come under attack in the “Fairness Doctrine” aimed at taking conservative talk shows off the air. Why? Because liberal talk shows cannot make it on the open market and those who will be in power do not like what is said on the conservative talk shows. Expect the liberal media to not raise any objection to this blatant silencing of criticism on our nation.
Are you in a union? Be ready to lose your freedom to cast a secret ballot. Under Obama and the Democratic Congress, the card-check rule will no doubt come to pass, which allow union organizers to visit you in your home, in front of your children, and ask if you are voting for the union in your workplace, or who you are voting for to lead your local. How will you react with two or more union activists on your front porch asking you for your vote right then and there?
What about the freedom of religion and separation of church and state. Under an Obama Presidency with a Democratic Congress, we can expect liberal judges — who believe in judicial activism and the ability of the bench to legislate — to be appointed to circuit and appeals courts as well as the Supreme Court. Given the decisions by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals over the last decade or more that have been overturned by a narrowly divided court, we can expect more liberal justices denying churches the ability to determine who they can and cannot marry within their religious beliefs and churches, who can and cannot serve as priests and ministers. A secular ideology will erode the religious values of our country and it would not be a surprise to see “In God We Trust” removed from our coinage and “one nation under God” removed from our Pledge of Allegiance in schools.
With a plan to increase taxes and make payouts to those who pay no taxes under the guise of “tax credits,” Obama will decrease the incentive to succeed. There is tremendous data from many different countries and eras that show lower taxes, particularly on the producing sector of an economy, increases tax revenue and economic growth. Increasing taxes decreases incentive to produce more, invest more and causes economies to contract. People who have never signed the front of a paycheck have a hard time understanding this, and those on public payrolls have an even harder time understanding this economic truth. Obama’s plan to increase those who make the most money in our country and give that money to those who make the least encourages both groups to work and produce less. It creates a disincentive to success.
Obama has put forth about one trillion dollars in programs. I am not pulling that number out of the air, it has been added up by numerous individuals in the media. He plans to pay for it by taxing the highest 5% of income earners in America. Once a government program is enacted or expanded, have you ever seen it go away? What happens when the top 5% of income earners decide to earn less and pay fewer taxes? Why earn an additional $10,000 to make $160,000 when it will cost you an additional $5,000 in taxes? Under Obama’s tax and economic plan spending will increase and tax revenue will decrease. The current deficits in Washington have nothing to do with tax collection — following the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, tax revenue hit record highs every single year through 2007; no, the deficits have to do with increased spending every one of those years that was greater than the increased tax revenue.
America is divided, about half of us are Democrats and about half of us are Republicans. For a man who is one of the most liberal members of Congress to say he can unite our country in the same speech he criticizes half of the country lacks honesty. Yes, I am frustrated because I know I am not the only one who sees this, and I know that others who do will nonetheless vote for Obama.
On my checklist of integrity, freedom, personal responsibility and accountability, John McCain gets high marks. He has admitted to a group of black voters in Alabama he was wrong in opposing Martin Luther King Day as a National Holiday — that is taking responsibility and accountability for his actions. After his involvement in the Keating Savings and Loan Scandal he renounced earmarks and adding pork to spending bills — that is integrity. He stood alone and criticized the President for not sending enough troops into Iraq, and pushed for the surge (which turned the tide and is allowing us to start bringing troops home). He believes in not only our freedom but the freedom of the Iraqis, whom we liberated from the tyranny of Saddam. McCain had the courage to tell Michigan voters that the auto industry will not be bringing jobs back to the state, and Iowa farmers that we need to stop subsidizing ethanol production. But these values matter little to many — they would rather listen to the speech than understand the issues.
Those who have been blinded by the stage lights following Obama since I wrote my post in February 2007 can see no wrong, and have probably stopped reading, for I am just an unhappy Republican frustrated that my guy will not win the White House. I am frustrated, not because I don’t think my guy will not win — as I type this it is Sunday afternoon and I still think McCain will win — but because of the hypocrisy swirling around Obama and his campaign and the complete lack of willingness of anyone on the left to acknowledge any of it. Frustrated that so many of my neighbors and acquaintances in Long Beach have ignored the dual standard of examination by the mainstream media, ignored the sliding scale policy declarations on Iraq, taxes, gun control and other issues, ignored the rhetoric of unity while making accusations and deriding half the country. Anyone who thinks electing the most liberal ideologue to run for President since George McGovern in 1972 will unify our country has a different idea of unity than I do — but that is why so many say they will vote for Obama, because he can bring us together.
No, this is not a screen test, but Obama has passed it in Long Beach where he will probably get 60% of the vote, probably closer to 75% in my Congressional District. He has passed a screen test in our state, where it will probably be 60-40 in favor of Obama. No, this is not a screen test, it is an election for the most powerful job in the world — unfortunately all we have had for the past twenty months is one, long screen test.
Your thoughts welcome, click here to email me or on “Leave A Comment” below for public response.
