That whole mess of candidates.

In honor of Iowa Caucus day, I'm posting a chunk of a note I sent a lovely friend of mine regarding what I thought about the 2008 presidential candidates.

---

I must say that there is no presidential candidate that I'm completely in love with. I can pigeonhole myself in a few ways. For one, I am pro choice all the way. For two, I fully support gay and transsexual equality. My life experience has taught me that there is nothing to be gained and everything to be lost by excluding these individuals. On the other hand, I don't think marriage should come with special government-granted privileges. That speaks to another pigeonhole of mine, church-state separation. That's a big one, actually. I think our government should seriously stay away from even seeming to support any particular religion or group of religions. As marriage is a religious ceremony, government should have nothing to do with it.

That's where I am socially, at least. Call it a liberalish platform. I am also confused as to why so many people are afraid of socialized medicine. It seems to work well for Great Britain, where the National Health Service enjoys a very high rating for excellence. I'm sure it would boost our economy as well, as the huge insurance premiums being paid by individuals (such as myself) these days would evaporate.

Our interventionist foreign policy has been a total disaster from beginning up until the present. I agree with Ron Paul on that point. We should definitely reduce our presence around the world and stop being the world police. However, disengaging from NATO is a terrible idea. It would amount to abandoning our friends on the world stage and seriously damage global security. By supporting NATO, we mutually guarantee security with much of Europe. As big a country as we are, we really shouldn't try to go it alone. Foreign policy in the United States requires a very even hand, careful and canny. W just blundered through it, and we see what that got.

So that would be some points of my policy were I running for President. I would lose badly, not just for the policies, but for the fact that middle America at this point would not vote for a polyamorist.

So who else? I generally support Barack Obama. I really appreciate his mutiethnic and diverse upbringing, and I think it would serve him well on the world stage. His health care program is a bad idea, but not as bad as what we have now, and no one has detailed anything better. He seems to grasp foreign policy much better than most of his co-candidates. He is a wise observer of the human condition. He supports stem-cell research, as I do. He seems to have my opinion on most social issues.

Alternately, I support Dennis Kucinich. He's very bright and really does have peace in his heart, and I agree with his social ideas, generally. His foreign policy leaves much to be desired, though.

So sure, I'd like to see an Obama/Kucinich ticket.

As for everyone else (in order of how likely I would vote for them): Edwards is meh. Clinton goes for political expediency over wisdom and is possibly gullible. Ron Paul you've heard me talk about. McCain is too socially conservative for me. Who is this Brownback again? Romney is a lying ignorant-of-history douchebag. Huckabee is the religious right. Fred Thompson mimics Reagan. Giuliani should be jailed for his criminal activities.