Being a pretty staunch conservative, there is generally little doubt that I will vote Republican. I still do my homework, because I think it's irresponsible to just vote blindly down party lines, but 99 times out of 100 a Republican candidate is going to fall more in line with my political preferences. I've been trying to keep my blog nonpolitical lately because we all get enough debate everywhere else these days, but I really want to articulate why I'll be casting my vote for Senator McCain.
Let's get one thing out in the open, though: he was not my choice for the Republican nominee. I'd be much more enthusiastic if Mitt Romney were on the ticket (preferably as the presidential candidate, but he would have been an asset in the VP spot). Therefore, because it's hard for me to get truly passionate about the McCain campaign, one of the main reasons I'm voting for him is that I don't like the alternatives presented by Senator Obama.
One more thing I think is important: my personal faith does not dictate my vote. I want a president with a strong moral code and I happen to believe that Christianity holds people to a very high moral standard, but as long as I and others have the freedom to practice our faiths without prejudice or persecution, a candidate's religious preference is of little concern to me.
While our next president will have many issues facing him, I think the biggest one is the economy. I'm solidly ensconced in the "middle class" and I'm told that, regardless of who gets elected, I won't see my taxes increase. But if corporations and small businesses see the kinds of tax increases proposed by Senator Obama, it won't matter that my pay stub looks the same. Business don't pay taxes: they will do everything they can to keep their profits consistent, so they'll cut jobs or raise prices to cover increased tax burdens. Then I'll pay more for that home I want to build someday, or the clothes I need for my job, or the car I'll be picking up when I eventually leave my position at Alma. Other implications of raising taxes are better stated here.
Let's get one thing out in the open, though: he was not my choice for the Republican nominee. I'd be much more enthusiastic if Mitt Romney were on the ticket (preferably as the presidential candidate, but he would have been an asset in the VP spot). Therefore, because it's hard for me to get truly passionate about the McCain campaign, one of the main reasons I'm voting for him is that I don't like the alternatives presented by Senator Obama.
One more thing I think is important: my personal faith does not dictate my vote. I want a president with a strong moral code and I happen to believe that Christianity holds people to a very high moral standard, but as long as I and others have the freedom to practice our faiths without prejudice or persecution, a candidate's religious preference is of little concern to me.
While our next president will have many issues facing him, I think the biggest one is the economy. I'm solidly ensconced in the "middle class" and I'm told that, regardless of who gets elected, I won't see my taxes increase. But if corporations and small businesses see the kinds of tax increases proposed by Senator Obama, it won't matter that my pay stub looks the same. Business don't pay taxes: they will do everything they can to keep their profits consistent, so they'll cut jobs or raise prices to cover increased tax burdens. Then I'll pay more for that home I want to build someday, or the clothes I need for my job, or the car I'll be picking up when I eventually leave my position at Alma. Other implications of raising taxes are better stated here.
While you or I might not agree with lavish lifestyles of the super-rich, most of them have made sacrifices to earn that wealth. When they choose to use their money to help those less fortunate (which is important, but the key word here is "they choose," instead of "they are mandated"), I would prefer they donate to organizations with a track record of success. Who did a better job after Hurricane Katrina: FEMA or the Red Cross and other organizations whose tangible relief efforts continue to this day? I don't think the government is nearly as successful with programs like welfare as local nonprofit organizations are with their various assistance programs, because local organizations are better able to gauge the specific needs of their community members and give them a hand up in effective, appropriate manners. If individual taxes rise, there's a good chance fundraising for these local nonprofits will be increasingly difficult. "The government is already spreading my wealth around to take care of those behind me; why do I need to give locally?" For some families, it may not even be a choice: they may simply be unable to give as freely if more of their money is going to the government.
(I hate posting things like this. But I'll draw strength from a wise friend who quoted Martin Luther on his blog: "To disobey one's conscious is neither wise nor just." In a post that I know was challenging for him to write, Marc made some good points but didn't change my mind. I don't expect my post will change anyone's mind, either; but, like Marc's post did for me, I hope it gives those who read it some things to think about as they cast their vote.)


