Someone asked me about my political views recently. As a starting point,
this site has a straight-forward description of the different views, conservative vs liberal.
I think of myself as a conservative on most issues, although I am a little leery of the growing strength of the religious right (politics and religion should NOT mix). I do have liberal leanings when it comes to abortion (I’m pro-choice), education (I think the whole school vouchers thing is unrealistic), and same-sex marriages (I don’t feel this threatens the sanctity of anything). While I support the second amendment, I don’t think the average American really needs the right to own semi-automatic/automatic weapons. But I support the war and I don't lay all the blame for the down-turn in the economy at the feet of the GOP.
With that said, I'll probably vote Republican. Earlier this year, I stated that I wouldn't make up my mind for certain until the candidates picked their running mates. I think this is more important than usual because of McCain's age and Obama's profile. If Obama had selected Hillary as his VP (which I DIDN'T think would happen, but you never can tell...) that would have definitely confirmed a Republican vote from me, because I think Hillary is cold, conniving, and crooked as a dog's hind leg. There's NO WAY I think she belongs back in the White House in any capacity, let alone next in line for the presidency.
Now that the VP selections have been made, I think it's hilarious that the liberal media keeps blasting away at Palin's credentials and experience level. Like a two-bit stage magician... look over here as I flourish my cape, let me draw your attention to their woefully inexperienced VP candidate, isn't it horrific! Just don't look closely at my hands while I conceal our equally inexperienced PRESIDENTIAL candidate. Do you want to draft a rookie as your starting QB, or as your second string?
Another reason I will probably vote Republican is to keep a balance in the overall federal government. The Senate and the House are likely headed for Democratic majorities and a Democratic president to boot would be too much. There are good points and bad points to each party and they coexist, in part to keep each other in check. It's going to be a really close election, and I won't be surprised, whichever way the final wind blows.
I've also been asked, "why do I support the war?" Well, nobody likes war or wants to be at war. But I will say that I think the initial invasion was based on intelligence about WMDs that all the European nations and the US shared and believed to be valid at the time. Iraq didn't cooperate with the UN inspectors or abide by the UN mandates. Also, Saddam Hussein had already used chemical weapons against minority populations in his own country (180,000 Kurds killed in ethnic cleansing in Northern Iraq and 150 Shi'ite Muslims in Southern Iraq and these are just the ones that they tried him for... there may have been more). How much of a leap was it to believe he'd use them against foreign enemies, or provide them to extremists or terrorists for the same purpose.
I think mistakes might have been made in the execution of the original invasion (not enough troops sent and the initial interim governor wasn't the right person for the job - those are the two major mistakes). 72 hours after we took over in Baghdad, they delisted (decommissioned?) the entire Iraqi military forces, so now you've got thousands of newly unemployed,
armed men, who suddenly had nothing to do. It's as if they partly created their own enemies, the insurgents. (There are non-military Al-Qaeda insurgents at work in Iraq, too). Anyway, that whole thing should have been handled differently. But, once the US troops invaded and took over, it would have been chaos to just pull out without helping with the rebuilding and restructuring.
Think about how long the US had troops in Germany after WWII. Our army bases in Germany and Japan are staffed with US troops at all times.We still have thousands of troops in Korea, believe it or not (over 30,000, last I heard). But we need to stay in Iraq and get the job done before we pull out completely. Recent skirmishes are showing that the new Iraqi army is learning to hold it's own. The country needs to be stabilized with a working democracy in place, a reliable army, services for the citizens up and running. Pull out too soon and insurgents could topple the new government.
It's also politically significant for there to be a democratic government in the mostly unstable Middle East that is friendly to the Western World. Our other "friends" in the middle east (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Dubai, etc) are all monarchies. Having a democratic ally in the Middle East is a more nuanced argument for our continued presence in Iraq, one that the majority of Americans might not really care about; but the world is a smaller and smaller place and our interactions and relations with other countries impact our lives everyday, whether we realize it or not. This is where the discussion would segue into the economy but I'm just not up for that right now. I'll save that for another post.
