The "Obama Effect"

Forget the "Bradley effect". After the 2008 Presidential Election, we may well have a new political term to describe voter behavior: the "Obama effect."


"If the undecideds put McCain over the top, said Aaron Mishkin in the Weekly Standard, it won't necessarily be because they're racists. It's the fear of being "thought" a racist that makes them reluctant to admit they don't like Obama for perfectly valid reasons of policy and experience. The media keeps telling them that Obama is the future, and that anyone who doesn't support him is either a bigot or a moron. So when these "undecideds" choose to disagree, political scientists may have a new phrase in their lexicon: "the Obama effect." "

[source: "The Week Magazine", November 1, 2008]


I, for one, am tired of the liberal left and the biased media telling me that if I'm not for Obama then I must be "either a bigot or a moron." I don't support Obama for many, many valid political reasons: a lack of practical experience being at the very top of the list.

Obama's plan to immediately "withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq [if elected]" is a slap in the face to all those who have bravely served in Iraq and the Middle East. It also defies logic and reason, given the fact the U.S. "Military Surge" in Iraq has worked and brought unprecedented peace and stability to the region. As I said before,

"how can you "strike at the heart of terrorism" [Obama said in a campaign speech at the end of last week] if you order an immediate, across the board, withdraw of US military troops from Iraq, and systematically destabilize the region? Make no mistake, destabilization is statistically highly likely given Obama's withdraw scenario. Destabilization of the region will result in an increase of available resources (i.e., guns and other weapons) and unhindered movement for terrorists. Terrorist groups will once again have an increased influence in the region and may once again have the means necessary to strike on U.S. soil.

The U.S. military "surge" in Iraq has resulted in a semblance of order and our taking out the number 2 leader behind Bin Laden. The surge has worked, and we are closer than ever to "striking at the heart of terrorism". If we suddenly change course, 180 degrees, with an immediate troop withdraw, we would loose the ground that we have gained with lives of our own American men and women thus far.

Obama's statement this morning is a prime example of Obama's inexperience and pandering to a segment of the American electorate who truly don't understand military strategy or what is at stake in Iraq and the greater Middle East. We, as Americans, ALL WANT PEACE and order in the world, but that peace and order sometimes comes at a price and is kept in place by military intervention. History has shown this time and time again: especially when you are dealing with extremists who have no intention of "sitting down and negotiating";their unswerving end goal is the total annihilation of the "evil western world" and its people (that's you and I!).

I fear that Obama's inexperience in Foreign Policy would put American back in the position of having its head in the sand again: right back where we were on 9/11/2001 and the months leading up to this horrific terrorist attack on American soil. That is NOT "CHANGE WE NEED!" ".

John Mcain is for "winning the war in Iraq" and bringing our troops "home with victory." He won't sit down and negotiate with dictators on their terms, and he has voted to support the U.S. military troop surge that has proven effective and puts closer to ensuring our nation's safety against future terrorist attacks.

Obama's plans for the economy aren't sound in the long run either. Energy independence is a key factor to restoring our economy. Obama is opposed to many safe and immediate solutions to this energy crisis (e.g., off-shore oil drilling off coast of U.S. and nuclear power). Further, he wants to tax and penalize [per his own comments in campaign speeches these last days] into oblivion the coal industry, even in light of huge strides made in "clean coal technology". This direct attack on the coal industry will cost us American jobs, jeopardize our much needed energy independence, and make electricity cost more for you and me. None of the latter will help an already staggering American economy!

John Mcain supports clean coal technology, nuclear power, off-shore oil drilling now, natural gas, and pursuing alternative energy sources (solar power on large scale, wind, hybrid and bio fuels). He is for all technologies which have been proven safe -- with new technology developments -- that will get American on its immediate way to energy independence.

Obama did nothing to help avert the financial crisis. He remained on the campaign trail and did not return to the U.S. Senate to review the bailout plan, give his input, and vote. Obama did not even vote "present" during this crucial time. What does that tell us about his leadership abilities?

John McCain suspended his campaign and returned to Washington and the U.S. Senate when the country was on the verge of financial collapse. He heard the debates, reviewed proposals, gave input and sought to bridge party differences. He voted at this critical time and put "Country First." John McCain has also vowed to review Wall Street regulations and to enact legislation that will ensure that Wall Street never again has the power again to do what the AIGs, Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's did to the American economy.

Obama's plan to lower taxes on the middle class is riddled with holes, in my opinion. A large portion of those eligible for the "tax cut" did not even pay taxes in 2008, but they would still receive a check? To me, that is equivalent to buying votes with taxpayer dollars. Meanwhile, Obama plans to increase taxes on small business, which have historically been responsible for creating long term jobs in the economy. Obama's plans to increase "infrastructure jobs" (e.g., government jobs) will only create short term jobs, increase bureaucracy and the national deficit. I also heard that Obama wants to tax 401k (retirement) contributions as a source of revenue, but I have yet to verify that this is fact. If it is: scary!

John McCain's economic plan will lower taxes, relieve burdens on small businesses and create new and permanent jobs to grow our economy. He has vowed to end all earmark spending and put government on a budget "just like you and I live on" [per John McCain's campaign speeches yesterday, 11/3]. This is a necessary step toward reducing the national deficit. Sarah Palin has a superb economic record in her state of Alaska. She turned a huge government deficit (from her predecessor) into a surplus and put money from energy revenues back into the pockets of every citizen of Alaska. Palin's expertise on economic issues will directly translate to the national scale and help to put the American economy back on track.

Finally, Obama is for abortion, including partial birth abortion. Just look at his voting record. Obama even voted against a bill that would have provided immediate medical attention to babies that were alive after an abortion procedure. If you don't think abortion is a crucial issue, just read my blog from earlier today: "Children: Opening Our Hearts and Minds." In today's busy world, we often become immune to violence in all of its forms. Maybe we need to rethink the significance of abortion and its impact on our society for generations to come.

John McCain is pro-life (against abortion) and has a strong voting record to support this stand. He and his wife have adopted children, some with medical needs, from foreign countries.

The clock is ticking. We're down to the final hours. Think long and hard: which candidate is going to do the best job for our country when the cameras are off and the real work begins? Do your homework, sort through the bias and the rhetoric, and vote on the issues.

God Bless the candidates, in these final hours, and our nation as a whole.