Hysterical and Useless

Balance starts when you get out of bed

Friday, September 5, 2008

Why I cannot vote for Obama

"At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity, idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols- " A. Huxley

It is probably best to look at what Obama did in his career to this point- then make an analysis.

* In 1993 Obama joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 12-attorney law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development.

* He was elected to an Illinois State Senator since 1997. He was brought to the public attention by former Democratic Senator Alice Palmer and in a still unclear chain of events, unseated his mentor and took her seat for the State Senate.

* Obama was a founding member of the board of directors of Public Allies in 1992, resigning before his wife, Michelle, became the founding executive director of Public Allies Chicago in early 1993.

* 1993–2002 He served on the board of directors of the Woods Fund of Chicago, which in 1985 had been the first foundation to fund Obama's DCP, at the same time serving on the board of directors of The Joyce Foundation from 1994–2002, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995–2002, the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Center for Neighborhood Technology, and the Lugenia Burns Hope Center.

* In 1996 he sponsored a law increasing tax credits for low-income workers, negotiated welfare reform, and promoted increased subsidies for childcare.

* In 2001 Obama supported Republican Governor Ryan's payday loan regulations and predatory mortgage lending regulations aimed at averting home foreclosures.

* In 2003, Obama sponsored and led unanimous, bipartisan passage of legislation to monitor racial profiling by requiring police to record the race of drivers they detained and legislation making Illinois the first state to mandate videotaping of homicide interrogations.

In 2005 Obama was elected to the US Senate.

* Obama voted in favor of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and cosponsored the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act.

* In September 2006, Obama supported a related bill, the Secure Fence Act.

* Obama sponsored legislation requiring nuclear plant owners to notify state and local authorities of radioactive leaks

* In December 2006, President Bush signed into law the "Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act," marking the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor.

*In January 2007, Obama co-sponsored the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which was signed into law in September 2007.

* He introduced S. 453, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections.

* Obama also introduced the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007.

* In 2007, Obama sponsored an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges.

* In 2007, He sponsored the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry, and co-sponsored legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism.

* In 2007, Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.

* In 2008, Obama is currently in charge of 2500 people in his Presidential campaign.

* In 2008 Obama is in charge of a campaign budget amount of $220M.


His disloyal handling of the Alice Palmer affair still bothers a lot of people in the Chicago area. A side note is that Palmer campaigned for Hillary during the primaries.

His state voting record is very dismal. He was spending most of his time on the inner city boards between 1997 and 2002. During that time he was working his way up from the South side to the very affluent Hyde Park area. There is still a feeling of abandonment by some on the south side.

Obama has had no long standing executive administration experience. His voting record is fairly weak. The largest bill that he pushed through congress was also cosigned with Republican Dick Lugar to keep weapons out of the hands of terrorists.

Looking past the hype by the media, there is not much that I can see from Obama that convinces me that he would bring any change at all, since he has not challenged the system that exists within the government positions he has held.


We have seen the greatest cycle of economic expansion of human history over the last 60 years. The economic forces that exist in the world have very little to do with the President, with the exception of the embrace of Keynesian economics by FDR in the 1930s. The economic cycle we are going through presently has nothing to do with present day politics. It is a restriction of cash flow between lenders. This started with the deregulation of the financial sectors back in 1994, under Bill Clintons (with a Republican Congress I might add) watch. That effect created a house of cards effect that was eventually going to fall on itself.

In 2008 it finally did.

With a $9.5 Trillion deficit, it seems foolish to vote for a Republican especially after 8 years of drunken sailor like spending on foreign wars, with the exception that the last thing we need to do is restrict trade- since that is the only thing that is propping up our currency right now. If we start going back from the global economy at this point, without a game changing plan, our economy will become deflationary. We cannot afford to be an isolationist economy.

Obama’s waffling on the subject of trade is extremely worrisome.


The situation in Iraq has nothing to do with spreading democracy across the Middle East, WMDs or freeing the Iraqi’s. It is a long standing plan as a country “that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to general global power" (1992, Wolfowitz Doctrine). In essence the invasion of Iraq has always been about protecting our resources from extremist elements.

While you may disagree with this strategy, it is a strategy our nation has embarked on and we need to see it through. It is a carbon copy of the Cold War tactic we used against the former Soviet Union and will need the next 10-20 years in order for it to work. Islamic Extremist Fundamentalism incubated during our last isolationist period (Clinton admin), which resulted in the attacks on 9-11. We are setting up military perimeters around Iran and Syria to implement a first strike vantage point in case of nuclear weapon development.

As a planet we are on the precipice of a world conflict over energy resources (eg, SUDAN, GEORGIA, and VENEZUELA). The strategy is to protect the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait from extremist Islamic elements of Syria and Iran. In the era of “peak oil”- and this will be the nature of the world for the next 30 years until alternative fuel sources are realized.

North Korea (nuclear power), Pakistan (nuclear power), India (nuclear power). Israel (nuclear power), the resurgence of Russia (nuclear power), have created a new dynamic in the world that requires a delicate combination of force and negotiation. Obama has shown nothing in his history, as far as handling these delicate situations with the proper combination of force and negotiation.

Obama has a very populist message that appeal to people, but withdrawal from Iraq- without sufficient alternative energy resources has the potential for disaster.


I agree that people are partially to blame for the current warming cycle; however the cycle of petroleum isn’t just going to be solved by electric cars and windmills- or by “Obama’s promises of reducing carbon dioxide emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050; reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; require fuels suppliers to cut carbon content by 10 percent by 2020”. There is no solid way to do that without completely changing the world’s society.

To start, there has to be more of a concentrated effort by local municipalities to reduce the amount of reliance on petrochemical related products and fuels. There has to be a cultural change before there is a meaningful adjustment to the amount of carbon dioxide reduction.

By cultural change, we would have to become more localized in our travel, localized sources of food and in the goods and services we consume. This would mean major sacrifices in the quality of life in both the upper, middle and lower classes. This is not something the federal government can demand. This has to start at every individual community and household on a grass roots level.

The problem is that we are a society of convenience. Our food is grown, harvested and transported with an astounding amount of petroleum products and petrochemical by products. We do not have proper biodiversity in our food supply chain in this country. It which requires massive amounts of petrochemicals in the form of fertilizer and pesticides - and that is a major (yet hidden) reason for global warming, pollution as well as the rampant diseases such as cancer and heart disease that are costing billions of dollars in healthcare.

The USA’s ships almost all of the “dirty” manufacturing over to other third world countries like China, Mexico and India. The pollution that was choking athletes in China during the Olympics were caused by industries that we have steadily shipped over to China over the last 20 years, industries that we have restricted because of successful regulation by the EPA. By keeping this country “clean”, we are ruining other parts of the world, thus the planet by our endless consumerism.

The airline industry is also a major pollution source, but one that no one wants to talk about. When you look at the numbers, they are staggering. Unless you start restricting the amount of flights that the airlines fly and most importantly sacrifice what the airline services offers our culture, you will not significantly reduce that source of carbon emissions.

On any given day, more than 87,000 flights are in the skies in the United States. 35 percent, or just over 30,000 of those flights are commercial carriers, like American, United or Southwest. On an average day, air traffic controllers handle 28,537 commercial flights (major and regional airlines), 27,178 general aviation flights (private planes), 24,548 air taxi flights (planes for hire), 5,260 military flights and 2,148 air cargo flights (Federal Express, UPS, etc.). At any given moment, roughly 5,000 planes are in the skies above the United States. In one year, controllers handle an average of 64 million takeoffs and landings.

Remember this is only the United States; think about the same amount of carbon emissions all over the world coming from other countries combined them and then think about how that is affecting the global warming crisis

Obama nor McCain is going to do nothing to change these forces with weak promises- Again it has to be a cultural change- not a Federal Plan.


Obama’s plan to raise the minimum wage is going to be disastrous to the medium to small business owner because it is only going to increase the costs of doing business and not adding any additional value to the goods or services offered by that company. His tax incentives double dip on small business that are not LLC’s where the salaries and the income earned by the companies owners are tied. They are not going to hire additional workers under these conditions and will not be able to ship work to Mexico or China, where he plans to penalize them as well- for shipping jobs overseas. On top of that, if they don’t supply (or can’t afford) healthcare to his employees, he will tag another 6% payroll tax on top of that.

But Obama will give them $500 in tax credits, right. Why $500? Isn’t that the same amount as the refund check that Bush sent out this year? What is the difference?

The cost of doing business in this country is ridiculously expensive. Goods and services are almost 4 times more expensive in the United States and Europe than the rest of the world. Most of this tied to the outrageous cost of healthcare and an aging workforce. As other emerging countries become more competitive, they will supply the rest of the worlds market with cheaper goods and services, leaving the United States in the cold.

We have to stop thinking about what we are entitled to as a nation and more about how we are going to compete. We are not going to compete with hand outs to people that aren’t going to work any harder than they did before. It has to be a free market evolution- not a federally mandated tax incentive and a restriction of capital in excessive taxes on capital gains (Obama will increase the gains tax by 25%). If we restrict cash flow from the upper regions of the wealthy, if we restrict trade with other countries and we don’t fix the financial markets- we will be in worse shape than ever.


So in the end, it you have to vote for the devil you know. McCain has historically been a centrist, small government Republican. He has compromised himself to the GOP in order to stay in the game, however- looking at his history- John McCain has always been willing to stand up for what was right, regardless of what the GOP wanted him to. He is open to free trade, which is one of the reasons I am voting for him. He understands government and international issues better than Obama, and most of all, has the courage and the fortitude to act on those issues that need to be addressed.

His tax plan offers more advantages to the open market system. Letting employers continue on with growth on their own terms. McCain will double the personal tax exemption for dependents to $7,000; Reduce the top corporate tax rate in phases to 25 percent from 35 percent. Give businesses a first-year deduction for new equipment. Convert the research and development tax credit to a permanent credit for 10 percent of R&D wages. These are the ways to create more jobs and new growth in a capitalistic society, not Obama’s way.

Sarah Palin has the executive experience, presently residing over a $5.5bn budget and an employee base of 15,000 people. She is pretty savvy in the ways of government and would be a good pick to go against Hillary in 2012.

Forget about the social issues like gay marriage and Pro-life. Those are just a smokescreen for the GOP party hacks to appease the far right . From everything I have read in her published record, while conservative- she has been fairly balanced in her government dealings.

Some internet rumors that need to be dispelled:

She did not ban books from the local library. She complained about the books, but didn’t ban them.

She didn’t try to get creationism into the schools. She said the students should have the right to know both theories, but never followed through on implementation of the plan.

$20M of the $27M of the entitlements she used were for sewers and public transport, which isn’t unusual for the state of Alaska- which has received more entitlements from the US government than any other state in the union since it became a state.

She was never part of the API, since she has been a registered part of the Republican Party since 1983.

Anyway- I would rather pick experience than words.