Change I Can’t Believe In
For me, the final straw when it came to Obama was public campaign financing. I don’t really understand the point of public financing per se; I think it’s essentially a phony-baloney hobgoblin used to “level the playing field.” However, when a candidate explicitly promises to accept public financing, and then makes an absolute one-hundred-and-eighty-degree turn on the issue, the only explanation being a puerile “McCain started it!” (even though McCain never even so much hinted at reneging on his promise,) then I cannot bring myself to support such a candidate. By the way, the real reason that Obama decided not to accept public financing was because he wanted more than the $85 million cap that public financing places on campaigns. Greed as usual.
I am tired of being hit with phony-baloney hobgoblins day in and day out by a sputtering campaign and it’s zombific followers. From nailbiting over “anthropogenic climate change” to self-wetting over “the world’s opinion of us,” Obama has effectively turned the lot of his supporters into weak, infantile, dependent followers who are desperate to have their hands held. What happened to the rugged individualists that define our great land? That’s one thing President Bush can never be accused of: being a follower. Obama’s cabal loves to claim that Bush and especially Karl Rove use fear to further their own causes, from foreign policy to the economy to national security. Just today, Obama demonized “Karl Rove-style politics.” Really? Is that the best that they can come up with? The most offensive thing that Karl Rove has done his entire political career was make some joke fliers thirty years ago, a mistake that he has profusely apologized for. Conservatives joke that liberals can find any calamity in the world and blame it on George Bush. If not Bush, then Karl Rove. It appears they can.
I am also tired of having my life’s judgment put in question every time I mention that I like and support Bush. I mentioned in a previous column that, as a tangential expression to Obama’s insinuation that “McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time” (which is pure obfuscation: 90% of the votes in the Senate are unanimous and procedural,) I agree with Bush about 90% of the time. Admittedly, I wasn’t hugely upset over Harriet Miers. My main disagreement with him has been immigration and North Korea, both of which I can understand where he’s logically coming from. I don’t believe Iraq was a bad choice, and I believe that in life things take a little more time when they need to be done properly. I also believe that one omission Bush did make was to not ride Congress hard enough when it came to outrageous spending decisions. However, like I said, 90% of the time, I agree with him. I have become accustomed to the eye rolls, the looks of disdain, the under-the-breath muttering. Whatever. I think that Bush has his heart in the right place. Do I think that Obama wants to make this world a better place? Of course. Do I agree with the means? Of course not. Do I feel comfortable with the people who Obama is attracting? Absolutely not. Anytime a candidate attracts supporters from Hamas to bottom-feeding “better than you” media mental midgets, it should raise a cavalcade of red flags. Obama seems, for the most part, kind and genial enough on TV, until he is asked a tough question, and then he spins, triangulates, and discombobulates to the point that I am left feeling confused, amused, and ultimately, hollow.
I refuse to be silenced in criticizing Obama for fear of being called “racist” at every turn. I refuse to be shoehorned into supporting a candidate I do not support. I refuse to be intimidated, to be subjugated, to be bullied into supporting this man. Obama is absolutely not now, not ever, change I can believe in.