Thoughts on the Election, Politics, and a Little on the World in General

As most of those who know me have discovered, I’m a person of rather conservative values. In light of the election of a very liberal president, I’ve taken time to reflect on this campaign and its potential effect on the world around us.

It is an interesting time in our world. One of the most exciting and historic presidential elections in our nation’s history was decided with the election of the Democratic nominee, Barack Hussein Obama, soon to be the 44th president of the United States. The election of Obama and the campaign in general, have made history and, in the process both united and divided a country.

On one side of this campaign was the Republican candidate, Arizona Senator John McCain, a Vietnam War veteran, an all-American hero with a history of bipartisan politics, working with not only people from within his own party, but also with Democrats across the aisle. Seemingly, Senator McCain would be an ideal candidate for president.

On the other side, the Democratic candidate, Illinois Senator Barack Obama, a former community organizer who rose through the ranks of the Chicago political machine. Obama served less than one term in the Illinois state senate, then four years of his first term as a United States senator before running a successful campaign to become president of the United States. During his time in the Senate, NationalJournal.com listed Obama as the number one most liberal senator. Number 4 on the list is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a socialist.

This campaign has brought to the surface a number of different emotions in the people of this country. For some, this election was just like any other – not worth voting in because neither candidate was worth the effort. After all, they’re just like everyone else in Washington – full of crap and carrying plenty of big shovels to spread it around. For others, it was very emotional and energizing, with people choosing to fiercely support either conservative or liberal ideologies. What sorts of ideologies were there to create such polarization in our country? Why are so many people on both sides up in arms over this election?

From a conservative’s point of view, Barack Obama left much to be desired as a presidential candidate. First of all, we have a man who got to where he was with the help of the highly corrupt Chicago political machine. This fact alone made some people nervous because the Chicago political machine is known for promoting some rather seriously shady characters. Regardless of Obama’s intentions, merely being associated with some of the Chicago politicians within the machine was an issue.

During his time in the Illinois state senate, Obama’s voting record on issues was questionable and cause for concern. It wasn’t so much what he voted for. On the other hand, it wasn’t really what he voted against, either. The concern came from the 130 (no, you didn’t read that wrong – that's one hundred thirty) times that Obama voted “Present”. A vote of “Present” is neither a vote for or against the issue at hand. It’s merely a designation that one showed up for the vote. This raises the all-important question why refuse to take a stand on issues 130 times? Was it because Obama was afraid that his voting record might come back to haunt him some day? In a sense, it did. For me, a representative of the people who is afraid to make a decision because he has his eye on his own political future rather than the future and well-being of the people he represents is a major issue. When I’m considering who I would want to represent me, my family, and my nation, I’m certainly worried about electing someone who might be afraid to commit to a decision because it might come back to bite him in the end. From where I’m sitting, isn’t that the job you’re signing up for? As president, you have to make the best decision you can, based on your own education, experiences and the help of trusted and hopefully knowledgeable advisors. Is it the right decision? Who knows? You may not have the luxury of worrying about whether or not it will make you look good to the historians. Only time will tell how truly smart or foolish your decisions as president were. What a president needs to be concerned with is how to best serve the people of this nation. THAT’S the job. Based on all of those “Present” votes, it didn’t exactly look like Barack Obama was looking toward the best interests and needs of the people.

Going hand-in-hand with Barack Obama’s questionable voting record is his questionable associations with people who worked against the best interests of this country. For example, William Ayers, member of the Weather Underground, an anti-Vietnam War organization which protested the war through explosions at the Pentagon, the U.S. Capitol, and several other government buildings in the 1970’s. If someone is seeking to be entrusted with the well-being of this nation, why should we look to a man who is, in any way, associated with someone who is best remembered for violently attacking government? In all reality, that doesn’t say much for the Weather Underground that if they had the resources to set off these explosions, couldn’t they have put those resources to better, more constructive use? Don’t get me wrong. I think the fact that our government lied to many of our soldiers, as well as to the nation as a whole, is terrible. We sent more and more soldiers into Vietnam to fight a war we knew we couldn’t possibly win. I don’t, on the other hand, condone violent means of protesting those actions.

Ayers aside, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright ranks as another disturbing piece of Barack Obama’s past. I have a hard time accepting the idea that Barack Obama was in the church of a man who was so outspoken against our nation and yet never really knew it and didn’t really agree with it either. If he didn’t believe the notions being put forth from Reverend Wright’s pulpit, why stay in his church for so many years?

So, let’s assume Barack Obama is being labeled guilty solely on the basis of being associated with these people. Why sidestep the questions about these associations and several others? Barack Obama had the media in the palm of his hand throughout his campaign. He had plenty of opportunities to properly address the questions about why he would be connected with Ayers, Wright, and others. For me, his quick, dismissive answers really weren’t very convincing. I wanted him to convince me that he really didn’t agree with the ideas of these men. Reverend Wright’s pulpit tirades were simply too much to explain away.

What about the real issues of the campaign? Did any of them matter in my decision not to support the election of Barack Obama? Absolutely! Consider these three words – Joe the Plumber. One of the most referenced moments in the latter days of the campaign came from Barack Obama himself, when Ohio plumber Joe Wurzelbacher asked how Obama’s economic policies would affect him and his desire to buy his boss’s business for himself. Joe was concerned because Obama had been talking about how he was going to give a tax cut to 95% of Americans, about how only that 5% making over $250,000 per year would see a tax increase. It seems that if Wurzelbacher bought his boss’s plumbing business, he would become part of that 5%, and would see his tax burden rise. Obama told Joe that the 5% seeing a tax increase needed to pay more to pay for the tax cuts that everyone would get. “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” That issue alone is troubling to me in more ways than one.

First of all, I absolutely despise the idea of wealth redistribution. Last time I checked, Robin Hood was a fictional character, not a form of government. We shouldn’t rob from the rich to give to the poor. One of the founding principles of this country is that if we work hard, we should profit from the fruits of our labors. Obama’s tax policy seems to work against that. His policy would discourage people from working hard for fear that the government would come it and take it away, in the form of higher taxes. If I work hard, I should be able to decide what to do with my money, not the government. If I work hard and sacrifice to make a better life for my family, I shouldn’t be told that I don’t need the money, that there are others who need my money more and I’m going help them regardless of what I might think about it. I’m not an idiot. I do know there are others who aren’t as well off as I am, but shouldn’t it be MY decision who I help and how? I don’t need politicians to pass laws that decide for me. I can tithe to the church or churches of my choice. There are also plenty of charitable organizations in this world that I believe do good work for needy people – St Jude’s Children’s Hospital, the American Red Cross, the Salvation Army, and Habitat for Humanity, just to name a few. You may have noticed that “supporting people too lazy to work for what they have” didn’t quite make that list. Before I’m dragged out into the streets understand two very important things – 1) I don’t oppose welfare programs that help people get back on their feet and teach them how to support themselves, and 2) I know that a lot of people who are on welfare are actually hard working people who are just having problems making ends meet or finding a decent paying job.

Along with the problem of wealth redistribution, I also loathe the idea of promoting wealth envy -- that hatred people have for people make more money than they do and have more things than they do. To me, wealth envy is completely pointless and non-productive. From time to time, we all see someone who has something we would like to have. Strangely enough, people, we have a great solution for that – work for it! That might mean working more hours at work; it might mean doing without a few of the extras so many of us have in our budgets – cable TV, internet service, cell phones, movies, whatever. Most of us have the capacity to find the money in our budgets that can be saved, possibly invested if needed, to allow us to get that which we want. The problem with wealth envy is that it teaches you to hate people for having more or that they owe you something. I’ve got news for you. No one owes you anything. You owe it to yourself to do the best that you can do for yourself and your family.

Aside from the social issues surrounding it, Obama’s economic plan is fundamentally flawed. One of the basic principles of his plan involves raising taxes on large corporations and individuals making more that $250,000 per year. He says those tax increases will allow lower taxes on 95% of families in this country. Wrong! Raising taxes on corporations is just a fancy name for raising taxes on families. The only way for families to avoid these tax increases is for them not to buy anything from any company that will be subject to these higher taxes, or from any company that buys any thing from a company that will have its taxes raised. Okay, I know what you’re thinking at this point – “What in the world are you babbling about”? Well, I’ll tell you.

Pick a corporation, any corporation. How much in taxes did they pay last year? Any guess? $1000? $50,000? $1,000,000? How about ZERO? Economics lesson – businesses DON’T PAY TAXES! People pay taxes. You pay taxes. Businesses don’t pay taxes. Of course, you’re thinking that I’m crazy. Businesses pay taxes. You can go online and look up how much they paid in taxes. We have laws governing how much in taxes businesses must pay and by when. All of that is absolutely true. However, in essence, businesses still don’t pay taxes. You, the consumer, pay taxes for them. Let’s look at an example.

We have a company we’ll call Cool Cases Company. Cool Cases makes those refrigerated cases you see in your neighborhood grocery store. Cool Cases, being a large company, will be subject to a tax increase under Barack Obama’s plan. Well, Cool Cases has its overhead costs – utilities, equipment maintenance, rent, payroll, etc. These costs aren’t going to go away just because their taxes have gone up, so Cool Cases is going to have to make sure they make enough to cover them, plus pay their taxes, and still come out with an acceptable profit margin for their shareholders. Because of the fact that they will owe more in taxes, CCC raises their price for their products. Now, let’s say Walmart is a customer of CCC and they’re in the process of building yet another Super Center. Their rep from CCC tells Walmart the price on their cases went up. Walmart, needing the case to furnish their new store, pays the new, higher price. A few months down the road, Walmart opens the new Super Center to its customers. Because Walmart had to pay more for the equipment to go in this store, they have to set their prices on the products a little higher. After all, that money has to come from somewhere, along with the money that Walmart has to pay because they, too, are subject to higher taxes. So now, instead of $3.99 for a gallon of milk, maybe it’s $4.19. A loaf of bread that would have been $1.79 is now $1.89. And who pays those higher costs? You do – you, the consumer. And where is that money going? To the corporations, to pay their bills, including their taxes. It’s called “trickle down economics”. A tax increase on corporations ultimately trickles down to the little guy.

Another issue I had in this campaign didn’t involve Senator Obama directly, but more indirectly. It was the issue of racism. It disturbed me to see so many people who were voting for Obama solely because of his race. It disturbed me even more to hear some of those people declaring that anyone who didn’t vote for him was simply racist. We’ve already been through several of the reasons I wasn’t interested in voting for him. You’ll notice not one of them was because of his racial heritage. I, for one, don’t have a problem with race in politics. Years ago, Alan Keyes was a very promising presidential candidate. Had Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice run for president this year, I likely would have wholeheartedly supported their candidacy. For me, race wasn’t an issue and it never was.

That’s enough about why I didn’t want to vote for Barack Obama. Why did I vote for John McCain? Several reasons, actually. One is experience. I believe that John McCain’s experiences both in war and in public service were assets which would have served him well as president. When I’m considering a presidential candidate, I want to know that the person I’m voting for is going to have the fortitude to stand up to the threats which might present themselves. I also respected that Senator McCain has a history of bipartisan politics, working with Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. I see that as a step toward getting things done in Washington. Personally, I’m tired of these whizzing contests politicians have with each other where regardless of how good an idea you have, they’re not listening because you don’t have the right letter in parentheses after their name. Furthermore, I was impressed with McCain’s history as a maverick. He was more interested in doing what was right, regardless of whether or not he personally got the credit, regardless of whether or not it the “popular” thing to do. Sometimes you have to do things to help people, even if it turns out you’re helping to protect them from themselves.

In the end, I suppose none of this truly matters – why I wanted McCain elected, why I didn’t want Obama elected. The fact of the matter is Obama was elected. Almost certainly, he’ll be inaugurated on January 20, 2009. I don’t necessarily like the fact that he was elected, but that doesn’t mean I don’t respect that he will be the President of the United States. Believe it or not, I also understand why he was elected.

First of all, over the past decade, the Republican Party has drifted away from their core values. These days, they’re more like the Democrats than not. For many conservatives, that’s a real downer. In some ways, I can see how McCain may not have been able to win the election. His principles seemed to have kept him from directly addressing issues that he could have. For example, he refused to attack Obama over his involvement with Reverend Wright. Also, McCain, as the Republican candidate, was viewed as merely a continuation of the George W. Bush years. While it’s not been all bad, some parts, especially the past six months, have been horrendous.

Another reason Barack Obama was elected was because of what he claimed to represent – change, or more importantly, hope. The idea of hope is very important to people. It’s what gets us out of bed in the morning. It’s was keeps us pushing on. Over the past several months, Americans have watched as the economy has been steadily declining. The stock market took a nose dive, costing investors hundreds of billions of dollars. When families are already struggling to make ends meet, the last thing they need is to watch the economy collapsing. In the darkness of these troubling circumstances, Barack Obama offered people hope – hope of a better life, where they don’t have to struggle as much to keep food on the table, gas in the car, and have a few of the extras that make life a little nicer. Hope, however, can’t be spent. Neither can promises.

Over the next two years, we will see if Barack Obama can really deliver on his promises. If he does, we will then see if we’re the better for it or if we’ve merely succeeded in making people happy by giving them things the government isn’t really responsible to provide. If he doesn’t deliver sufficiently on these lofty promises, will we as a nation swing once again from center-left back to center-right? Even though President Obama would still have two more years left at that point, the fault would fall upon both him and his party, in control of both Congressional houses. While he wouldn’t feel the brunt of backlash, their control of Congress would be in serious jeopardy. He would then find himself in the same, unenviable position that George W. Bush has been in, fighting to get his agenda done in the face of opposing party control of Congress.

To those who did not vote for Barack Obama, I hope you did so for meaningful reasons. I hope you didn’t vote against him simply because he was “the black guy”. For those who supported Obama in his pursuit of the presidency, I hope you didn’t vote for him simply because he was “the black guy”. I hope you cast your vote for real, meaningful reasons. I also hope you were right in voting for him. If you were wrong, we could all pay the price. That price may be more of a bitter pill than any of us are prepared to swallow.