Iâ€™m tired of everyone dumping on George Bush. Iâ€™m the first to admit that he has some serious leadership deficiencies, but he is the President and won the job fair and square twice, despite what the Libs think. As President, he deserves our respect, just like Nixon and Clinton did. For eight years, I had to suck it up and respect a man who molested women half his age in his office. Nearly all the issues Bush has had to deal with are a direct result of Clinton policies and Democratic bungling, particularly as it relates to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and â€œmark to marketâ€ accounting standards. (For more information, see Brian Wesburyâ€™s column in the Wednesday, October 1, Wall Street Journal.) For those of you who think Bush â€œstoleâ€ the election from Gore, Iâ€™ll remind you that Big Al had a huge lead over Bush in the polls, inherited a prosperous economy and was basically handed the job by his boss and still couldnâ€™t close the deal. The election wasnâ€™t stolen; he flat out blew it.
Second, there is no â€œbail outâ€. Itâ€™s more appropriately being called a â€œrescueâ€. Secretary Paulson was on 60 Minutes Sunday September 29 and was very clear about why the â€œrescueâ€ was/is needed. To paraphrase, the global economy was close to collapse if somebody didnâ€™t do something. In 1929, when the market crashed and ushered in the Great Depression, President Hoover did nothing and this resulted in the New Deal and our current entitlement philosophy. The government wonâ€™t and shouldnâ€™t allow the largest insurance company in the world to fail (AIG), because of the global economic consequences that would ensue. Itâ€™s easy for us to sit here with only a small fraction of the information and none of the responsibility if things donâ€™t work out and suggest that Secretary Paulson, Fed Chairman Bernanke and President Bush donâ€™t know what theyâ€™re doing. But I believe they do, and when in doubt, Iâ€™ll fall back on the respect thing mentioned above.
Third, when it comes to this election, our choices are between bad and terrible, with Senator McCain being â€œbadâ€. Senator Obama is smooth, eloquent, good-looking and would be a great car salesman, but has a resume shorter than Joe Bidenâ€™s attention span. In fact, the choice of Biden in and of itself would suggest that he lacks good judgment. As for McCain, he doesnâ€™t believe in wealth and income redistribution (that is socialism, a la Karl Marx) and will protect us from threats both internal and external, and thatâ€™s good enough for me. Itâ€™s also how the Founding Fathers saw how the government should operate. I donâ€™t expect the government to educate my children or fund my retirement. Thatâ€™s my responsibility, not the governmentâ€™s. As for pandering to big business or big oil, (as some have suggested), I donâ€™t know what to tell you. Since big business employs most of the people in this country (at least until Obama is elected, then the Federal government will) I guess you shouldnâ€™t buy anything or go anywhere, because when you do, youâ€™re supporting big business and big oil. Itâ€™s your money, you decide what to do with it. If you want to make the country a better place, turn the tv off and read a book and by all means, do not, under any circumstances, watch the evening news. Itâ€™s not the governmentâ€™s responsibility to make the country better, itâ€™s ours.
Finally, letâ€™s talk about qualifications. It seems that whenever anyone suggests that Senator Obama is unqualified to run the country because there is absolutely nothing in his background to suggest he is (imagine interviewing for GEâ€™s CEO position with YOUR current resume), the first, and as far as I can tell, only thing they can bring up is Governor Palinâ€™s perceived lack of qualifications. Like suddenly, that makes Obama more qualified. Keep in mind these are the same people that forget that Bill Clinton came from Arkansas, a state that does not have many more people than Alaska. Governor Palin is not running for the job of President, sheâ€™s running for Vice President. The idea of her being President is only relevant if something should happen to President McCain. As Vice President, her primary responsibility will be to chair the Senate, and since sheâ€™s raised five children (and, given how Congress has behaved lately), Iâ€™d say sheâ€™s highly qualified for that job. Iâ€™ll even go so far as to say that should Nancy Pelosi ever become pregnant, sheâ€™ll know how to handle that too. If something should happen to a President Obama, however, we getâ€¦Joe Biden? Given the choices, Iâ€™ll take Palin. In fact, she may be the best qualified of all the candidates, and the LEAST likely to pander to big business and big oil.
The only thing I can say is that the last time we elected a President as weak and as liberal as a President Obama would be, the country was so screwed up that it took Ronald Reagan to turn it around. Thatâ€™s a fact supported by history too.