BEAR on 6/11/2008 at 18:56

---

\o/

I was just coming here to post that. What a great symbolic victory that proves again, once and for all, that north carolina is better in every way than south carolina.

june gloom on 6/11/2008 at 22:02

---

eat my fuck, Scots. I'm sorely centrist and I hate everyone. I vote for whoever I think is least likely to fuck things up. I voted for Kerry in 2004, I voted for McCain this year. I have my reasons god damn it

sethL on 6/11/2008 at 22:46

---

You saw nothing.

Muzman on 6/11/2008 at 23:47

---

Veterans only?

june gloom on 7/11/2008 at 00:50

---

Oh, right, having a differing opinion automatically makes me some mouthbreathing racist/homophobe/gun nut/filthy white capitalist/et cetera who supports Bush so on and so forth. I'm offended.

Very well, you want my reasoning for voting McCain? Fine, I'll tell you.

First, a few things: Obviously I don't vote party line. I don't really consider myself a libertarian though I do espouse some of their views (i.e. reduced government.) Obviously I'm not an an (http://www.youtube.com/user/XOmniverse) anarchist either. I'm aware the system is broken, but I'm also aware that a bloody revolution is almost impossible at this stage. But I do take offense at the idea that I am somehow Democrat or Republican because I espouse certain views (equal rights, lower taxes, etc.). Fiscally I'm a conservative while socially I'm generally liberal (though I support responsible gun rights, but that's an old argument I don't feel like reviving.)

I voted for McCain largely on the basis of the economy. I think Obama's economic policies will do more harm than good. Neither candidate had a worthy economic policy, but Obama's was worse. Obama's stated intent is to "spread the wealth" through taxes rather than growing more wealth by encouraging more businesses (which would create more jobs, which would mean more income- and more tax revenue.) The problem is that Obama believes that a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably. But that's playing a zero-sum game and puts way too much control into the hands of the government- which is precisely the opposite of what we need. What's worse, is that most of the 95% of people who would be seeing a tax break under Obama's plan don't even pay taxes. so who gets screwed? the singles with no dependants and the small businesses. Only 1% of individuals actually earn $250,000 a year, most entities that earn that much are small businesses who are going to be taxed to hell and back, and will respond by laying people off. That's some real economic growth right there man.

I'm a believer in the free market; when people say the current economic crisis is proof the free market doesn't work, they're either ignorant or intellectually dishonest- and what's worse is that the very people who demonize free trade are the ones responsible for the crisis.

Let me tell you a little story. In 1977 the Community Reinvestment Act was signed into law by Jimmy Carter. It was meant to prevent banks from discriminating based on race or gender or whathaveyou, it wasn't intended to allow people to get loans they couldn't afford. When minorities and the poor applied and were rejected, they complained to groups such as ACORN. ACORN got out the lawyers who started slinging shit all over the banks, and under the CRA- which was strengthened under Clinton- if the banks don't meet the "standards" they can run into trouble if they want to merge with other banks or otherwise expand. The point is, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stepped in and started buying up all these bad loans, which have been packaged in mortgage-backed securities. However, Fannie and Freddie are rife with corruption- and with the banks only too happy to have the problem taken off their hands by a supposedly government-backed institution that was corrupt to the bone, that obviously leads to problems. Their unregulated creative accounting led to the housing market exploding. Eventually the bottom falls out, all the adjustable rate mortgages (which are a terrible idea) start adjusting upwards, and people default on their loans. Nobody knows how much the mortgage-backed securities are worth because of a rule called "mark to market" accounting, when some banks start dumping the MBS at firesale prices, EVERY associated MBS is legally required to be valued at the same rate. And it's not just limited to MBSes either- it goes a lot further than that, extending to assets in general. The banks are trying to desperately divest themselves of these diseased assets, all the while more people are getting foreclosed on, there are way too many homes on the market, and the prices fall like a rock. In a nutshell, the government artificially inflated the housing market in an effort to increase minority and disadvantaged-consumer homeownership, ironically both inflating costs so high the very minorities they sought to help couldn't afford them, and causing an unsustainable boom that had no choice but to tank the moment those ARMs went from 1 percent to 9+ percent. Had they just left it alone, housing would have never gotten so out of control and there'd be no massive foreclosures. A lot of less-incomed buyers would still live in rentals or apartments. Nobody would be in danger of losing their homes. This bailout (that both candidates supported, dissapointingly enough) is a last-ditch effort to keep the bubble inflated. McCain voted for the bailout because it was politically convenient; he was not going to do something politically dangerous that close to the election. AFiH and I disagree on whether or not McCain would have won if he had opposed the bailout- people have short memories and they want solutions and quick fixes NOW NOW NOW. Granted a lot of folks were against it, but a lot more just wanted something to be done. Obviously obama supported the bailout because it means more centralized federal control of the economy, which is one of the tenets of the Democratic party. I'm not the kind of person who thinks that kind of idea is EVIL BAD FALSDKFAJSLDFA, it's just a differing idea of how to run the country that I believe is the wrong way to do it.

The problem is the "new GOP" (i.e. Bush-style republicanism) has absolutely trashed free trade's good name. Republicans in ages past have been champions of the free market, and the Democrats know this. They've managed to paint the bush administration's quasi-imperialism as "the free market" and then claim it doesn't work. Of course it doesn't work- because it's not actually the free market. What we have is market socialism: instead of directly competing, businesses try to use the government to pass regulation that hurts their competitors while benefiting themselves, and it is my opinion that government is a bad choice for corporate combat.

I have a number of other reasons for supporting McCain, not least of which is that I believe that a divided, distracted government is best because they spend more time fighting each other than taking away my rights. But the economy is the big issue.

That said, I fucking hate Sarah Palin and the Joe Fuckface Sportsbar demographic, and I blame her for killing McCain's campaign. Fuck that bitch. I hope she dies in an apiary fire.