Thursday, October 26, 2006

I won't have what he's having

Every day I ride the commuter train between Chicago and the suburbs. I asked my fellow train rider who he was voting for in our congressional district. While he didn't say he definitely was going to vote for the Republican incumbent, Mark Kirk (IL-10), he probably will. I asked, "why?" "Because he's good for Israel," was the answer. The challenger, Dan Seals, has made his support for Israel crystal clear. And anyone who has read my blog knows that I am a rabid supporter of Israel. I have relatives there who have and do serve in the army. So I wouldn't support a candidate that wasn't, shall we say, "kosher" on the issue of Israel. That being said it struck me another way. I offered a few reasons why he might want to reconsider his vote but I don't think I got very far. I have eight or nine train rides to persuade him though. Anyone who wants to read about Kirk calling himself independent and then voting 91% of the time with President Bush you can read through this blog or take a look at this one. In short, the guy is an empty suit who hides from his constituents and his opponents. He doesn't say anything obviously stupid and talks like, "I'm for strengthening Social Security," and "I'm for supporting seniors and veterans." If you can tell me what that really means please email me.

The point is that if you like a restaurant because you like one dish and the rest of the menu is warmed over rat vomit, pardon me if I don't want to eat there. Even if you say the Republicans in general and specifically Republican Rep. Kirk is "good for Israel" what would it take for you to not vote for them? This is assuming, as is the case in our district, that the challenger, Dan Seals, is also "good for Israel" which he is. My relatives' lives depend on it and I'm voting for Seals. So getting back to the menu. The Republicans have exploded the debt and deficit. They have taken us from $250 billion yearly surpluses to over $400 billion dollar deficits. The national debt has gone from around $5.5 trillion to nearly $9 trillion in under six years. Unfunded liabilities, the promises government has made for the future, was $20 trillion in 2000 it's now $43 trillion. Ronald Reagan once vetoed a transportation bill with around 150 earmarks for pork projects. Bush signed one with over 6,000 earmarks. On Iraq and Katrina it's been a disaster. Limited government? They dictate that California can't pass medical marajuana laws; same-sex couples can't have equal rights, not even marriage mind you just hospital visitation or pension rights; that you must say the pledge of allegience with "under God" in it; that stem-cell research should be banned; that end of life decisions, like in the Schiavo case, should be made in Washington D.C. in the Oval Office rather than say, I don't know maybe by a husband or a family at the hospice and don't forget it's now illegal to engage in internet gambling. Unless it's online state lotteries or betting on the horses online. And we decry when the Taliban banned kite flying or the Suadis ban alcohol. (We tried banning alcohol by Consitutional amendment no less and all it did was create the mafia.) Balanced budgets? Limited government? Competent and wise foreign policy? Smaller government? How about even competent government. The Republicans want to visit Mars but they won't visit New Orleans. It's farce at this point.

So again. What would it take to vote against a Republican? If after Iraq, Katrina, the spending, the indictments, the guilty pleas, the resignations, the elevation of governmental power over individual rights, the lies, the state of denial, the subsitution of faith for science, the support for creationism and a whole lot of other things - if after all that you still proudly want to vote for Republicans then there is nothing I can say to change your mind. Hope you enjoy the warmed over rat vomit too.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I asked you ,who you were voting for. Please use honesty in you blog. Keep the facts straight.

10:22 AM  
Blogger Crankyboy said...

Didn't know you asked. I will tell you I'm voting straight Democractic ticket. If you are voting Republican aftee the last six years then all I can say is what is the color of the sky in the world in which you live? That and up the dosage.

2:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree 100 percent about the rat vomit, but I also have to point out that Kirk's behind-the-scenes campaign tactics show he is NOT ON THE SIDE OF ISRAEL ... that he talks a good game for the Jews of his district, but his so-called "Israel support" ends there.

One of his aides was caught not-so-subtlely trying to intimidate a prominent Jewish leader, a former Kirk supporter who had switched his allegiance to Seals in this election. The Kirk aide warned this supporter -- the Tel Aviv University president -- that he risked losing federal funding for the university unless he changed his mind about Kirk. "Revenge is a dish best served cold," she wrote.

Anyone who can threaten to pull federal funding from TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY is no friend of Israel. If Mark Kirk really had Israel at the forefront of his mind and heart, he would have been outraged enough to fire the aide. But he didn't -- one has to wonder whether he told her to send the email.

Mark Kirk PANDERS to the Jews in his district, plain and simple. He says exactly what he knows they want to hear. It's insulting.

12:10 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home