Thursday, March 15, 2007

Why I Won’t Vote for Hillary or McCain

The office of President of the United States is an important position and it should be held by a person who actively wants the responsibilities of the office. However, there are those who want the office too much!

Both Hillary Clinton and John McCain fall into the category of wanting the office too much. They want to be President of the United States so badly that they have sacrificed their principles in their quest to gain the office. The problem is, we cannot allow someone without principles to hold the office. Bush is a prime example of what happens when someone without principles gains the office. That’s why you can’t get a straight answer out of Hillary and why John is starting to look as two-faced as a used car salesman.

Hillary tap dances over whether or not it was a mistake to go to war. She avoids the question when asked if it’s immoral to be gay. She triangulates and polls and calculates her answers to just about everything. In short she’s trying to figure out how to tell the people what she thinks they want to hear.

McCain is no better – though his approach is different. He was a maverick until the 2004 election, riding what he called the “Straight Talk Express”. Bush smeared him badly but all I can remember was McCain pathetically hugging Bush at the podium sometime after the election. It was a sickening picture. Now, McCain who was against religious zealotry is courting religious wackos. McCain, who was for gay rights is now against gay rights. McCain, who knew about torture first hand, votes to allow torture. That doesn't sound much like straight talk to me. In some circles he's picked up the nick name "Pander Bear" ... and the humor in it comes from the truth in it.

Where are their principles? What do they stand for. It would appear they want to stand for anything that will get them elected and that, in my book, is a good reason to vote for just about anyone else. They appear to have ethics like rubber bands ... or, as Nixon would have it, "situational ethics" ... and we all know where that got us.

No comments: