January 31, 2008

On "Holding Your Nose" and Voting

I just e-mailed this to some friends, and I thought I'd share it with you.

It's always a "hold your nose vote" when you vote. It's the nature of the 2 party system. So don't sweat it.

What's funny is the way we idealize the past, like every one paying homage to Reagan. We remember all the stuff that he did that we loved, but then forget all the selling out he did.

Original amnesty plan? Reagan.
Raise taxes on SS? Reagan.

The point is not to demean Reagan, it's to bring a reality check to our own thinking. Reagan only seemed like an inspirational revolutionary because of the time he was living in. From an objective point of view, Romney seems more conservative than Reagan.

The only differences are the times we're living in. Under the shadow of the Soviet Empire and strangled by 50 years of New Deal economics Reagan certainly seemed revolutionary. But we've been living under the reality of Reagan for the past 25 years now. All our candidates, including McCain, are Reaganites. Hell, that's what Obama meant when he said Reagan was a transformative figure. Even Bill Clinton declared that the era of Big Government is over.

McCain isn't nearly as bad as every one makes him out to be in my mind. McCain-Feingold? Bleh. What did it do, really? Not. A. Thing.

Closing Gitmo? No big deal. So we send the bad guys somewhere else. May even be necessary in the way that so many stupid PR moves are necessary.

My biggest problem with McCain is the immigration thing. But, like I said, that's just so Reaganesque of him to want to grant amnesty to millions of illegals.


So that leaves Romney. And as far as I can tell, the biggest problem with Romney is that he's Mormon. Which is less revealing about Romney than it is about our own prejudices. The kind of prejudices we don't even want to admit that we have. And I think those prejudices are slowly falling to the wayside as they are revealed to our conscience mind.

I'll be honest with you guys, I voted for McCain in the 2000 primary. If I had to do it over, I'd support him in a minute. Let's not forget that the real force behind McCain/Kennedy wasn't McCain....it was George W. Bush. And McCain's biggest selling point still is that he would have fired Rumsfield much earlier. Which, if you'll recall, I also called for and took a lot of flack for it.

But that brings us back to Romney. He's George Bush, only articulate, and without his two major flaws: he'll fire incompetents and he's not nearly as compassionate (I hope).

To be honest, I don't know why Romney is second choice for conservatives. Duncan Hunter was a joke from the start--no sitting member of the House has ever been elected President---not in over 100 years! Hell, when John Hawkins told me he was on the Hunter campaign, I was like, are you serious?

And Fred was, well, Fred was great but that was then this is now.

No need to hold nose to vote for Romney. He's the best choice. McCain? Yeah, well after the immigration fiasco I'd have to hold my nose to vote for him. It was a lot easier in 2000 when he seemed much less compassionate than Bush.

But that was between Bush and McCain. Knowing what I know now about both of them, I'll take Romney over either.

Just remember, politics isn't religion. Voting for someone other than Reagan or Jesus doesn't make one dirty or a sinner. The alternative to having candidates who don't perfectly reflect our preferences is a multi-party parliamentary system. And if you want that, move to France.

So, go support Mitt before it's too late.

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D. at 11:24 PM | Comments |