I can understand, to some degree, why there may be opposition to a national health care system run by the government. Perhaps those who don’t want it already have great coverage and are fearful of losing it. And there may be some who don’t want their tax dollars going to care for others. And yet there are others that do not want government in the health care business [hint: they already are with Medicare], hoping for less government in their lives. If someone has valid concerns about this heated and sensitive subject, they should feel free to voice them in a civilized and professional manner.

However, I admit that I am very perplexed on why people are opposed to a president encouraging our nation’s children to continue their education for any reason other than they dislike and don’t trust the man. Equating President Obama to a dictator who ordered millions killed or some pedophile on the street offering candy to minors is a huge stretch of the imagination, unless of course you really hate and despise Mr. Obama and everything about him, then I could see how such comparisons are made. Denying which people are allowed to encourage your children is every parents right, especially if you really do believe that someone may be subliminally communicating a message that is against your wishes.

Giving your health care needs to another entity can produce some concerns for many. It may seem that people want more control in what doctor they go to, what kind of coverage they have, if they can get the type of care they need and getting the proper treatment for any serious ailments they contract.

Same with the trust you place in others to educate your children. You want them growing up to be healthy, wise and intelligent members of society, endeared with your ideals, your thoughts, your teachings and your beliefs. Giving control to others that provide insight to them is the unknown that causes concern. As a fellow parent, I understand that. But at some point, they grow up. Throughout their lives, they find mentors, teachers, leaders, clergy, friends, other parents, relatives and yes, even elected officials, that will influence them in various ways. Parents will instill a good set of rules, but as intelligent carbon-based life forms, these kids will seek out the advice of many, not just from their parent(s) or anyone else their parents liked or approved of.

And yes, I do see why parents are in an uproar about a speech from a President. It’s advice from someone they don’t like or trust. And no amount of logic or reason will change their minds: they simply don’t want their kids to hear what he has to say, even if it’s in line with what said parents believe and have already taught to their children.

I smell a heavy dose of hypocrisy here.

For health care, you are already trusting others to make decisions about your medical needs. You trust the company you work for that they will provide decent coverage so when you go to the doctor – who you are also trusting – to make a sound decision on what type of care, drug or procedure that is prescribed. Those kinds of coverage and decisions change, sometimes yearly. The rise in health care costs changes the type of coverage you get over time. Most, if not all of these changes, are out of our control.

The same hypocritical logic can be applied to who educates or advises your children. If you don’t trust a sitting President to offer sound advise, what about others like a priest or a member of the clergy? Perhaps you know them in person and can better judge their motives. Or you simply just like them because you don’t disagree with them on many levels.

So what does it take to trust an elected leader? For former President Bush, his reading of “My Pet Goat” to a classroom of elementary-aged students didn’t produce the same kind of uproar Obama is getting. His goal of promoting reading was positive. But isn’t encouraging kids to stay in school just as positive?

I was a vocal opponent of George W Bush as our nation’s president and his policies. But if he would have offered a health care solution, I would listen to his proposed solutions. If he would have hosted a national speech to students to encourage continued education, I would want my child to listen. Disagreeing with what he did in office didn’t mean he wasn’t capable of offering positive advise.

Not everyone is lucky enough to be covered by a health care plan. In fact, there are 47 million in this country that aren’t. There are even more that are covered, but not quite as well as what their needs require. And while anyone, for a price, can currently buy their own coverage [pre-existing conditions permitting], it’s not always the most affordable option.

With regards to education, I don’t think there is any parent that doesn’t want their child to excel in the classroom. But given a speech of advise from someone the parent doesn’t already like or trust, then any positive message from that individual will simply be rejected.

Until we can stop the series of dividing ourselves over political parties, race, religious beliefs and hatred, we will continue to see the public rejection of forward thinking and positive changes and messages in this country.

No one is asking you to agree with everything our elected leaders propose. Just to voice your concerns and offer up alternative solutions that benefit more than just yourself.

And no one is asking you to support every word that comes from the mouth of an elected official. Just to be open to the fact that children can learn something positive from someone you may personally disagree with.

For President

I am a life long Democrat. I make no bones about it or try to hide it. But, I do not vote straight ticket, as I think there are many other qualified candidates that can put aside their personal vendettas and other divisive thoughts to represent the people their jurisdiction covers. I want to see more independent candidates on the ballots, for I think they could very well help erase a divide in this country and get people to really be concerned about true issues that affect all Americans.

As I always do, I researched the candidates, fairly and unbiased [which is not an easy task] and tried to see all of their positions and what kind of changes they would bring to the table. Let’s face it, the country is in tailspin of bad shit. Economy, the environment, human rights… there’s a lot that needs change. For almost the last eight years, we’ve wasted fuckloads of money in a country we don’t belong in, focused our efforts on issues that shouldn’t be issues anymore, allowed corporate greed and corruption to give large sums of cash to walking CEOs while wiping out the working class investments and threatening any chances of a stable future. Sure, we’ve made some progress, but in my opinion, it’s been minimal and it’s time we found someone to help guide this place to a better future. We can’t erase the past, but we can elect someone that will help both houses of Congress and other elected officials to get back on track.

Bob Barr

I had some discussions with one of my friends, a frequent commenter here, on the presidential candidates. Bob Barr was brought up as a potential option. Mr. Barr is a Libertarian, who’s party stands for less government intervention. I’m very much for less government in our lives. Although, we do need checks and balances and regulations set up, I think that could be managed a lot better than it is today with less than it has been for the last thirty years. But as I researched Mr. Barr’s positions, I found that he really didn’t have much of a history of pushing for less government. He started the whole impeachment process against Bill Clinton. Not for the “blow job” issue but for campaign fundraising issues. When the impeachment proceedings continued on, not on the fundraising concerns, but the lying under oath about Ms. Lewinsky’s actions on Mr. Clinton’s johnson, that was very off track and wasting taxpayers money and government time . Add to that a list of other “more government” meddling: Defense of Marriage Act, The War on Drugs, voting for the war in Iraq. To me, this is a Republican, which at the time of these positions he took, he was one. In late 2006, he moved to the Libertarian party and has since changed some of his positions. Sorry Bob, it’s a little too late. Leopards don’t change their spots over night and two years in the political scheme of things is considered over night.

John McCain

Enter John McCain. Decorated war hero, POW and an all around nice guy [on most days]. He’s been in the Senate for over twenty years and seemed to have some moderate views like stem-cell research and concerns for the environment. But red flags go up everywhere right away when you look at his voting record – over 90% of the time with George W. Bush. Then there’s the lack of support he gives to POW/MIA war veterans. Dave from Blogography has been very vocal about this over on his blog and explains Mr. McCain’s position [or lack of one] very well. And watching his campaign implode into a series of hate-filled rallies and racial epithets [although to McCain's defense, he did try to tell people "that's not very nice"] and focusing on what a bad guy his Democratic opponent is, turned me off even more. His meager offering for health care reform was to give a $5,000 tax credit to help add to your helath care and HMO coverage. At least they were upfront that this $5,000 would be taxable. Tell me how someone who makes $25,000 a year is going to come up with an additional $5,000 during the year for health care costs, then have to wait till April to claim it on their taxes, only to be taxed on that amount in the end. If I am reading this right, it means you are being taxed on money you spent only to write it off and be taxed on it. Not very logical or helpful unless you make a decent amount of money. And even then, $5,000 doesn’t even begin to make a dent into any emergency hospital visit. Adding to this his involvement in the Keating Five, which doesn’t give much hope for correcting these economic failings we are having. And I’ve not even mentioned his choice for a running mate, which could extend this blog post longer than I would like it to be. So I have to say a big “NO” to John.

Barack Obama

Which brings us to Barack Obama. First off, let me outline what I don’t like about Obama. As a junior senator from Illinois, I do think there is some lack of experience here. Not a lot, mind you. But being president can be tough. It requires some know-how and being able to negotiate terms and make decisions that can and do affect over 300 million people. Some of the promises he made to the people of Illinois were never put forth. I can understand that not all campaign promises are kept, but there were some innercity programs that could have had more attention. I wish he had the guts or balls to say he supports gay marriage. If it’s a personal decision, fine. But I think it’s a cop-out to say you support something that gives rights to same-sex couples, but than wanting to call it something else. Marriage is a civil right, not something exclusive to any religion. I will talk more about this later, but don’t appease for the sake of being nice.

What’s that you say? Why didn’t I mention other negatives like his middle name or that he “palled around with terrorists” or that he “wants to take everyone’s guns away” or that he’s not eligible to be president because “his birth certificate is a fake and he wasn’t born in this country”??? Because all of those issues are not negatives. They are fucking red herrings that people chase to ignore their focus on real issues like job creation, clear air, alternative fuels, health care, ending a useless war, financial stability and getting back our positive outlook to the rest of the world.

Lots of people have middle names that could scare up a controversy or two. If you focus on Mr. Obama’s middle name, you are being racist and just trying to incite fear. Bill Ayers is a well respected professor at a university. It’s been years since he was a violent protestor. It’s not like he was on the news last year for killing people. People do change over thirty years. The government is not going to come into each and every home and take all of your guns away. Do you really think that 37 states are going to ratify an appeal to the second amendment? This is about controlling illegal assault rifles and keeping them out of hands of kids and adults. Responsible gun owners will never be affected, despite the lack of Obama’s moose-hunting skills. And finally, how many birth certificate experts are there on the internet? Obviously, there’s hundreds of you. You are so well skilled at PhotoShop that you can spot a forgery a mile away. What the fuck ever. Get over your self and read this link or this one.

Casting The Vote

I voted this last Thursday in early voting. I waited in line for over twenty minutes. It was a line I didn’t mind waiting in. As I walked up to the voting machine, I placed my vote for Barack Obama for President. While I have reservations about his experience, I have enough confidence that he can focus on the imperative issues and what needs to be done in this country to help get us back on track. The Bush years fucked us over pretty bad. Ultra religious zealots running around trying to sway the vote and inject fear into getting people to vote their way. It’s not about winning that matters. It’s about someone standing up and wanting to take charge and give this country back to the people. If you have to use dirty tricks and fear and other forms of discouragement to win an election, we really don’t want you in office. That just means you’ll use the same tactics to get your way once you are elected. That only helps selected individuals, not the entire population. I want unity, not diversity. That’s why I voted for Obama. He is the strongest candidate to bring unity back to this nation. Will it happen for sure? I don’t know, but I think he’s got a good shot at making it happen.

——————————————————————————

Civil and Human Rights

There are two issues that I feel that should be removed from the political landscape: abortion and gay rights. While I mentioned above that I wished Obama wouldn’t beat around the bush for an alternative solution to gay marriage, I do wish it didn’t even have to be brought up at all. The whole religious vs. non-religious divide is doing nothing to help anyone in this country. To focus all of your efforts to save the unborn or deny someone their rights shows how short-sighted and selfish your views are. While they may be important to you, let’s face it… making abortion or gay marriage illegal does nothing to help or hurt you in your life. Your marriage stays intact. Your choice to not get an abortion never changes. If all it does is help you sleep at night or help you to know you are controlling someone else’s life’s decisions, then those are not valid reasons.

Plain and simple… abortion should be a medical decision between a woman and her doctor. Marriage should be a decision between two people that want to legally commit their lives together. Human and civil rights should NEVER be put to the vote of the people. Each and every time, the majority will vote away the rights of the minority, especially when it comes to subjects that border on religious beliefs. Now I’m not against anyone’s religious beliefs, just when they affect everyone. Again, it’s a majority vs. minority issue.

If you live in California, Florida, Arizona or Arkansas, you may be familiar with propositions that are intended to remove, deny or eliminate rights for GLBT citizens. Arkansas and Florida even effect foster or adopted children. I’ve already done a recent blog post on voting No on Proposition 8 in California. Marriage isn’t some exclusive right only for people that get married in a church. Marriage is civil. It’s a legal right. People get married without being religious or belonging to a particular sect. My wife and I got married on a beach in Lake Tahoe, Calif. Hardly a church [but some place I would consider spending my Sunday at]. And tradition…. what tradition? Marrying for property rights? Shotgun weddings? Divorce rates? Get it a rest. Remove your bias. Throw out your cherry-picked bible verses. Stop listening to the fear about what will happen if gays are able to marry. No church is forced now to marry anyone. Why would that change with same-sex marriage being legal? Any church has the right to deny who they want to marry. It happens with heretosexual couples, it will happen with same-sex couples. Nothing changes and people go find another venue to get married in. Just vote NO on each one of these propositions. It will prove that you really are not bigoted and biased and can let others live their lives, even if you don’t like it. Because at the end of the day, we are all human.

———————————————————————————-

Vote

I cannot stress how important it is to vote. Even if you disagree with me on each of the issues and positions I discussed above, at least exercise your right to vote. And stop finding ways to deny others to vote. That’s a fucked up way of trying to get your person elected or initiative passed. It’s a right we earned and each and every eligible person over the age of 18 should never be stopped from voting.

That’s all until Wednesday morning, when we will see what the outcome will be of all of this.