Tag: santorum

Why I will Vote for Obama in November

I am going to vote for Barack Obama this November, but not for the reasons most people will.  I didn’t last time.  I didn’t vote for McCain either.

I believe that Barack Obama has been a bad President.  He has shown little to no leadership, lack of backbone, a poor grasp of economics and has been in constant reelection mode since his inauguration.  He’s made a bit of progress, but hasn’t proposed real solutions to any of the big issues.  He’s spent huge amounts of money and continued to run up debt.  And before you say it’s the evil Republicans’ fault, Obama had a filibuster proof majority in both houses for a year and a half and still couldn’t get things done.

During Obama’s term, he passed health care reform, but only went half way.  Instead of leading, he outsourced all of the hard work to the very unpopular Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.  Whether you agree with Medicare for all or not, Obama could have passed it if he wanted to.  He also could have tried to push for fixing the root of the problem: that healthcare is based on use, rather than outcomes.  Instead we got Obamacare.

Guantanamo Bay is still open.  Even worse, Obama has presided over some of the largest erosions in our civil liberties in recent history, many of which are unconstitutional.  He signed a law that allows US citizens to be detained indefinitely in Guantanamo without a warrant, a trial or due process.  He’s authorized the assassination of US citizens who “support terrorism.”  He intervened in Libya and is thinking about it in Syria.

His TSA has introduced naked body scanners, pat downs of little kids and the elderly and is thinking about adding random TSA checkpoints complete with scans for cars on the highway!  The Orwellian “if you see something say something” is coming out of Obama’s government.  To not appear weak on terrorism, Obama has allowed all of this to happen under his watch.  If a Republican had been in office, the left would be HOWLING, but since Obama is a compatriot, the criticism in muted.

Obama’s justice department and SEC have let Wall Street do as they please, presiding over huge bailouts while leaving mainstreet to pick up the pieces on its own.  His administration has kicked the can down the road in just about every aspect of government, preferring to do the safe, hopefully crowd pleasing move rather than actually lead.  Afghanistan is still raging and seems to be getting worse by the day.  Our spending is out of control and our debt situation will be like Greece or Spain if interest rates ever rise.  To me, his biggest success is that he’s gotten us out of Iraq.

So all of that said, why am I going to vote for Obama in November?  Because since about 2008, the Republicans have been an unmitigated disaster.  They’ve pushed out the moderates and become the party of fear.  They’ve become anti-intellectual and incredibly social conservative.  Instead of a primary, they’re hosting an old school Christian religious revival, looking for other people to blame.  Illegal immigrants, Barack Obama, Islam, gays, college students…”others.”  This is a very very dangerous path to go down.

That Santorum, a guy who lost his home state by 18% points a few years ago, and Gingrich, who was thrown out of the House of Representatives for ethics violations, are mainstream and winning states in primaries is shocking.  Republicans are selling old policies, fear and religion.  Many have much more in common with the Islamist fundamentalists than they would ever like to believe.  They’ve started a war on contraception, gay rights and morality.  We have candidates that say with a straight face that the devil is attacking the US and that we shouldn’t have a separation of church and state.  We have states that are requiring candidates to sign anti-premarital sex pledges.

Unless something crazy happens, Romney will face off again Obama for the Presidency.  He is more moderate than the other Republican candidates, but he’s decided to practice the anti intellectual, pro Christian, politics of fear that the rest of the candidates are using to try to win the Republican nomination.  I don’t think Romney has much to offer as a President.  I admire the work he did with the Salt Lake City Olympics, but I don’t think he will actually make the big changes we need to save the US.  He’s not a transformational leader.

He’ll make some changes, while trying to get reelected in four more years.  We don’t need that.  We need a leader, someone comfortable saying that we need big changes and actually implementing them.  Someone who’s willing to go after vested interests on both sides and tackle our long term problems.

Romney won’t do it.  He’s going to try to get reelected.  And I have no idea what he really stands for.  I had hope for Obama, but instead he focused on getting reelected and staying popular.  Maybe as a lame duck he will find his convictions?

Probably not.  Obama will likely stay on the same path.  But there’s a 10% chance he says “fuck it, I’m going to do it my way” and actually lead.  We need motivation, inspiration, an “ask not what your country can do for you” moment.  Someone who will not be beholden to vested interests to take on the military industrial-Wall street complex, plus social security, health care and our national debt.

I’m fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  I don’t agree with Obama economically on the vast majority of issues.  But I’m going to vote for him because Romney and the Republicans are going down a road that I find despicable and don’t think they are the transformational leaders we need. I’d rather take the small chance that Obama can be  a game changer, because I don’t think he can really do much worse of a job.  We’re already beyond the point of no return for spending/reform, so any extra spending Obama does wont really hurt much, it’ll just make our day of reckoning a bit sooner.  His lame duck status might actually help him lead because he won’t have to worry about reelection.  Romney will.

In short, if Obama wins, he might do what he said he would in his first campaign.  If he doesn’t he can’t hurt much more than he has.  And it clears the way for potentially transformative Republican candidates to run in four years.  People like Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie or other potentially game changing figures.  If Romney wins, we’ll be stuck with him as the Republican candidate for the next 8 years.  We need a huge change and Obama is our best choice.  For now.

What do you think?

Santorum: The First Ungoogleable Presidental Candidate?

Rick Santorum finished a surprise 2nd place in the Iowa Caucus yesterday after gaining a ton of ground in the past two weeks with a huge grassroots campaign that took him to every county in Iowa.  Santorum finished a surprising 8 votes short of front runner and establishment candidate Mitt Romney and did it with lots of handshakes, personal events and groundwork, all the while spending almost no money.  He spent $20 per vote, compared to $480 for Rick Perry and $155 for Romney.  He also did it by eschewing the Internet, twitter and other new media.

Now, as the American electorate is being introduced to Santorum, their first reaction will be to run over to Google and type in “Santorum” or “Rick Santorum.”  Many will not like what they find, but not just for political reasons.  If they Google “Santorum,” the first 2 results and 6 of the 10 results on the first page will refer to the aftermath of a specific sexual activity (full definition of Santorum here, I warn you, its really gross).  If you Google “Rick Santorum” #3 refers to the same activity.

Santorum got its alternative meaning in 2003 after he made anti-gay comments, including comparing being gay to bestiality.  Sex advice columnist Dan Savage proposed renaming a sex act with Santorum’s last name to forever stain his name with his antigay comments.  I remember reading the original columns in The Onion and thinking it was pretty funny, but never thought that the campaign would actually catch on like it has.  Savage set up a website and it quickly went viral.  I cannot hear his name without thinking of the other meaning and now Google is introducing millions more to the alternative meaning.  Savage offered to take down any references to the other meaning if Santorum stopped his anti gay rhetoric and then donated $5m to marriage equality causes, but Santorum turned him down.

So what does this mean for Santorum the candidate?  And what does his story mean for the rest of us?  I think Santorum’s original comments in 2003 ruled him out from winning a Presidential election, so in the grand scheme of things, it won’t really change his chances of winning.  But it does make him answer uncomfortable questions.  And I think it’s the start of a trend.

Google and other social media have become such powerful tools, especially for people with influence.  It shows that if you piss off the wrong people on the Internet, you too can be synonymous with something equally disgusting.  Before, people were accountable for only what people could remember, or what they could find in librarian’s archives.  Now, anyone with a voice can share their opinion.  And their opinion is there forever.  Google and the Internet never forgets.

What happens when my generation decides to start to run for office?  We’ve had Facebook, Twitter, blogs and personal websites since our teens.  It’s going to be really easy for people digging up dirt to find photos of us wasted or doing stupid things (more likely both at the same time.)  What about old status updates and non-mainstream political ideas?  Bad jokes we made to friends that can be taken out of context?  We’ve all got it and if you don’t you’re either incredibly private or really boring!  People will either disqualify presidential candidate with these “problems” or they will realize taht everyone has similar posts and decide that it’s just part of life.  I sure hope it’s the former or we’ll have some really boring people in office!

The other issue that’ll affect all of us, not just politicians, is that the Internet never forgets.  Before the internet, we could reinvent ourselves, change our opinions, do dumb things when we were young and nobody besides the people involved would know your past.  We could start fresh.  It’s part of what made us human.  Now our past is all out in the open for anyone to find. From blogs to twitter to tumblr and now the Facebook Timeline, anyone with enough time or curiosity can find exactly what I thought in 2005 via my Facebook Timeline, my political views in 2007 via my blog and dumb things I tweeted to my friends in 2009.

In the past, we could change our opinions when presented with new facts.  In fact, that’s the most admirable trait that I think someone can have.  Now, if you change your opinion, you’re branded a “flip-flopper” or you “don’t have strong convictions.”  I think that’s bullshit.

Eliminating the ability to change and reinvent ourselves is going to be a really big change for humans.  There’s no way to put a wild past, a flirtation with a non-mainstream ideology or simple youthful exuberance behind you.  There’s always a record.  I’m not suggesting that it’s good that people can lie about their past, but I don’t think its healthy to be able to get as specific as the internet allows you to.  And Santorum is  one of the first public figures to experience our new reality.