Buckeye RINO

The State of Ohio Blogger Alliance has undertaken the task of highlighting criticisms of the Obama ticket that the in-the-tank MSM works hard to downplay or outright ignore.  The effort has been titled “Help Ohio Prevent Electing Obama Now” (HOPE ON), and, in all, 13 installments will be rolled out for blog readers to peruse and reflect upon.

Here are my recaps of Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.

Thurber’s Thoughts has the scoop on Part 6.  To access the accompanying video for Part 6 (and other videos accompanying the other installments of HOPE ON),  you can visit www.neverfindout.org.  If you scroll down the neverfindout page, you’ll see a video titled “Chicken Button” that is the one accompanying Part 6.  During Senator Obama’s stint in the Illinois State Senate, he could push one of three buttons on his desk to record his votes.  One button was red, to vote no.  One button was green, to vote yes.  One button was yellow, to vote . . . “present.”  That yellow button is the “chicken” button, and Obama used it 129 times when he could have taken a definitive yes or no stand instead.  Thurber notes that the “chicken” button was used on some of the most sensitive issues before the Illinois Senate, issues that other Illinois State Senators were happy to weigh in on with a yes or no vote, issues that would have more clearly defined Obama’s ideology.  Thurber concludes with these thoughts:

Obama and his campaign defend the ‘present’ votes as being due to concerns about certain provisions of the bill or questions about constitutionality. But a ‘no’ vote would have worked just as well – except it wouldn’t have given him political cover.

In the White House, there isn’t a yellow button, but there is something similar. A president can decide to do nothing, but that’s not leadership and such lack of decisiveness can result in disastrous consequences. This is not something I want to risk, so let’s never find out.

From the Buckeye RINO perspective:

I loved Rudy Giuliani’s speech at the Republican National Convention when he spoke of Obama’s chicken-button votes.

From his days as an adjunct law professor at the University of Chicago, students and faculty recall that while Obama would lead vigorous discussions of issues from many perspectives, Obama was always tight-lipped about his own personally held views on the topics at hand.  At the Saddleback Church forum, when asked which of the current members of the U.S. Supreme Court he would not have supported for appointment, he singled out Justices Thomas and Scalia, saying that he differed with their interpretations of the Constitution, but his answer was vague as he never elaborated on his own view of the Constitution.  That’s scary in and of itself to hear that two of the Justices who most strictly adhere to the Constitution and exercise the most judicial restraint are the two that Obama doesn’t want on the court, while shedding no light on what Obama’s real agenda is.  It almost sounds like Obama plans to run afoul of the Constitution.

I’ve written quite a bit about the MSM being in the tank for Obama.  The MSM has failed to pin down Obama and has persecuted Obama’s detractors, whether they be Sarah Palin, Pat Buchanan, Fox News Channel, or Joe the Plumber.  Obama has scoffed at the notion he’s the most liberal U.S. Senator, but where’s the proof to the contrary?  When the economy is the number one issue, why are some voters still concerned about Ayers, Rezko, and other radical and shadowy figures in Chicago machine politics?  It’s because Obama has made a conscious decision to remain an enigma as demonstrated by his vague, ever-shifting, and often contradictory rhetoric.  Obama distributed the money from the grants that were allocated to Bill Ayers’ education projects.  Ayers’ project had more to do with social engineering in the realm of education than it did with meeting academic goals.  What does that portend for education policy in an Obama administration?  I’d like to know, but Obama is not planning to elaborate during his current stealth campaign.  Obama has shifted his positions on how to achieve energy independence so much that it’s impossible to determine what he REALLY stands for.  On the most talked about foreign policy issue, that of meeting with leaders of enemy nations at the presidential level with no preconditions, he was very clear on the issue during the primaries, but lately he’s deliberately trying to distort his own message on that front and it angers me.

John McCain has clearly defined himself even when he took positions that were unpopular (positions that remain unpopular, I might add) with his own base.  At Saddleback Church, America saw the decisive John McCain, and that’s what’s kept McCain competitive through the remaining weeks of the election season.  I think late-deciders in this election are going to rightfully feel some anxiety about pulling the lever for a nebulous Obama and feel much more confident about pulling the lever for a transparent McCain.