Obama vs. McCain 2008: Who Will You Vote For and Why?

We have finally reached the end of our weekly forum on the presidential election. We have had many great discussions on a range of topics, such as character, Iraq, the economy, abortion, relationship with LDS Church, health care, faith and family values, terrorism and diplomacy, education, and political corruption. Click here to see the full list of topics.

One of the great things that has been achieved in these forums, I think, is a respectful demonstration of a diversity of political viewpoints held by faithful Latter-day Saints. This kind of conversation, unfortunately, is rare — and so I applaud everyone for making it happen.

Now is the time, for those who are willing, to declare which presidential candidate you are going to vote for (or have already voted for). Be sure to explain why. Arguments for third-party or independent tickets (or even for staying home, I suppose) are welcome. Feel free to make predictions also. Again, please keep things respectful; if you wish to bash a candidate, this is not the place.

If you feel more comfortable using a pseudonym (fake name), feel free to do so.

(By the way, this is TMB’s 100th post!)

Email a friend

Advertisements

46 Responses

  1. I support Obama, while I understand how the government works so plans will be changed either way in our system (a president can’t make choices all by himself on issues), the main reasons are because of the heavy leanings on everything education. Then the medical issues, I have preexisting conditions, I cannot get anywhere near an affordable health insurance and as such I don’t go to the doctor even when I should. On the majority of issues I support him (not all), and when looking at both candidates and thinking overall he stands out to me…

  2. I will vote for Chuck Baldwin. He is opposed to an aggressive foreign military presence, honors and respects the limits of the Federal government, prefers state and local government over national government, and has committed to treat the Constitution as the highest law of the land, rather than just as a set of interpretive “guidelines.”

  3. I have voted already and chose Obama. I did so because I’m a communist, hate the constitution, despise America, and am prepared for a glorious worker’s revolution. I believe Obama is my personal messiah, but mostly I voted for him because he’s black and doing so helped me feel like I’m not a racist.

    Of course, none of those things are true about me or my reasons for voting for Mr. Obama, I’ve just decided to embrace all of the different characterizations Obama supporters have gotten lately. ;)

    It’s really too bad – for the first time in my life politics were actually fun. I liked all of the big players that emerged. I think McCain-Palin is a good ticket, but I think Obama-Biden is just a bit better. When they discussed their ideas I think they both brought great things to the table. I think regardless of who wins we will have good leadership, and better leadership than we’ve enjoyed under Bush. I don’t intend that as a slight to Bush or his people. They had some difficult situations to work through and I think history will judge them more favorably than we are doing right now.

    Unfortunately, I can’t help but feel that things have gotten out of hand. I had hoped that both Obama and McCain would be uniters – Obama inspires people in ways we haven’t seen from a politician since Kennedy, and McCain has historically been terrific working both sides of the aisle. I think those things are still true, but it’s a shame that half of the country will be tempted to reduce Obama to a Marxist that has won entirely with style, without substance, and on race, and half of the country will be tempted to reduce McCain to Bush part II (III?) whose only goal is to see the fat cats get fatter.

    What had once energized me has now depressed me as I’ve seen the positive discourse many people have had over the past few months degenerate into smoke and mirrors discussions involving extreme categorizations digging deeper holes into everyone’s philosophical trenches.

    And so help me if I hear someone say one more time how they regret that Romney didn’t make it through. For better or for worse it is clear he is not what the people want. I wanted Giuliani but the people didn’t want him either.

  4. For those who follow this blog, it should come as no surprise that I voted for Obama (last week through a Utah absentee ballot). I will say, though, that my enthusiasm for Obama has somewhat tempered since the time of my original endorsement. Some of that has been because of thoughtful discussions on this blog. I think that the Obama campaign has been involved too much in negative and “spin” politics (though, compared to McCain, this is nothing). I also had hoped Obama would prove to be more of a centrist on social issues (this has happened somewhat, but not to my satisfaction). I do think, though, that Obama has proven himself to be a capable leader and thinker in terms of the economy and foreign policy (especially the former). He also has demonstrated excellent judgment in his choice of running mate. And for the most part, he has engaged in a clear, positive, and consistent campaign. I disagree with Obama’s pro-choice views, but, as I have argued before, I think that an Obama administration will do more to lower the number of elective abortions than a McCain administration. And that, in my opinion, is more important than anything on this issue.

    I have become increasingly disappointed with McCain throughout this campaign. His campaign has been erratic, sensational, and ridiculously negative. More importantly, he has not demonstrated to the American people how his administration will differ significantly from Bush’s in terms of the economy. It is not enough for McCain to say that he has taken on Bush and other GOP leaders. The American people want to know how he will differ on the economy. The best thing that McCain could do for himself politically is to make these differences clear. That he has not done so implies that such differences do not exist. I know it’s a slightly worn-out Obama trope, but the American people cannot afford four more years of this. McCain also demonstrated remarkably poor judgment in selecting Palin to be his running mate. At first, I thought this was a good decision, but I very quickly saw this choice for what it is: politically motivated and not in the best interests of the American people. Thank goodness the majority of Americans has seen the same thing. I am not making this argument simply on her experience — it is her demeanor, her intelligence, and her judgment that I take issue with.

    Were McCain the person he was 10 years ago, I would have been strongly tempted to vote for him. Unfortunately, he has sold out to the radical right-wing of the GOP. The most deplorable shift is his shift on tax cuts. McCain used to be against Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (presumably without being a socialist?). But you can’t have this position and win the GOP ticket these days.

  5. […] Posts Obama vs. McCain 2008: Who Will You Vote For and Why?The Highest Law of the LandObama vs. McCain 2008: Round 21: Symbolism of PresidentThe Prime […]

  6. I will vote for Obama (though my vote won’t count for much here in New York state). I only have two reasons

    1. Iraq – John McCain will NOT bring our troops home from Iraq. He will keep the occupation going with a vague definition of “victory”. Obama has a plan to end that war. Wars do end. Will we end them responsibly? Obama will. McCain won’t.

    2. Torture – The Bush administration legalized torture in America. It is utterly reprehensible and must be ended. Sadly John McCain won’t. He voted for the Military Commissions Act in 2006 that provided retroactive immunity to CIA operatives who employed torture on detainees. He will NOT end torture. Obama will.

  7. Neither.
    two contradicting reasons…Either:
    1. they both cannot be trusted to do what they say they stand for.

    or:
    2. They both will impact my values and rights as a Citizen in a negative way.

    Neither has differentiated themselves in a way that matters to me, that would suggest that I would make the right decision by choosing from the lot.

    What am I to do? I will write in my vote for the President of the United States and excersize that right. That way I know that I am not comprimising my principals or going against my contiance.

    God bless,

    Maybe…”Donald Duck for Pres.” At lease when Donald says something bad you cannot understand what he is saying.

  8. Personally, I will vote for Obama. I really love his temperance and I really think he can be level headed in a crisis. I saw most of a documentary last night about Obama and McCain, and it really bolstered my support of Obama. I think he is very honest, though he of course has faults.

    I do like McCain though. If the Pre-2004 McCain were running this year, I might have voted for him. Prior to that time, he was a true maverick. He voted his conscience. He truly typified the type of politician that I wanted to vote for. In 2004 everything changed for him, and he lost my support.

    In the end, I believe that virtually no elected official could be as horrible a President as George W. Bush, so I would probably not be horribly disappointed if McCain did win.

  9. “no elected official could be as horrible a President as George W. Bush,”???

    What about Carter, Nixon, Clinton, these wer presidents that made the people suffered for their greed for Welth, Power, and Sex.

  10. Um, yes, Carter was not a great president, but he was humble and did not disgrace the post. Nixon was bad, but he was still an intelligent semi-respectable figure. I’m still not sure how people keep piling Clinton on as a bad president. He was a good president that did one thing that tainted his image and the office. The rest of his presidency was mostly honorable. I honestly believe that, if it hadn’t been for his libido problems, most Americans would have voted him in for a third term (if it were possible).

    W. DIshonored the presidency and the standing of the U.S. with the world. He continually lied to the American people. His administration will most likely not be looked at favorably in the future.

    Anyway, I voted for Obama.

  11. So, Killing people and calling it Suiside is ok in order to cover-up a scandle? Honerable… Clinton was far from honerable, He never could tell the truth. Look at any of his Press speaches and count how many times he touches his nose, that is one of the tells that he was telling a lie. Give me a break on how Clinton and his wife brought honer to their position.

    When did “W.” Lie? Please Quote it so we all can see exactly where he knowingly spoke a dishonest word to the American People?

    -D

  12. ditchu,

    This is not the place for a tirade on Bill Clinton.

  13. Obama,

    McCain wigged out thefirst time he saw a crisis and I don’t want that to happen again.

    Don’t tell my wife.

  14. I will hold my nose and vote for McCain.

    Obama wants to increase taxes on those making over $250k a year. I make nowhere near this amount, but find it disgusting to steal from those who have worked hard through school and their business and careers to get somewhere, only to have the government come in and take it away and give it to those who want something for nothing.

    [Portion of comment deleted; sensational and ridiculously overgeneralized bashing of candidates and their supporters is not tolerated here.]

    I REALLY don’t like John McCain, but Obama would be a disaster!

  15. dennis,
    Sorry for the tirade, just responding to others that posted. I guess that no one (excepting myself) here likes the current President.
    I think this is my last post here, I guess I did not understand the fourm and thus attempted to engage a discussion.

    Again I am sorry for the jump on the Clintons.

    good night,
    -D

  16. Nader,
    Both Obama and McCain take donations from the same huge corporations that have gotten us into the current financial crisis. They both take megabucks from the industrial-military complex in the form of campaign contributions and are both beholden to corporations rather than to the American People as they should be. Nader will regulate Wall Street so that nothing like what we are experiencing right now will ever happen again.
    Nader is the only one that will get the US out of all of its wars, including Iraq and Afghanistan, and will withdraw from the nuclear weapons harboring nation of Israel as well, demanding that Israel deal fairly with Palestinian Arabs.
    Nader is the only one who will seek after a healthcare plan that will insure all Americans.
    Go nader. Sure, he has no chance to win this election, but when you are faced with a choice between Coriantumr and Shiz who are you going to choose? As for me, I’ll take the cave.

  17. The election will not be close. The economic headwinds facing the incumbent party have reached nearly gale force. Even Alan Greenspan’s faith in “self-regulating markets” has been shaken. Eight years of Republican control of the White House, six of them with Republican control of Congress, have not been a happy affair. War, economic crisis, and arrogance in governing, including a cavalier attitude towards Constitutional balance, have taken their toll on the country. The economy and our economic prospects for the next several years are much worse than I thought just a few months ago, when I was sharply critical of our economic policies and the economic record of the Bush administration. The policies of the past eight years, which in some ways go back two or even three decades, wedded as they were to an ideological demand for deregulated markets and tax cuts for our richest citizens, are now discredited. The phrase “worst since the Great Depression” has become commonplace. Try as they might the McCain-Palin ticket cannot run away from the Republican brand and has failed to articulate how Republican “mavericks” differ from regular Republicans. They have not been able to reach out simultaneously to the GOP base and the centrist independents. Senator McCain’s campaign suggests an erratic Republican response to our economic crisis and a continuation of our current foreign policy in the Middle East.

    Senator Obama has an opportunity not only to change the direction to our politics, but by virtue of his intelligence, his personal history, and his temperament he has the opportunity to be a president who can inspire the nation as few presidents have done. Kennedy, FDR, and even Lincoln come to mind in this regard. Given our current predicament, he will need to employ his considerable talents to their full extent. Rebuilding our banking system, restoring confidence in our markets, remaking our energy policy, reforming our health care policy, and rethinking our educational policies are all now urgent tasks. At the same time, we need to extricate ourselves as best we can from costly foreign wars that have alienated our traditional allies. All these tasks will no doubt be done imperfectly, but we must attempt them as best we can, and the architects of the new policies should not be the architects of the policies of last eight years or even the last twenty years. Senator Obama was prescient enough to see that this year’s election would be about change. Nine out of ten Americans now believe the country is on the wrong track. Indeed, the question is whether our economic engine has fallen quite off the tracks. Senator Obama was also able to see that the election will also be about hope, because hope will be in short supply for many in the next few years. Senator Obama is the candidate most capable of articulating America’s hopes and uniting the country in the pursuit of those hopes through some very tough times.

  18. I voted for Obama because he appeals to my moderate and analytical sensibility. I really connected to The Audacity of Hope and I respect his tempered perspective.

  19. I like a little of what Marxist Mike says (especially the part about being communist…): I think Obama is our best chance at bringing the nation back together and working together toward becoming great again (and by that, I don’t mean an economic or military superpower, but don’t ask what I mean…).

    Another reason I chose to vote for Obama (tho not the only one) is this: I feel like President Bush has abused his office and over-stepped his authority on too many occasions and as a consequence, has turned the executive branch of the government into something more powerful than it was ever intended to be. I don’t know if the next president will reign in some of that power or not, but I trust Obama to do so more than I trust McCain.

  20. I voted for Obama. I made my decision long ago. He is the best to lead our nation during these hard times. And frankly, McCain has not told us anything that he would do IF elected. All he does is attack Obama when only the issues matter. McCain campaign speeches are boring and that Palin woman is nothing but a colossal joke and it sickens me to think of her as Vice President and perhps President. Barrack is intelligent, young, energic, he has stuck to the issues and laid his plans out for us if he is elected as our President. McCain has done nothing.

    He is not a socialist, nor a muslim. Those comments are ridiculous! I do not believe or word of it! Never did!

    Obama is the only choice!!

  21. I’m very much looking forward to voting for Obama on Tuesday!

  22. I (early) voted for McCain. The short reason why is that I prefer conservative politicians. I believe that he stands the best chance of governing in a manner that I approve of.

    Specific reasons:

    Economy: I have a similar view of the American Dream as “Joe the Plumber.” I don’t need the governments help to succeed, and I don’t want them to penalize me when I do so. Senator Obama wants to “spread the wealth.” That is a wonderful ideal for a philanthropist to work for with their own money, but a horrible thing for a politician to do with someone else’s.

    Foreign Policy: The war in Iraq is going very well thanks to Senator McCain and the support he gave to the “Surge”. I want to see that war wrapped up successfully and a permanent military presence established there similar to Germany and Japan. I want to see our success in Iraq followed through in Afghanistan. I don’t want to see Iran build a nuclear bomb. I want Israel to be supported if they have to defend themselves. I want Russia to be contained. I trust Senator McCain to do all these things. I trust Senator Obama to do none of them. With Obama I’m not sure what I’d get, either he’d take an extremely soft and weak line on foreign policy, or he’d feel the need to prove himself, go overboard, and invade Pakistan. It’d probably be a mix of the two but I expect it to be a mess.

    Abortion: Senator McCain is Anti-Abortion-Rights, Senator Obama is Pro-Abortion-Rights. The analysis is simple. In addition, Governor Palin as the Vice President could be a game changer in the abortion debate. She has lived a “Pro-Life” life and could be a powerful advocate of it’s message.

    Judges: Senator McCain won’t be perfect on judges especially with a heavily Democratic Senate, but I trust he will put moderate to conservative judges onto the bench instead of the liberal activist judges that Senator Obama would prefer. To put it in simple terms, McCain’s judges would be more likely to support the church’s side of upcoming legal arguments than Obama’s judges would.

    Patriotism: Senator McCain’s and Governor Palin’s view of America resonates with me. I don’t get the same impression from Senator Obama. The impression I get from Obama is: “America is the greatest nation in the world… Let’s Change it!!”

    Associations: I’ve been trying to do mainly positive points rather than negative ones but this one really is more of an Obama negative than a McCain position. Senator Obama has been comfortable associating with, allying himself to, and being mentored by very controversial and corrupt individuals in his life: Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Rashid Khalidi, Tony Rezko, and others. Either Obama is completely clueless when it comes to individual character or he is hiding a more radical core behind a moderate appearance. I’d prefer to not find out which of the two it is.

    Military Experience: I’ll finish on a positive note. This obviously isn’t a deciding factor for me, I voted for President Bush instead of Senator Kerry for example. But I will say that it would be much easier to support the war effort if it was led by someone like Senator McCain. He understands the military, their love of country, and dedication to their mission. He has put his own life on the line, he has proven his courage and character in the most trying of circumstances, and there is no doubt who most of our soldiers would prefer to have as their Commander in Chief. I agree with them and hope to see McCain elected as President.

  23. Not to be offensive but too many ppl think a black president will bring everything u desire in a president well i’m sorry but i dont’t think so. To be honest how much experience has he got at politics and such not very much ! he publissises a good campaign but really it’s the ppl behind him pushing his agenda so it will end up where he’s just as bad as the last president u pushed out of office!!!

  24. guy from uk,

    Well, speaking from my vantage point here in the states, I don’t think there are many people who think “a black president will bring everything u desire in a president.” (I’m sure there are some people in the African-American community that might feel this way, though.)

  25. I will reluctantly vote for McCain. I believe that the “fundamental change” that Obama has promised is moving toward more government control, higher taxes and less freedom. The government cannot legislate against greed. We as individuals have to uphold higher standards of personal conduct. What we need are better citizens and less governemnt.

  26. I am voting for OBAMA and I couldn’t be more excited about it. He has truly inspired me. We have a lot of politicians who are good at politics what we need is some who is a good man not just a good politician.

  27. I would say OBAMA is a pretty good politician. Broken promise about campaign financing; shifting rhetoric on trade depending who he is talking to; promising the world to his supporters in terms of “spreading the wealth”; refusing to break with his party during his brief time in the Senate; he threw his grandmother under the bus in his speech on race.

    Make no mistake, Obama is an exceptional politician.

  28. Ryan,

    So, no declaration of who you are going to vote for?

  29. I am a military retiree and VietNam Vet so Hussien Obama is not on my shopping list. Nor is McCain. Neither of them has addressed any real issues. Only one 3rd party candidate has. Chuck Baldwin. Constitution Party. Check his site then vote.
    Respectfully,
    Dana Shaw
    U.S. Army Airborne/SCUBA Ret.

  30. [Comment edited for spiteful assertions.] So thank god that Barack Obama won the election by a landslide [comment edited].
    Obama is NONE of those awful things you’ve called him and is not going to enact any of the policies that some of you extremists attributed to him.
    All I can say is welcome President Obama!!

  31. Sadly we have come to this.

    We will soon be an Obama-Nation.

    But why in the name of all living and good did he choose Biden as his VP? I think I am more fearful of Biden’s leadership than that of Obama.

    Well I will just have to console my wallet during its 4-8 year oppression.

  32. I rather have McCain then Obama, but now since Obama is in office. I guess there is no choice.
    Reasons:
    1) Obama is taking from the rich more, means they take away jobs from the poor and especially middle class.
    2) Obama plans on giving people in poverty more money, the money that us, the middle class work for. So technically, you don’t have to work to get money, since it will be given to you.
    3) Obama is planning to spend one TRILLION dollars from our taxes. So cutting taxes is almost impossible.
    4) Obama plans on taking troops home, so terrorist can now attack like 911. (Read up on the war, maybe everyone should too, since it shows you that a radical group is killing all peace and we are trying to help our allies from being slaughtered)
    5) Taking away money from businesses that are trying to thrive. I mean if you want to make money and get a lot of money, it won’t be worth it with more taxes, just because you are successful.
    6) And furthermore, if you let more illegal aliens in, you let the tourist in too.

    Obama needs to realize that not many people are good anymore, and when they make a huge mistake, like lie, cheat, or steal, they should be punished. It isn’t against their rights, we can’t give them more chances, they bite the hand they are fed with and right now America has lost an arm. So we need to start working on business and less on giving people money. They can work for it anyway, unless that’s too much.

  33. A year since the election. Just wondering…how’s that “hope and change” working out for you?

  34. Halloween was yesterday, troll…

  35. I’m offended. The question is a serious one and unlike a troll, I am not perusing blog sites trying to cause trouble; rather I am an avid reader of this site and though I have not chosen to opine in the past I am curious. A year ago many of the comments made here expressed the same sense of “buy in” to the Obama promises that swept the nation. Now it begins to appear that Marxist Mike in his facetious commentary way back when was closer to the truth than anyone could imagine. Sorry about my crude form in the previous post. It just seemed so fitting.

  36. I apologize if I offended you. When people make sarcastic remarks on long since dead threads, there’s usually a troll afoot. If your question was meant to be taken seriously you should’ve written it as such, not like some smart ass. Then again I’m merely a reader myself, so I’ll just slither away back into the shadows.

  37. Seriously, What is your take on the Hope and Change you should be seeing as a result of Obama’s proposed politics?

    I for one cannot see much of a differance, except those who were so loud about Bush sending troops to war are now quiet at Obama moving those troops and sending more into War.

    The best he has done is made me hope for change. As he (Obama) plans to take away all my money, to instill that hope for change… Sp’ange, you got sp’ange?
    -D

  38. In late 2008, after years of conservative rule, the economy was on the edge of collapsing in a panic not seen since the thirties (see http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/09/speech-less-tales-of-a-white-house-survivor/ ). While serious financial reforms remain to be made and while it will take a long time to dig ourselves out of the hole we are in, the anticipated end of the recession (http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/story.html?id=2155447 ) is welcome news.

    On the war front, it remains to be seen what President Obama will do in Afghanistan, but he clearly has moved in Iraq to wind down our involvement in a way that I would have not expected from either Senator McCain or President Bush.

    The obvious threat to “all my money” is not from a modest tax increase to trim the deficit or from a program to reduce the number of those without medical insurance, but from an unregulated Wall Street that has repeatedly shown its ability and tendency to bring down the economy not just of the U.S. but potentially of the whole world. The Taliban is unable to inflict as much damage as the gang on Wall Street and their enablers in Washington. See http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

  39. Leo, you can’t be serious?! First, conservative rule? Do you refer to Bush? It is a stretch to call him a conservative and congress was anything but. It was the likes of Frank and Dodd that led us into the housing crisis and that dominoed right through the financials who were heavily invested because they were forced to be. This stuff is easy to search out. All of congress is quilty of standing by and watching it happen, including our current President who was then a Senator. A couple of bias news stories don’t change the facts.

    You are right in your second paragraph however; It does remain to be seen what our President will do in Afghanistan. I’m sure that the men and women over there wish he would hurry up and make a decision.

    Please dude, dust off your copy of our constitution and read through it. The things you want big brother to do he just doesn’t have the authority to do and if the way he is handling the H1N1 virus is any indication of how he will handle the rest of our healthcare?…I would rather not

  40. I meant conservative in the sense of a passionate and in my view naive belief in wisdom of unregulated markets and the belief that we should dismantle the regulations set up to prevent financial panics that we realized we needed after President Hoover (R). The dismantling of regulations began in earnest under Reagan (R) and led to the savings and loan debacle. (see http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html). The deregulation continued through Clinton (D) and Bush (R) and their Republican and Democratic enablers in Congress, including Dodd (D), Frank (D), and especially Phil Gramm (R). From Alexander Hamilton (Federalist) to FDR (D) and until Reagan (R) it was believed that we the people have a right to regulate banking and corporate behavior.

    I would be very surprised if the Roberts court or any Supreme Court or Congress or President since in the last 70 years would agree with your constitutional views. As for the H1N1 vaccine, remember that it is being manufactured by the private sector and sold to the federal government as well as other governments around the world. Would you prefer that it be sold to the highest bidder in an unregulated market, like the ads you get for medicines on the internet that come from goodness knows where?

    When he was a Senator, President Obama, in contrast to so many others, argued for more banking regulations http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/422/create-new-financial-regulations/ I admit he was not as active as Ralph Nader, but he was definitely on the side of more regulation, not less. Not all regulations are good, of course, but deregulation is another name for anarchy.

  41. Leo,
    Tom is right, I’d rather not give the government authority over my healh and helthcare. Letting Government handle healthcare will only limmit our options, especially the way Obama keeps trying to press the health insurance Companies to pay for his idea and caping their ability to compete with Gov-care.
    At this point I just wish we didn’t go so socialist as we have with our government. We are so far from Lasse-fare…

    It ticks me off how there was such an uproar with Bush and his actions but when we see Obama doing the same thing there is silence from the same crowd.

    I can say there had been some dicesions theat Bush made that I don’t like but he at lease didn’t go against his political stance set in his election, like I see Obama doing. He is so crooked he talks arond corners.

    -D

  42. Leo,
    I’m sorry to tell you that Obama has been lying to us since the beginning of his campaign. It’s actually quite embarrassing that it took me so long to realize this. He is indeed a Marxist radical as he has demonstrated not only by the people he associated himself with before the campaign, but also through those he surrounds himself with in the White House. People like self proclaimed Maoist Anita Dunn, Chavez lover Mark Lloyd, Admitted communist Van Jones, Cass Sunstein, Ron Bloom, and the list goes on. He wants government control and to revolutionize America. That’s what healthcare is about, it’s only about more government power and socialism. These people are anti-free market, anti-constitution, and anti-personal liberty.
    Here is some truth that I found about the real motive behind healthcare. We should all watch it and take note.

    Oh, and regarding your misunderstood comments on regulating the banks, I would encourage you to read The Case Against the Fed by Murray Rothbard and Meltdow by Thomas Woods. They’re both very short and very informative about the corruption that government regulation and intervention creates.

  43. Tom,

    I will admit that I’m a bit disappointed in the first year. I am not at all pleased with the amount of spending that has taken place, and thought that Obama would be smarter than that. Unlike some that feel that the government is intruding too much into business, I’m actually glad that this is taking place for businesses receiving bailout funds. One of the problems with the Bush set of bailouts was the lack of oversight – that’s been addressed, albeit not in a way that many conservatives are comfortable with, but that’s what you get when a business should fail and gets propped up by the government. Sad thing is, with the government’s funding or not, many of these businesses just aren’t viable and will completely self-destruct eventually.

    I do feel it’s a shame that the wedge between the parties has been driven even further – at least where I live in Utah, people can’t rationally talk about politics. There’s a lot of Obama griping, but very little gets said in terms of the specifics of what he’s done that’s so awful. Mostly it’s speculating on healthcare reform issues and general griping that a democrat is in office. Because, truth is, he hasn’t really done a whole lot in his first year. Might be better that way, because there are problems that need to be addressed, and I don’t feel they are being addressed the right way, and I don’t think that would change regardless of who had won the election.

    Lastly, in full disclosure, my family has benefitted from Obama – we received the $8k first time home owner’s grant. That was very nice for us – my wife and I had great credit scores, money in the bank, and were debating whether it was time to buy a home. That incentive (plus UT’s $6k new home grant) made it a no-brainer.

    Marxist Mike signing off

  44. I agree with Mike that Obama hasn’t really had time to accomplish much other than set an agenda. I am old enough to remember when new presidents got a honeymoon period. This seems to last about a week now. Everyone seems to be hyperventilating.

    If anyone really longs for the good old days of unfettered capitalism, I suggest reading Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, which influenced Teddy Roosevelt quite a bit. You could also read up on the Great Depression (Utah voted for FDR) or you might try reading Jennifer Government, a dystopian novel about a libertarian future. You could even go back to the Articles of Confederation or the Whiskey Rebellion, which reminds me of the spirit of the tea-baggers.

    I don’t view my democratically and constitutionally elected government as my enemy, thought I don’t view it as perfect. The American Revolution was a protest against taxation without representation, not against any taxation once we had representation. It was a protest against domination by a foreign monarch, not against our own democracy. The founders of our country, and Joseph Smith himself, recognized the value of the government in standing up for the little guy against powerful private, moneyed interests. What was slavery, but the ultimate extension of unfettered capitalism, where, in the end, people own other people.

    Have we had problems with the Fed? Absolutely! As the Frontline program pointed out, Greenspan was a regulator who didn’t believe in regulation. He allowed the derivatives market to become a dangerous and opaque market, more like a game for insiders than a free market, more like a time bomb than an engine of growth. But he did so because he was a disciple of Ayn Rand. But ending regulation won’t make markets less opaque. The answer is better people at the Fed and the Treasury Department. We’ve had them in the past. It is not impossible to find good public servants, unless you believe government is inherently bad.

    Do we have problems with Obama advisors? Absolutely! Let’s talk about the big advisors, not the small fry, who are merely a distraction in my view. President Obama has put people like Geitner and Summers, associated with the Bush era, in key positions. He needs more people like Paul Krugman.

    Virtually every industrial democracy has found it necessary to mix capitalism with regulation. Too much government is bad, but so it too little. Our public sector has been starved and inequalities have increased as the post Reagan years have unfolded. One would think Latter-day Saints would be concerned about an unbridled capitalist system that increases social and economic inequalities.

    I do worry that President Obama has not put in place the regulations necessary to reform the banking system and the markets, which is job number one in my view (after the emergency resuscitation of the economy). And, as we all seem to agree, he hasn’t yet signaled his course in Afghanistan. Also, as a veteran I must say that my heart goes out today to those shot at Ft. Hood, as well as their families. We are all Americans.

  45. Just to make things clear, the person previously designated as Dennis is not me (this site’s administrator). To avoid confusion, I added a “2” to this person’s name: Dennis 2. If you join in again, “Dennis 2” and would like to use your own initial or otherwise modify your name, then please do so.

  46. Leo,
    I don’t even know where to start on correcting all of the misinformation and historical inaccuracies in your post. It would take more time than I’m willing to give. But one thing I can’t let go…how can you honestly argue that Alan Greenspan’s policies were a result of him being a disciple of Ayn Rand!? Do you have any idea who Rand was or what she stood for? Greenspan once agreed with her and even supported sound money backed by gold. He even wrote a great article in 1966 which supported that idea and blasted the Fed’s regulation of the money supply and massive deficit spending as, “a scheme for the confiscation of wealth.” However, he clearly no longer agrees with anything he said or what Rand believes because he completely contradicted his own article by enacting the very policies he spoke out against when he became chairman. It’s actually quite ironic. Claiming that Greenspan acted the way he did because he was a disciple of Rand is about as ridiculous as a Buddhist monk claiming to be a disciple of Christ.

    Please read the article
    http://www.321gold.com/fed/greenspan/1966.html

    One other quick thing. Do you honestly believe that slavery was “the extension of unfettered capitalism?” Where did you come up with such a silly idea? Please, in the future, educate yourself on a topic before commenting on it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: