Oh, yes we did...

Don't be alarmed by the political stuff...if you want to scroll down and see movies of the kids, just roll on by this.

As I've had more and more occassion to visit a number of the blogs that are out there from some of our friends and relatives as well as some of their friends and relatives, I've noticed that some might seem to share an assumption. And while I agree that this assumption might be warranted in part (we are, after all, LDS) I hate assumptions in general. As you might have guessed, that assumption is that we voted for John McCain and not Barack Obama. That assumption, as you might guess from the pictures and the title of the entry, is a false one.

Speaking for myself, let me give you my reasons for voting for Mr. Obama, and why, for the most part, I voted against John McCain (my true heart's desire was a Nader / Paul ticket, but that is another story).

1) Character really does count. I was outraged when Bill Clinton used the Oval Office as a brothel and then lied about it. Why would my opinion change about a man like McCain who cheated on his first wife and left her because she wasn't attractive any more, and who repeatedly berated and belittled his current spouse in public (before he ran for president)? If his current wife has a pre-nup, I didn't think that was character I could count on. In my little world, adultery trumps pot smoking and "terrorist" paling any day on the nasty-stuff-not-to-do list. Forget the racial slurs from Obamas preacher - I'm worried about the ones that came out of McCain's own mouth. Besides, McCain peddles booze in Arizona - not exactly what I call the family values candidate.

2) The Religious Right. McCain was a hero to me in 2000 when he pegged the tele-priestcraft-evangelsits as "agents of hate." Eight years later he threw his arm around them and all but offered to serve as their shoe shine boy. Sorry, but when Pat Robertson calls Episcopalians and Methodists the Anti-Christ, I know that the Mormons are the next to go if somebody doesn't stand up. Are there plenty of dems that feel that way about Mormons? I think this week in California proves that is the case. Nevertheless, my past experience has shown that while the Left may disagree with my religion, they will, for the most part, let me excercise it without criticism on a personal level. In other words, I've only ever had Baptists spit at me and throw bottles at me, not liberals.

3) War. We surely need to defend ourselves, but Exxon profits reaching the highest level in the history of the world? Sorry, folks, no way you can convince me that the very real attack on the United States wasn't manipulated for commercial gain. President Eisenhower's last speech gives you chills when you think about this. Give me a Nixon, give me an Eisenhower, give me anybody that is willing to use diplomacy over ill-conceived adventurism ala Wilson, Harding, and Coolidge.

4) Smarts. A BA from a naval academy vs. a JD from Harvard Law. I know, I know, street smarts are supposed to be enough (whatever), but I've had eight years of "nucular" and I think I'll take elitist for the next eight. I understand that our last two Harvard men, Kennedy and W. (with an MBA after his history degree at Yale) were busts, but I'll take one more gamble on the school considering it also gave us the two Roosevelts, and the two Adams.

5) Hope. Is Hope so wrong? Lincoln brought hope on the coat tails of his second term. Roosevelt (both Teddy and Franklin) brought hope to difficult times. Reagan brought hope to 8.5 million unemployed and an America with 18% inflation. Frankly, none of those leaders had been "tested" with years of policy making before America threw in with them. What, Reagan could see Mexico from California? It was hope he spoke about.

6) Foreign policy. Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran vs. Obama in Berlin. 'Nuf said. See point 3.

7) John Maynard Keynes vs. Milton Friedman. John Maynard Keynes via WW II gave us moderated prosperity for 30 years. Milton Friedman and supply side economics gave us obscene greed and wealth transfer from the lowest 40% of Americans to the top 5% of Americans. Keynes is a blunt and bloody economic instrument, but Friedman has proved to be...unspeakable.

Ok, so I'm sure to take a ribbing from some of my associates and certainly some of the relatives for this. I could be wrong (I did vote for George W. Bush in 2000), but I really hope I am not. I really had to ponder this one out, and as far as I'm concerned, if the kids in Idaho are shouting "assassinate Obama," I've chosen the right side.