Which Presidential Candidate Should I Vote For?

Which presidential candidate should I vote for in the 2008 election? A simple question that requires more than simple thought. Historical precedent dictates (with a few exceptions) that my choice is limited to only two presidential candidates. My choice is further limited by the fact that one candidate is a Democrat and the other candidate is a Republican. And still further limited in that there is by no means enough of a "political record" on the part of the Democrat candidate in which to make an "informed" voting decision. The same is true for the Republican vice presidential candidate that, due to the Republican presidential candidate's age, could wind up (if elected) assuming the role of the presidency at any time.

Then there's the question of political philosophy. Should I vote for a so-called Liberal (Obama) or should I vote for a so-called Conservative (McCain)? There are many Americans that believe, in their heart of hearts, that Obama is an out-and-out socialist (or even a communist) and that Obama has sympathetic ties to Muslim terrorists. Moreover, those same Americans believe that Obama would like nothing better than to see America, as they know it, destroyed. On the other hand, there are many Americans that believe, in their heart of hearts, that McCain is an out-and-out fascist and war-monger that will not hesitate to send Americans off to their graves in defense of corporate/capitalist interests. So, before I can honestly answer the question, "Should I vote for a so-called-Liberal or should I vote for a so-called Conservative?", I need to know exactly what a "Liberal" is and what a "Conservative" is. And my "need to know" goes way beyond looking up simple word definitions in a dictionary or political science textbook. Indeed, "my need to know" requires a careful examination of what the candidates have done rather than what they have said. That minority of American voters, that have held their noses and have undertaken the effort to scratch through the "politics-as-usual" crap know what John McCain has "done" and know what Joe Biden has "done". McCain and Biden have been U.S. senators for many years and, therefore, members of the Washington elite. Consequently, their voting records, statements in support of their voting records, and virtually anything else connected to their "politics" is easily accessible to any American that can read a newspaper or go on-line.

Prior to 1980, I was not affiliated with any political party. In 1976, I voted for Jimmy ('I'll never lie to you.') Carter. Like many American voters, at the time, I was sick of Watergate and I wanted to see a "fresh" face in the White House. Carter won the election and American voters thought that they got a "fresh face" in the White House, along with what appeared to be an honest and decent man. But Jimmy Carter's "fresh face" was about the only "fresh face" in the White House, for he was immediately surrounded with Washington Insiders and international elitists dictating policy to him. Indeed, Jimmy Carter's face turned from "fresh" to "stale" within a relatively short amount of time. In 1979 I had had enough of Jimmy Carter. Consequently, I registered as a Republican. I, subsequently, voted in the 1980 primaries and cast my vote for Ronald ('Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall') Reagan in the general election. Much like Jimmy Carter, I and many other American voters, perceived Ronald Reagan to be an "honest and decent" man with a "fresh face". Reagan won the election and as soon as he entered the White House he was surrounded by Washington Insiders and international elitists (one of them being his two-term VP) dictating policy to him. After Reagan served two terms, George ('Read my lips; no new taxes') Bush, Reagan's two-term VP and father of our current president, was elected president. George Bush had an impressive (within elitist circles) resume: a fighter pilot in WWII; an Ivy League education (Yale); Texas oilman; a Texas congessman; an American ambassador to the UN; an American ambassador to China; head of the CIA, the chairman of the Republican National Committee. The difference between George Bush and both Carter and Reagan is that George Bush was, from day one, a Washington insider and international elitist. Therefore, no one had to dictate policy to him. George Bush ran again only to be defeated by another "fresh face"-- an obscure governor from the state of Arkansas by the name of Bill ('I did not have sex with that woman'/I didn't inhale.') Clinton. Bill Clinton, the first baby-boomer to become president, served two very colorful terms as president. In some circles, he was even described as "the first black president". Clinton was loved by many Americans, but he was equally hated by many Americans. Indeed, many Americans viewed him as "white trash" and, partly, as a result, he was the second US president to be impeached by the US congress. Had Clinton not lied about having sex in the White House he might not have been impeached. And the interesting thing about Clinton's White House sexcapades (lest we forget our history) is that he was more discreet about his "affairs" than was JFK or LBJ (who even bragged about his sexcapades). As for our current president, George Bush (I call him El Presidente Jorge Bush) . . . I can say quite a bit. But for now I'll be kind and just say that George had a tough go at it and, as a result, the American people now have a very low opinion of him. I voted for George the first time around . . . but not the second time around. But please don't take this to mean that I voted for John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election . . . for I sat out the 2004 election for a number of reasons. One reason being that getting up off my duff, driving to the polls, and actually voting for either Bush or Kerry would have been an irrational and unconscionable act on my part. As you can see, I'm not a partisan.

When it comes down to prior political experience determining the success or non-success of a president, I'll say this: Lincoln served eight years in the Illinois legislature and one term as U.S. congressman. Woodrow Wilson was president of Princeton University and governor of New Jersey. FDR was a state senator for a brief period, assistant navy secretary, and New York governor. Harry Truman was a local administrator, a U.S. senator, and VP for less than three months before assuming the role of president. Dwight Eisenhower was a general. JFK served six years as a U.S. congressman and seven years as a U.S. senator. LBJ served twelve years as a U.S. congressman and twelve years in the U.S. senate and as VP under JFK. Nixon was VP for two terms and prior to that he was a U.S. congressman and senator. Gerald Ford served twenty-four years in the congress and was house minority leader. Jimmy Carter served two terms in the Georgia senate and one term as governor. Ronald Reagan, a former Democrat turned Republican, served two terms as governor of California. George Bush (Reagan's VP) served three years as a U.S. congressman and two terms as VP. Bill Clinton served as attorney general for the state of Arkansas and served as governor for eight years. Our current president, George Bush, was governor of Texas.

As to presidential appointments of judges to the various U.S. courts, history supports the following: All of the above presidents have appointed a number of U.S. judges that, on many occasions, expressed contemporaneous written opinions contrary to the political philosophy and actions of the president that appointed them. That's one of the advantages to being a U.S. judge as opposed to a politician per se: i.e., once a judge is appointed, he or she has leeway when it comes to expressing his or her true opinion. I venture to say that if presidents, senators, and congressman, expressed their "true opinion" to the American public, America would be on the verge of a civil war.

It would benefit the country greatly (and perhaps the rest of the world, too) if Americans were to crack open their history books and their "civics" books--and any other book, for that matter--prior to going to the polls and casting their votes for the next president of the United States. At this point, Americans need to take a long and hard look at themselves, in the mirror, in order to determine who and what they are, what they've become, and where they're headed. To not do so means that American's are content with engaging in a presidential "crap-shoot" every four years.

A Brown Commodity and the American Dream

During the trial, the media reported that Jaunita showed "no remorse" and at times there appeared to be "joy" on her angelic face and in her dark, pretty eyes.

Excerpts from Jaunita's statement to the jury:

I have suffered the process of jury selection, for throughout that process I noticed that virtually all of the potential jurors comprised the largest concentration of vacuous stares and ignorance that I have ever witnessed. The very few that exhibited anything more than a bundle of emotions were promptly dismissed and are no where to be seen in this courtroom.

The only difference between the prosecutor and the advertisements on the billboards that I saw, while dangling above Park Avenue, is that the prosecutor is less succint and colorful in his message. The prosecution is a walking, talking, self-promoting ad-man for the American justice system. And like all ad-men he relies upon deceptions and outright lies to sell his product.

Your American Dream shines on the surface and shimmers around its edges. And cast against the sullen backdrop of the world, your dream forms the perfect incongruity. But beneath its shining surface, your American Dream is stark in its darkness. Your dance to The Crap and Crackle Hop has deafened you to the torment of your conscience and the pleading of your soul. You Americans are very good at attaching colorful labels to things that you don't understand . . . all for the sake of convenience. But to understand requires much effort and careful thought. Understand this: I am not a little brown commodity.

No, I do not regret ripping Rich Bill's eyeball out of his head anymore than I regret my condemnation of the prosecutor, you the jurors, and your American Dream. You're so-called dream is an illusion brought about through the clever promotion and deception of the dream keepers. I now know that to achieve the American Dream requires much less honest sweat from the brow than it requires the abandonment of all self-doubt and the consequent leap over the threshold into the world of anti-doubt where one forever remains a slave to delusion and a procreator of deception.

You, members of the jury, have the American smirk of certitude all over your faces. And certitude is the most abject form of ignorance. And in your eyes is the look of pigs troughing at the heart of humanity. Solitude and certitude can never coexist . . . .

Juanita's ode to the jurors:

Journey down from your high top silly American race;

and look in your mirror at the lie on your face.

Citizens scaling mountains with gunny sacks

returning to their mirrors in their run-down shacks?

Those that break no commandments earn your scorn and hate

and those that break all commandments, live a prospered fate.

The angel that broke one commandment is in a filthy cell;

joyful and laughing; for a dirty white boy fell.

You stumble and bumble through life's cold uncertain mist . . .

Your solitude and certitude can never coexist

Rich Bill, a man of certitude (and a dirty white boy, too)

Rich Bill was so secure in the rectitude and certitude of his "mantra", and the philosophy contained therein, that he would take advantage of any occasion to espouse its tenets and demonstrate his contempt for non-adherents by pointing out to non-adherents what fatalistic fools they be. On one such occasion, while Rich Bill was in a lower-Manhattan "working-man's" bar with his corporate staff consisting of twenty-something MBA's, he overheard the man, sitting next to him at the bar, talking nonsense with a friend, about the-luck-of-the-draw and when your number's up, it's up! The man, sitting next to Rich Bill, was in his mid-to-later- fifties, and the right side of his face was deeply scarred and it appeared to have suffered severe burns, and part of his skull was "caved in". Rich Bill laughed and said to himself, "this pathetic loser looks like hell". Rich Bill turned to the twenty-something MBA, sitting next to him, put his hand on her thigh, his mouth up to her ear, and said, "listen to this fatalistic loser sitting next to me . . . he's a prime example of what can happen to you if you allow externalities to invade the equation of your existence". Rich Bill turned toward the man that looked like hell and shouted, "you make me sick!" The friend of the man that looked like hell immediately got up and walked over to rich Bill. "What did you say?" Rich Bill turned his head, smiled at his MBAs, gave them a wink and said, "Watch this!" He turned back toward the man and said, "I said that your friend is a fatalistic loser and he makes me sick!"