It's for that reason that I won't be donating my status to command you all to vote for the same person I'm voting for; I'd much rather you come to your own decision based on some critical thinking. Instead, I'm going to dedicate my time to letting you all know just what you're voting for when you place your ballot a certain way. Specifically, that "certain way" will be for the Republican ticket. So without further ado, if you place a vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin on Tuesday, you are also sending out the following messages:
You support political irresponsibilityTo be fair, some of my explanations have opinion injected into them, but the main points are 100% factual. This is what the campaign has done, and if you vote for them, you're essentially saying it's okay to use all of those tactics to win. I don't know about you, but that is not the message I want to send to our politicians--that it's okay to be so sleazy to win the presidency. And if you agree with me, I highly suggest that you consider sending the GOP a message by placing your vote for someone (anyone!) else.
Polls have been showing for the past few weeks that McCain's choice of Sarah Palin is bringing his ticket down. And this is for good reason: Palin was a completely irresponsible pick on his part, showing his complete disregard for the big picture ("Who will be able to handle the job should something happen to me?") and a fixation on pure politics ("Who will be able to rally the base and draw over bitter Hillary supporters?") I don't need to go into details; we all know that the cute little hockey mom is completely in over her head. On top of that, weren't the Republicans initially bashing Obama for being unprepared? And then they go on and select Palin--a woman who can't describe the Bush Doctrine, can't tell you specifically what papers she reads, and can't name any Supreme Court decision other than Roe v. Wade. McCain wanted a female VP? Fine. But it was an insult to all qualified candidates to pick Governor Palin. Hell, it was an insult to all women, and all Americans, in general. Yet, if you vote for McCain, you are completely cool with this.
You support Rovian tactics
I don't know about you, but I'm sick of this politics of fear and slander. I want to hear about what a candidate is going to do for the United States, not about who the other candidate was in gym class with. But the latter road is the one McCain 2008 chose to take, in part because it's exactly what defeated him eight years ago. William Ayers? Why don't we ask the people of Chicago, who have lived and worked with him for decades, what kind of person he is. Or, we could listen to this educator be compared to the guys who flew planes into our buildings by people who just heard of him. Then we can link him to Obama because they sat on a board together. Cool. As for Professor Rashid Khalidi? Oh no! He's a Muslim and Obama went to his party! I mean, seriously, who cares? That move especially is race-baiting and nothing more.
And most striking was the McCain camp admitting that if they talked about the economy they'd lose, so they'd shift the conversation to Obama's background instead. The American people weren't outraged enough over this. A presidential candidate essential said that he'd lose if he talked about relevant issues facing America and instead would just sling mud. This is inexcusable.
These tactics are an insult to our democracy and are all giant distractions. But, you know, if you vote for this ticket you completely approve of politics being handled like a cheap tabloid.
You're cool with repetition of lies and questioning of truth
The one thing that the GOP did during this campaign that angered me like nothing else was to encourage people to question the truth and to debate facts. I think I first noticed this when Palin couldn't give her opinion on the Bush Doctrine, and the defense from the Right was that the question was ambiguous. No, no it wasn't. I think I learned what a foreign policy doctrine was in 10th grade Global History. You cannot redefine a term when it suits you, and you cannot lead the American people to thinking that it's okay to debate facts. Because it's not. That's why they're facts. This strategy came up a number of other times, and I found it completely preposterous.
This is closely tied in with the belief that if you repeat the same lies over and over again that it will become true. How many times did McCain mention these phantom "fines" that exist in Obama's health care plan? And how many times did Obama say they didn't exist? But it doesn't matter, because if you say it enough...! Similarly, socialism? Good grief; Karl Marx is rolling in his grave. BOTH candidates are going to tax progressively (as this country has done for some time) and BOTH candidates have proposed health care plans to help the average American pay his or her medical bills. But Obama is somehow the socialist here? Get real. Furthermore, the US socialist party hates the man. But oh right...we can ignore facts nowadays.
And my new favorite: Obama wants to kill the American entrepreneurial spirit because of his tax plan. Palin doesn't obviously believe this; progressive taxation has never hurt this country in all of its existence. Oh, and if I recall correctly, the economy was booming under Clinton who was president before Bush's tax cuts. But it's fun to ignore that and say otherwise because it makes Obama seem like a scary red commie. Aye...
You want to help with the assault on science
This also ticks me off, for obvious reasons. America should be the science power of the world. We have the money and talent to always be ahead in technological achievement. So why does the GOP want to stifle this? First we had Bush vetoing federal stem-cell research multiple times because he likened it to "killing babies." No, no, that is not what it is Mr. President. And more recently we have John McCain blasting Obama (twice!) on an "earmark" for a projector, but failed to mention (or didn't know, or didn't care) that said projector was the core ingredient for a planetarium. And then there was Ms. Palin, mocking research with fruit flies while being completely ignorant of the fact that it is helping to solve autism (which, ironically, is what she was talking about when she made this comment).
How can we lead the world in science and technology if our leaders don't get it, and worse, are against it? Of course, this isn't a top priority if you vote McCain/Palin.
You also want to assist with the assault on achievement
In 2004 "liberal" was the dirtiest word in America. In 2008, they're trying to make it "elite". And what does elite mean? They haven't given a precise definition, but it seems to have something to do with being well-educated, well-spoken, intelligent, successful, etc. If you're not a good country boy like Joe Six-Pack then you're a raging liberal elite who raises your nose at everyone and wants to turn the country into an aristocracy.
But wait. John McCain is pretty elite. All Republicans in Congress are pretty elite. All of the big rich CEOs who often vote with the GOP are also elite. So what is up with this doublethink? I'll come back to that later. But why is there this assault on intelligence? I'm sorry, but I don't want Joe Six-Pack being the ideal American because Joe doesn't know what's going on. I want my leaders, and ideally the entire electorate, to be "elite" in order to make democracy most effective.
...Then again, that's me. If you vote GOP, well then, you obviously don't see this as a big deal.
You want to divide America
Palin loves "pro-America" parts of the country. One of McCain's managers believes he can win in the "real" part of Virginia. Is this painfully divisive or what? And isn't this coming from the same side of the aisle that blasted Michelle Obama for saying that she was "truly proud" of her country? That comment pales in comparison to dividing the US into real America (small-town flag wavers who vote Republican) and, I suppose, "fake America" (the homes of all those damn elite!) I mean, this is serious and offensive stuff here. I want a president who sees us all as Americans, regardless of political affiliation. I want a leader who won't use divide and conquer methods to win an election. But if you aren't in agreement, you know who to vote for!
The appeal to lowest (uncommon) denominator doesn't concern you
Pretty much everything said above can be tied to the McCain camp's tactic of appealing to the lowest common denominator. Let's take Joe the Plumber (ha!) for instance. This is a dude who misunderstood Obama's tax plan, which would actually help him out. This is a guy who doesn't have a plumbing license and who has had issues with paying taxes himself. Yet he's become a Republican icon, is allowed to lead rallies, and implied that Obama would mean an end to Israel. What?! Is this for real? But yes, it is, because McCain is trying to rally those people who fall for this stuff. And it's incredibly depressing.
To revisit my point above about the doublethink around "elite". Yes, all those people are elite, but the good ol' small town real American base doesn't see it. I mean, it's like they believe that McCain and the CEOs were educated in log cabins and live in shacks located in farm country. Give me a break. But then again, who can blame them? After all, they already believe that Obama and Ayers were terrorists bffs, that said friendship is more important than the economy, that fruit flies and projectors are a waste of money, and that we need to do away with the elite of the cities. And the McCain camp has been reveling in it. Instead of saying, "Hey, let's appeal to the bright members of society so they can lead 'the masses' to us," they go, "Well, the easiest thing to do is to get the mob of idiots on our side. Let's go!"
That, folks, is insulting. I want to be talked to my leaders like an adult, and not talked down to and fed lies and half-truths because they think I'm too dumb to comprehend. And you all should be insulted too. And if not...
Now to the Republicans. There's nothing wrong with being a Republican. I myself would probably be one if 1) they weren't obsessed with pacifying the Christian Right, 2) they didn't use all the tactics mentioned above, and 3) I didn't hate the US party system. But let's be very clear here: the current GOP, led by John McCain of 2008, has showed that it's no protector of traditional Republican ideals. What ever happened to fiscal responsibility and protection of states' rights? Why are we spending unimaginable amounts on a war we shouldn't be in, charging the taxpayers to "bail-out" Wall St., and trying to get amendments passed into our Constitution that restrict who can marry whom, what medical procedures a woman can get, and what adults can do in their bedrooms? Small government and fiscal responsibility? I don't see it. So I cannot buy the excuse that, despite all of the above, you're voting Republican because you agree with Republican ideals. Because the fact of the matter is that this party forgot what it's about needs to redefine itself, and it won't do so unless it sees defeat on Tuesday.
Barack Obama's platform contains elements that I fundamentally disagree with. It also contains elements that I am somewhat skeptical of. But he ran a relatively clean campaign focused always on the issues and hardly on distractions (how many times did Keating come up? McCain's infidelity? Hardly any). I respect the way he sold himself tremendously, and the contrast with McCain's tactics are stark. Even if I was a Republican, I don't think I could bring myself to condoning the campaign practices by giving them my vote. I'm not saying Obama is perfect, because he's not. But I just could not support John McCain this year, because doing so with be telling him that what he did to our election process is okay, and I don't want to see our country continue down that path any longer.
So don't vote for someone because you're friends are doing it. This election process has been long, but take a moment to consider all of its ups and downs. And then think about what your vote means: it is both an evaluation of how the campaign was run and a belief that the candidate will take this country in the right direction. The stakes have never been higher blah blah blah etc etc etc cliche cliche cliche. But think about it: the winner on Tuesday will set a standard for how campaigns are executed, how parties construct themselves, how America is seen on a global stage, where our foreign policy will go, and a host of other issues. Seriously...take some time out and determine if you're sending out the proper message to our leaders, your fellow citizens, and the rest of the world. It's pretty damn important.
