Still Undecided?

You’ve no doubt had your fill of phone calls, TV ads, and former friends calling you stupid and hating your guts for taking a different political stand than they. I would say that this has been a particularly pernicious presidential election, but I would be lying. It’s just like all the rest. Recent wounds are more vivid than old scars, as it were.

I’m going to voice my opinion here, and if you don’t want to read it, no one’s holding a gun to your head. This is my opinion and mine only. I’m not telling you to adopt it, so please shitcan the comments about how stupid or misguided I am. If you want to refute what I posit, fine. Just skip the ad hominem crap or I’ll delete your comment.

Other blogs will tiptoe right around this important subject, but you know this turkey too well to think that he wouldn’t bludgeon you with his opinion.

Selecting a president and a platform is not like trying to be on the winning side of a football game. When the final gun sounds, the football game is over and of no lasting consequence to the fans. This isn’t about bragging rights. It is about seriously considering our future as a cohesive, viable, and vital country.

Some say it is too late, that the country cannot be saved. That’s a lazy philosophy, one that will result in no good. The current administration has attempted to anesthetize the masses with its handout policies, its promotion of wealth envy, its pro-union brotherhood, and its anti-business orientation. The resulting placated passivity, coupled with individual greed and desire for “free stuff” without commensurate individual responsibility is a highly undesireable, burgeoning national psyche that must be treated aggressively.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of the way in which Obamacare was passed, against the wishes of most citizens, with Nancy Pelosi ginning up votes by telling the public that we have to “pass it in order to see what’s in it” instead of allowing ample time for study.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of cherry deals for both U.S. and Canadian auto workers’ unions to “save Chrysler”, while screwing bond holders, including many state pension plans.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of divisiveness, creating and emphasizing artificial gaps between rich and poor, polarizing people against business, and using the furor to create stifling regulations via bloated Executive Branch departments that circumvent congressional checks and balances.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of expanding unemployment rolls, more formerly productive workers on the dole, counterproductive extensions of unemployment compensation, paying people not to work, then paying tongue-in-cheek lip service to “creating new jobs”.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of anti-bipartisan spirit in federal government, the “my way or the highway” mentality, the contempt this administration has shown for the ideas and thoughts of its opposition, the desire to stifle rather than compromise. Is it any wonder why this president has not been able to ram a single budget through congress? Even his own kind have rejected his lavish spending.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of how much weaker this nation will be at home and abroad given the weak leadership from this president and his selected henchmen. I think of how the primary orientation from the start has been to campaign first, and govern second.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of how this country will collapse under the weight of its accumulated debt if the profligate spending continues, entitlements are not dealt with, and continued draconian regulation, union favoritism, and disincentives to employment conspire to further compromise productivity.

When I think of “four more years”, I think about what effects the forthcoming “fiscal cliff” will impose upon the economy.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of how the middle class is en prise. The masses that once made us the greatest, most productive nation on earth are gradually being transformed into handout seeking drones as rights, property, and prerogatives are usurped.

When I think of “four more years”, I think of how “me first” issues like abortion, gay marriage, immigration control, and “free stuff” have become dominant over the real issue of how to preserve this great nation. If we neglect to keep our eyes on the ball, we’ll lose the game.

Obviously, I could go on. The problem is that when I thought through the dubious accomplishments of the past four years, I could come up with nothing positive. Nothing at all. Sure, the incumbent was handed a “mess”, as he’ll be the first to tell you, but he volunteered for the job, and no one said it would be easy. He wants an “incomplete” grade, because he wants us to believe that in “four more years” he can fix everything he either neglected to fix or screwed up further during his first four years. As I recall, the only “incomplete” grades that were valid were caused by illness or personal hardship; this, on the other hand, would be like one of those “I” grades that is a negotiated attempt to avoid an “F” by extending the amount of time to complete a class most others worked through in the time allotted. Obama has earned a solid “F”. Let us not give him his requested incomplete. He’s out of excuses. Four more years will only leave us in deeper doo-doo when he’s done. Wasn’t he the guy who once told us that if he couldn’t get the job done in four years, he would be a one-term president?

His penchant for averting congress, coupled with his being a lame duck would be disastrous during a second four years. Imagine an unrestrained Obama tightening the noose around energy companies so he can fund his pet renewable projects, costing all of us megabucks on our energy bills and at the gas pump. That’s just one area.

Think about the one thing he can control with impunity—foreign policy. With the Senate expected to remain under Democratic control, Obama and a compliant Senate can manhandle U.S. policy abroad. This is what he was referring to when he told Dmitri Medvedev that “after the election [he’ll] have more flexibility.” I can foresee concessions and kowtowing abroad that will further weaken us and perhaps imperil us as a nation.

Mitt Romney isn’t perfect. Like all politicians, he has flip-flopped on some issues that have been notoriously bandied about by the media. Of course, Obama has done the same, but being a media darling, he has gotten away with it by and large. We all change our mind. Our positions evolve as conditions change. Politicians are certainly bent on being elected, so they respond to what the traffic will bear. Frankly, I could care less about whether Mitt Romney ever mentioned overturning Roe v. Wade or Obama was once opposed to gay marriage.

Unlike the incumbent, Mitt Romney has successfully run a large business. We are a capitalist nation, and it is capitalism, not socialism that has made us strong. Yes, some capitalists are driven by greed, but then again, if we’re condemning people for greed, how about condemning half the populace — those who espouse the “free stuff” mentality, as well?

Unlike the incumbent, Mitt Romney has successfully run a major state. Being an executive requires people skills, the ability to compromise, and “thinking outside the box.” Mitt Romney has demonstrated these qualities throughout his lifetime. Obama has been a community organizer and what else? Not even a full term as U.S. senator. A failed first term as President of the United States. His resume doesn’t portray him as the better candidate.

Mitt Romney is not George W. Bush and the times now are quite different from that which they were in 2000. Twelve years later, we’ve suffered through some pretty bad shit, at the behest of Obama, Bush, and their predecessors. The past four years of exponentially increasing debt, decreased world status, and mean-spirited partisan politics did not cure anything, they exacerbated what was already bad. Obama’s excuses don’t wash. It’s a tough job. He screwed it up.

I hope that we can find some new hope in Mitt Romney, hope that we thought we were getting when we bought the “Hope and Change” line the incumbent pandered. Hoping against hope, maybe, but sticking with the incumbent gives us no hope at all.

It will be a long road back. I believe Mitt Romney will work hard to bring in ideas from all quarters, as one must do to succeed in business. I believe that a Mitt Romney administration will not compromise progress for the sake of ideology. I believe that with a strong leader we can trust — and yes, I believe that Mitt Romney is sincere and trustworthy — we can unite to better shoulder the hardships that are as inevitable during a national rebuilding effort as the are during a football teams rebuilding effort.

The Nittany Turkey endorses Mitt Romney for President of the United States.



No matter for whom you cast your ballot, please exercise your right and responsibility to vote, damnit!


  1. Joe says

    I will give you another “Amen, brother!” The insanity has to stop and the real road back requires Romney in the oval office.

    • says

      “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
      —Alexis de Tocqueville

      To paraphrase de Tocqueville, U.S. voters are by and large a bunch of self-serving me-firsters who elect greedy bastards in their image. How the hell can our republic survive this “free stuff” oriented society?


  2. BigAl says

    To be blunt, I think both candidates suck (would you prefer to eat a bullshit sandwich or a horseshit sandwich). And both are slaves to economic theories (keynes vs supply-side) that are fantasies that don’t work which were dreamed up by brain dead economics PHDs.

    But you’re right about one thing – Obama is a failure and doesn’t deserve another term. So I guess Mittens deserves a chance to show that he isn’t just the Mormon version of George W.

    What we really need is a None of the Above choice, that, if selected by a plurality of votes, would force the parties to start over and nominate two different canditates.

    • says

      Believe it or not, I agree with much of what you’ve written. Adam Smith is mah man.

      I’m right about more than one thing, but you’ll accept what you want and leave the rest. You know what has to be done.

      I have a libertarian friend who intends to vote for Gary Johnson. As far as I’m concerned, that’s a vote for Obama.

      I might have my head straight up my ass or perhaps I’m delusional, but I believe that Mitt will surprise a lot of people by digging in and giving it the old college try—if we have the sense to elect him. It’s an almost untenable position, but I trust him a helluva lot more with the reins of this great nation than the jackass who sits in the office right now.

      That’s not a racist comment, by the way. I considered good ol’ Suthun boys Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton jackasses, too, for different reasons. I’m an equal opportunity disparager.

      We’ve just been through four lousy years of Jimmy Carter II, only worse. Can we recover? Who the hell knows.

      I have to admit that after four years of Obama, I’d be happy if Slick Willy were to occupy the Oval Office again, if we had no other choice.


      • PSUPing says

        As a bit of an alternative point on the whole voting for Johnson thing, I’ll share my logic for my vote for him. I have come to believe that the only wasted vote is the one that you use on a candidate you don’t agree with on a majority of issues. I actually do agree with Johnson on a number of issues. For that reason, I’ll register a vote for him. To me, it’s more important to express what my actual opinion is rather than voting for “the lesser of two evils”.

        Also, I’ve seen the logic that a vote for candidate C is the same thing as a vote for candidate B. In the case of Johnson, that’s not necessarily true. If you look at polling in Colorado, Johnson actually takes more from disaffected Democrats upset with Obama’s positions on the wars, civil liberties and drugs. The old paradigm of Libertarians stealing from Republicans is not quite as true as it used to be. People are largely becoming dissatisfied with the major parties and people of both parties are looking for alternatives. Especially on some of the traditionally liberal issues, Democrats have proven themselves just as unreliable as Bush Jr was on keeping government limited. It may end up being more of a wash in the aggregate than people would previous have thought.

        One final point for Johnson, is the possibility for the future. Even he doesn’t proclaim that he’ll be victorious. However, if he’s able to get to 5% of the vote, that starts up matching federal funds AND forces the states to put the Libertarians on the ballot next time without the crazy qualifications some states have. Having an actual 3rd party on the ballot could help increase the discussion and ideas in the country. That’s something we all sorely need.

        Also, even though I may disagree on the choice of candidate, I respect your opinion. It wasn’t just a mindless recitation of talking points. It’s refreshing to see opinions that aren’t straight out of the RNC or DNC press releases. Regardless, it’ll be an interesting next four years.

        • says

          Thanks, PSUPing, for your well written and thoughtful comments.

          I am not a GOP myrmidon by any means. Although I disagree with some of its tenets, the Libertarian Party is a much tighter fit with my personal philosophy of smaller, less intrusive government. I would love to see the Libertarian Party become a viable third party.

          Some of the Libertarians (with a capital “L”) I know are not only anti-government, but also anti-business. I cannot and will not ever put myself in that category. I am a capitalist. So, there will be differences between me and Libertarians, at least in that respect.

          I agree wholeheartedly with your disgust at voting for the lesser of two evils. Your points about not wasting your vote by casting it for Gary Johnson are well taken.

          I’m pretty conservative and cautious; when it comes to making radical changes, I want to slow down and make certain I’m doing the right thing.

          This past year, I took the first step toward ditching the two-party system from my perspective. I unregistered myself as a Republican and re-registered as “No Party Affiliation.” (I can’t vote in primaries, which bothers me, but it bothers me even more for the GOP to think I’m solidly in their camp, which I’m not. So, this way I get double the phone calls and junk mail, because both major parties think I’m available to do their bidding.)

          I wish Mr. Johnson a good result tomorrow. Your points about states putting the Libertarian ticket on the ballot are compelling, but just not for me this time around. Thanks again for chiming in with your opinions.


  3. BigAl says

    I would put Bush Jr alongside the Peanut Farmer and the Big 0 on my list of criminally incompetent presidents. It’s taken 12 years of piss poor managment to put us in the current mess.

    The sad thing is that Eisenhower was probably the only really good president during my lifetime.

    • says

      “The mess” goes back further than 12 years — at least to the repeal of key provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, but probably even further back to the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 et. seq. Most of the legislative revisions to the act occurred during 1989-1999. Thus, we’ve implicated Jimmy, 41, Slick Willy, and 43. Ronnie didn’t do anything about it, so add him to the list.

      I was born during Truman’s first term, but I don’t remember anything at all before the 1952 election. As I grew up in Pittsburgh, Republicans were not looked upon with great favor. My memories of the Eisenhower Administration are therefore biased, due to the then prevailing political climate in da Burgh.


Leave a Reply