Presidential Campaign 2008

The '08 Presidential Campaign promises to be entertaining, whether it is informative is yet to be seen. All of the candidates talk about it being time for a change in the United States, and each Presidential hopeful has published on their campaign website the changes they plan to implement during their 4 or 8 year tenure; unfortunately, many voters do not take the time to review these plans, compare the plans with other candidate's, and think critically about the effects the implementation of these plans would have on the United States. Deciding whether these changes proposed by the respective candidates will be beneficial or detrimental to the Nation is the main objective of each voter.

There are currently six people who, at the time of this writing, are still in the race for the most powerful position in the world: President of the United States of America; they are: Democratic candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Mike Gravel; and Republican candidates John Mc Cain, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul.

DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES

Barack Obama

Many Americans question where Obama's loyalties lie. Ethnicity? Heritage? Race? Or the country? In this country, when racism is spoken about it is typically referring to individuals whose skin is black; no one wants to mention what is sometimes referred to as "reverse racism," or racism based on a person whose skin is NOT black. This is a subject for another article, but I mention it here, to make a point: There are NO races, religions, or ethnic groups that have not experienced hate crimes, racism, racial profiling, and discrimination, not to mention that the African Americans were not the only group to have been enslaved.

So why do many other Americans question Obama's loyalties? Because of his ties to Muslim and Islam, as well as some accusations that the church with which he is a member actively participates in reverse racism. An in-depth investigation into the Trinity United Church of Christ reveals no reverse racism; the church does encourage pride in ethnicity, race, and heritage, but there is no evidence that anyone has been turned away because he or she is not black.

As to Obama's Muslim and Islamic ties, there is no shame in embracing one's religious heritage, regardless of what that heritage is; this country was built on religious freedoms. However, Obama has never claimed to be any religion other than Christian. That Obama is arguably the top running Democratic Presidential Candidate speaks volumes to this country's progression in tolerance, despite criticisms on his religion, heritage, and even his middle name, "Hussein." It is a fact that none of the candidates running for President are the first, nor will they be the last, to face discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, heritage, weight, age, gender, health, appearance, or any other descriptive aspect.

I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Obama has not accepted any campaign monies from PAC's or lobbyists in Washington, as other candidates have had no qualms in accepting. This demonstrates to me strength of character and good ethics on his part, as well as the ability to stand behind what he says in his campaign promises (namely to end lobbyists' role in writing national policies, governmental secrecy, and wasteful spending).

Obama's plan for change is well organized, centrally located on his website, and very reader friendly. His promises are, for the most part, what the majority of Americans want to hear, and they are not so different in breadth from his opponents. While they sound a bit ambitious to realistically be able to implement in a 4-year period (with the bureaucratic red tape that so often blocks change) this ambitiousness, too, is not so different from his opponents. Very few people are naïve enough to believe that most of these promises will be kept, or even half; however, if they were, Obama could easily go down in history as the Greatest American President of all time.

Hillary Clinton

Clinton's Presidential race has, without a doubt, been damaged by her husband's indiscriminative antics during his tenure in the White House, the most significant being the Monica Lewinski debacle. Although, you have to commend Hillary on keeping her composure in the public arena during this fiasco; I readily admit I would not have handled it quite so well!

The Clinton campaign had no qualms about coming out swinging, but then the Clintons have always been aggressive on the campaign trail. It worked well for Bill's campaigns, but is it damaging Hillary's? I wonder if critics do not want Hillary to show a softer side, she is a woman, but if she did, would critics then say that she is weak and would not make a good President?

Clinton has an extremely detailed plan on how she plans to follow through with her campaign promises, but it is not centrally located; multiple pages have to be pulled up to view everything, and the links are sometimes difficult to find. Interestingly enough, one-quarter of Clinton's campaign website home page is taken up with a contribution/campaign donation banner (link).

Mike Gravel

There is not a lot that can be said about Mike Gravel. Gravel has been MIA in the political arena since 1981. He has been excluded from Democratic debates, because sponsors do not believe he makes for a viable, backable candidate (CBS News). He is suing "pro-Hillary 527" for running an ad on YouTube that he claims will violate the law IF it is aired on television, since 527 is not registered with the Federal Election Commission. This move reeks of desperation.

The YouTube video prominently displayed in the center of his website homepage is, well it's pathetic! I found it interesting that there were no pictures of Gavel on his website, with exception to the one in the "Gavel Gear" section that is a campaign poster for sale as part of a small donor package for $1000. What exists of Gavel's stance on issues is minimal at best and does not cover all the issues on the table. This, to me, is the equivalent of a Kindergartener running for the Miss America title.

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES

John McCain

John McCain's crowning glory is his history of serving in the military and being a POW in Vietnam. Then there is his political career that blossomed in 1982 with his election the Arizona House of Representatives. McCain is without a doubt, the forerunner for the Republican nomination.

As a side note, Arizona Central offers some interesting information about McCain's infidelity to his first wife (as allegations have arisen recently about more allegations of infidelity to his second wife), his history of flipping on issues in prior elections, and several incidents involving the loss of his temper with former running mates and others. (A link to Arizona Central is located in the references section.) Question is: Does the United States need a President with difficulty controlling his anger? Or would the Unites States benefit from a leader who refuses to back down and is quick to fight? And do we need someone else in a position of power who will tell the American public what they want to hear, instead of the truth?

McCain clams to be 'willing to address the fundamental problem of health care;' however, he does not have a clear plan in which to do so. The "details," if you can call them that, are very vague and reminiscent of the current President Bush; it looks like a pretty cake, but you go to slice it and find out it is nothing but an empty box with pretty icing. McCain's stance on the issues is presented more logically than Clinton's, but not as well presented as Obama's; it is easy to find, but requires multiple clicks to get any detailed information on the issues, that turns out to be not so detailed after all.

Mike Huckabee

Mike Huckabee is probably the most conservative candidate in the running for President at this time. Huckabee makes no secret that he wants Roe vs Wade overturned and does not support the woman's right to choose; that alone should knock him out of a majority of votes. Huckabee wants to eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes, gift, estate, social security, medicare, and self employment taxes; this sounds good, but will cutting federal spending make up the difference? At the same time, he believes a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq is a mistake. How does he plan to finance a war without taxes when the national debt is over $9 TRILLION and is growing by approximately $1.6 billion dollars each day? Huckabee's website is laid out in an easy to find manner; his stance on the issues are set out in black and white with no apologies, but are his policies logically and fiscally sound? Or is Huckabee just whistling in the wind?

Ron Paul

Ron Paul has had a consistent political career (no flip flopping on issues) and has been dubbed "Dr No" because he has "opposed so many things in his political career," specifically, anything "not explicitly authorized in the U.S. Constitution" (Chicago Tribune). Paul's stance on issues is laid out in more detail than many of the other candidates and in an easy to read format, and, at least to me, Paul's stand on political issues make a lot of sense. About the only issue that may present a problem is his stance against abortion and partial birth abortions; although, he wants to leave the issue of abortion up to the states, removing it from federal jurisdiction.

Paul consistently pulls in large crowds and large monetary donations. Support for Paul is a bit like an undercurrent, you are not quite sure where it is, until you step into the water; although Paul is not favored to win the GOP nomination for the Republican party, one wonders if this undercurrent could still push him through and keep his name on the ballot for the real election day.

Negative Politics

Obama has come under fire from his opponents for his "flowery speeches." However, one does not get elected into holding any public office without being charismatic, which includes the overuse of rhetoric in public speeches. Sometimes, I wonder if being able to spin a situation into having a favorable outlook is not part of the job requirements. Having charisma and the ability to give eloquent speeches are a requirement for any leader; in my opinion, no one was more skilled at this than Martin Luther King. It says a lot about the speaker's leadership skills when their speeches live on into a new millennia. King's "I have a dream" speech continues to move people, myself included, and will undoubtedly continue to motivate and inspire the next generation and the generation after that.

It was pretty clever of Obama's campaign to turn the political attacks from Clinton into attacks on Obama's supporters. It was a trick or a slight of hand to take voters' attention off of the issues and to make voters or Obama's supporters to feel personally attacked by Clinton. It was a cheap ploy that very few were naive enough to fall for; so, it was followed by the preemptory "truce" offered to Clinton from Obama, which was nothing short of rhetorical bull to show himself in a more favorable light by "taking the high road."

It is a known fact that no one is fond of negative politics, but negative politics serve the purpose of demonstrating a candidate's character and forces candidates to defend their current policies, proposed future policy changes, and voting history.

It is time for a change, but not a change based on skin color, gender or any other basis that does not in any way dictate how well or poorly a candidate can lead our country. I personally care about the color of a presidential candidate's skin, gender, or any other triviality about as much as I care how many times a day they pass gas. All these are descriptors of the person that has no bearing on how he or she will perform in leading the most powerful country in the world.

Even a candidate's moral values do not play a huge role in whether he or she can do an acceptable job as President; many good Presidents have been known for their extra-marital activities and some for unethical and illegal behaviors, just have a look at the Watergate debacle if you want an example. Candidates should be evaluated by what politics he or she stands for, and whether those politics and the candidate's stance on said politics make sense both logically and fiscally for the Nation. Character is an important indicator or what type of President the candidate will be, and as such, should be given careful consideration.

References

Arizona Central Click here to view this article.

Obama '08 campaign website www.barackobama.com/

CBS News Click here to view this article.

Chicago Tribune Click here to view this article.

Clinton '08 campaign website www.hillaryclinton.com

Gravel '08 campaign website www.gravel2008.us

McCain '08 campaign website www.johnmccain.com

Huckabee '08 campaign website www.mikehuckabee.com

Paul '08 campaign website www.ronpaul2008.com