I attach a link -- http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/letters/x2109423246/Rosen-Hope-for-the-futurel
to the Metro West News where there are some oppositions to my opinion letters supporting Obama. I inclusively responded to them the following:
It is impossible to talk about THIS election without mentioning George W. Bush or John McCain. This election is, after all, ABOUT electing either John McCain or Barack Obama. This election is in RESPONSE to the presidency of George W. Bush and Republican party policies. Unfortunately, to court the religious right, McCain whom I admired in 2000, is an anathema to me now because he tries very hard to reflect that less-than-thoughtful mostly religious base of the Republican party. It is impossible to address issues without mentioning both George Bush and John McCain. They are nearly mirror images of one another. In my opinion, George Bush has ushered in the most corrupt and utterly tyrannical administration in this history of this country. He has put all of us at great risk. The policies one spoke of (including 9/11) that were so disastrous happened on his watch. Pelosi, et al while admittedly APPEARING weak in some ways did not have the numbers to overrule the Bush disaster.
Moreover, I am, after 59 years, most assuredly not so naive as to think Barack Obama is the savior for everything. Of course, I know that. I regret if I gave that impression. I do not think that. I do not believe in messiahs. However, last civics book I viewed mentioned that third parties were rather ineffective in this country. In view of that, the choice now is between two candidates. I do believe of those two that Barack Obama is by far the better choice. He is, of course, younger and, in my opinion, more intellectually astute. He will support not only a foreign policy I agree with more but a social policy that is more acceptable to me as well.
I can assure one insulting blogger that when taking 'civics', I did NOT 'look out the window'. My minor in college was political science. That most assuredly does not make me an expert. It does though, I would like to think, make for opinion that, hopefully, has a background of expertise which cultivated it. Over decades I have given my opinions much thought as I waxed throughout the years from the left to the right and back again.
We define differently what we think is good policy for our nation. I want a more just, more humane, and less belligerently bellicose country. I think that Barack Obama and the Democratic party can best provide more of what I want than can John McCain and the Republican party. Barack Obama certainly, though, cannot and will not do it all. George Bush and his cronies have assured us of that.
I added another comment addressing a point I omitted.
Calling Obama Osama is not only insulting to the senator it is juvenile. It reminds me of children on a third grade playground. If I said More of the Same Pain McCain, for example, people would criticize me and quite rightly so.
In addition, Biblical quotations are ineffective when arguing politics. For every quotation one can find and equal and opposite Biblical phrase. The Bible is filled with contradictions. As stated in my previous response, I do not think Senator Obama is a savior and I do not believe human beings messiahs. Rather, Senator Obama promulgates policy and belongs to a party that is more in accord with my political beliefs. He has voted, by my standard, correctly on most issues.
I do realize that both the Republican and the Democratic parties are guilty for the mess our nation is in. However, it is clear, and has been for decades, that there is a DECIDED difference between the two parties although both admittedly depend inordinately on monied interests for their survival. Despite that, I submit, for example, the Iraq invasion and occupation would NEVER have occurred if Gore had been the victor in the Supreme Court presidential choice of 2000. We would have four thousand men, who are now dead, alive. Moreover, we probably would have captured Bin Laden, the REAL perpetrator of the 9/11 tragedy. I even postulate that 9/11 may NOT have happened since a President Gore would most likely have heeded the myriad of clues and one prescient memo which said 'Osama Bin Laden to attack the US.' Bush smugly and stupidly ignored that crucial memo and a number of other warnings from outgoing Clinton administration officials regarding the danger of Al Qaeda.
I can point, too, to other social issues which might have been different had a Democrat held the reins of power. A relative of mine, a former Harvard College, Harvard Medical graduate, a physician and person of professional/personal excellence has a debilitating disease similar to Lou Gherig's disease which shortened his career, placed him in a wheelchair, and relegated him to a life of much suffering. A Gore presidency might have helped, through stem cell research, cure his tragic malady. Our nation could have been, for the past eight years, at the forefront of research and cures for hideous diseases through the use of stem cells. Can you imagine, too, the effort a Gore administration would have devoted to the environment and reversing global warming? Instead of life AFFIRMING policies the Bush administration has been responsible for the unnecessary death of thousands many of whom are children and other innocents. For ALL these things and so much more, I believe the Democratic and Republican parties are more than SIGNIFICANTLY different. They are LIFE SAVING different.
I disagree with you. All politicians are NOT the same despite many being placed into office by corporate interests. The common people like you and I (as you put it), do occasionally get a vote.