Don't Fall (in Love)

Reasons why I wanted, earnestly, for pull for Obama:
1) He is, or seems, intelligent. His books are well written and have inspired millions. Then again, compared to Bush, who wouldn't look smart?
2) He taught constitutional law at a prestigious white bread university
3) He is black. (yes, racist as it is, I think it would be totally cool to have a black president)
4) As long as there is no real difference between the way the two parties govern, and until a viable third party rears its head, why not vote for the guy who reads a tele-prompter better?
5) He is a smoker, and I want to be able to say, "Hey, I might not be president, but at least I'm not stupid enough to fall for that damn fool habit."
6) He is from the mid-west, which seems like a very grounded, sensible place for a president to come from.
7) He is good looking, and I honestly feel it is just and right to favor better looking people.
8) I have friends, with opinions I respect, who are in love with him

HOWEVER, when I'm honest with myself which is as rare as it is dangerous, there are reasons why I cannot, under any circumstances, support Obama:
1) The Hollywood Elite support him. Actually, they not only support him, they vociferously, emphatically support him. This cannot be good. These are the rich, out of touch people for whom the phrase "tabloid fodder" was invented.
2) His tax increases started with those making 300K, then dropped to 250K, then down to 175K. Meanwhile he and his running mate both voted to increase taxes on people making more than 40K. Whatever your opinion about tax increases or punishing the rich might be, you have to admit that this is either incoherent or dishonest. These are your only choices and they are not good ones.
3) The News Media have their heads so far up his ass, they can't think straight. Actually, they're lucky the sun shines out of there, otherwise our entire press corps would be lost in the dark. If you think this is false, feel free to stop reading. If Triumph the Insult Comic Dog sees it, call it a fact. And you know it would bother you if they were swinging for the guy or gal you hate.
4) Hypocrisy. Never mind that he PROMISED to accept public funding until he tasted the millions pouring into his private coffers. And I know they're ALL guilty of it. But from the man who gave us the truly noble "I am my brother's keeper" speech, who makes millions on book deals and probably hasn't paid for a meal or a suit in ten years, I would expect his aunt (living under the poverty level in public housing), and his brother (a hut in Kenya) to have gotten on the gravy train. As far as I can tell, he hasn't done much for them, except ask you and me to open our wallets and buy them something. On the rare occasions they are approached by the press, what do they say? "Check this car he bought me?" No. "He invited us to stay in his mansion in Chicago?" Not even close. Not even, "This suit was Barry's. He sent it over when he got some new ones." No. All they say is "We've been told not to talk until after the election." He could have really had me here. I love a person who, like Oprah, quietly, personally shares their bounty, first with their family, then with other's in need. Which brings us to the deal breaker.
5) Socialism. My noble, big hearted brother has been heard to say "Damn right I'm a socialist. I want to help and take care of people." To the degree that his desire to help others is honest, I can only commend him and everyone who believes as he does. But this is not what socialism is. If you want to go out and help and take care of people, nobody's stopping you. Go ahead. No, a socialist is NOT someone who wants to help others. A socialist is someone who wants to force other people to help. Since the whole Joe the (pretend) Plumber imbroglio, I have made the same proposition to every Obama supporter willing to discuss it: "Not sharing from one's wealth is selfish and wrong. Obviously. But the only thing worse is someone who thinks it is OK to FORCE people to share. Discuss." They cannot disagree. They change the subject every time. I want them to explain it to me in a way that makes sense to me. They never can. Let me state it more clearly: I believe with every gummy bear lodged in my heart that not sharing is wrong. That said, with those same gummy bears I know that forcing people to share is Satanic. It is evil. It degrades every culture that has tried it. It never elevates poor people. It results results in class warfare (as George Bernard Shaw observed, the government that robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul"). It goes against the founding documents and philosophy of our country. And to the degree that you think it is OK, you are either ignorant or evil--or you know something I don't. The government forced redistribution of wealth is at least as sickening as greed and selfishness. If I could believe otherwise I would. But I cannot find a philosophical or historical leg for socialism to stand on. And finally . . .

6) I'm not looking forward to 4 years of toothless SNL and Daily Show episodes, as they man they love and support and endorse takes the office they are accustomed to mock and deride. But they're smart people, perhaps this final fear is unfounded.

So there it is. I might have just lost the respect of some people whom I love, who stopped reading this blog a long time ago. All I ask is that you extend this one, all important courtesy-the most important favor people in a democracy can do for each other: When someone goes through the trouble of thinking things through honestly, and applies that thinking to earnestly held convictions they hold because they want to be good, give where they're coming from a chance. When Obama is elected, he will be my president, and I will honor the office and the man in it appropriately, which is much more than people who disagreed with the previous president can say.

Do I need to repeat that I did not vote for Bush and won't be voting for McCain?