Monday, September 29, 2008

The Pissed Vote

I still don't like John McCain. He has kicked conservatives in the nuts far too many times for me to believe he's changed in a few months and it's time to jump onto the Straight Talk Express. Even his pick of Sarah Palin, while encouraging, was not enough.

But now that the polish is off both candidates and their respective VP picks, I can start looking at each individual and deciding their pluses and minuses. Obviously, I find myself more in agreement with the McCain/Palin worldview, than the "change" that Obama/Biden would bring. But it comes back to McCain and his tendency to get all bipartisan (which means hand jobs for his Democrat pals), as well as Sarah's lackluster abilities so far in hostile interviews (although the debate is still important and could make me waver). So that still didn't convince me.

The fact that the third party candidates have all turned out to be cheese dicks (Cynthia McKinney included, despite anatomical confusion) has not convinced me to vote McCain either. Had there been a third party candidate that I could get behind, I would have dedicated every other post to getting his (or her) message out. But the one I agreed with the most was Bob Barr, and he still seems to think our troops in Iraq are "occupiers." So for trying to court the Paulistas, I'm left adrift.

Which brings me to Ron Paul and my point. Of the candidates in the Republican primary, the one I agreed with more than most was Ron Paul. But besides his isolationist tendencies, which meant I would never vote for him, his biggest problem was the fanatics who surrounded him. We are often known by the company we keep, and the people we attract. And it is the kind of supporters of Obama that I've encountered that have made it clear what I will do come election day:

On Election Day, I will cast my vote for Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin!

Now this doesn't mean I won't hold them up for scrutiny, criticize them, or cease being objective. I'm still way too cynical to trust McCain to get it right.

However, the viciousness and fanaticism which has been leveled against McCain and Palin tells me several things:

The left honestly fears what will happen should they be elected, and fears their chances are good.

They fear that Barack Obama, despite what they say, doesn't possess the ability to stand up face to face to McCain and win a fair fight.

They are so fanatical that they ignore anything that doesn't fit their worldview and don't seek anything resembling the bipartisan crap McCain keeps annoying me with.

So I want to thank Toad and Shaw specifically, as well as the crazier liberal elements in the blogosphere and the mainstream media. This was a decision I didn't want to have to make, but you guys just pissed me off enough to make it easy. On election day, I probably would have sucked it up, voted for the lesser of two evils, then posted my final decision, making people doubt my vote to the last minute. But now, in the face of fanaticism that knows no dialogue, with those who want to define everything as a battle between left and right alone, to appease those who do not know nuance, I choose a side.

Now back to the bailout bullshit. Ugh!

22 comments:

Dave Miller said...

Patrick, I could actually vote for McCain, in fact I did in CA when we had an open primary.

However, I believe a President must pick a qualified person to be VP. Even more so in this instance.

An objective person would be hard pressed to see Palin as qualified.

Nice, energetic, a quick learner for sure. But those are great qualities in someone interviewing for a regular job. Not the Presidency, which given McCain's age is a very real possibility.

That decision alone makes a McCain/Palin ticket unacceptable if you believe in country first.

Obob said...

As I look as the stumbles of Palin, I'll wait till the debate. I've been married to long to underestimate a motivated woman. Not to mention her abuse from Tine Fey and company. The subtle insults are not ignored by women. I know I don't have ovaries, but ya'll have one of ribs and I haven't come back for it yet, so I get an opinion.
my spider senses are on DEFON pi

Shaw Kenawe said...

"...as well as Sarah's lackluster abilities so far in hostile interviews..."

Hostile interviews?

Katie Couric pratically put Palin over her shoulder to burp her! Couric was incredibly gentle and respectful.

And I don't take any responsiblity for your choice of McCain/Palin. None.

You vote for the people who most closely reflect your values. It has nothing to do with my criticisms of the McCain/Palin ticket.

Being hostile to the opposition goes all the way back to George Washington's second administration.

If you think the interviews with Palin were "hostile," you can be grateful she didn't live in the latter part of the 18th century.

I agree with dave miller. McCain's choice of Palin showed a reckless disregard for the country.

McCain's a known gambler--he made a huge gamble on going with Palin.

We have yet to see if he gets the big payoff for it.

So far, she hasn't brought independent or Hillary voters to the ticket--those are the voters he needs to win the election. And her approval ratings have tanked.

Only the Republican base loves her.

You apparently are a part of that.

Good luck.

Bob said...

"The Pissed Vote"

That's to freaken bad!
Sorry, but we can't always get what we want. Maybe you should vote for Obama.
Would you rather adopt the Marxist cause of the class struggle, the utopian fix for all way? And become part of a unified coalition of the socialist countries around the world, in the hope that mankind can find Obama’s “collective redemption”?
Maybe concider that!

We’re Americans. We are our own government, and we, the electorate decide what course we will take. So YOU deside, Do you want Obama's "change"?

Shaw Kenawe said...

After thinking about your post, Patrick, again, I'm struck by the admission that you were convinced to vote for McCain/Palin because two liberals pissed you off?

That's a reckless reason for anyone to make a decision that will affect the country for the next 4 or more years. And it's also silly and petty.

I'm voting for Obama because:

He has demonstrated time and again he can think on his feet. More importantly, he has demonstrated he will think things through, seek advice and actually listen to it.

Obama is a gifted speaker. But in addition to his smarts and energy, possibly his greatest gift is his ability to inspire.

For eight years, American politics has been marked by smears, fears and greed. For too long, we've practiced partisanship in Washington, not politics. The result is a cynicism every bit as deep as that which infected the nation when Richard Nixon was shamed from office and when Bill Clinton brought shame to the office.

This must end, but John McCain can't do it. He can't inspire, nor can he really break from a past that is breaking this nation.


This was eloquently put not by me, but by a staunch conservative newspaper in Stockton, Calif., that has not endorsed a Democrat for the presidency since Franklin Roosevelt.

Bob said...

Dow Plunges 700 points After House Rejection of Bailout Bill.
Are you dingbats happy now?

Toad734 said...

FYI: The troops are occupying Iraq. They aren't there on vacation and they weren't invited.

So you like people like Charles Keating, John Hagee and Rod Parsley? And you think Palin is ready to be President?

Fanaticism against McCain and Palin? Is that a joke? All the straight up lies put forth by the McCain campaigns ads, all the crazy preachers endorsing McCain, and all the same scare tactics used by Rove and Bush against Dems and even McCain from the past 2 elections and you think it's the Obama campaign that is vicious?? What color is the sky in your world?

Yes we fear what will happen if McCain continues Bush's financial and foreign policies and have an even greater fear of Palin becoming president because she can't keep her legs closed and eats moose burgers because that's all the qualifications she has.

The debate was a fair fight and McCain, despite being such and expert in pronouncing names, I mean, in foreign policy, couldn't even win that debate against Obama. Imagine how he will do when they actually talk about economics or constitutional law?

Ditto, ditto as far as your world view is concerned. Liberals are actually the ones who incorporate new ideas into their world view it’s the conservatives who shun anything outside of the 10 commandments.

It's your funeral. Vote for McCain if you like although I don't think it will make a difference but if it does, I will start selling the "Don't blame me I voted for Obama" stickers.

Oh, the bailout failed yet my credit card still works. Kind of reminds me of how there were no WMDs in Iraq, a war McCain said would be quick and easy.

shaw kenawe said...

Someone hurt the House Republicans' feelings so they give a huge FU to the country.

Stock market is down 700, and it's only 3:30 pm.

We're all eating the shit sandwich now.

Thank you GOP.

Bob said...

"Thank you GOP"

Thank you Pelosi

This is very important.
We HAVE to look at the bigger picture.
Americans are going to get killed Financially, people will lose their jobs, not be able to get loans, credit cards will sky rocket.
This is no time for playing sides

Patrick M said...

Dave: As I have listed, there were many things holding me back from voting McCain. Sarah has a little more to get up to speed on, but compare her to the Marxist (Barack Obama), and he's been working on getting his policy straight for a year and a half. So unless McCain takes the William Henry Harrison route, she'll have plenty of time to get up to speed.

However, considering the alternative is The Marxist, it makes my decision easy.

Obob: Except for those already committed to The Marxist, I think most people will get surprised in the debate. I'm just wondering what Biden's gaffe will be....

Bob: You summarized the choice of those who seek to elect The Marxist perfectly:

Maybe you should vote for Obama.
Would you rather adopt the Marxist cause of the class struggle, the utopian fix for all way? And become part of a unified coalition of the socialist countries around the world, in the hope that mankind can find Obama’s “collective redemption”?


As for the bailout, it's failure is a victory for conservatism. Especially if it doesn't solve the problem and is just another socialist-inspired bill. Hell, even The Marxist backed off from supporting it. Which means he'll probably vote 'present' when it gets to the Senate.

Shaw: You know the general direction I was leaning anyway. Your inability to have a reasoned discussion about your political opponents in defense of The Marxist has merely clarified my positions.

But since you want to know my reason to vote for McCain:

He wants to simplify the tax code (and may be willing to go FairTax with some arm twisting).

He will continue the fight in the war on Terror, and will command fear and respect from our enemies.

He will fight with the political establishment as he has done many times before, only this time with the power of the veto.

He understands the meaning of the words duty and honor.

He will pick judges and Supreme Court justices who follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

He leans toward more free market solutions rather than government programs.

I'd go on, but then everyone will keep commenting while I keep typing.

Also, no need to blame the GOP. Considering it's a Democrat majority, a unified party can easily pass anything they want.

Toad: I can always count on you for the moonbat response. Suggestion for the future: If you don't just vomit forth the same old shit, you can persuade people better.

And the proper term is "Liberators."

Bob said...

Patrick M said..."As for the bailout, it's failure is a victory for conservatism."

The conservatives may think so...but just wait until this effects them. They think it's all about BIG GVT. But it's not, it's about everyone.
Not just the little schunck that bought a house that he couldn't afford, like many people think!

Wait til they look at their 401's and their IRA's
Then they will come back and change their minds...

Patrick M said...

Bob: It's about solving the problem, not just "doing something" like we've done before. The fact that the "bipartisan" deals keep crashing is an indicator that they're loaded down with shit. I understand that there are risks, but if you've noticed, the last couple of banks to go under got bought up really quickly.

This is what sets broad principles apart from the quick fix theories. If we merely rush through a fix, we're going to have this problem come around and bite us in the ass again.

Throwing Stones said...

Patrick, I can't agree with you at all.
I think this is bad news. McCain chose to make a high-profile spectacle of suspending his campaign in order to press for the package. I think the failure of the package will come back to haunt McCain and virtually ensure the election of Barack Obama. Obama is a statist who does not believe in free-markets. I think we'd have been better off with the bailout and a President McCain, than with no bailout and President...ugh, I can't even bring myself to type it.

Patrick M said...

Stones: It's good news as far as the fate of the country is concerned, but you're probably right about McCain stepping in it by rushing back to Washington to save the day. The Marxist will probably be hanging this around McCain's neck on the next debate. One of those advantages of voting 'present' i guess.

And for future reference, if you just want to call DingleBarry The Marxist, we'll all know what you mean and it will annoy the libs that much more. Although I like the name DingleBarry too.

shaw kenawe said...

The Marxist will probably be hanging this around McCain's neck on the next debate. One of those advantages of voting 'present' i guess.

And for future reference, if you just want to call DingleBarry The Marxist, we'll all know what you mean and it will annoy the libs that much more. Although I like the name DingleBarry too.



Annoy us? No. It just gives us more evidence for why the country is fed up with the Right. Why twice as many people are registering as Democrats as they are Republicans. The country is fed up with being led by petulant cry-babies who can only stamp their feet and call people names when things don't go their way.

When you guys get stressed, you bring out your best ammunition:

Name-calling.

Just like powerless 10-year olds do.

Nice going, kids.

Patrick M said...

Oh, if you're wondering, I've resorted to namecalling because I'm tired of hearing it in other places:

John McCain is a reckless, selfish politician who wants the presidency so desperately that he would foist this uninformed, babbler on America.

...said more about him and the sort of snarling, petty man he would be as president than it does about [The Marxist].

They're putting more lipstick on the pitbull hoping her fans keep up the nutty idea...

JOHN MC CAIN, LIAR (title)


That's just a sample of what I find on your site. There'd be more, but most of the time you quote other namecallers instead. So if I'm resorting to childish shit, I sure as hell didn't start it.

Plus, since The Marxist is a Marxist, it's a label and not namecalling. Now DingleBarry is namecalling, bit it's funny. I probably won't use that incessantly, though.

Toad734 said...

I keep asking the same questions until I get answers.

You think Palin is ready to be President? Why, because she used to look good in a swim suite and can see Russia from her house and sounds like a Canadian?

And exactly how is Obama Marxist and McCain isn't? The bail out McCain is crying about isn't Marxist? Pelosi isn't allowed to speak isn't Marxist?

Patrick M said...

Toad: Okay, here's the answers:

You think Palin is ready to be President?

Probably. She seems to have done well first as mayor and then as governor of Alaska. She's also to the right of McCain, which is a positive. However, I want to see her in the debate with Biden before I can answer yes to that, as there's still more to learn about her.

And exactly how is [The Marxist] Marxist and McCain isn't?

The Marxist favors wealth redistribution, government solutions for virtually everything (health care, jobs, the economy), class warfare, a similar worldview to people like Rev J Wright (I'll put some side-by-side quotes up on a future post), a history of affinity with Marxist professors, and a funny name (just kidding on that, but I'm just quoting him on that).

McCain doesn't.

The bailout (as written by either Congress or the Bush administration) amounts to a power grab by government. Bush is wrong, McCain is wrong, Nazi Pelosi is wrong, and The Marxist is wrong.

shaw kenawe said...

Probably. She seems to have done well first as mayor and then as governor of Alaska.

Probably? PROBABLY? Many of your rightwing elites see her for the fraud and intellectual cipher that she is. And you say probably? She has shown not one iota of knowledge on any of the important issues facing America. Her answer to the $700 billion crisis on Wall sTreet was astounding. Not only did she not know the answer, she didn't even understand the question.


You think that leaving the village of Wasilla up to its ears in millions of dollars in debt is doing well? Where's your good Republican fiscal conservative creds here? Or are you ignoring that fact? And Alaska gets more federal dollars than any other state in the Union. Not bad for a state that has fewer people in it than the bleachers at Fenway Park hold.

But don't let facts get in the way of your ideology.


She's also to the right of McCain, which is a positive. However, I want to see her in the debate with Biden before I can answer yes to that, as there's still more to learn about her.

You completely ignore her abyssmal performance in the Gibson and Couric interviews? Again, let's not let reality get in the way of your illusions.

She. Knows. Nothing.

And you think this is a positive for a potential president of the most powerful country in the world?

Let's hear it for promoting underachievers and ignorance.

You are dishonest with yourself if you truly believe stupidity is the best way to achieve excellence in America.

Toad734 said...

She was governor of a state whose main source of revenue was oil when oil was trading for $140 per barrel, for a year an a half. I could run the fourth leas populous state if oil was trading at $140 per barrel!
I think you are going to get your answer on Thursday.

Exactly, wealth distribution, taking taxes from me, who is not wealthy and giving it to major corporations and rich people. Or you could say, the rich getting richer over the last 50 years, the poor getting poorer and the middle class seeing the their value fall, while cutting taxes on the rich is also wealth redistribution. How is that not wealth redistribution but paying for a kid to have brain surgery is? If you are against wealth redistribution in this country then you have to be for more government regulations on the financial sectors and against the outsourcing of jobs overseas and taking away the job of an American making a living wage in order to give a rich CEO a raise and then forcing that worker to go work for wall mart for a quarter of what he was making selling the products he used to make which are now made in China with child labor. That is wealth redistribution! Not putting more money into education by raising the taxes of the richest one percent who are now twice as wealthy as they were 10 years ago.

McCain favors the bailout which is wealth redistribution from the common tax payer to the riches people in the country. That's Marxism! I love it how you people think it's only Marxist when money flows downward but when it flows upward it's somehow a capitalist free market. Give me a break.

Patrick M said...

Shaw: Yes, probably. That means a lot depends on that debate.

As for the interviews, I haven't got around to watching them in detail, so....

You are dishonest with yourself if you truly believe stupidity is the best way to achieve excellence in America.

Marxism IS Stupidity, thus I vote against The Marxist.

Toad: You make it so easy....

...cutting taxes on the rich is also wealth redistribution.

Uh, no. How does not taking someone's money involve redistribution? Redistribution is when the government uses force to take money from one group and give it to another. Any across-the-line tax cut, therefore is good.

The Marxist, on the other hand wants to "cut" my taxes. One problem, though. I don't pay any. So he favors wealth redistribution.

McCain favors the bailout....

So does The Marxist. It's a lose-lose situation there.

Lost interest.

Dee said...

Dave:
How can you say that about Palin when Obama has the same or arguably less experience and he's on the top of the ticket?? Its insane!!

Also, I bring up my Teddy Roosevelt analogy once again. I'm sure many panicked when he became president but he more than rose to the occasion.

Patrick:
Its the same for me except I could never stomach Ron Paul at all. And I don't consider myself as voting for McCain, I'm voting for Sarah Palin. And our country cannot afford Obama when it comes to our pocket book and our national security.