For all of the twenty-eight years, eleven months and two days I’ve been alive, I’ve been a Republican. In every election I was eligible to vote in, I’ve voted Republican. Every single one.

Loyalty is important to me. I’m loyal to my husband, family, friends and employer. I’ve been loyal to the Republican party thus far. But has the GOP really been loyal to me? Not really. Is it realistic to think they should be? I’m not sure….

Today, I voted for Barack Obama in the Wisconsin Primary. It was one of the most difficult decisions I’ve had to make, politically speaking.

For several long months I’ve weighed my options, I’ve absorbed the headlines and the polls and tried my best to give every candidate a fair shake. To say that my political views have evolved would be an understatement. The way I see this country today has changed completely since the last time I voted for a presidential candidate.

I could say that it’s because of the opportunities I’ve had to research politics. Writing about politics for the last year at BlogHer has definitely opened my eyes to other ideas and opinions. But this isn’t the only reason I’ve changed my voting direction.

I think I’ve learned that it’s okay to be objective, it doesn’t make you weak. Not knowing who would get my vote was the best thing to happen to this Republican because it forced me to really delve into the issues and get a good grasp on which candidate stood where.

In years past, I voted strictly based on one issue: abortion. As a Catholic, there was no way to compromise my morals. I could never bring myself to vote for a candidate that supported abortion. I wasn’t willing to budge. I don’t believe my choice was wrong, but I’m also distraught about some of the things that George W. Bush has done in his eight year tenure as President of the United States.

Perhaps I’ve matured in eight years. I’m a wife, a mother, a full-time employee. I worry about health care, education, the environment and terrorism. I get upset with each school shooting that I read about in the news. I get angry every time I open the newspaper and see another violent act against women and children. I’m fed up.

I’m tired of politics-as-usual, and I desperately want a new face in the white house. I want someone who can give this country, and our government, the kick in the behind it so desperately needs. I looked at the men and woman running for president and struggled to determine who that someone would be.

When it comes down to it, Barack Obama is the man for the job — as of right now.

I don’t know what will happen in November, but I feel comfortable with Obama. I like his plan for health care. I think he can be the Education President. I believe that he will be the man to get down to business and make the changes Americans are craving. He’s worked for the votes. He truly cares about me and my family; even though I’m not a Democrat, Obama has shown me there is room for me in his party.

I don’t feel that way about Hillary Clinton. Her arrogance is infuriating. She’d rather blame others for this country’s problems instead of admit she’s played a part in creating them — especially when it comes down to Iraq. It’s as if she thinks she deserves to win, without having to work for my vote. Several radio ads for Hillary kept placing blame on Bush for Iraq, but Hillary voted, too. I needed her to admit she made a mistake, but she couldn’t do it, and it bothers me.

Don’t get me wrong, I support the troops and the fight to end terrorism, but I think we’ve gone too far in the Middle East. This is also why I worry about John McCain as president. He’s prepared to station troops in Baghdad for several, maybe even a hundred, years.

Because I don’t believe that Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul (whom I was starting to like more and more) stand a chance against John McCain, I decided that my vote would have more weight in choosing the Democratic candidate.

Initially, I only wanted to vote for John McCain because of his stance on abortion. That was my bottom line.

On the contrary, I wanted to vote for Hillary Clinton simply because she’s the first viable female candidate and that alone is a big deal. But what does it say about me if I vote for a person based on one issue, as opposed to voting for another based on several?

You can understand my conundrum. I tossed and turned for five days before I made my decision. And it wasn’t easy. I thought for sure that after I made my choice at the polls, I would feel guilty. But I didn’t. I felt relieved.

I still have to figure out what to do about the issue of abortion. I’m hoping that Barack Obama will embrace my feelings and help us find a way to end the needless abortions committed every year. (I can understand desperate situations like rape, incest and protecting the health of the mother.) I believe that Barack will be the candidate to bridge the gap between left and right. I didn’t see that happening with Hillary Clinton. I dislike her “my way or the highway” attitude.

Ultimately, for me, it was about being comfortable with the choices, Democrat or Republican. Barack Obama made me feel comfortable, even hopeful. I think that says it all.

I caught the last half hour of the Republican All-American Forum last night on PBS.  I was very impressed by the candidates that actually made the time to appear on the televised debate.

I have to confess that early on, I didn't like any of the Republican candidates.  It's very difficult to decipher who is real and who is pretending.

But, oh, how Governor Mike Huckabee shined.  He was confident, he spoke clearly and at a pace that didn't make me nervous like that of Congressman Ron Paul.  Huckabee made eye contact with the audience, with host Travis Smiley and the journalists, Cynthia Tucker, Ray Suarez and Juan Williams.

The segment I was able to watch was about Employment Disparity.

When Cynthia Tucker said, "Governor, I want to ask about race and unemployment.  In 2006, the unemployment rate of black high school graduates was 33% higher than the unemployment rate of white high school dropouts.  What do you think accounts for that in equity?"

Governor Huckabee said that part of it is because there is still racism in this country and the opportunities aren't the same.  Some of it has to do with the fact that there are people who unfortunately, still look at a person's face, and the color of their skin, and that's something that government can't change, but leadership certainly can speak to.
Huckabee stated that one of the things that all of us need to be aware of is that there isn't an equal opportunity for every American yet.  "We can say there is, but it's not true," he said.
candidate who admits that racism is real and still existent in this country.  Especially when so many politicians avoid the topic of race.

Huckabee stressed that it is important that all Americans have the same opportunities as everyone else.

Congressman Ron Paul spoke rather fast during the debates and I found it difficult to listen to him.  He answered Cynthia Tucker's question by talking about a stronger economy and better minimum wage laws.  He said we need sound government laws, sound wages, a sound economy.  He mentioned a bill that would allow wait staff, or people trying to get a head start in life should not have to pay taxes the first few years until they get ahead.  I'm not certain how that would work.  But it is intriguing.

Senator Sam Brownback stated that clearly, we still do not have a color blind society.  He also admitted that racism is still here in the United States.  He also talked about economic growth and the need for an optional tax flat for areas that need opportunities to grow.

Congressman Tom Tancredo said he does not agree with these "race baiting" comments about why we have these problems.  It has nothing to do with race, he said, but with the welfare system. He stated that two things have devastated the black community when it comes to economic opportunity.  First, the welfare state has paid people to be at home and not in the workforce, and the millions of imported, low income workers that have depressed the wage rates for the lowest incomes among us.  I don't believe the welfare state has made it difficult for black Americans to find jobs.  I think the lack of jobs and the racism that still exists in the U.S. has given black Americans no other choice but to use welfare that is available to them.

Congressman Duncan Hunter said that Republicans in the 90s, when former President Clinton was in office, initiated legislation three times to reform the welfare system.  He stated that Clinton vetoed the bill twice, signed the third time and then took credit for it.  I was turned off by this implied "slam" and I don't even like Bill Clinton.    

When the welfare reform took place, Hunter said, the number of jobs for single moms went up, families did much better and the average income went up, and according to HHS, there was a 33% increase in jobs for those families on welfare.  He stressed the importance of jobs being available in the community for all Americans and the importance of helping the small businessman.  I can't argue with that.  My father owned a business and struggle with high taxes and low profits for most of his ownership.

Ambassador Alan Keyes, believes that there are no moral foundations and family structure in the black community.  He said that black men today find job opportunities in prison.  That is something that reflects that when you allow the family to break down and allow the father to be driven from the home, you have established the conditions for the upbringing of children to be non-productive, to be violent and to be turned in directions that will be destructive of their economic community.  He stressed that a culture of promiscuity, selfish hedonism, that leads people to believe that the major partnership isn't important, the you have especially destroyed the black community.  Ambassador Keyes caught my attention with his remarks and I was very impressed with his passion for his beliefs.

Overall, I'd say that each candidate presented himself in a positive way.  I'm still reviewing the parts of the debate I missed.  You can watch them by clicking this link.

**Cross-posted from BlogHer.org.

The first time Hillary Clinton was "in office" she tried to come up with a plan for universal health care for all Americans. I was only 14 when Clinton was the head of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform, but I remember discussing the speech that her husband, President Bill Clinton, gave in September 1993 in my ninth grade civics class.

He spoke about how millions of Americans "are just a pink slip away from losing their health insurance, and one serious illness away from losing all their savings." My family was uninsured in 1993. My father was self-employed and couldn't afford the extremely high costs of private insurance.

President Clinton's statement is still true today. Forty-seven million Americans are uninsured. These 47 million Americans cannot afford the cost of coverage, and Hillary Clinton believes her health care plan is going to fix the corrupt system that is health insurance.

The failure of Hillary's first attempt at health care reform was largely due to several conservatives, libertarians and insurance companies lobbying against her "Health Security" plan, calling it overly bureaucratic and restrictive of patient choice.

There's the word that makes people swoon and cringe simultaneously: Choice. It's an interesting rhetoric, as Ezra Klein said in a Slate article.

What is now being dubbed HillaryCare 2.0, Clinton appears to have learned her lesson, calling it the "American Health Choices Plan" or "Individual Mandate" plan. Clinton assures Americans will be able to keep their current health coverage if they wish to do so, while allowing businesses and their employees more choices of health plans.

Crystal Patterson of HillaryClinton.com blogs about some of the highlights of Clinton's plan:

As for small business owners, like my father, Patterson says "Hillary would give tax credits to small businesses that provide healthcare to their workers to help defray their coverage costs. This will make small businesses more competitive and help create good jobs with health benefits that will stay here in the US."

This plan sounds too good to be true! Am I the only one who is skeptical? Hardly.

Rich Lowry writes:

Ezra Klein writes:

Klein also wrote about the HillaryCare ad now airing in New Hampshire.

Darleen's Place writes:

Katherine Kersten of Think Again writes:

Calmer Than You Are writes:

Fred Thompson offers his reaction to HillaryCare with this video, saying "What is it that makes liberals think the best way to help somebody is to punish them?”

Red Clay Citizen writes:

Elizabeth Edwards has her own concerns. She accused Clinton of copying the health care plan outlined more than seven months ago by her husband, John. Edwards said:

Townhall.com reported that Edwards calls Clinton's plan "John Edwards' health care plan as delivered by Hillary Clinton."

Reflections by Kris had this reaction to Mrs. Edwards statement:

Yes, I too, would like to know why Mr. Edwards isn't speaking up for himself and calling Hillary out on the stolen goods?

To be fair, Hillary's plan is similar to John Edwards'. From the New York Times last February: