I’ve decided to work through my inclination not to post on
social media and talk about my personal history. So to put this post in perspective, I retired
as an Air Force officer the first time, then as an Air Force civil servant the
second time. For all of that period I
held security clearances. I repeatedly
signed non-disclosure forms that said if I disclosed classified information to
unauthorized individuals I would be subject to penalties such as 10 years imprisonment
or $100,000 fines. Over the years, I
stayed away from social media because of a concern of inadvertently revealing
information that could affect my security clearance and my job.
So my view is that Hillary Clinton should have been
prosecuted and penalties imposed. If not
in jail (miraculously), she should be on probation and ineligible for office.
Many of us lived through the Clinton presidency where we
continually heard that one’s private sexual life was not germane to one’s
performance as president. Most Republicans
probably thought that was wrong, and it’s definitely leading to a feeling of
hypocrisy when planning to vote for Trump.
However, with Bill Clinton there was substantial reason to believe most if
not all of his accusers were legitimate. Hillary vociferously attacked those
accusers. With Trump I have seen
accusations of lesser offenses than Bill Clinton’s rapes, all coming within the
last 30 days of the campaign, from years ago, and with almost no proof. The claims against him sound too much like
the insults of racism, bigotry, and the twisting of Trump’s words that stream
continuously from Hillary Clinton and the main stream media. Denigrating Trump, rather than pushing her
policies, seems to be Clinton’s primary approach to campaigning.
What I will base my vote on are the comparative advantages
and disadvantages of the policies of the two candidates. Most of all, I believe in the Constitution of
the United States and in the concepts of individual liberty and unalienable
rights. I want the Supreme Court and the
other life-long appointees of the federal judiciary to interpret the laws and
apply the Constitution as they are written.
I do not want an unelected, life-long set of jurists legislating from
the bench and destroying the rule of law.
Hillary wants to nominate liberal justices who will legislate their agenda from the bench. Trump
wants justices that will apply the Constitution.
I want the right to own and carry a weapon as needed for self-defense. Hillary either wants to repeal the Second
Amendment or allow states such as California or New York or the District of
Columbia to place any restriction on ownership, up to not even allowing you to own
a gun. Trump defends the Second
Amendment.
I believe in the right to life of the unborn fetus, so does
Trump. Clinton believes in allowing late
term abortions and partial birth abortions.
I believe in the right to live your life according to your
religion. Clinton’s judges and the great
majority of liberals no longer believe in Religious Freedom outside your home
or place of worship.
I believe in the right to Free Speech, for everyone,
including corporations, companies, unions, and any organization that represents
a group of citizens. Clinton wants to
reverse Supreme Court decisions supporting that belief. And just to comment on liberal culture, I don’t
believe that freedom should be abridged on college campuses that take money
from state or federal governments.
Obviously, I believe in a strong military. Trump plans to reverse the decline in defense
capabilities of the Obama years. Clinton
believes the Obama approach is correct.
Regulations are probably my second biggest concern after the
Constitution. Obama (as well as Clinton)
and the EPA’s campaign to kill coal, natural gas (fracking), and pipelines to
distribute the fuel is disastrous. We
have a power network that relies on fossil fuels for something like 67% of our
power. Do you want brown-outs and high
energy costs in your future? Sure, I
like solar and wind, and believe they should be expanded as economics and
technology allow. But I also have
graduate degrees in electrical engineering and physics. Alternative sources of energy (i.e. solar and wind) can supplement, but they can never be a primary energy source,
and they are costly. We recently obtained an
estimate for a solar installation for our home.
To provide about 77% of our annual usage, it would have cost us $65,000
(before federal tax credits). And that’s
after years of hearing that the cost of solar is coming down! I worry some about cyber attacks on our power
grid. With a solar installation I could
guarantee our water pump would work during sunny days. But our refrigerators, freezer, and air
conditioning (in south central Texas) wouldn’t have any solar power at night.
Beyond the EPA, Obama has expanded bureaucracy/agency
regulations that are stifling our economy and its growth. Clinton wants to continue that approach. Trump wants to reverse it.
Free trade is an issue that I’ve changed my mind about over
the years. In an open society where
politics and national interests do not manipulate economic behavior, free trade
would be great once a steady-state condition is reached. Until then, there would be disruptions and
hardships on individuals, groups and communities (i.e., your job would be at
risk). With the current nation-state
partitioning of the planet’s population, our current agreements are destructive
to our economy. High employee salaries
and costs plus high U.S. taxes mean jobs and manufacturing move to other
countries. If you increase productivity
(to make an item cheaper to offset high employee costs) by automating the
manufacturing process, you end up with fewer jobs. Trump claims he will modify treaties to
achieve deals that are not disadvantageous to the U.S. I think he deserves the chance to show what
impact a changed approach may have.
Clinton wants to continue with our current ruinous approach.
Health care is another issue that seems to be a core item of
contention. Obamacare has shown that a
liberal attempt to impose government regulations on our health system causes
higher costs and less choice. I use the
military retirement TriCare system, and cannot imagine a $5,000 annual
deductible. But I have also seen what it’s
like to live with the doctor they assign you with no choice. I’ve gone in to a military clinic coughing up
green phlegm and been given cough medicine as their solution, I presume because
they were told to minimize the use of antibiotics and to keep costs down. I had to go to the emergency room days later
to get an x-ray and the antibiotics needed to clear up the bronchitis. I do not want to transition to government
provided medical care for everyone, whether a public option that is cheaper and
drives out private competition or a single payer (government only) system. Choice will disappear and costs will
rise. If you don’t pay the costs because
of government subsidies, other taxpayers will.
Trump presents us with the chance of a revitalized health care
system. Clinton’s will be a European or
British system.
On immigration and national security. I want to see our immigration laws
enforced. I don’t want borders where
drug smugglers, terrorists and anyone with two feet can enter our country
illegally. Secure the borders, don’t
just promise it or provide misleading statistics showing it’s not a
problem. Then work on the issue of legalizing
those who came here without permission--that have not demonstrated other
criminal behavior. And do not grant
entry to prospective immigrants without a background check, especially if they
come from countries supporting or involved in terrorism. Trump believes in that approach. Clinton does not.
On international affairs and national security, Clinton and Obama have a history. Clinton does not propose significant changes,
for the most part. The situation with Russia,
China, Iran and North Korea has deteriorated, in my opinion, due in large part
to Obama and Clinton foreign policy.
They do not seem to have the ability to counter increasing and emerging
threats. They seem to ignore it. Clinton’s state department ignored requests
for added security in Libya. When an
attack came that killed four people, including our ambassador, they did not
even launch a timely military rescue. I
do not know how anyone can think Clinton’s foreign policy experience and
decision making is something we want in a President.
Further, Clinton has recently proposed a no-fly-zone in
Syria. Early in the Syrian conflict,
that might have worked. Today, Russia
has set up mobile variants of the S-300 air defense system (I am not an expert
on this) that can take out anything flying within 100 to 150 miles of the
system. Can we take out those
units? I don’t know--maybe. But it would seem to require a direct
conflict with Russian forces. Otherwise,
how would we control the air? Either
Clinton was just trying to sound tough and smart for votes, intentionally
misleading the voters, or she is inept and poorly advised about military
operations.
Trump won’t talk much about his approach, which is
considered good operational security, before an operation. On the other hand, it doesn’t let you make
firm conclusions about his decision making.
He does have good advisors!
On general temperament, I still lean to Trump. Can you envision an extremely successful
businessman with the characteristics Clinton claims for Trump? He couldn’t make a deal or arrange a
contract. I expect Trump's deal
making skills would make an excellent President. Can you see a foreign head of state trusting
anything that Clinton says? Well maybe,
if they make a big enough donation to the Clinton Foundation.
Finally, I almost overlooked policing in America. With Black Lives Matter and recent media
attention on police shootings of minorities, this has become a significant
issue. My wish is to allow police and
the local justice systems to do their investigations, and if needed, go to
trial. Complete the initial process without
federal intervention such as FBI and justice investigations, and premature
conclusions and statements from the President.
If the local/state investigation and follow-up appears in error,
prejudicial to one party, or not timely, then get the feds and public interest
groups involved. The police need our
support to maintain the rule of law.
Trump understands that. I’m not
sure Clinton does.
To wrap up, I think it is almost unconscionable to vote for
the candidate that does not support one’s beliefs on the Constitution,
regulations, the economy, health care, foreign policy and crime/policing. I can live with uncouth outbursts. I can only feel anger about a public servant
who has violated the trust of the American people by disclosing classified information
to unauthorized individuals on unsecured networks and devices, then made light
of it. I don’t see that the arguments
are even close. Trump will be my choice.
