Who to Vote For?

For some individuals this question is a no-brainer. However, I have never been active in politics. Until recently, I couldn’t have cared less who was president. In my point of view, no great change in my life had come from Presidential policies, and politicians were merely different faces of the same evil. My distain for the government’s lack of ability to deal with the myriad of issues that seemed to slip between the cracks coupled with their sticky fingered policies that seemed to squelch more and more of our constitutional liberties were almost enough to confirm me a libertarian.
In a strange way, I’m almost glad that I have kept my distance from the volatile political arena until I had a proper education on the subject and a healthy couple of decades of “real world” experience to give me a more mature and objective opinion. It wasn’t until I enrolled into two government classes this semester and begin to read the federalist papers and the constitution of the United States that I realized the founder’s vision and design for a democratic society eerily resembled the same utopia of which I had often wished for. A flood of questions entered my mind. How had their vision become so distorted? What went wrong? How do we fix it? With the upcoming election drawing near, I felt pressed to come to some conclusions to internal queries as well. What is my ideology? What are my views regarding economic and public policy? Who do I vote for? The simple truth is I wasn’t sure. I could regurgitate the views of my family members, yet I had not formed solid political opinions, which is possibly why I never made it a priority to vote. The idea that our ideology is inherited (if we come from a line of Republicans, then we will most likely be a Republican) doesn’t sit well with me. I like to think that I am in charge of my decisions. I’ve always been a tad rebellious; maybe this is why I am the black sheep. I couldn’t in good conscience vote for anybody until I had answered the questions above, so I endeavored to do so…
First, I looked at the fundamental differences between the two partisan ideologies to determine where I stood and measured which party platform better represented the democratic principles set forth by the founders.
Below is a list of positions taken by the Republican and Democratic parties, and my own thoughts about them.

Republican Platform
“No Kyoto, no mandatory carbon emissions controls” = more emissions & pollution
“Strongly support voluntary student-initiated prayer” = religion in schools
“Limit role of federal government in education” = education standard & funding left to
who?
“Support the death penalty” = Kill people
“Let Boy Scouts exercise free speech (ok to ban gays)” = constitutional rights protected
(What?)
“States should not recognize gay marriage from other states” = not honoring a
advocated point in both the federalist papers and constitution (bad)
“The Patriot Act is used to track terrorist activity” = yep, but who are the terrorists-
everyone?
“Homosexuality is incompatible with military service” = Is this the sexual preference or
a new alien life form I missed coming to Earth. How does sexual preference determine the worthiness of a soldier?
“Ban abortion with Constitutional amendment” = WOW I should stay out of this one! BUT-
I lost two children before I had my three angles, and I could never abort a life growing inside of me. My sister at 16 had an abortion and I (10) tortured her for a whole month with snide “baby Killer” comments egged on by my strict Roman Catholic & Republican upbringing. I am sure most of my bad Karma has stemmed from moments like this. I can not describe the intensity of the hell it was to reach the second trimester of a pregnancy and loose your child- twice, and I can not imagine how terrible my sister felt making her decision. There are no words for how sorry I feel for ever adding to her pain. It was hard for me to understand why someone would choose to carry out the deed, until it was discussed that so many woman who had a child from a rape or similar situation beat their child or mentally abuse them, the mothers could not handle the daily reminder of their encounter. I am no fan of abortion, and I am certainly no fan of child abuse. Alternately, If a woman finds out that she is due to give birth to a child with such severe birth defects that they might not survive, Is she right to decide not to go through with the pregnancy? I don’t know, but I still have a hard time telling others what they should or should not do in this situation. Rest assured the woman suffers anyway!
“Promote adoption & abstinence, not abortion clinic referrals” = absolutely,
responsibility is key, and abortion should never be promoted.


Democratic Platform
“Develop renewable energy and efficient vehicles” = More $ for us, less pollution for the
environment
“Cut the deficit in half over the next four years” = less debt
“Support affirmative action to redress discrimination” = This one comes dangerously close to
giving an unearned advantage to peoples (an anti-constitutional move), but is geared to counteract and make right on the “redress of grievances” which is constitutionally consistent.
“Racial and religious profiling is wrong” = of course it is
“Tax credits and investment support for small business” = small business is incredibly important to the economy
“Transparency in corporate accounting” = yes, no more Enron…
“Support lifelong learning and Distance Learning” = support education!!!
“Expand coverage and cut healthcare costs” = More people with affordable health care
“Put science ahead of ideology in research and policymaking” = advances in science should be
encouraged
“Cut taxes for middle class, not the wealthy” = Heck yes, trickle down doesn’t work & don’t
the wealthy have enough?


Social conservatism embraces the idea of Social Darwinism (the rich or powerful have risen to the top through their own hard work and intelligence; the poor belong there due to their lack of effort or intelligence. Survival of the fittest, and the elite rule). This is simply not in keeping with the democratic principles, nor is the economic theory of trickle-down (tax breaks to the rich will also benefit the poor by trickling down a small bit of the wealth to those individuals). The other three cornerstones of the Republican platform seem to be religiously based (gays, abortion, prayer in schools) Which aren’t gays citizens as well, afforded the same constitutional protections as heterosexuals? In addition aren’t matters of religion meant to be separate and thereby respecting the diversity of the nation’s people?

The democratic platform is hard to criticize if you hold it to the democratic principle test, but I do have a few observations… First, enacting a draft is in my opinion a breach of free will; while it is not a breach of the democratic principles per say, it is an uneasy transition for me. Second, the ever unpopular subject of affirmative action- When put in black and white (no pun intended) the idea seems undemocratic as it appears to pose an “unearned advantage” which is a violation of democratic principles, yet it is enacted in order to make right on a long history of the oppression of minorities and women. The ideals of balancing out the political weight of classes and races are most definitely a main democratic principle. In light of the big picture I can understand the need for such policies granted they are not taken to an extreme.
All being equal, I would have to say that the ticket that best represents an attempt to adhere to said principles and thereby helping to “form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of welfare” as stated in the constitution, appears to be an Obama ticket (much to the dismay of my family, who are Republican. I guess that shoots down that whole inherited theory). Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems to me that we might not be in the predicament we are in if we would vote according to the candidate that more readily represents the democratic ideals (benefiting the whole), and not simply for the candidate who serves their best interest.