An Obama presidency, I believe, would be detrimental to this country in several ways. Two of them could potentially put the country in such a bind as to take years and years to recover from (if ever). Here follows my thoughts concerning those two things.
Universal Healthcare. The first major reason why I would not vote for Obama is that he supports and has promised his supporters that he will work towards creating a “universal healthcare” system in the United States. Another term for universal healthcare is socialized healthcare. That term should put up red flags. Socialism. Socialized. In short, the federal government would provide ‘healthcare’ (the definition of which is hotly debated based on what is covered and what isn’t, etc.) to all Americans who wanted it. This plan would of course cost billions of dollars. Taxes would have to be raised substantially in order to pay for it.
I personally believe that a socialized system of healthcare would not only be inefficient and bureaucratically obtuse, but it would end up costing us (the middle-class) much more than health care currently costs. I also believe over time it would lower the quality of healthcare across the board. Currently, the United States has the most sought medical treatment in the world. A so-called universal healthcare system would put the Feds in control of our medical system. The federal government: the same people that run Social Security, which is nearly bankrupt, and Welfare, which has been in constant need of reform seemingly since it was begun. The federal government, run by lawyers, career politicians, and special interest groups, would be in control of the healthcare that your family depends on.
Socialized healthcare’s likely inefficiency coupled with its billion dollar price tag still speaks not at all to the giant leap forward such a move would be towards Socialism in the United States. This latter reason should be reason enough to be weary of the idea. Alexander S. who lived and was persecuted under Communism in the Soviet Union said (paraphrasing), “a nation that practices socialism, is a nation wherein the people become completely demoralized…”
Barack’s desire to socialize healthcare speaks to his core liberal political ideology, a political ideology that runs contrary to the capitalistic principles upon which this country was founded, and upon which the fundamentals of our economy still thrive.
The War in Iraq. The second major reason why I would not vote for Obama is his position and promise to his supporters concerning the war in Iraq. Obama supports a ‘timetable’ approach to the war. In short, he promises to pull out all U.S. troops from Iraq within 15 months of his presidency (the actual time-span that he originally stated has fluctuated somewhat during his campaign).
What does this mean? It means that instead of having a military or diplomatic goal, such as ‘eliminating the terrorist insurgents from Iraq,’ or even ‘staying long enough to ensure that the Iraqi people can defend themselves by way of their own police, and infrastructure/government’ … instead of something like that, Obama supports what is little more than an arbitrary time table for withdrawal. This means that no matter what is happening in Iraq at the time… once 15 months is up… we pull out. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that if that’s the U.S. policy concerning the War, the terrorists will simply wait- biding their time- for the U.S. to leave the region, leaving a wide open range for them to infiltrate anew and undeterred. Furthermore, to have a President that has promised his supporters that he will withdraw the troops by such and such date (sooner if possible) the enemy has every reason to continue suicide bombing, etc, in order to create more motive for that President to pull out (all the sooner).
By contrast, a President who vows to fight the war until ‘victory’ is achieved (defined in some clear way) will give the enemy no such motive or hope of success. Rather, the terrorists will know they are fighting a committed enemy and some among them and without might even eventually find it futile to continue the battle (as has happened in many places in that region already).
Anyway, I hope I’ve made myself clear as to why an arbitrary time table is simply bad military policy and strategy. It would leave the middle east unstable, leaving it vulnerable to falling under a regime not unlike the one we just took out. In short, it would risk the United States losing everything we’ve already fought for- making the deaths of our troops to be in vain, not to mention the havoc and fear it would wreak upon the people of Iraq who would rightly feel completely abandoned.
After all, why should we expect the Iraqi people to ‘finish’ the job that we started? (This is a question posed by a local talk-show host, and I think it’s a great question.)
In a nutshell, to leave Iraq according to a time-table rather than according to the completion of a successful mission, would leave that region unstable, further damaging our inernational standing as well as complicating our already flimsy and weary energy/resources situation. Whether or not you agree with the inception of the War, we have by this point obligated ourselves on moral grounds to see that the Iraqi people are left with their own country safely back in their hands once their hands are strong enough to support it. To do so requires military scaffolding that, even as we speak, is succeeding. As success follows success the scaffolding may be slowly but surely taken away. To leave prematurely in order to please constituents at home would be utter folly.
Thus, based on Obama’s stated positions concerning the War and Health Care, I could not and will not vote in support of him.