|
Tony Rubolotta
Compromise for the Common Good
October 16, 2008
I hate to say it, but when Bob
Casey said John McCain lurches from left to right, it was one of the few
truths to come from the Democrat campaign. When McCain reaches across
the aisle, he turns his back on the people that would provide his
strongest source of support. McCain was the mainstream media’s choice
for the Republican candidate for president for that very reason. What
the media touted as his strength is his weakness. Nonetheless, there are
absolutely compelling reasons to support McCain versus a radical leftist
in the form of Barack Obama.
First, someone has to deal with Ahdmenijad and his ambitions for a
nuclear armed Iran. Unlike so many of Obama’s worshippers, Ahdmenijad is
no fool and not susceptible to the "change” mantra and rhetoric of
charm. Obama, like most narcissists, will over estimate his ability to
influence people and likely give Iran more than enough time to develop
nuclear weapons. America’s enemies are watering at the mouth over the
prospect of dealing with an anti-American president enamored with
himself and eager to imbibe the false praise that will surely be heaped
his way.
Ahdmenijad knows what he wants, and no wet behind the ears leftist
brimming over with self-adulation will deter him. This issue isn’t going
away and Obama’s sweet talk isn’t going to work.
Second, I believe it is a near certainty that this country will suffer
one or more devastating attacks during the term of the next president.
If Mexican drug dealers and smugglers can bring tons of drugs and
thousands of illegal aliens across our border, smuggling chemical,
biological or nuclear weapon components across the same border should be
a piece of cake. In the aftermath of a nuclear explosion in an American
city, the sitting president will have little choice but to declare
martial law.
Since I believe that will happen, I’d much rather it be McCain than
Obama. For a leftist, martial law would provide the excuse they need to
suppress all criticism of their administration under the guise of
national security. I also suspect Obama would come up with a number of
"emergency measures” that clearly go beyond dealing with the actual
crisis in order to implement a radical domestic agenda. Furthermore,
congress, even if dominated by Republicans, would be powerless to stop a
president invoking martial law. Don’t count on the courts either.
Third, energy will be our next economic crisis under Obama. In the
second debate, he made a statement that was cunningly deceptive about
energy policy, giving many the impression he now supports offshore
drilling for oil, coal and nuclear energy. That isn’t what he said
though he tried to make it sound that way like a sleazy attorney using
weasel words. What he said was he would "explore” offshore drilling,
coal and nuclear energy.
The enviro-whackos picked that up, which is why they didn’t condemn
Obama for making that statement. Obama has already "explored” and
decided the issue. There will be no offshore drilling, coal or nuclear
energy. Instead, we will continue the pursuit of exotic technologies
decided not on economic merit but on politically motivated grants.
Government policy under Obama will be the sucker punch to K.O. an
economy already stunned by the liberal orchestrated and managed
financial crisis we are now enduring.
Finally, changing the most successful economic system the world has
known for the sake of "change” is not the kind of change I want. Don’t
be fooled by the European socialists because their economies are being
propped up by a massive infusion of cheap labor to delay the pending
bankruptcy of their welfare states. That cheap labor riots in the
streets of Paris, bombs trains in Spain and subways in London, and rapes
women in Scandinavia as a religious duty. That is a high price to pay to
conceal failure.
Claims that capitalism is unfair and unjust pale in comparison to the
unfairness and injustice of the economies that Obama wants to emulate.
Do Americans really want the two-class system of communism that
impoverishes the masses to satiate the privileged? Do we really want to
be like the old Soviet Union, China, Burma or Zimbabwe? Poverty may be
an undesirable consequence of capitalism but under communism, it is a
guaranteed and planned result.
John McCain is not my candidate of choice, but for the common good I
will compromise because the other choice will be so devastating in its
consequences. |
