I have voted in every presidential election since 1956.  Sometimes the choices were clear and sometimes not so clear, but in every instance the choice was between one American and another.  The differences among candidates were in political ideas, Democrat and Republican.  What a tragedy for our country that this is not the case in 2008.

        Two possible choices for Democrats this year are a "particularly good liar" married to the original teller of lies, and a novice, come-from-nowhere product of the Chicago political machine who won the political lottery and became a senator.  At best, both are socialists and can easily be described as anti-American in philosophy and ideals.  For twenty years the novice sat on the knee of a virulent preacher who in earlier times would be tried as a traitor to the country.  The national shame is that so many among us are willing to support and vote for them.

        In the past, Americans could choose to vote for a Republican opponent who shared their values and distinguished himself as somebody not prone to accept Democrat positions on important issues of the time. Sadly this is not the case this year.

        Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are two sides of the same socialist coin.  Both want universal health insurance (erroneously called universal health care) which they say will provide health care for all, both want the government to control aspects of our lives never envisioned by our country’s founders as even possible, both want to have the United States weakened and to lose the war against Islamic Nazism, and both want the government to grow endlessly at the expense of those who make the country great through hard work and self reliance.  Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, who predicted that capitalism will self-destruct if allowed enough time, would be proud of them.

        And who can we choose to become president if we are unsatisfied with the Democrat contenders; a "maverick" Republican often praised by Democrat house organs for his Democrat-like political achievements.  But being a maverick in politics is nothing worthy of praise; it simply means someone who is willing to deviate from his party principles and become, in the words of the dictionary, "a lone dissenter" from the politics of those who elected him to office.  Even now John McCain contravenes many political views important to Republican supporters and appeals to "independents."  But who are ''independents''?  Aren’t they those who prefer to sit on the fence when it is necessary to make hard choices?

        McCain, like his Democrat "adversaries," is taken-in by the man-made global warming hoax, and wants to replace independent American decisions of security and self protection with being a "good world citizen" who strives to accommodate the views of others who do not have the same primary obligation to protect Americans.  Catering to world opinion is not something an American president should do if he is to fulfill his constitutional obligations to the citizens of the United States.

        Another problem with McCain is his failure to understand when Democrats are eating his lunch. Joining with Feingold and Kennedy to create laws only shows that he is not a true Republican, because there is no way that these kinds of legislative partners are capable of producing laws that reflect our core values.

        How could someone who wants to become president not see through the hogwash of the "inconvenient untruth" of global warming?  McCain is willing to accept the international mantra and act on this false premise even if it means subverting the greatest country in the world, and leads us into economic ruin and unpleasant changes in our quality of life.  Al Gore acolytes ignore real science and latch onto the unscientific belief that man can change a planet that has withstood a history of violent climate changes before humans were around to drive gas guzzlers and before the light bulb was invented.  Unbelievably, McCain is one of them.  Has anyone asked McCain on what evidence he believes that we are warming the world by what we do?

        Too often, elections are occasions to vote against a candidate rather than an opportunity to vote for a candidate of choice.  Unfortunately for us, all the presidential election in 2008 is one such time.