I have on multiple occasions posted that I am neither a Democrat or Republican and that in fact is true. I am registered as "Undeclared" here to
keep my options open.
I have never truly cared for the two Party System we have and the way it is rigged to stop any hope of a 3rd Party or true Independent from being
able to effectively campaign.
Many here have treated Mr. Paul as if he was a 3rd Party Candidate, but the truth is that even if elected he would still be beholding too the Party
because he would be unable to win without them.
I had decided earlier on that I would likely vote for the Libertarian Candidate for two reasons:
I tend to lean their direction on more issues than the traditional Parties stances.
As a form of protest against the flawed system as it is.
Then along comes Barr, a Republican that is best known for leading the charge to Impeach Clinton over his commission of Purgery. He is by no stretch
of the imagination a Libertarian that I can see. To me that indicated that the Libertarian Party sold out its own principals to get a high profile
name on the ballots. I had to ask myself why and the answer comes back money. There is no chance of the Libertarians winning, so money is the only
possible explanation for selling out.
Being neither opposed in general to Democrats or Republicans and due to the fact that I base my opinion more on the individual than the Party, I had
to come to a decision other than to not vote which is unacceptable to me. With Barr being ruled out that leaves me with Obama, McCain or choices even
less palatable to me.
Then Obama does something that catches my eye and has great meaning to me because it seems to define his character or lack of it. He decided against
Public Funding! Now politicians changing their mind has little impact on me and in fact raises my opinion of someone if they are able to lay their own
beliefs aside and embrace the wishes of the voters. The old "flip-flop" argument is nonsense as any honest person is going to change over time as
they learn and grow. That is a desirable trait in fact, but this is different. This is a character only issue.
Obama is the FIRST candidate since 1971 to refuse public funding for the general election.
USA Today Article
By Emily Cadei, CQPolitics.com
Today's announcement by presumed Democratic nominee Barack Obama that he won't be taking part in the public financing system for the general
election has important implications for the presidential race...
...Obama is likely to have a huge advantage over his Republican rival by the time the conventions roll around. Taking public funding would neutralize
...Campaign finance reform groups are also disappointed. "We had hoped and expected that Sen. Obama would stick with the public pledge he made to
accept public financing and spending limits for the presidential general election," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21.
AS RECENTLY as November, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was unequivocal about whether he would agree to take public financing for the general election if
his Republican opponent pledged to do the same. "If you are nominated for president in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding
in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?" the Midwest Democracy Network asked in a
questionnaire. Mr. Obama's answer was clear. "Yes," he wrote. "If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the
Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."....
..."Senator Obama has long been a proponent of public financing of campaigns, and we are asking the FEC to take a step that could preserve the public
financing option for the parties’ nominees," said Obama spokesperson Bill Burton.
The Raw Story Commentary
...Barack Obama's decision this week to opt out of public campaign funding, breaking his earlier pledge to accept it if his opponent did, is
generating fierce debate.
For example, the Associated Press's Liz Sidoti has charged that "Barack Obama chose winning over his word ... and with that, the first-term Illinois
senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician."
Now that brings me to McCain and what I have come to believe about him.
He is far from perfect, but far closer to an acceptable candidate for my tastes. His so called "flip-flops" are all related to either his changing
stances on opinions over time or the fact he realizes he must sometimes act based on the wishes of the voters. None of his changes seem to be of the
sort that screams to me he is a liar as was the case with Obama's "flip-flops".
He appears to be an honest person even though I don't always agree with his stances. He has shown that if a majority of the voters oppose his views
he has flexibility. He has experience the best and worst life has to offer and came out a winner. He is not a elitists Ivy Leaguer like Obama or
pretending to be something he is not like Barr.
I've both read and listened to his infamous "100 year" comment to get it into context. I had no problem understanding what he truly meant and can
only assume those who did not are actually lying due to partisanship. He was just being a realist in stead of telling us what we want to hear; another
good trait in my mind.
There you have it. I'm going to vote based on character, which leaves only McCain. There is no candidate that reflects my views, so I'm left with
this, my only logical choice.
I'll also admit right up front that Obama's associations with shady characters and fanatics does play a part in my decision. To avoid the ridiculous
"Racists" accusations, I'll remind everyone that my Daughter (Ivy League School on a full scholarship and my pride and joy) is the same race as
Obama; half Black and half White. I am White so that should indicate my stance on Race. I am color blind and always have been.
Rather than another veiled flame thread, I would rather hear others reasoning as to who they are or are not voting for, in the form of statements
without arguments. I know that will never happen, but it would be interesting to read all the same.