Wednesday, October 8, 2008

a personal note on a public matter

from Bud: 

Those who know me, and readers of this blog, will recall that I used to admire John McCain.  Still, there is no chance that I would vote for him this year for President. He is not the person I thought I used to know, and with Sarah Palin, he's become a totally lost cause. I can't think of a worse insult to hand America that his hugely dishonest and demagogic running mate from chilly Alaska.  

People seem to assume that if a voter isn't for the Republican, he must be for the Democrat, but this is not necessarily so. 

During the Democratic primaries, I didn't make any choice between Obama and Clinton.  Living in Michigan, I would have a right to vote in any primary I wished, but the Democrats took away that choice here by not running a real election.  Most candidates dropped out and the ones who stayed in, didn't campaign here.  

In the past, I have voted for Ralph Nader. I know he's ugly, I know he's cranky, I know he's obsessed.  But every time I see him or read his words, I find myself agreeing with him.  

Yet, I have decided to vote for Obama this year.  I detest the Republican Party in all its crookedness and bigotry and plutocracy. I think their people have become anti-democracy, anti-tolerance, anti-science. Most of them are abusive, and disrespectful of the aspiration of common folks. They tolerate the bigotry of racists and elitists.  If Eisenhower could see today's Republican Party, he would leave it. He had too much dignity, too must honor, too much honesty for this pack of neo-cons and know-nothings; and he would never have tolerated the thievery.


So I will leave Nader to his loss even though I like his ideas. Instead I add my voice to those who say: Change! Change or we're doomed. And at this point, Obama is the only likely change agent for America. I don't believe any of the scandal and sleaze manufactured against him. He's not a terrorist or crazy man or disloyal muslim --- or any of that. At the debates, he's been the adult in the room.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

In other words, the least of the evils?

Bud said...

That was not the impression I meant to give. I meant that the situation with the Republicans is so serious a threat to us all that I must go with the viable alternative rather than the nonviable one.

Anonymous said...

from Alice: As far as health care;
medicare; medicaid or Social Security(the "entitlements") go I don't hold out much hope for any improvement for years. The rich CEO's have robbed our treasury(not called welfare of socialism for the rich!?@*%=) and left the country in such bad shape that it will be a miracle to just keep the ship a float. Engler and his buddies acted similarly in MI. We got a head start for the title of highest unemployment state. Read:
"Thieves in High Places: They've Stolen Our Country and It's Time to Take It Back" by Jim Hightower

Anonymous said...

I don't know how I'm voting yet, but if I vote of Obama, it will be Obama taking a vote away from Nader. I resent the whining cry of the Democrats that all left leaning third party voters are supporting the opposition. My vote belongs to me, it is not something I steal away from the party. If I don't support the party candidate it's because he hasn't even tried to address my concerns let alone earn my vote. So if I vote for Obama, I will be once again selling out to the lesser of two evils out of fear.

Bud said...

Thank you anonymous --- you put it extremely well.

Anonymous said...

There is a preferential voting system here - which means the voter has to number the candidates on the ballot. One benefit of this system is that you can vote #1 for someone like Nader, then vote Obama #2, then put the evil Republicans dead last. So, you can vote for a candidate that isn't expected to win (like Nader, or the Greens here) but register your approval with their policies. They record the primary vote here - the Greens usually get around 10% - and most of their second preferences go to Labor. It would have prevented Bush winning in 2000, cause most of those Nader votes surely would have gone to Gore.... Because the Greens poll about 20% in our electorate, the winning candidate has to take into account some of their policies.