Monday, November 3, 2008

2008 Endorsement: John McCain



by Justin La Grange

I'm writing to you not as a Republican. I'm writing to you not with any racial mindset. I'm writing to you not with riches or richly in-debt. I'm writing to you as an American; from Warren Buffett to Joe the Plumber to Betsy the Smoking Homeless; from Harvard's Joseph Ocklesworth IV to Holland's Joe the Plumber to Huntington Beach's Jose Rodriguez; from J. Lo repping the Bronx to Mary-Jo repping the South to Scar-Jo repping SoCal. I'm writing to you as an American who wants to see the best of present and future. As an American, who wants to preserve the tradition and sanctity of the presidential office. As an American, who values a leader with only the top notch representation of American values and character. As an American, I can think only of John McCain as an option to represent this country going forward.

First and foremost, I would like to start out by paying tribute to and saluting Barack Obama. After witnessing the vicious, slanderous, unfounded, and hurtful attacks hurled at Governor Sarah Palin, I decided to take the upper ground in terms of fair political discourse. Senator Obama should be applauded for potentially becoming the nation's first black president. He's a man of unparalleled brilliance, style, and inspirational qualities. I don't want to take away from the magnitude of that achievement, and I think he has the character and durability to be a good leader.

However, I do have some significant reservations.

Senator Obama rose to fame and power after appearing at the 2004 Democratic Presidental Convention, during which time he gave a rousing speech that catapulted him to the United States Senate after serving for a few years in the Illinois State Senate. During his four years in the Senate, he focused two of those on his run for the Presidency.

The biggest question in all of this is why? Why now? There's a certain level of audacity to saying that you're going to run for President after such a short stint in major public office, notably one without any executive experience. Isn't there a certain level of effrontery to want to be President without waiting your turn and gaining more experience? Isn't there a certain level of effrontery to shoving yourself into the Presidental nomination without having a clear ostensible record for the American people to judge you on? One has to wonder why Barack Obama hungered to do all of this so quickly? One has to wonder if the ascendancy of Barack Obama to this level without much experience or record speaks to a dangerous cult of personality? One has to wonder if Barack Obama can get away with too much as President with such a dangerous cult of personality and an irresponsible subservient swooning media?

One of my best friends articulated this very well as he was fluxuating on who he will support in 2008:

"I must be at peace with my conscience. I am no longer a supporter of B. H… well you know the rest. My heart is full of regret for abandoning my beloved H. Clinton and falling victim to the empty promise that is Obama. Mr. Obambi has recently shown his true colors and demonstrated that he is no super hero, but simply a heartless and dispassionate politician. Obama’s thirst for power and popularity is unrivaled and frankly it scares me. Obama has acquired international fame and recognition and I fear that his first priority is no longer the interests of the American people..."

First and foremost however, we are in a center-right country that tends to average out to having center-right values, whether they be economic, foreign, social, etc. The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama is on the left. Perhaps, but questionably, not on the hard-left, but consistently left. Whether it's "spreading the wealth around", talking to rogue states without preconditions, relentless support for unfettered abortion rights, reasonable hostility towards free trade, massive union support including open voting, excessive support from labor unions, affirmative action support, anti-voucher or anti-significant European style competition overhaul of the education system (in favor of throwing more money at the problem), being strongly against gun rights, too much government intervention in healthcare programs, spending proposals ($1T in new spending), getting a grade of "F" by the National Taxpayers' Union, a poor grade by the "Citizens Against Government Waste" group, or a lack of commitment to immigration reform, his record is decisively left and arguably out of the mainstream. With the aforementioned record, policy proposals, and endorsements I find it probable that Barack Obama will certainly move towards the "implimentation" of policies outside the American mainstream, and with the trifecta of House and Senate control, there's a horribly large possibility that this unholy setup without checks and balances can lead to severe pushes of agenda outside the mainstream. Most Americans don't want this, and these policies don't align with mainstream values.

While I don't think Senator Obama shares deep sympathies with any of his controversial associations, I fault him heavily for deceiving the American people by throwing these associations under the bus when it was politically convenient to do so. Obama flat out lied to the American people when he denied launching his state senate career in domestic terrorist Bill Ayers living room. He has lied to the American people when he claimed that he did not know that his pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, was an anti-American and anti-white zealot who said that the government gave black people AIDS as a way to kill them off. He presumably has lied to the American people about his Aunt Zeituni's illegal immigration status (or for writing about her so much in his books, he sure is a sucky nephew). He's dishonestly downplayed his associations with Farrakhan and Tony Resko. He admitted to flirting with Marxist ideology and doing drugs in college, certainly not becoming for America's commander-in-chief. In summary, I think Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton said it best:

"The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training."
-Joe Biden

"Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign, and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002"
-Hillary Clinton

In contrast, recognizing that Senator John McCain is a significant and intelligent departure from President Bush, who Senator Obama shamefully and wrongfully puppets as a would be extension of Senator McCain, I very strongly endorse Senator McCain as President for 2008.

Senator McCain has an extraordinary record of leadership dating back to his days as a naval war hero who refused to abandon his men in his Vietnamese POW camp and extending to his present triumphs of extraordinary bipartisanship and running an underdog campaign in a toxic Republican climate.

Senator McCain has had an extraordinary amount of experience dating from his naval service over 40 years ago to his many years in the US Senate.

In an era of excessive partisanship, Senator McCain has been proven to be far more bipartisan and less divisive than Senator Obama, dating back to McCain-Feingold and calling religious-right leaders "agents of intolerance".

Senator McCain is as committed to combating climate change and dedicated to environmental issues as Senator Obama, and coupled with Governor Palin's extraordinary experience with energy issues, the McCain/Palin ticket is as formidable a ticket as the Democrats in leading America towards energy independence.

Senator McCain is one of the most experienced and respected leaders in America in terms of foreign issues and foreign policy. While the Democrats and Senator Obama would have sent Iraq into a cascading quagmire, Senator McCain demanded a troop surge as put forth by General Petraeus, which has now preserved and vindicated all the effort, blood, money, and tears Americans have put into Iraq. Iraq is now seeing its lowest levels of violence since combat began and the combined 53 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan now have a chance at a stable democracy instead of the excessive tyranny they lived with under Saddam Hussein and the Taliban.

Last, but most importantly, I'd like to discuss with you why Senator John McCain is the only choice for President in these troubling economic times.

Let's start with this idea of extra taxation, which in this case includes Senator Obama's proposed raising of the dividends tax, capital gains tax, corporate tax rate, and taxes on those that make over $250,000 (although that is changing day by day). When you are in an downturn slash economic environment in which people are not willing to take risks to further stimulate the economy, you have to incentivize people to take risks in a glum economy, and that includes tax cuts and not tax raises. All of these groups in which Senator Obama seeks to tax are the groups which have the potential capital to build, restimulate, and grow the economy, and create jobs.

It's NOT ABOUT RICH VS. POOR, it's about common sense and growth. It's no secret that when Reagan cut the upper class tax rate from 70% to 28%, revenue to the government doubled. People who are at the upper rungs of the economy need to be rewarded for their increased ability for entreprenurial output and innovation.

In regards to McCain's plan to lower corporate taxes, take note that our corporate taxes are the second highest in the world. During a potential recession, why would you scare international or internal investment in the US away from creating businesses and jobs in America? Why develop a business in the US, taxed to high hell, when you can open up shop in Ireland for 1/3 the tax rate? It's not simply about oil and other corporate fat cats. It's not about class warfare. Lots of businesses are struggling and if you make hostile business climate taxation policies, businesses don't grow and leave US shores, setting up in more business friendly economies, and our economy tanks. In our potential recession, we need to keep businesses in the US and lure more businesses here, and we can do that by lowering corporate taxes.

We've lived too long with a government that is not a good steward of our taxpayer dollars. John McCain, unlike President Bush, has vowed to streamline government programs and take out the veto pen to cut down drastically on wasteful congressional pork-barrel projects.

Here are some comments I've made recently about John McCain's general mantra to grow the economy:

"There's so much waste in the government. Republicans aren't about cutting programs like healthcare and medicare. We are about streamlining them, making them less bureaucratic, finding waste and cutting it, and operating government organizations more efficiently like a business. While Bush hasn't been responsible about cutting pork-barrel, McCain and most Republicans will be. Democrats will not allow that because they have to bend over to union interests and have no concern for spending Americans' hard earned money. No one in America should have to pay one cent more of taxes for an inefficent government that IS NOT RESPONSIVE TO THEM or RESPONSIBLE STEWARDS OF THEIR TAX DOLLARS!"

"Unfortunately, it's not just as easy as tax those above $250,000, not to mention Barack raises taxes on everybody with the doubling of the capital gains tax. 110,000 small businesses in America make revenue about $250,000, and raising taxes on them stifles growth and hurts their bottom line. In addition, citizens who make over $250,000 are generally more intelligent, innovative people who will cycle money back into the US market either through creating more businesses or buying products. They fuel the economy and create growth, innovation, and jobs - in a potential recession, it's better they have the money and not the inefficient federal government where a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats decide what to do with it."

"I know being poor in America sucks, but I am of the opinion that wealth is created for everyone in a very free market (semi-regulated to the point of enforcing contracts, external factors, and exchange of information) that heavily rewards innovation, growth, and risk-taking. The US took off because people were allowed to do that en-masse, and other countries with heavier redistribution paradigms are far more stagnant. In other words, we can live in a society where we have a gap between the rich and the poor or we have a tiny gap between the less poor and poorer. There are optimum tax rates for generating overall wealth, rewarding risk taking and innovation, and creating economic balance and fairness, with the acknowledgement that life just can't be fair and equal for everyone, but it can be reasonably decent for all. I believe tax rates are too high, and unreasonable when we have a government that wastes 40 cents of every dollar with bureaucratic negligence and inefficient waste. It's not just programs, although lots of those are ridiculous. It's about the need for streamlining."

McCain's healthcare plan will insure 21 million more people in America, versus Obama's 26 million. However, McCain's healthcare plan is far more efficient because it doesn't involve federalizing more healthcare and new federalized programs in America. This is not the time for larger government.


I'd also like to address Governor Sarah Palin's VP Candidacy. Sarah Palin is the only candidate on either ticket to have executive experience, which includes running the largest state by land size as well as a $40 Billion Dollar economy. It is unfair to judge her entire future on a couple of bad interviews only days after she arrived on the national scene. If you look back to her debates for the Alaska governorship you'll see her performance is tremendous when versed on the issues. Look at her progress from those interviews to the Vice Presidential Debates. Look at her performance as the most popular governor in America. Think how far she'll go when she arrives as VP at the White House. Think how amazing she'll be once she's sat in on foreign policy and staff meetings on all the issues. Sarah Palin no doubt has a reformer's heart and an incredible intelligence that some people refuse to see because folks like Keith Olbermann diminish her because they're scared of her and they patronize people who don't talk like they just came back from an elite Washington cocktail party.

People - I understand we desperately need change! I promise from the bottom of my heart that John McCain will offer the change you are looking for and represent you with the utmost honesty and integrity with which he has served this country for nearly half-a-century.

Please, vote for John McCain on Tuesday. From California to Maine. From men to women. From rich to poor. From straight to gay. My friends, I love you all and I feel strongly about this.

______________________________________________
Obama's Redistribution of Wealth Discussion Back in 2001:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Obama's Record on Voting 96% of the Time with his Party/Biography:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/

Key Votes:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/

Project Vote Smart - Obama on the Issues:
http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=9490

Interest Group Support:
http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=9490

Quick State by State Electoral Update (Current as of 7P Nov.1.08)

by Justin La Grange

As we know by now, it is not the national polls that matter (although they are important trend indicators), but state polls that determine the outcome of the electoral college. Obama could be registering 60% to 40% nationally (theoretically), but if he's getting 100% support in California, Washington, New York, Massachusetts, etc, it is still hypothetically possible to lose the electoral college (just an illustrative example that national polls aren't necessarily king).

Funny things are starting to happen. States that McCain should have absolutely solidified like North Dakota, Arizona, Georgia, and Arizona are becoming bonafide swing states with Obama trailing by exactly 3-4% in all of these states. But states that McCain was trailing in recently that he needed to solidify have been tightening, like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Carolina. Indiana and Missouri have actually switched back into McCain's column.

With all these polls, keep the following in mind:

In 2004, President Bush was trailing 13-17 points behind John Kerry in Pennsylvania right before the election. President Bush lost Pennsylvania by roughly 2 points. Today, John McCain trails by only 7.5% in Pennsylvania, after being behind about 10-12% early last week. Remember that Obama was also ahead in the Pennsylvania primary polls, and absolutely tanked in the primary outcome.

John McCain is the "safe candidate", especially in backwater states in places like Western Pennsylvania. And 1 in 7 voters are still undecided. This is the reason why John McCain's attacks on Ayers and "socialism", and GOP PAC's attacks on Resko, Wright, and Khalidi are not totally in vain. They solidify doubts in undecided voters who will view John McCain as the safe candidate: the white naval hero who has the bipartisan record. To illustrate, it was reported in Texas that 23% still incorrectly thought that Obama is Muslim. While I don't think that's specifically the case with these undecided voters, people will often vote for the candidate that they have the least questions and doubts about in the voting booth.

Also, these polling outfits take into account heavy turnout by African-American and youth voters. While African-Americans have been coming out en-masse, the youth vote this year is a little more dubious. Also, these polling outfits have not taken into account increased turnout among Republican voters, which if speaking to any Republican I know has been any kind of anecdotal indication, Republicans and many moderates will be out full force mobilized against Obama.

I've been looking at these polls, and a lot of them just don't seem right. For instance, California is a state far more prone to success for McCain than Bush, and yet the numbers are showing 57%-33% in favor of Obama. While it's true California is not that heavily polled, I can promise you that those numbers are inaccurate, especially when Bush has lost California in numbers like 57-43 and 55-45. If California is absolutely incorrect from an outfit like RCP/Yahoo Political dashboard, what does it say about the other polls in undoubtedly the most accurate polling outfit which averages all the other major polls.

And as a verbatim mention from my other note:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=33243837333&id=1219649&index=0

Possible Reasons for Polling Error:

Voters who are more enthusiastic about their candidate tend to respond to pollsters. More often than not, that candidate would be Barack Obama, perhaps making him overrepresented in the sample.

The Bradley Effect: People don't want to tell the pollster they're voting McCain or they put themselves in the undecided category for fear of seeming racist. This intimidation effect seems plausible, as I don't feel terribly comfortable going around Berkeley toting my McCain/Palin pin (but I do), but will be very comfortable toting McCain/Palin in the ballot box.

Safe Candidate Syndrome: People are not afraid to go with the more controversial and less safe choice (if their a moderate swing voter) when chatting with a pollster or doing some online survey. However, there's a certain finality and seriousness of the ballot box that makes people re-examine their concerns and fears and vote with the "safe" candidate

The Numbers
Taking into account how grossly wrong all these polls could be from the factors I've listed above, look at the current swing state percentages from RCP/Yahoo Political Dashboard, keeping in mind McCain can afford to lose a couple of these states:

Missouri: 48.3%/47.7% (McCain/Obama)

Indiana: 47.3%/46.8% (McCain/Obama)

North Carolina: 48.3%/47.0% (Obama/McCain)

Florida: 49.8%/45.7% (Obama/McCain)

Ohio: 49.2%/43.6% (Obama/McCain)

Virginia: 51.0%/45.0% (Obama/McCain)

Pennsylvania: 51.2%/43.7% (Obama/McCain)

Nevada: 50.5%/44.0% (Obama/McCain)

Colorado: 51.5%/45.3% (Obama/McCain)

New Mexico: 50.3%/43.0% (Obama/McCain)

Keep in mind the margins in these states are all below 7.5%.

While I definitely don't think McCain has an equal shot at winning, and he's certainly on the defensive with an uphill battle, I'm here to say that for anybody that thinks Obama definitely has this in the bag might just be a little too hasty. McCain has a chance here, and if he had no shot, Vegas wouldn't be riding 84-16 on Obama. They'd be riding 99-1. McCain has always been the underdog, and he's always come back from behind. They declared him dead in the primaries, and here he is today running strong against a major Democratic tide. Never count out John McCain.