Candidateless - no Obama, no McCain

• It is Democratic Party's turn to take the wheel.
• Danger of overcorrecting the course.
• Why Obama is not my candidate?
• Why McCain is not my candidate?

• Voting present over 120 times – while this is very rational from the selfish point of view (he has gotten much less heat about this then he would have gotten if he had voted one way or the other) and emphasizes his intelligence and rapidly acquired political wisdom it contradicts the role of the public servant. By voting present he clearly did not represent and serve the people that had elected him but rather served the advancement of his personal career. Does that make him a bad person? Not necessarily, but it certainly raises big doubts about his honesty – does he really mean what he says or is he saying things just to get votes?*
• "I was against the war" line – I believe the Iraq War was necessary (see Iraq war - many questions, one simple answer) and I do think Mr. Obama understands that, but he voted against it. So, why did he really vote against the war? If you think of it, given the conditions and the information available there are only three possibilities to explain his vote against the war:
  • Political ploy – a vote pro wouldn't provide any value in the future whereas a nay vote has great potential. A nay vote is beautiful: if in the future it becomes clear that the war was the right thing to do you are certain of one thing: countless young soldiers and innocent civilians will loose their lives in the war and you can always use those as a perfect shield in case someone attacks your nay vote; if it turns out that the war was not the right thing then you have suddenly discovered "oil" in your backyard – you can come out and proudly say "I told you so – you see, I am the smarter guy. I was able to pierce through the cloud of misinformation that the Government created and see the truth while you couldn't – next time you better listen to me!"
  • He had information others didn't – information that contradicted what the Government was feeding the people and the Congress, information that told Mr. Obama that Iraq did not pose a threat to us, that attacking Iraq was not the right thing to do. What is that information and where would Mr. Obama have obtained it?
  • He did not have the interest of this country at heart. This is the least plausible alternative. Spare the brainless nuts, it only takes a couple of years of living in this country for anyone with a brain to fall in love with it – yes, it is not perfect but there is no other country on this Earth of ours that can compare with it.
  Having listened to Mr. Obama's life story I am convinced beyond the reasonable doubt that his vote against the war was a carefully calculated vote, a smart ploy that has so far proved to be a gold trove for him. Yes, it shows he is smart but it also shows that he puts his own self interest above all.
• "I wrote a letter…" claim. So, Mr. Obama wrote a letter to Secretary Paulson two years ago warning him of the upcoming financial turmoil – he is a genius isn't he? He saw it coming and warned us but we did not listen! This is certainly another smart move – he knows that the letter will be ignored since it is a generic worthless piece of crap, but, he also knows that there is no downside to it, only a potential upside. If his "warnings" turn out to be nothing then no-one will ever mention his letter so his total cost is contained to the few minutes he spent writing it. Even if someone would mention his letter he can simply say that he is very happy to have been wrong but he did the prudent thing by warning the government. On the other hand, if he is lucky, as he in fact was, to be able to claim that he warned the government but the government did not listen then that would be gold for him. And gold it was! Messiah Barak now says – "I told you so; you did not listen and look what happened: a catastrophic financial crisis. Now you better listen to me if you want to save yourselves!". This is such an obvious political ploy that it really bothers me to hear him claim to be a hero. On this subject my aggravation is heightened by the lack of professionalism of the independent media. Are they just idiots and can't see the ploy or are there other reasons that they have overlooked such an obvious thing – I have yet to hear someone ask the question "what did your letter really say?", "why did you not make a bigger deal out of it when you saw that the Government was ignoring you?", "do you think you did all you could to protect the interest of the people that have elected you?". Should the media ask such questions the fallacy of his claim would become obvious. Now, to be fair, this little "game" may be considered simply a smart thing in Washington and Obama is playing by the Washington rules but I consider it dishonest and manipulative.
• The "hatchet" approach against the last eight years – it is likely that Mr. Bush has made plenty of mistakes in his 8 years in the office, maybe proportionally more than his predecessors – however, the use of the "hatchet" is irrational – the "scalpel" approach would be the rational one. Again here, I think Mr. Obama is not saying what he believes but what he thinks will give him the greatest political gain at the moment and that really bothers me.
• The choice of the Vice Presidential candidate, Mr. Biden. What's wrong with Mr. Biden? Mr. Biden may have been a great American – he may have great merits as well as flaws but I really don't need to spend my time analyzing those for there is one single thing that immediately disqualifies him and makes him completely un-fit to hold a public office. His son, the one that showed his face on TV and for whom Mr. Biden said that he was very proud of, has been a lobbyist in DC! If there are any despicable, parasites that do not contribute anything to this society but corruption and dirt those are the lobbyists. Mr. Biden had the audacity to state that "he has never worked with his son on that capacity" – all I can say to that is please, spare me… – if daddy wasn't there to trade favors the lobbyist son wouldn't have lasted a day in DC.

• Mr. McCain is at an age when he can be a great adviser due to his wisdom and experience but sad and cruel as it may sound, he is running on his last gallon of gas and unfortunately there are no gas stations where he can fill up one more time. We all have parents and grand parents who fall asleep in the middle of the conversation and I can’t help but think that Mr. McCain will be just like that shortly after he takes office – he is a hero but he is no superman. A senate seat for him is fine as he wouldn’t miss much if he sleeps half of the time but I view running the United States of America as an intensive, grueling 16 hour a day job and I honestly don’t believe that an over 70 year old individual is up to that challenge (I may think and feel differently when I reach that age bracket myself but not at this moment).
• - The choice of the Vice Presidential candidate – Mrs. Palin is good looking, charming and a hockey mom but unfortunately those attributes do not qualify her to hold a high office. Does the lack of experience bother me? No, absolutely not – in fact she has plenty of executive experience. What truly bothers me is her inability to formulate a rational answer to any higher level question (notice I am saying higher not high – by higher I mean anything above a hockey/fishing/hunting conversation). Beyond the bother, what scares me is the fact that she is a religious fundamentalist. A religious fundamentalist hockey mom may be ok but a religious fundamentalist with power is extremely dangerous no matter what the gender, the race, the nationality or the religion is.