I have this wierd problem. Well, it isn't really problem but it's one of those things in humanity where you try to figure out why gravity is about the only constant on the planet....
Here's what I mean:
My kids have been bugging me about who I'll vote for. They know I can't stand McCain and I am not a huge fan of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. I don't particularly hate any one of them mind you, I'm just not a fan of ANY of them.
It's going to probably come down to Barack Vs. McCain. And it will get ugly. No doubt in my mind about that.
The thing I don't like about Barack Obama is his track record. I can't get away from it. He doesn't have enough of a track record. I'd like to be a doctor but I don't have a good track record in topics like biology and chemistry. Ergo, I'm not a doctor. Obama really doesn't have a track record as a leader.
However, in CT, the whole thrust of the past campaign featuring Joe Lieberman vs. Ned Lamont was that Joe Lieberman has a track record and it isn't a bad one. Yet I don't think there was anyone in the state who wouldn't concede that Ned Lamont would have made a superior Senate Leader. Joe Lieberman is a career political hack and his recent dumping of any pretense of loyalty to any party or person except those that can further his political ambitions (in this case, Republicans) is reprehensible.
I'm using the comparison between Barack Obama (basically a good state senate representative with little track record) and Joe Lieberman (a long standing US Senate Leader) to wonder out loud whether experience is all it is cracked up to be. Joe Lieberman claims to be the experienced Senator that crosses partisan lines. Nonetheless, he seems to have lost most if not all of his moral compass.
I'm absolutely sure I could care less who crosses partisan anything. I care alot about who gets the answers right. After 8 years of Republicans destroying (yes, destroying) our democracy and the ideological pipes that hold our country together I'd like to see a candidate that clearly demonstrates an understanding of what is right and wrong. We're all born with a strong sense or capability to have honesty, integrity and recognition of truth and there are a whole bunch of things that aren't gray areas:
Killing people - Wrong
Healthcare for Children - Right
Schools and meals for children - Right
Helping those that can't help themselves - Right
Torturing people - Wrong
Usurping our justice system to imprison innocent people - Wrong
Spending $2 billion in Iraq per week - Wrong
There are some areas where we shouldn't compromise. Too much of the last 10 years in the United States people have closed their eyes and hoped that somehow our huge problems would land themselves on autopilot. We seem to be replacing our values with our wallets and we let our markets define our moral direction.
One thing that GW Bush has confirmed for me: one person can make a huge difference in our direction. He has been one huge enabler for companies and special interests and has told the little people (that would be just about everyone outside of the top %1) to go eat cake.
The question is this: can our next president manage the ability to identify what is right and wrong and take action to fix it? And the thing that sucks is this - no matter who I vote for I will have to accept a compromise right off the bat. Not a good way to start any relationship.