No Decision '08

I know most of you guys don't like the political stuff, but occationally I write for the Green Blog (listed on the side) if you want something less serious. So far its only one of mine but its "Zeno's theory" if you want read it.

The Economist, which stands as one of the more unbias publications, had on its cover last month the two presidential candidates and the line: America at its best. For a second I believed them, but the problems with this political election are highly subtle and exhaustingly complex.

The main issue that everyone ought to be voting on is the one that poses the most immediate danger or problem for the country. Enter problem 1.

The issue, if we looked at it today, would certainly be the economy. We have a nation, as Lou Dobbs might say, that cannot cloth or feed itself. Our reliance on other countries for our most basic needs not only is nerve racking because of our dependence on shaky foreign business markets, but because even at these “fair trade” [sic] prices, how would anyone be able to afford them when they don’t have jobs, because 2 years ago they were making those clothes.

If the economy remains and issue, its an election that’s decidedly in Obama’s favor, but this of course is the problem. McCain doesn’t know much about anything when it comes to economics, or how social safety nets, put in place because of issues we’d resolved back in the 30’s, work and why they shouldn’t be dismantled. During the primaries Mitt Romney hammered McCain on this very issue (and rightfully so) and sowed up Michigan before going down in a Super Tuesday blood bath (where he only took Massachusetts). More concerning is that his advisory committee (or what looks like it) is more callous, apolitical, and out of touch than any of the other free-market advocates. Phil Gramm’s “Nation of whiners” comment should be exposed to the light of day far more than it has been to date.

So what’s the problem right? Obama wins and, while he doesn’t necessarily have the econ background covered, everything turns out better than it might with McCain…until the problem shifts.

Let’s just assume that the economy actually does improve. It won’t be until about the middle of the 1st term and at best it will recover slowly. Neither of these candidates are Putin or Reagan so we’re not going to see unfettered progress with the intelligence required, and as much as John McCain wants to be TR, he’d never have the fortitude to grab out-of-control business by the reigns and tell them if they can’t help America, we don’t need them.

But Obama is being forced to the left but a bunch of out of touch lefties who still want to see the war ended, and as much as I’d love to bash the hell out of them, there are some points they make that have a strong sense of validity.

1. This is a huge economic drag. The money we continually sink into this occupation could be better spent just about anywhere.

2. The occupation itself. Its why traditional conservatives like Buckley and Buchanan (why are all the conservatives Irish?) opposed the war three years after supporting it. Invasion? Yes. Democracy? Yes. Empire building? No. I don’t think that’s what we’re doing over there, but long story short is….

3. The Iraqi’s need to govern themselves. If they want us out of not, we can’t be there forever. They have the tools now to conduct themselves in a way they see fit, and if we stay, their not going to review some of the more savage behavior as just that, savage.

But the occupation has logical reasons for continuing. Casualties are down, way down. And while the opponents will tell you that one casualty is too many, that’s just not war. I agree we shouldn’t have gone in, but don’t give us a reason to have to go back in.

This is why this election is a nightmare. It’s reactionary.

We don’t have the option to select a man based on our best interests, just our best interest. And that’s three options short of acceptable. We’re talking the lesser of two evils here since we’re never going to hear them discuss much of anything on the lower end of the political spectrum. Whose education policy do you favor? In fact where is most of the domestic policy? I don’t know if we’re in the business of calling the economy “policy.”

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. If voting third party is throwing your vote away, I might throw mine up.

Bloomberg ’08.