A comment...

My dad seemed a little irritated, to say the least, when I told him I wouldn't be voting for John McCain. I'm sorry, but I just simply won't vote for someone who sounds like they will continue growing government beyond its means. If I knew Michigan was going to come down between Obama and McCain, I would probably come through for McCain, giving in to the fact that a vote for McCain is a vote against Obama. Unfortunately, though, it won't be close in Michigan (thanks for nothing, Detroit). The only good that comes from the fact that Michigan is going to Obama is the fact that I can now vote my conscience rather than my common sense. It's too bad that conscience and common sense don't always align, isn't it?

My Vote

By this point, I'm sure you've all assumed that I'll be casting my vote for John McCain on November 4. I'm sorry to disappoint all of you who thought you had me figured out. I in fact will not be casting my vote for John McCain come November 4. It is true that for the past few months I have been planning on voting for McCain. However, over the past few weeks John has done just enough to make me second guess myself. Of course I will definitely not be voting for Barack Obama, either, as his socialist policies of income redistribution and universal health care, along with his weak stance on foreign policy and complete lack of experience in everything besides campaigning are pretty good reasons to withhold a vote. That being said, I've got some thinking to do over the next 11 days about who I will cast my vote for, whereas I do have my mind made up about the rest of the ballot.

One of the largest factors that drove me away from McCain was simply his negative campaigning. Running for President is like interviewing for the most important job in the world. The potential employer that you're interviewing with is the American people, as it is us who will decide who to employ as the next President of the United States. In any other job interview anywhere in the world, a person with the interview skills of John McCain (or Obama for that matter) would be laughed out of the office. Interviewing 101: When interviewing, you want to describe for your potential employer what benefits you can bring to the company and how you will make the company more successful, both financially and socially. You don't go in there, sit down in front of the desk, and try describing why the other individuals applying for the same job shouldn't be hired. You don't point out their deficiencies, and you certainly don't point out what you believe to be their weaknesses. You leave figuring that out to the employer. All you do is lay out the facts about yourself, answer any questions the employer has, and go on your way. In this case, the call-back is the election. The results of the election reveal who the American people have hired as the next President of the United States. We should hire someone for proving their worth, not for proving the lack of worth of their opponent. Both candidates are guilty of this throughout the election, which is one reason why I will vote for neither of them. When I run for public office someday, I hope someone digs this writing up and calls me out on it if I go back on my values and resort to mud-slinging. It's killing what very little dignity our political process has left, and it disgusts me.

Along with the above reason, McCain's support for the ridiculousness that is the progressive income tax, along with his proposal that the government buy up mortgages from anyone who is struggling to make payments, coupled with the fact that he voted in favor of basically nationalizing our country's banking industry has proven to me that John McCain is no conservative (nice run-on sentence, eh?). Anyway, it's not that I think John McCain would necessarily drive our country in the wrong direction, but I definitely don't think that he would do much to take it in the right direction either. It's basically the stance that Jennifer Granholm has taken over the last 6 years...the idea that if I don't do anything at all, I really can't do anything wrong.

As for why I'm not voting for Obama, it should be fairly obvious at this point. Anyone who can think for themselves and do some simple math will see that Obama's policies don't add up. He's waffled on gun rights, he supports infanticide, shows weakness in foreign policy, wants to increase taxes on small business, redistribute wealth, socialize health care, and the list goes on. Both candidates are completely ridiculous, and I refuse to vote for either of them. I need a shirt that has portraits of each, with the words "dumb and dumber" stamped across their foreheads. I'll leave it up to you to decide which individual deserves each of the two fore mentioned adjectives.

Nicely said...

This is one of the best summaries on the implications of this election that I've found thus far. It's very, very long. It's also very, very good. If you care at all about voting on issues and based on rationality and reason instead of glamour and rhetoric, take the time to read this piece:

To the Undecided Voter

Let's Talk Taxes

Over the past couple of weeks, we've heard both Obama and McCain talk a lot about taxes. There's a lot of rhetoric, so let's try to sift through what's been said and figure out the reality and the reason behind the words.

First, we've heard Obama say time and again that McCain favors tax cuts for the rich because he supports extending the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts lowered the upper income bracket's federal income tax from 37% to 35%. Now, I'm not mathematician, but 35% seems like a heck of a lot of your hard earned money to be paying out in taxes. Now compare the 35% that the upper bracket pays to what I would consider the middle class. Those who make between $33,000 and $79,000 only pay 25%. So the tax burden of the upper class is still significantly higher than that of the middle class. So basically what Obama is saying is that, even though the upper class already shoulders the majority of the tax burden in this country, they're not giving enough of their hard earned money to the government.

The progressive tax system is a complete joke to begin with. Why should those who make more money pay a higher percentage? Just because they can is the answer we've been getting from Obama and Biden. Biden even went as far as to say the upper class needs to be patriotic and accept the higher taxes. The fair tax, or even the flat tax for that matter, would be a much more fair way of distributing the tax burden. If we simply had a flat tax, where everyone paid the same percentage, those making more money would obviously still be paying more. Let's just assume we had a 10% flat tax. Those below a certain income level would obviously still pay nothing, but for those that make $30,000, they'd be paying $3,000 in taxes. Someone making $100,000 would be paying $10,000. You make 3x more money, you pay 3x more in taxes. Seems like a more fair system to me.

Or, even better, how about the fair tax? Let's abolish the income tax altogether and get rid of the IRS, who is simply soaking up billion of budget dollars every year. A fair tax would be a federal sales tax that would fairly tax a person's buying power. A person who has the means to purchase more expensive items will naturally be paying much more in taxes. Not to mention, this would make it impossible for illegal immigrants to avoid paying taxes as well as solve the problem of people simply not filing taxes. There would be NO filing, and everyone would be paying into the system, no exceptions. The progressive system isn't fair to begin with, but apparently Obama thinks it's a little too fair to "the rich." What a joke...

Passing your piece of the American Dream puzzle

So what is the American Dream, anyway? Well, for everyone it's a little bit different - the substance of the dream, that is. The premise, and the only thing that is guaranteed, is simply the opportunity to pursue whatever it is that you want for your life. That is all the Dream really is. It's not a nice car, house, family, white picket fence, medium-sized short-haired dog, good health care, or good job. It's simply the opportunity to pursue any of the above, or whatever you may have your heart set on. So if the only thing guaranteed is the opportunity, is it then the responsibility of the government to provide the individual pieces of the American Dream puzzle to all? I would say not.

One candidate for President believes to the contrary, however. Not only does Barack Obama believe that the government should hold a person's hand their entire life, but he also is trying to provide for some by taking from others. If you have missed the whole "Joe the Plumber" issue, let me fill you in. Obama's plan is to give tax breaks to the lower and middle class while increasing taxes on those that make over $250,000 a year. For those that are having trouble doing the math, that simply means he's going to take money from those who have, for the most part, worked really hard to get where they are in life and give it away to the lower and middle classes, many of whom don't pay any taxes in the first place. Let me say straight off - I certainly don't want a tax cut, rebate, credit, or whatever, if the money is simply being taken from people who have worked hard and achieved success. Any middle-class person who accepts such a tax cut should be ashamed of themselves. I someday hope to be among those making more than $250,000, and if I do, I'll pay my fair share of taxes, as do most Americans. However, there is no reason that those who make more should pay a higher percentage. A flat percentage of $250,000 is already significantly more than the same percentage of $50,000. The wealthy already pay the majority of the taxes in this country, but apparently not enough in the opinion of Barack Obama.

On a separate note, Jack Hoogendyk completely owned Carl Levin in the U.S. Senatorial debate. Jack was well prepared and used the short amount of time he had to provide pointed and direct answers. Levin once again resorted to the blame game and directed all failures to the Bush administration, while even admitting that he secures a great deal of earmarks (reads wasteful spending) in the U.S. Senate. Levin has been a part of the problem and is certainly not part of any solution. He offered middle-of-the-road answers and failed to deliver any real proposals on how exactly he can make the life of Michiganders better. Jack made some common-sense proposals, such as making English the official language of government, educating people on health care rather than providing it for them, and redistributing education authority to those who actually know something about education. Levin is a joke, and should have been laughed out of the Senate a long time ago. Vote Hoogendyk for U.S. Senate on November 4.

Healthcare is NOT a right

Read this article. Posed are some very simple questions. What is a right? If you have the right to healthcare, don't you then have the right to three square meals a day, clothing, shelter, etc.? If the government doesn't have the right to regulate what we eat and where we live and the types of activities we indulge in, then healthcare isn't a right.