why i won't vote for obama

ok so i'm going to give you all a moment to get over the title of this blog:

no i am not voting for barack obama.

now, don't get me wrong, i'm also not voting for john mccain. and i make no secret of the fact that obama is certainly closer to in line with my politics than is mr. mccain. i am genuinely afraid of another term of republican rule both for my own sake (many good scientists are losing their public funding) and for the general politics of the country. but my problem is that, contrary to what the republicans are trying to make middle america believe, obama is a down the line liberal. he's no radical. he's no william ayers. if only he were.

i think an article from the guardian this summer about sums up how i feel about obama so i won't entirely rehash this issue. obama would be a symbolic change but not necessarily a substative one. now this isn't to say that he doesn't differ from the bush-republicans on important issues, because he does. but obama is a clinton-esque liberal, without doubt. yes he's pushing to roll back the bush tax cuts and give lower-income households a break. yes he's pushing for better (but certainly not universal) health care. but he also lectures parents about raising their children in a disturbingly cosby-esque manner. and his anti-war stance is really anything but.

i'm going to spend a minute on that one, because i do think it's important. yes, obama has been a fierce critic of the war in iraq, and justifiably so. but why, exactly, is he arguing for pulling our troops out of iraq? to send them to Afghanistan of course. fight the 'good' war, the 'correct' war, to 'hunt and kill' bin laden. wait, this is our anti-war candidate?

Afghanistan in my eyes was not, is not and never will be a good war. it's still a neo-colonial project that has more to do with ensuring US hegemony in the region than with fighting terrorism or fighting for human rights (does anyone else find the idea of invading a country because the women are oppressed absolutely ridiculous? because, historically, occupying forces are generally such a positive force in the fight for liberty...). our fight in afghanistan has and will continue to kill civilians. and if recent events (or the cadidates statements, including mr. obama) can be any indication, the war is starting to spread to neighbor countries, magically crossing borders and attacking villages without breaking international law!!!! what if, say, the syrians wanted to stop US from sending planes and bombs to use within THEIR terrority and so decided to blow up strategic weapons pipelines in the us? HMMMMMM?

but to put a pause on my ranting, a vote for obama is, like it or not, still a vote for a halkish and imperial american foreign policy. a vote for obama is still a vote that would enable private insurance companies to reap huge profits by denying appropriate care to working americans. a vote for obama is still a vote for corporate america, a vote for wall street bailouts, a vote for more money spent on defense than on education, and a vote against the true interests of most americans.

but what it comes down to is that i don't believe obama will be a voice for the voiceless, i don't think he will fight for the true silent majority of americans that are truly struggling, the americans that understand that the american dream is no longer a reality, that all too often poverty is passed down from generation to generation.

now, i would like to add a couple of things. first, i want to do nothing to take away from the historic nature of this election and the amazing campaign that obama has run. this is a country that not so long ago still had legal segregation. to potentially have a self-described black man in the highest office would be symbolically unprecedented. and amazing. and inspiring. and i would probably cry, and more than a little.

second, the fact that i'm voting in new york, a state that will go for obama regardless of my vote gives me the freedom to vote my heart. were i in ohio, florida, or even iowa i may be forced to reconsider.

but with the freedom that i have, how could i endorse a neo-liberal agenda for the highest office? a vote may or may not mean that much in this odd two-party indirect democracy that we live under, but it's about the extent of my political agency. shouldn't i use it to say NO to this system that i don't believe in. i want MORE political choices. i want real, substative CHANGE. it's not a revolution, but it's what i can do for now.