Why I Am Really Voting for Barack Obama

Although some took me serious, I was of course jesting when I wrote a couple of weeks ago, “Why I am Voting for Mitt Romney on Nov. 7.” I was more serious when — with the help from a poetic friend — I wrote, “Why I Am Not Voting for Mitt Romney on Nov. 7, or Nov. 6

With one of the most important elections in a generation only two days away, it is now more than time to get dead serious.

So here are — without any poetry and as serious and sincere as I have ever been — my very personal reasons why I will be voting for Barack Obama on Tuesday.

First and foremost, because I love America.

Fifty-five years ago I chose America to be my new homeland and five year later America chose me to be one of her new naturalized citizens. On that day, I became a real American and no political party is going to take that away from me.

Subsequently, after serving my adopted country honorably, meritoriously, for 20 years in her armed forces, America truly became my country and no political party is going to take my country back. Barack Obama will ensure — at least for four more years — that all Americans are considered real Americans and that no one takes America back from any American, Republican or Democrat.

Second, and just as important, I have a fine, loving, productive son who happens to be gay. I have real concerns about how my son will be treated, how his rights may be affected, how the rights of all minorities will fare if Mitt Romney is elected. I have absolutely no doubt as to how Barack Obama will continue to protect and advance the rights of all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation, race, national origin, gender, etc.

Both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are good, religious men. Religion is a sacred but very personal matter and it must remain apolitical. Church and State must remain separated, as was envisioned by our Founding Fathers. With Barack Obama I am confident it will stay that way.

Our country should go to war — commit blood and resources — as a last resort, only when our national security is at stake. Obama has finally extracted our nation from the disaster that was the Iraq War and is on course to end the longest war in America’s history. Romney and the bellicose ideologues in his party are once again chomping at the bit to involve our country in unwarranted and possibly even more disastrous foreign military adventures.

I just happen to believe that when our economy is in trouble it is the job — the sacred duty — of our elected officials, of the political parties and their candidates to do everything in their power to put the economy back on its feet again — not to obstruct its recovery, not to make the defeat of the President from another party their number one priority, not to hope that our economy “fails.” I find a party’s nominee who explicitly or implicitly subscribes to such cynical, un-American capers simply unfit to hold the highest office in the land. Barack Obama will continue to — hopefully with less obstructionism from Republicans — steadfastly bring our economy back along with our traditional values and unity in time or crises.

I just happen to believe that in the wealthiest nation in the world no citizen should face financial disaster when hit by a serious illness or accident or should have to make a choice between food or medicine; that no citizen should go homeless or hungry — especially not our veterans — and that perpetual enslavement to a financial “institution” should not be the penalty for obtaining a college education. Barack Obama has already laid the solid foundations to ameliorate these conditions.

I just happen to believe, along with Barack Obama, that Americans do not think they are victims; that Americans do take personal responsibility and do “care for their lives”; that those Americans who pay little or no income tax do so because they don’t earn enough or are elderly Americans who are collecting the fruits of their lifelong contributions and sacrifice; that among the 47 percent who are allegedly “dependent upon government” are millions of veterans who have given their country everything, including health and limbs. Anyone who has such a derisive opinion of 47 percent of a nation’s citizenry does not deserve to be their president.

Romney’s inconsistencies at best, cruel betrayals at worse, on women’s rights, gay rights, health care, illegal guns, climate change and numerous other critical issues and his turning a blind eye to his party’s blatant voter registration and intimidation actions along with so many other sleazy political shenanigans are not the constancy and character traits I want to see in our next president.

Finally, I will vote for Barack Obama on Tuesday because he has refused to be swiftboated, to be mowed down, to be defeated by a barrage of shameful and withering attacks not only on his leadership and rightful accomplishments — such as the death of Osama bin Laden which eluded his predecessor — but also on his birthright, his patriotism, his religion, his race, and even on his family and his manhood.

Barack Obama has withstood, prevailed and thwarted each one of these scurrilous attacks in a dignified — presidential — manner. He has been tested, steeled and has gained the resoluteness to serve America even better in his second term.

Photo: DoD

Auf Stumbleupon zeigen
Auf tumblr zeigen

Author: DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

  • SteveK

    Thanks Dorian… Well said, I agree with your logical conclusions 100%.

    Everything you said illustrates, point-by-point, the candidates stated positions and the positions and actions of Democratic and Republican lawmakers and their political parties past, present, and future positions… AND, the negative consequences we’d face if Mitt Romney won.

    This is why I proudly voted for President Barack Obama several weeks ago.

  • SteveK

    Thanks Dorian…

    Everything you say illustrates: a) the candidates stated positions and goals if elected; b) the positions and actions of Republican lawmakers; and, c) the Democratic and Republican Parties past, present, and future positions and goals for our country.

    With this information the choice should be easy… And, President Barack Obama got my vote several weeks ago.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Thank you, Steve — for your kind comments, but specially for your wise vote.

  • fob

    An article that immerses one because it is thoughtful, written with pause and authenticity. Here’s hoping we are all thoughtful.

  • ordinarysparrow

    thanks Dorian… am with you on this, for sure…

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Hi “fob,”

    I now know for sure, but I thought I recognized your kind and distinctive style.

    Thank you so very much.

    @OS, as usual, you are very kind . Thank you!

  • sheknows

    Well written and so very true Dorian. Romney has none of the character traits I want to see in a leader of this nation either.. or even someone I want to hang out with. The 47% comment was something I thought would absolutely end his campaign on the spot. Still reeling from the fact so many of that 47% will still vote for him!!( and a great portion of the 53% who heard him)
    You are a sane voice in the wilderness.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Appreciated, sheknows.

  • Dr. J

    They’re reasonable points, Dorian, they’re just awfully faint praise for Obama. Sure, he’s a little less hawkish than the Republicans but happy to keep bombing our way into Middle-Easterners’ hearts. Sure, on gay rights he’s trailing behind public opinion a few years closer than the GOP, but trailing he is. And sure, he’s trying harder to fix the economy than the Republicans, so if we’re giving partial credit for effort, Obama deserves more of it.

    It’s a good year to vote none-of-the-above.

  • Willwright

    I agree with the points but my main reason for voting for Obama is that the GOP has become an exclusive far right conclave. Their extremism needs to be completely repudiated and defeated soundly at the polls. It doesn’t matter
    whether you think Obama done a good job or not, it’s just that what’s on offer from the other side is completely unacceptable.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Dr J.

    Looks like we disagree only as to the degrees with which we disagree and agree with respect to Romney and Obama, respectively.

    (Wow, that looks complicated, but I can’t think of a better way to put it)

    Thanks for your comments

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    @ Willwright:

    Any reason to vote for Obama is welcome.

    Thanks for commenting

  • PATRICK EDABURN, Assistant Editor

    Obviously we differ on various issues but your post is well thought as always.

    I am somewhat unique in that there are things about both candidates I like and things that I dislike, so I am not in the position of expecting doom if one or the other wins.

    I agree that it is important to help the needy and to insure all have the basics, though in my position I fear that if some in the Obama camp get their way I would be going from being able to provide myself with those things to being both unable to do so and denied any assistance in resolving that problem

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Thanks for commenting, Patrick.

    Differences of opinions are not only healthy, they are at the core of our democracy.

    I just do not quite understand your comment:

    I agree that it is important to help the needy and to insure all have the basics, though in my position I fear that if some in the Obama camp get their way I would be going from being able to provide myself with those things to being both unable to do so and denied any assistance in resolving that problem

    Perhaps you can explain. Thanks

  • PATRICK EDABURN, Assistant Editor

    Well Dorian as I think you know I am self employed and so that raises a few issues with me.

    For example even supporters of the ACA concede that it will raise the premiums for the individual health care market. So it is quite possible I will be unable to afford those increases. The ACA proposes to help those who cannot afford coverage with exchanges, provided that their employer does not offer coverage.

    While we will not know for sure until things are implemented, past history suggests that as a self employed person with no employees I am not considered an “employee” and thus would not be eligible for the ACA (much in the same way I pay taxes to fund unemployment but am not eligible for it)

    Thus I would 1) be unable to afford insurance, 2) be required to pay the penalty as a result and 3) would have no way of obtaining coverage other than somehow coming up with more cash to pay for it.

    This is one example. I could also point to discussions about imposing health care surcharges on all businesses regardless of income, eliminating business deductions (and thus raising my taxes), etc.

    I’m not saying these things absolutely will happen but certainly there is a real possibility they will. When I’ve discussed this issue in the past, both here and on other forums the general reaction from the left has ranged from “well we might try to fix that later” to general indifference.

    This is not to say that there are not those on the left who would find this an unacceptable situation, but the general pattern has been less than concerned.

    Thus my concern about how that could play out for me.

    And I also welcome differing viewpoints, and am pleased that most of the folks at TMV, regardless of which side they come from, do too.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Thanks for explaining, Patrick, and I can see why you may be concerned. Let us hope, however, that those fears do not materialize.

  • PATRICK EDABURN, Assistant Editor

    Well I would hope that your view would be more than just hoping they do not materialize and instead would say that such an outcome would be wrong :)

  • ordinarysparrow

    Dorian….was listening to NPR, they had some one t discussing Mormonism and Mitt Romney…
    They brought up the Mormon belief of the Second Coming of Christ that is suppose to have Jesus coming back to Jackson County Missouri and reigning from the Mormon temple for a thousand years of peace.. found this interesting for i live in Jackson County,Mo.

    I think it is good that overall Romney’s faith has not been an issue for i deeply hold to separation of church and state…

    Yet after hearing about the Second Coming belief i wondered how many of the Fundamentalist that are strongly supporting Romney are aware of these beliefs?

    Looked up on the web a summary of the Mormon beliefs on this issue will share. If they are correct looks like i am in the right place. :)

    “Mormons believe Jesus will return to earth in Jackson county Missouri to begin a 1,000 year reign. They think Mormons will at that time become gods. But before the return of Jesus, they believe the United States will come to a constitutional crisis, on the verge of collapse.

    They believe America will be saved by a Mormon leader. The founder of the Mormon religion, Joseph Smith, said, “The time will come when the destiny of the nation (USA) will hang upon a single thread. At that critical juncture, this people (Mormons) will save it from destruction.”

    Their prophet Brigham Young said, “When the Kingdom of God bears rule, the flag of the United States will proudly flutter.” Mormons, also called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), believe the Kingdom of God will arise from the rule of one man on earth, a political figure who will also be their spiritual leader.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    It goes without saying that such an outcome would be wrong. However, without any facts and sources to support such views/fears (that I know of) they are still just concerns that I hope will not materialize. Let’s hope for the best.

  • Carl

    Oh I don’t know. I think that if this country moves to far to the left or right, which it has the capability of doing, I may not love it so much anymore. Unfortunately if one party should become dominant, being as politically far apart as they are, that likelihood becomes self evident.

  • Rcoutme

    Patrick E.: I guess I am grossly misinformed. I was under the impression that someone who is self-employed (or a stay-at-home caregiver) is eligible for the insurance pools that are to be created in each state for those who do not have employer-offered health insurance. I know that in my state, Massachusetts–the one that the ACA was designed on, that we DO, in fact, have the provision that self-employed and unemployed can buy into the state insurance system. Perhaps, in the ACA, when the “government option” was taken out, the ability of the self and unemployed was also taken out? I don’t know…

    If you have more information on this I would be eager to find out.

  • hyperflow

    Independent here. TMV feels like an echo chamber lately. Nicely written, but still. Echo Echo Echo

  • Rjohnson

    Some people may like Obama but I don’t. He said something during his second debate that offended me. He said that guns should be kept out of the hands of the mentally ill. That comment suggested that every mentally ill person is capable of violence. That isn’t true. My mom and I are mentally ill and neither of us are violent. I know other mentally ill people who aren’t violent either.
    Obama’s comment was both offensive and prejudice. It’s people like Obama who will keep the mentally ill in the dark ages for about 500 more years.