Most of our votes, here in the US, are a selection of the lesser of two evils. 2008 has the potential to be a unique and promising year. Thus I am compelled to voice my political viewpoint without being asked.
After watching Obama's Ebenezer speech, I was left impressed. His call for unity of all people makes a lot of sense. Unlike many speeches, Obama did NOT criticize other candidates. I think he really hit the nail on the head when he spoke of a moral deficit and an empathy deficit in our country. In my own life and in those around me, I see a need to look at the underlying causes of physical or superficial issues. I believe this is true in our country as well. Until we have a mindset as a nation that is not based in fear or strong egos, I do not believe we will be a positive force in the world.
The notion of looking at the root--emotional root--of our nation's mistakes and bullying attitude makes perfect sense to me if we are up for real positive change.
This is only the beginning, but an area that I've never heard a politician address before. To then do some real work and shift the policies and current course of our country (diminishing privacy and personal rights, questionable wars, out-and-out lies concerning presidential decisions) is in order.
Obama has been a civil rights attorney on the south side of Chicago standing up for the less fortunate. He's a man that understands the needs of the people--he's been working to help them his whole career.
As for the war in Iraq, check the record. Hillary voted to allow Bush to pursue this endeavor.
After researching both Democratic candidates, there's positive and negative on both sides. It's tough to filter through what's fact and what's fiction. But in the end, Obama seems like the best choice.
Here are some reasons Mike (my partner) is supporting Obama:
- He has a history of helping diverse groups find common cause.
- His policy ideas seem to be based on morals earned through personal experience, not from campaign focus groups.
- Of all the candidates, Obama as president could do the most towards repairing America's image around the world.
Additionally, Obama works from the bottom-up, not top-down. Clinton is does the opposite. Check out this article from the Washington Post.
Also, check out the Wall Street Journal article where Clinton now wants FL and MI to count--after agreeing five months earlier that they wouldn't. Hum, do you suppose her winning in those states has anything to do with it? Where's the consistency and standing by your word in that? Perhaps, Obama has also turned back on his word, but I've been researching and haven't found it yet. It's just possible we have what may be a stand-up guy running for president!
Clinton said (see Washington Post article above), "I know how Washington Republicans think, how they operate and how to beat them." This doesn't sound like unity to me, and is a divided country what we really need?
Today is the first day of the rest of your life!