Barack Obama

I remember watching the 2004 Democratic Convention on TV. After Barack Obama gave his speech, in the same way that Ronald Reagan gave his speech in 1968 for Barry Goldwater, I remember saying, "This guy is going to be the first black president of the United States". At the time, I wanted to know much more about him; I was hooked. I bought his first book "Dreams of My Father" and I read most of it. I'll be the first to admit it, I liked him. As a person, I liked him. He sounded like an average person. However, I changed a lot over the last 4 years. I started off as a communist/socialist, experimented with the far right and read everything ever written by Barry Goldwater, went out with a liberal group that drank beer and discussed politics called "Drinking Liberally", drifted towards the middle, and finally made my transition to a more conservative stance. Now, I'm not one of these radical conservatives that refuses to challenge his own beliefs, but I tend to be quite conservative...at least financially/economically. I, personally, think abortion is a disgusting act; however, I feel that it is and always should remain a woman's choice. I support welfare, but only to help people get back on their feet. I've seen it work and I believe that it is necessary to help hard-working people who run into difficult times. I believe that international issues are America's business and we should intervene when it's necessary and if it's possible financially and militarily. I believe that the United States should start raising taxes to start paying off the war in Iraq. The majority of people in America have not and do not feel the effects of living in a country in a state of war; this needs to change. I support the war in Iraq because of the vital need of having another functioning, self-sufficient democracy in the Middle East. Aside from all of that, I am hard to pin down politically.

Barack Obama, in 2007, began showing his true colors and those colors are more obvious now than they ever were. The Obama that we see now can't stand behind a podium and give magnificent speeches and call it a day. He must now be placed in the pressure cooker and face the hostilities that many politicians face on a daily basis. To date, Obama carried his far-left beliefs through the primaries to finally defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party nomination. Since then, we have all seen how much Obama has changed. He changed his stance on the Iraqi troop withdrawal, his non-support for the troop surge (which has and continues to work), his stance on campaign finance, and has not put any focus on the black and hispanic communities. He rearranges the truth to fit what he has said in the past. When faced with criticism on his past stances, he dances around the issue and refuses to admit that he has, in fact, changed positions. My question to Obama supporters is, "How can you trust someone who can't stand firm on anything?" How do you know what he stands for if he keeps changing his views and positions? A person can only dance so much before he gets tired and gets caught sleeping. Case in point: John Edwards. We all felt bad for John and the rest of the Edwards' family after hearing that Elizabeth had breast cancer. We saw how compassionate John was for his wife and we felt warm inside for seeing a husband stand by his wife in her time of greatest need. However, we now see how much we were fooled...myself included.

Not only had John gone out and had an affair, but he, most likely, also conceived an illegitimate child from this affair. From this day on, John Edwards has no moral ground to stand on. Any future chance of running for president is shot and any future doing anything else is pretty much shot. John was the democrat that I supported the most despite not being a democrat. He was a great politician, but he sure comes up short in the morality department.

Barack Obama is now what Michael Jackson was to the 1980s. He's a token black guy that has a lot of white friends and can be black when he wants to be black and can be white when he wants to be white. People in the media that keep asking if race will have anything to do with this upcoming election are beating a dead horse. Of course race will play a huge factor in this election. This election may be historical on an age and color basis, but it will have no redeeming value to it. The GOP has done a fairly poor job running this country the last 8 years and it has forced the American public to nominate an inexperienced black guy and an over-the-hill crusty, white guy who sold himself out just to finally get his name on the ballot. The John McCain from 2000 was a real political machine: military experience, maverick, called out the conservative Christian leaders as "wacko", and ran the campaign that he wanted to run. However, because of the current political climate, he has failed to stay the same politically. The conservatives wanted Romney, but the independents wanted McCain. The Bush Administration pushed a lot of their voting base to the middle and this could have a lot to do with the fact that a real conservative politician wouldn't stand a chance against either Obama or Clinton.

I feel that Obama is doing what he doesn't want to do, but is being forced to do...gravitate towards the middle. If Romney would have gotten the nomination for the Republican Party Obama could have easily kept a lot of his leftist leanings because of the political polarity of the two candidates. However, there appears to be a developing trend in American politics. Romney once ran against Kennedy as a Democrat. He was against the NRA, supported abortion, and supported gay marriage. However, he lost an election standing on those grounds. Despite his defeat, American politics allows politicians to "reinvent" themselves politically and are able to do so with little hostility.

I then feel inclined to ask this question, "What good are political beliefs if they can constantly change without criticism?" I have faced much criticism because of my change in political view, but that tends to happen to young men and women during their mid-twenties and early thirties. We tend to accomplish more, get paid more, get better jobs, and enjoy living better lifestyles. We support welfare when we're young, but oppose it as we get older and become more successful. It's like not having an opinion on abortion or being pro-choice until a woman chooses to abort the child that you and her created together. You see, we experience different things in life and those experiences change how we see the world. You may vote against school levies in the beginning, but vote for them when your children's education is affected by the outcome of that initiative. You may vote against an initiative to provide more money to the public library, but when you have a child who loves to read and study at the library you see how important those extra funds really are. I hope you see where I'm going with this.

Political changes are common for most people. The only political group that doesn't change that often are senior citizens. They're on a limited budget as it is and they overwhelmingly vote against any initiative that further deprives them of their monthly income. However, the young generations of people constantly change because of changes within their own lives. Social security is never an issue until you're old enough to collect or know someone personally who benefits from it after becoming physically handicapped or have lost a parent or spouse. You see, core values aren't core values because life isn't consistent. Once you get married and have all of the children you'll ever have you might begin to develop a sense of core values. Property taxes, school levies, marriage/child tax credits, etc. will affect how you vote, but this is in no way permanent. This could change the second a particular issue hits close to home for you.

After much thought and consideration, I'm still not voting for Obama or McCain. I'm still voting for Ron Paul. However, I'm pretty sure that my political views will change as I graduate college, begin my career, get married, start a family, see my parents grow older, and prepare for my own retirement days. A lot can happen and nothing is for certain. That is why I understand why Obama and McCain have altered their political views, but I do not support them. They're not doing it for anything else besides trying to get elected. I understand how someone can change politically because of a personal issue or a life-altering situation. The United States will continue to see this political pendulum that has existed for hundreds of years. People in the 1980s loved Ronald Reagan, but were disgusted of George H.W. Bush's handling of the economy and voted in William Jefferson Clinton. The economy flourished with Clinton because of the dot-com boom, but he failed horribly in his foreign policies. George W. Bush has done a poor job domestically, but has possibly created a very important democratic state in the Middle East. Before you criticize how Bush "lied" to get us into the war in Iraq, consider how history has explained this decision. Kennedy sent troops to Vietnam after failing horribly with the Bay of Pigs. Saddam sent his troops into Kuwait in the attempt to raise their hopes after fighting Iran for 8 bloody years. Clinton bombed Iraq amidst his political scandal with Monica Lewinsky. Bush used 9/11 as a motivating force to get troops into Iraq to establish a democratic state in the Middle East. The whole issue of "weapons of mass destruction" was just an excuse to get us into a war with unlimited funding appropriations. The American public and the UN Council would never buy the excuse of democracy promotion or regime change and that is why they chose to "create" a reason to invade. They knew that Saddam wouldn't back down and publicly state that Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction. He wouldn't do that because he would be viewed as a weak leader in the Middle East and face a possible Iranian attack. For example, let's use the American Pie example with the girl spreading rumors that Finch had a massively large "member". He didn't deny it and whether or not it was true was regardless. It was only what people were told and believed that mattered. No guy would admit to having a less than average size penis and this is a great analogy to the psychology behind Saddam's refusal to deny that Iraq did, in fact, possess weapons of mass destruction.

We are now seeing how poorly the GOP has left this country and how little the democrat controlled Congress has done to correct it. That's the beauty of politics: it's always changing. So, if you find yourself changing your political beliefs it's okay. However, try to understand why they're changing and try to understand that people can indeed change. People who refuse to change despite learning new facts, are a rarity. A politician changing their political stances and views should be understood, but ridiculed as well. They, unlike you, have a motive for changing and it's important for you and the rest of the citizens to find out why and hold them accountable. Every action a politician makes should be reviewed and taken into account. As Ghandi once said, "Be the change that you see". It's up to you to decide what that change is and what needs to happen in order for that change to take place.