Take a Right(Part 1)

Elections are won by men and women because people vote against a candidate rather than for one. The Presidential Election in 2008 promises to be no different. Americans have registered to vote in record numbers, just to be a part of this historic race. We have two candidates, Senators Obama and McCain, who propose policies that are polar opposites of each other. Senator McCain has the leadership, record, right policies, and the character that should be expected of the next President of the United States.

John McCain’s leadership abilities can be traced back to his experiences in the United States Navy. His naval career began when he graduated from Naval Academy in Annapolis and became a naval aviator. He flew 22 bombing missions in Vietnam before he was shot down and captured by the North Vietnamese. For 6 years he was held at Hanoi Hilton where they would break almost every bone in his body in an attempt to gain U.S Military secrets. McCain could have been released early in an effort to gain positive propaganda, but he refused. The military has a “first in, first out” policy and John McCain honored it. McCain received his first taste of Washington while serving in the Naval Liaison Office. This position allowed him to meet congressmen and senators from both sides of the aisle. McCain retired from the Navy in 1981 and decided to run for a congressional seat in the 1982 election. As a congressman he took on fellow Republicans on issues such as the U.S Marine deployments to Lebanon and on Indian Affair bills. John McCain was elected as a United States senator in 1987 and began to earn the “maverick” title he has been given. He opposed the 1993 military conflict in Somalia which upset many of his Republican colleagues. He showed his willingness to put partisanship aside and began to work with Democratic Senator Russ Feingold to reform campaign finance laws. He co-sponsored the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 to help fight the increasing pork barrel projects. In 2001, he fought against his own party’s tax cuts saying, “I can’t in good conscience support a tax cut, that doesn’t cut spending as well.” In 2003, he stepped across the aisle again, and co-sponsored a bill with Senator Joe Lieberman that introduced a cap and trade system for greenhouse gasses. Republicans opposed this bill 49-6, and Democrats supported it 37-10. We are currently in the mist of what many would call a financial disaster. The collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sent our economy in a downward spiral. In 2006, Senator McCain and 19 other Senators, none of which were Democrats, sent a letter to the Senate Majority Leader stating, “If effective regulatory reform legislation for the housing-finance government sponsored enterprises [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] is not enacted this year, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to this enormous risk”.

Barrack Obama has never shown any form of leadership, let alone one that would remotely compare to McCain’s. While an Illinois state senator, he continually voted “present” on many controversial bills (MSNBC.com). Rather than take a stand and possibly alienate some constituents, he simply bowed his head and decided not to vote. In the U.S. Senate, we simply have an absence of votes. He only had the seat for 143 days before he announced his candidacy for President. After all, many contribute his success to the fact he has never been made to take a stance. Of the votes Obama casted, he voted along his party lines 96% of the time .

John McCain also has the right policies to turn this country around. He promises to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which would keep the highest tax bracket from jumping from 35% to 39.6%. He also proposes lowering the corporate income tax rate from 35% to 25% and keeping the capital gains tax cap at 15%. The Center for Data Analysis (CDA) believes that under the McCain plan total employment would grow an average of 2,126,000 jobs in the next 10 years. They also say that the gross domestic product (GDP) would increase nearly 3 times as much as it would under the Obama plan. Their analysis shows that a family of four will have an average of $5,138 more in disposable income under McCain's plan . Obama promises to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which would raise the highest tax bracket to 39.6%. He would also enact a new tax on individuals who make over $250,000, but hasn’t released the details yet. He promises to cut taxes for the “middle class”, but simply doesn’t have the record to support such a claim. In fact, he voted twice on a budget resolution that would increase taxes on individuals making $42,000. He proposes making the corporate income tax rate 35% and increasing the capital gains tax cap to 20%. These tax increases will inhibit investment and cause the stock market to continue to drop. The CDA said that under the Obama plan we would see total employment rise an average of 915,800 jobs and a family of four would have an average of $3,631 in disposable income.

David Horowitz speech

Last night I had the pleasure to attend a speech given by David Horowitz. I have to start by saying I had some serious reservations about going to this event. I had never really heard of this man, and am relatively ignorant on the issues of Israel and Palestine. That's not to say I don't care about these issues,especially given my own face to face battle with Islamic terrorism, but that I have spent the majority of my time reading up on domestic issues. The school paper made the man out to be some sort of Anti-Muslim extremist and that extra security for the event was provided. Also, the organization hosting the event has somewhat of a controversial history. So with all that in mind, I was somewhat worried about what the speaker would say.

I thought Mr. Horowitz did a very good job not offending anyone. He started out his speech by saying their are good Muslims as well as Bad Muslims. I'm pretty sure you can say that about any group or race. He gave a history of how Israel came to be and talked about the Muslim Brotherhood. He talked about a bunch of things I, to be honest, had somewhat of a hard time following. He did pose the question to the MSA (Muslim Student Assoc) asking them to Denounce Terrorist Organizations such as Hezbollah. I thought for sure this would be an easy task. I thought we could all agree that terrorism is bad,but boy was I naive.
During the Q&A portion of the speech, a man from the Council on American-Islamic Relations(CAIR) stood up and attempt to discredit Horowitz.He said asking Muslims to denounce terrorists, after giving a speech about Muslim atrocities, was unfair. The school Paper quoted him as saying "Its like asking, when did you stop beating your wife?" I think this guy is obviously misguided. Everybody in this world should denounce terrorism. We should all be able to agree that terrorist actions are evil and wrong. Anyones inhability to do such a simple thing, does make me question them. If a white person refused to denounce the KKK, we would assume they where racist would we not?
The school paper editorial board said,"The MSA should not have to denounce organizations they do not openly support." The question then becomes why wont they denounce them? I will openly denounce any terrorist group responsible for killing innocent people. The paper went on to say that Horowitz insights hatred. I thought Mr. Horowitz did an excellent job saying not all Muslims are bad. He started and ended his speech that way.

Racism in the Campaign

Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream that "a man would not be judged by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character." Unfortunately, this spirited race for the presidency has fallen far short of that dream. Today, many Americans are supporting the Democratic candidate simply because of his race and cannot name or explain a single policy he has. Howard Stern, who I normally disagree with, recently proved this in a skit he did on his radio show. He sent someone out to find Obama supporters, but switched Obama's positions with McCain's and people still supported him. In order to help some of these voters; let's address some of his polices.
Senator Obama supports a federally ran health care system. Before you decide if you support this, ask yourself: "Do I feel it is my responsibility, as a tax payer, to pay for the health care for the alcoholic, chain smoking, junk food eating neighbor down the street?" Medicare, which is federal health care on a small scale, has already been shown to be 30% fraudulent. We also need not look farther than to our neighbors in the north to see a federally ran system. The Canadian Medical Association own president, Dr. Brian Day, has been quoted saying, "This is a country where a dog can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans can wait two to three years."
Senator Obama supports raising taxes on people who make $250,000 or more a year, and promises to cut taxes for everyone else. Never mind the fact that his senate voting record doesn't support this. Before you decide if you agree with this increase, ask yourself: "If you work hard this year and earn a 4.0 GPA, and I slack off and earn a 2.0 GPA; is it fair for the school to take a point from you and give it to me?" It's the same concept, but with money. It is unfair to take their money simply because they work hard.
Senator Obama supports raising the capital gains tax to 20%. Capital gains are profits you make off of investing in stocks. The stock market today is falling because people are pulling their money out and not investing. The last thing we need is to give people another reason not to invest. We need to lower the rate and encourage investment to get the stock market back on track, before we see a crash like 1929.
These are obviously not all of Senator Obama's policies, but remember that Obama's main plan is to expand the role of the government in our everyday lives. We can all agree our country is in dire need of a change. Either candidate is going to provide the country with change, although it may not be the best kind. It is my prayer that before we enter that voting booth, we take an honest look at each candidate's policies, their record, and their overall character to make our decision and not just the color of their skin. Dr. King gave his life so we wouldn't exclude someone from the presidency becomes of their skin color, and I believe he would be equally saddened to see we gave it to someone because of it.