Another email exchange about the election

 - 
10/21/2008
Here's another good email exchange resulting from my (tepid) Obama endorsement. It's a good one, I think: On 10/21/08 9:57 AM, "Michael Boyle" wrote: Sir I read your editorial today endorsing Barrack Obama for president. What I fail to understand is your premise that because we are spending billions in Iraq, we should vote for someone who will get us out of there post haste for political reasons, not international relations or logical reasons. I have no quarrel with you that we shouldn’t have gone to Iraq, nor should we stay any longer then absolutely necessary, but to choose a candidate because he wasn’t the one who put us there is somewhat like jumping off a cliff because you don’t like the view. The Obama administration is under the mistaken impression that people like me (small business, 3M per year revenues) are rich fat cats that don’t pay their fair share. 45% for estate taxes? How about the fact that those estate monies represent monies for which taxes have already been paid? Mr. Obama will repeat the often past practices of every politician. He will chant all of the things that make everybody happy and then go on some alternative agenda. Mr. Bush did this to our detriment, why do you think Mr. Obama is so special he won’t do exactly the same? At least John McCain offers some straight talk in a political arena known for deceit. Michael William Boyle Investigative Consultants International Westfield, New Jersey 07090 www.icinj.com From: Sam Pfeifle [mailto:spfeifle@securitysystemsnews.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 10:48 AM To: mboyle@icinj.com Subject: Re: Obama for President? Hi Michael, Well, you and I agree on the tax issue, and I put that up front in the editorial, so I’ll just address your point about the war spending and political motivations. We didn’t get into the Iraq War by mistake, regardless of whether they really believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. I believe that the Bush-Cheney-Rove American Exceptionalism doctrine – essentially, we have the right to interfere in foreign countries because we are the world’s superpower - is what got us into the Iraq war, and I am concerned it will get us into a war with Iran as well. As Obama fundamentally disagrees with that doctrine, and McCain agrees, I think they have a fundamentally different approach to foreign policy. I don’t think it’s just political posturing on Obama’s part that he will get our troops home faster, and will be less likely to engage our military overseas and therefore spend far less on foreign engagements. I understand your cynicism about politics, believe me. I find myself disbelieving just about everything that comes out of a candidate’s mouth. One emailer told me I was naïve to think I could even endorse on the basis of what the candidates laid out in their platforms and positions. I was better off voting on “character” and “experience,” he told me. Well, if we’re ever to return accountability to politics, I think we have to start taking candidates at their word and then holding them accountable to those words. Why is McCain offering straight talk, but you implicitly believe Obama is lying? McCain has vastly changed his opinions since the start of the campaign, whether it’s with taxing medical benefits or offshore drilling. Candidates try to get elected by telling different constituencies what they want to hear. I can’t say that McCain is any different than any other recent candidate in that regard. If Obama fails to deliver on his promises, we can vote him out in four years. How in the world we gave George Bush another four years after his performance is beyond me. Thanks for reading, and thanks for your feedback. Sam On 10/21/08 11:06 AM, "Michael Boyle" wrote:  Sam At no time did I mean to infer that Barrack Obama was lying. I think both candidates bend the facts and their stances as you suggest. I also agree that we lack what I refer to as “statesmen.” People who have a genuine policy outlook that is beneficial to the integrity and continuation of the American dream. Frankly, I think good people don’t run anymore, because they don’t want to get involved in the double dealing and duplicity that goes on every day in Washington (I apply this to both sides of the aisle.) I appreciate your note back. I think what is remarkable is not where we disagree, but where we agree that no present candidates address what this country really needs. Some fiscal responsibility mixed in with some global appreciation for the world we live in………….. Best regards. Michael William Boyle From: Sam Pfeifle [mailto:spfeifle@securitysystemsnews.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 11:14 AM To: mboyle@icinj.com Subject: Re: Obama for President? Michael, On that we can certainly agree. We don’t have a great choice before us. By the way, I’ve been posting some of these back and forths I’ve been having via email to my blog. Would you agree to have this back and forth posted? I think it’s a good one. Cheers, Sam On 10/21/08 11:06 AM, "Michael Boyle" wrote: Absolutely, post as you see fit. Michael William Boyle