Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (0)
Close call
Ps
On Nov. 4, our country faces a watershed decision. Should voters cast their ballots on a decorated military hero and longtime U.S. senator, or should they take a leap of faith on a first-term legislator with transformational leadership potential?
John McCain vs. Barack Obama.
Like many of you, we have struggled with the choice, particularly as global events have unfolded in recent months.
McCain is an experienced, tested leader who can work both sides of the aisle without caving to special interests or even leaders of his own party. He has the courage to make tough decisions and remains a strong believer in the power of tax cuts. McCain's tax cuts would lead to greater job growth and economic expansion, but would accomplish little in stemming metastasizing budget deficits.
We know little about Obama's potential as commander in chief other than polls showing favorable ratings throughout Europe and Central America. Importantly, he is less popular in Muslim countries most concerned with the advent of nuclear states, terrorism and radical Islam. He was wrong on the surge in Iraq and we remain concerned about on-the-job training for the young senator in such perilous times.
Obama's tax plans represent a redistribution of wealth from corporations and personal incomes more than $250,000 to the middle and lower income brackets. The Heritage Foundation concludes that his budget deficits would amount to about $1.3 billion over 10 years versus McCain's $2.5 billion. While we believe in supply-side economics, the next 10 years will be dictated by policies that curtail, not add to, record breaking budget deficits.
On the tax-and-spending front, Obama would have kindred spirits in the Democrat-controlled Congress. We are more likely to see less gridlock on this and other fronts, and depending on your income level or view of the role of government this may or may not be a good thing. Obama's recent overtures to the so-called Blue Dog Democrats are a welcome sign for those of us demanding spending restraint and balanced budgets.
We believe the finger pointing over past records and shady associations is less relevant than either candidate's potential for leadership in a new world facing the dual threats of nuclear terrorism and a nationalized economy. We look back and wonder which was worse: McCain promoting a moratorium on financial regulation in 1999, or Obama proposing to cut and run from our troops and commitment in Iraq?
The "change" mantra can be claimed by either candidate. Obama brings the obvious: our first African American president with enormous inspiration and generational appeal. He represents a clean break from the Bush years and its record of intolerance, environmental neglect and poor planning. McCain has an actual record of change, which is easier said than done, and he is no George Bush. But while it is true that he's not Bush, his choice of Sarah Palin and other gut decisions are reminders of a blundering past. And, incidentally, we have wondered when it became exemplary to place bottom of your class in college?
The choice is yours and the country will be better for moving in new directions with either candidate. If Obama prevails, the country needs to watch his proclivity for building a welfare state in a time of growing federal control of the private sector. His liberal bent on health care and other expensive programs would be good for government-fueled Northern Virginia, yet they might dampen private enterprise and job creation across the country.
You must be logged in to post a comment.