I cannot remember having such a difficult time in determining who I would vote for in any election as I have had heading into Tuesday’s California Republican Primary. For much of the primary season that was mostly run in 2007 I juggled the top three candidates: Mitt, Rudy and McCain. I questioned Rudy Giuliani’s strategy of staying out of the early races—I understood his reasoning but disagreed that staying out of the media for eight weeks could be beneficial. Ultimately his campaign fizzled in the Florida primary and Republicans are left with two solid candidates (I am sure I will get emails from the RonPaulites and maybe an IYHuckabee supporter or two, for discounting their candidates—so be it they are out of the race).
I do not have a tremendous amount of factors through which I filter my decision for whom to vote. Character and integrity are at the top of my list. Our President is our CEO, as such whoever resides in the White House needs to be someone who is consistent, is reliable in where they stand and in whom all the world may look and believe what is said.
Second, and last, are the issues. Most Democrats have the same or similar positions on most issues as other Democrats and most Republicans have the same or similar positions on most issues as other Republicans. I have two issues with which I feel the President has the most impact on our lives and our country’s overall well-being: security and government’s place in our economy. I want a President who understands our place in the world as the Superpower, the one country every other country looks to when they are in trouble, when they need assistance, when they need support. As well someone who understands that there is a significant number of evil people out there desirous of killing not only Americans, but Germans, Italians, Australians, Buddhists, even other Muslims—they want to kill anyone who is not part of their Islamic terrorist sect. There are, and has been for almost two decades, terrorists and murders who want nothing more than to kill those who do not adhere to their barbaric way of life and justify their barbarism under the banner of Islam. We need a President who understands this and is willing to use the necessary force of our military to eradicate those who engage in terror of not only the United States but other countries, religions and people as well.
On the issue of the government’s place in our economy it is simple: quit spending so much damn money and do not try to raise my taxes to pay for it. The percentage of our populace that is employed on the public payroll is ridiculous. The amount of our government budgets that go to feel good programs that are generally used to buy votes of the locals is obscene. There is only one person in the nation with the ability to singularly impact the budget and therefore the spending and the revenue of the Federal government, and that is the President through the power of the veto. I want a President who will not be afraid to use the veto stamp to control earmarks, pork and last minute additions to the Federal budget that annually adds tens of billions of dollars to spending. As well I want a President who understands the law of taxation in that the more you tax the less you get. The current tax rates due to expire in 2010 need to be permanent, I want a President who supports that position and will fight to have it happen.
On these issues: character, security, government spending and taxes, I will vote for John McCain on Tuesday. I am very aware many of those to the right of me in the Republican Party (a very high percentage of membership) will disagree with my choice and I know their arguments:
· The McCain-Fiengold Act and its attack on the 1st Amendment
· The Kennedy-McCain Bill on immigration and the unacceptability of some of the provisions including an amnesty type option
· The Gang of 14 compromise that stopped Democrats filibustering nominees for Federal Judicial appointments
· His vote against the Bush tax cuts in 2002.
My response: While I am not in agreement with McCain-Feingold at the time he stood with his President who signed the bill and with many other Republicans whose votes were needed for passage. While I disagree with the provisions it has not favored one party over the other.
On Kennedy-McCain, immigration has become a top tier issue in the past few years; this is the only attempt at legislation to do something about the whole of the immigration issue. As I wrote in July (“Senators Out Of Touch”) I felt the process was wrong and each part of the immigration issue needed to be handled one piece at a time. The President and the Congress however wanted “comprehensive” reform—it proved to be too much for the American people and the bill died in Congress.
While I was upset at the Gang of 14 compromise on the Federal judicial appointments, it did break the stalemate that was in effect and allow several of President Bush’s appointments to be confirmed. Further the nature of the compromise reserved the right of filibuster for future Republican members of Congress should a Democrat be elected to the White House and attempt to appoint any egregious radicals to the courts, say someone half an inch to the left of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
What these three issues show is that McCain understands the legislative process, understands what is needed to have legislation pass, and has the courage to take the heat from those in his own party to work across the aisle to get as good of a bill put together as possible. For all his talk about “unifying the country” Barack Obama has done nothing in this regard except give a few speeches. He has proposed no legislation, has not reached across the aisle to seek what compromise may be available on any issue and instead has declared very liberal and non-unifying stances on most issues. If a voter was honest when stating that “unifying the country” was his or her primary concern then that voter should vote for McCain. He understands that you need to give a little to take a little and most legislation is compromise of some sort.
On his vote against the Bush tax cuts I applaud Senator McCain’s stance. While I was, and am still, thrilled with what I consider to be the most important piece of domestic legislation signed by Bush, I applaud McCain for his statement at the time that he refused to vote for tax cuts without spending cuts. In my research I have not been able to find McCain adding earmarks or pork for special interests to any spending bill—he stands by his position with his actions.
I want a President who will not pander to his audience, who will represent clearly our interests at home and abroad, who will continue the fight against Islamic terrorism and will battle Congress to cut spending and taxes.
On Tuesday I will punch my ballot for Senator John McCain.
Your thoughts welcome, click here to email me or on “Leave A Comment” below for public response.
