The case for Obama

If you are going to vote for Barack Obama, please state your case for doing so.

Some rules for this thread: A “negative ad” is defined as one that mentions your opponent. So don’t mention how your candidate is better than anyone else. Give the positive reasons for why you think Obama would make a good president. Also, I don’t want arguing. If someone posts a reason that you dispute, don’t say so. Just let it go.

I’d like this to become a compendium for readers trying to make up their minds.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • http://www.geneveith.com Veith

    J, I deleted your comments because they violated the rules of the thread in saying how your candidate is better than the other one, instead of presenting your candidate’s case in itself. Nemo, I deleted your comments because they just criticized my deletion and were thus off-topic. Anon, I deleted your comment because it violated the first sentence of the post, asking only for people who are going to vote for Obama to post on this topic.

    Come on! Can’t anyone come up with any positive reasons to vote for Obama?

  • J

    Let’s try again.
    I support Obama because he supports solving international problems with diplomacy and international cooperation; he rejects the Bush doctrine of perpetual ‘preventive’ war. Obama does not favor only the richest Americans. He has a first-class intellect and temperment. His family is adorable. He does not make me ashamed of my president.

  • allen

    I’m voting for Obama because the present provision of medical insurance in the US sector of the global economy is a millstone around our necks, making our products more expensive on the world market. This millstone prevents capitalism from being unleashed. Medical insurance has to become a public utility. Then the rest may prosper.

  • eric

    Thank you for the challenge Dr. Veith. This is my Positive Argument.

    His decision making process is conservative. He consults and is willing to change his mind in face of facts on the ground. He will not abdicate his post as commander-in-chief by asking his Generals to provide political cover.

    He is a post Boomer. He was not old enough to make any decisions in the 1960s, so maybe he can lead us beyond them. I believe he will be presidential and support centrist positions on social issues, even though he holds liberal views on abortion and guns. IF the first thing passed is FOCA or federal gay marriage; He will not get to work on the core “social contract” issues he is running on. I am much more worried about social issues in a 2nd term.

    I would like to thank everyone who participates on this blog. Your questions and challenges have made me think through my decision. They ultimately have not changed my mind, but they have clarified my expectations of our next president, whoever wins.

  • FW

    I am voting for Obama,because I think his approach will make a greater difference in reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions in the usa.

    I do not believe that the narrow strategy of electing a president solely on the idea that he will install supremes that will overturn roe v wade is a good one. This appears to be the singular reason for many to vote for obama or against him.

    the best argument i have heard so far for overturning roe v wade, is that our laws should reflect what is right and wrong. murder is wrong. abortion is murder. therefore roe v wade MUST be overturned.

    I don´t imagine a high percentage of the populace, even pro-lifers who would honestly pursue this logic to it´s logical conclusion: the death penalty or life for committing a capital crime or being accessories for doctors, nurses, accountants and women who participate in a abortion. In fact, I see the Pro-life faction conveniently being blind to the fact that most “pro-life” candidates are in fact in favor or death in the cases of rape or incest.

    Even if we COULD succeed in passing laws that would make abortionists die for their crimes, would this be workable when the vast majority of the public would be strongly opposed to this?

    adultery is wrong. divorce is wrong. I know these things do not approach murder in severity or consequence, yet these ARE examples where everyone seems to be complicit in accepting that the law cannot always reflect what is right. Murder-by-way-of-abortion is , in practical terms of curbing it, somewhat different than other forms of murder, in that those involved can commit this crime against humanity in a way that no police action could really combat in the same way as other murders. here in Brasil , where abortion is criminalized, this becomes readily apparent.

    Obama´s legal view is that the courts can practically never step ahead of where the public consensus is. THAT was the real takehome points of that last flap over his 2001 lecture. He even said that he would be troubled if current courts were “activist” in the same way the warren court was on the issues surrounding civil rights. This understanding does fit the full arc of his public statements and recollections of his law students and conservative colleagues at the u of chicago from his work as a professor of constitutional law consistently.

    He is clearly following this specific thinking in his views on Roe V Wade. And I have to say, he has persuaded me on this point. conservatives cannot force laws down the throats of a majority who strongly disagree. unfortunately so. lives are at stake.

    Yet to do this he directly violates his other, equally strong, companion view that the courts need to favor the weak, voiceless and powerless in society in those cases where the constitution appears to be contradicted by legislatures. This IS a conservative small-r position. most movement conservatives now seem to favor a much more small-d democratic process favoring referendums even over legislatures if they disagree with what the legislature as done. This ends up being horribly inconsistent (to whit the oregon referendum on euthanasia…).

    Obama is blind here to the clear implications of his very own strongly held views, exactly in the same way our founders were blind to the inconsistency of race-based slavery in their time.

    I fully support Obama´s legal views. I am pleased that they form a consistent and I say reasonable view. and I will fight hard to point out to him and others the naked inconsistency of those very views with roe v wade and other related laws.

    This is why i will voter for obama with some passion, but will view him as no perfect president.

  • Pingback: Barack Obama On Best Political Blogs » The case for Obama


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X