First, let me say that I like John McCain. I sure wish I could have voted for him in 2000. The tone of so much of what I've heard of the Republican convention has really turned me off. McCain gets that the American people are sick of this way of doing politics. Although he didn't get massive claps, I deeply appreciate his comments on reaching across the isle.
[I can't stand Lindsay Graham--if he even gets mentioned in the history books (doubtful), his way of thinking about Iraq is what the footnotes will make snide remarks about.]
I do want to say that I resent the continued insinuation that somehow the Republican party is the party that loves the U.S.A., U.S.A, U.S.A. Anyone can shout "U.S.A" like a drunk at a football game. I want people who can think through complex issues, not just shoot when you can't think of anything else to do. (By the way, when did moose hunting qualify you to be Vice President?)
As nice as McCain is, I thought his speech was pretty flat. Who cares about earmarks? That's part of the way representing your state works. It reminds me of Bush Senior's feeble attempt to advocate lawsuit reform in 1992. Nobody cared (although I voted for him).
I didn't find some of his lines heartfelt. So he said, "we need judges who don't legislate from the bench." Somehow, I don't think this is really his beef. He was reading the party's script on things like tax credits to send your kids to private schools.
I did appreciate what he had to say about hating war and doing everything in his power to keep it from happening. I wish Bush and Cheney had had more of this in them. And frankly, I thought these comments were in tension with the rest of the convention's war rhetoric.
My conclusion: McCain is far more inspiring when people are talking about him than when he is talking himself. I honor his service; I honor the fact that he suffered for so many years in Hanoi... just like I honored John Kerry for his service four years ago. Now that we've got all touchy feely, back to the real topic at hand: who would be the best person to be President of the United States?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Ken,
But I agree that McCain is more inspiring when you hear about him than from him. He isn't a gifted speaker. But he is way ahead of Bush (not hard to do...worst president communicator in memory). I for one care about the earmarks. I know that is part of how the game is played right now...but it doesn't have to be. And a veto is something he can do whether anybody likes it or not. At least he made a promise HE can keep. Most politicians (him included) make lots of promises they can only keep if lots of people help them keep them.
His anti-war rhetoric was powerful. His anti-torture position has completely taken the issue of the table---it is decided now apparently. This was a big plus for the Dems pre-Huckabee's withdrawl. His wife is his biggest liability, she was syrupy sweet fake. Same deal for her - more inspiring when OTHERS talk about her life. She should stay off the stage for him from now on. Michelle Obama definitely trumps her every time.
I want him to explain his health care plan. It doesn't make sense to me yet. Now that the pep rallies are over perhaps he will. does it makes sense to you? Tax us on any health care benefit, but then give us a tax credit? Confusing to me.
I want Obama to admit the surge has worked and that he was wrong that it wouldn't. I don't want another Bush, I never make mistakes president. And it seems that Iraq has undercut Obama's election by supporting his position. Demanding a timetable takes THAT issue off the table. Either way now, we will have a timetable for withdrawl with the next president.
McCain has a history of bi-partisan work. Obama doesn't really as far as I can tell.
Obama sees the complexity of issues more thoroughly. Obama is more open to change in general. Obama will communicate better with the world. Obama will appease more in foreign policy.
I was as turned off by the Democratic pep rally as the Republican. Seems to me most of the attendees are a little over the top cookoo on the party or at least the convention helps them look that way.
I am back to undecided. That means the Republicans made some headway with me. Perhaps in big part because I am so devoted to the cause of women in the workforce. Even if she is a "Dobson" mom...she has a better-than-Hillary resume.
Thanks for this rundown... it's more objective than mine because I am still so steamed over the last 8 years. I think McCain would probably be a good president, especially if he does what he's saying he'll do. But it's hard for me not to want the Republicans to be punished for the last 8 years. In other words, for me a tie goes to Obama.
I plan to cover different domains on Mondays. I did education this past week. I've already written Mondays on energy and the environment. Since Drury apparently isn't going to touch politics this season with a 10 foot pole, I guess I'll be the place for people to sling mud this year :-)
I pointedly avoided watching either convention - political theater. I think no matter what McCain's experience of torture or his past opposition to it, his recent acquiescence has robbed him of much of his moral authority.
I agree with Dave, McCain's health plan is odd. The idea that putting $5000 of your own money into a tax free account will reduce the roles of the un- or under-insured is hard to understand. How many people have anything close to $5000 sitting around. I'm sure Cindy McCain and Phil Gramm do but the idea is frighteningly out-of-touch with the situations of the Americans who need health care reform the most. How big would the tax credits have to be to make this work? How is this tax and tax credit not a transfer of wealth.
Mostly what McCain will have to do to win me over is prove that he can make decisions with deliberation and not shoot from the hip.
[Deleted previous, more edgily political, post]
I still cannot subvert American ideals to interantionals interests UNTIL there is some accountability at the international level, besides the U.N.
Please see my blog, as I have written more about it...angiespoint.blogspot on Identity, Law (Justice), and Internationalism.
I believe that there are issues which neither side will address. The most important is that extra spending and/or tax cuts by both camps are estimated to increase the national debt by between 3-4 trillion over the next decade. We are a credit card society at the private/business as well as the governmental level. I would hold that both McCain and Obama are sincere but that neither party is willing to adress this issue. I would support a combination of higher taxes and spending cuts so that we as a society can both balance the budget(and quit borrowing from our adversaries) and pay down the national debt over time. Any government services should not be charged to the next two generations while baby boomers keep on asking the government to spend shamelessly.
John Gardner
Onalaska Wisconsin
This talk about "the surge worked" reminds me of the joke where the doctor brags that the operation was a success, but the patient died. When originally proposed, the surge was intended to assist the political viability of the Iraqi government, a goal that is still some ways off. The Baghdad region is relatively calm now, meaning that terrorist bombings are less frequent, but you can't credit the surge for all that. The reduction in violence coincided with the successful completion of ethnic cleansing and forced relocation of many innocent Iraqi citizens. Do we want to take credit for that too? I think not.
Or to use a slightly different metaphor, it's as if a surgeon makes a major mistake while performing a routine operation and then, after the patient flatlines several times, she brings the patient back against all odds, doing a procedure that the other surgeons in the room do not advice.
Then the surgeon boasts at her great skill and ridicules the family and other doctors for doubting her greatness as a surgeon.
Think about the issue of war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Assume that we should never have gone into either place. Ok, perhaps that might have been wise at least in the case of Iraq. But, what do we do know as Christians? Do we ignore the just war tradition and simply get out asap? Do we stay for a prolonged period? Do we leave and simply stand morally aside while a semi-civil war or a holocaust breaks out? Do we do what I have hears some in my own Wesleyan congregation say and simply withdraw and let the inhabitants of those countries kill each other? Would that be responsible? Would it be what Christ would want us to do? I think not. I would argue that our response in Iraq should have been to remove Saddam and then withdraw within a year or so(or draw down our forces).I don't respect Bush because he never asked the American people to pay higher taxes to pay for the war or to make any real sacrifices(except for the troops and their families). If these war are real threats to our nation we should pay for them and not ask the younger generations to pay for our actions. War may be a form of hell on earth but is sometimes necessary(think of the American Civil War or if you were Jewish in Europe during WW2).
John Gardner
Onalaska Wisconsin
If you're looking at energy/enviro on Mondays, I'd recommend taking at peak at a popular blog at climateprogress.org. He'll admit he's progressive, but my he does his homework and posts 4-5 x / day.
I think jose's metaphor fits better.
John G, I wonder when it became so unfashionable to pay one's bills! We might not like the "tax and spend" attitude of Congress in the past, but the "borrow and spend" mentality of the GOP Congresses, led by President Bush, are worse. They are saddling our children with unbearable debts. It's just so irresponsible. I encourage the young people of today to see what's happening and to get involved and vote. They ought to have more of a say in their futures.
I wanted a chance to vote for McCain too.. and I was steamed at the Bush dirty tricks phone campaign in South Carolina that suggested McCain had a biracial daughter from an affair with a black woman... that was dirty even if it got "born again Bush" into the White house. I hope for ( a little) better from McCain and Obama. (So far) I think they have been better examples.
I watched the live feeds (w/o pundits) of both conventions for 5-6 hours each day [I know--I'm sick]. And I also agree on "tone." In the Republican convention I felt McCain was the most moderate speaker of all. Same for the Democrats--that give me a ray of hope that there really could be more civil conversation... but then again I'm "professorial" and that is supposed to be a slam ;-)
(You are right about my steering clear of politics this fall--my only column related to it comes this Tuesday.)
Heard a fun response to Guliani making fun of Obama's "community organizing" experience on the web today:
"Jesus was a community organizer. Pilate was a governor."
Frankly, anyone who can run a primary campaign that pulls the rug out from under the Clintons!!! must be an executive genius. Let's see, how well did Guliani do in his campaign? And he sure managed to get himself VP on the Republican ticket to with his political saavy.
Palin's and Guliani's sarcastic abuse was cheap, incorrect and not very clever. Obama has only defended her and in fact Obama has been outspoken about his respect for McCain.
Palin's attack of Obama claiming he had "only" been a "community organiser", was graciously responded to later by Obama who told voters, “the Republicans really had fun with the work I did after college. I don’t know if they understand what it means to, at the age of 22 or 23, to pass up more lucrative options and work with people who are having a tough time, and seeing when people work together, we can do amazing things –- rebuilding communities, and setting up job training centers and starting up after-school programs for kids.”
It's ironic that while McCain plays on his life as a war hero, Obama and the Democrats only express their utmost respect. However Kerry was riduculed and accused as a traitor by the Republicans for his life as a war hero. McCain has spent his life trying desperately to become the most powerful man in the world, while Obama has fallen into politics almost accidentally due to his genuine concerns and skills. I'd rather have someone who has not been involved in politics all his life than someone experienced in the art of deviousness and deception.
Obama's experience is more impressive to me than a war record or a gun toting governor who slashes funds for homeless mothers and builds bridges to nowhere.
He went to Occidental College, a liberal arts school in L.A. After a couple years at Occidental, he transferred to Columbia University, where he majored in political science with a specialisation in International Relations.
After graduating, he went to work as a community organiser in Chicago. Following three years of helping some of Chicago’s poorest residents recover from a steel mill closing through job training programmes, he went to Harvard Law. There, he became the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review. Instead of seeking a high paying job upon graduating from Harvard, he returned to Chicago and went back to the neighborhood communities by organising and helping to register 150,000 voters. He then began working at a civil rights firm and went on to teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago. He did all of this before his career in politics began. So next, ten years experience in public office.
His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars are spent. He has also been the lead voice in championing ethics reform that would root out Jack Abramoff-style corruption in Congress. Obama has co-sponsored immigration related bills related to his service on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee including the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act.
I didn't hear all of McCain's speech but even warmongers hate war so his words were hollow. Obama always opposed the Iraq war and Palin thinks it was the "will of God". That's just astonishing. Republicans talk of victory but I see no cause for celebration in thousands of civilian deaths and the fighting and presence of troops still in the Middle East.
sorry - that's a bit long and cross sounding.
Post a Comment