Serious question here. I'm not an Obama supporter, first of all. So, this is no "HillaryLover" in disguise. I wanted to post this question here, at Obama Central, because I want to see if there is any rational reason to vote for Obama. If I can't get some decent answers here, then there is no real reason to vote for Obama at all, is there?
So, let's start with the basics: Obama is inexperienced. What has the guy run? He's been a ConLaw professor at Chicago, an Illinois state representative, and a one term US Senator. He's had no executive experience that I can tell.
Both McCain and Hillary have had far more time in the US Senate or white house, and have dealt with national issues on a regular basis. From what I can tell, Obama has hardly done anything in the way of bills or votes.
So, there is no record for Obama to run on, or at least not much. The record I can find is of him being about as far left as anyone there is. He is very pro-abortion (endorsing partial birth abortion), he is historically anti-gun (he says he is for the second amendment, but has endorsed or voted for just about every gun ban he can--including supporting DC's gun ban that basically means no one can own a gun). So on his record, we can see he is pro-abortion and anti-gun.
I don't know much else about his record, if he has one. Cerrtainly nothing else has surfaced.
That's a pretty thin record. So, we are left to examine his character and judgment. Indeed, hasn't that been his campaign? That he has the judgment and character to lead, versus Hillary and McCain? He represents Hope and Change, right? So, I ask myself, change what? What does Obama want to change? He says he wants to make the world like us more. He wants to end the war in Iraq (and Afghanistan?) I recall him saying he wanted to invade Pakistan, though I assume he has gone away from that one.
But the fact of the matter is, it's Obama's character and judgement we have to go on, right? And here is my question: The man's judgement can only be judged by the company he keeps, correct? I have serious questions about it. Let's see why: Obama's associated with a lot of unsavory people. Why?
- If Obama has such great judgment, why did he associate with Pastor Wright for so long--20 years? Did he not know that Wright was a Black Liberation Theorist who blamed whitey for everything? If he did and just didn't care, isn't that a big clue that Obama thinks the same way? And if it's a new revelation to Obama, are we to assume that Wright went on all these "ze white folk are the problem!" sermons for 20 years under Obama's nose? That doesn't show good judgment, does it? It's good that Obama threw Wright under the bus (to join Obama's grandma), but doesn't that also show Obama is a typical politician? How is that "Hope" and "Change?" For just one example: Wright and Farrakkhan apparently went to Syria to meet with Gadafi--and Obama just didn't know about this? What kind of Judgment does that show that he simply either never figured out Wright was that kind of man, or else Obama knew and just didn't care?
- Ayers. Okay, Obama's not as closely associated with Ayers. But Ayers held a campaign fundraiser for Obama in Ayers home, and Obama went. They served together, but the damning thing to me is Obama basically saying that Ayers and a Republican Senator are the same. That Ayers is a "normal" member of society or something like that. Obama genuinely didn't see any issues with associating with former terrorists? That's the judgment I question: why did Obama not seem to see anything wrong with Ayers until he was called on it? After all, Ayers' former girlfriend died in an attempt to kill hundreds of US military people. And Ayers shows absolutely no remorse for the attempt. Does Obama agree with that "the US is the root of all evil" mindset that Ayers and Chomsky share?
- Rezko. Again, this is about Obama's judgment. He had no questions about Rezko until it came up in the media? If he didn't, how can Obama's judgment be trusted, if he can't tell Rezko was slimy?
Now, it's possible that Obama will say that the "blame white america" views of Wright, and the "America is the devil!" views of Ayers are actually correct, just as I've seen many people here at DailyKos say. Indeed, there's a strong strain here of "Wright is correct, as well as Ayers!" But for people who haven't taken the Obama plunge, the question is valid: how do I know that Obama doesn't support these views? Just because he says so? Yet he chooses to associate with all of these individuals--doesn't that bear on his judgment? And I've not even brought up the anti-Israel views of most of his influential advisors. Is a vote for Obama a vote for "America is wrong, Israel is wrong, and if we just gave up all what makes us special, we can have peace in our time?"
So all these signs point towards a man who is far, far left. Is the Hope and Change that Obama promises just far leftism?
If the response is that Obama's views on the issues are important, I question: what views does Obama have that aren't populist? He promises massive expansions of government, right? He promises massive tax increases--is there any tax he wants to cut? Goverment run health care--to me, who thinks "DMV" when I think of any government run program, how is that supposed to be a good thing? How will he persuade people who don't want to lose a war that he isn't "cutting and running--i.e. Vietnam, again?" How will Obama persuade people that he will protect them when the first thing he says is that he will talk with countries that have sworn they hate us. What, exactly, will he promise them? Will he say "No" to them when they ask him to give in to them? And why do groups like Hamas, Chavez, and FARC endorse Obama? Isn't that a red flag?
Obama promises that he will change Washington, right? That he can bring people together. How is he going to convince the other half of the country to sign up for his radical socialist plan? How is he going to convince Republicans that they will be happy with massive tax increases? How will he work together with Republicans, when I've yet to see any evidence that he can (since that means compromise at the least)--and even if he DID, wouldn't you people at DailyKos call for his head?
So, I'd like some answers to these questions. In brief: what evidence is there that Obama can bring hope to America that doesn't involve our humiliation before the world, with corresponding "give everything to the UN" mentality? What kind of change will he bring that won't bankrupt me with taxes and feelings of "I should pay because I caused all that is wrong!"? And when will Obama say that people need to take responsibility for themselves instead of everything that is wrong being whiteys fault or Bush's fault or those evil Republicans fault that I guarantee I can work together with, while demonizing them the entire time? How can I trust Obama to not be Chomsky's wet dream of destroying America that I recognize and like? The one where I'm proud that America is strong and the people take responsibility for themselves, with the government getting out of the way? Where I have a right to own a gun and protect myself, and values like virtue, chastity, and honor are respected, not mocked?
Yes, yes, "You aren't who DailyKos is meant for!!!!" Yep. But this is Obama central, so why not ask these questions here? I'm not a progressive, which I interpret to be little different than Marxist. From what I can tell, there isn't much difference. But tell me--Is Obama going to be a progressive? Or will he try to be fair and honestly represent people who don't hate "Bush's AmeriKKKa?"