Some disagree with my priorities, placing health care, energy policy or other items ahead of international issues and fiscal restraint. I certainly don’t under rate these other problems; they are important and need to be solved, however, I see my picks as overarching issues, that is:
- There can be no successful energy policy without a dramatic improvement in our international standing and ability to successfully deal with terrorism, and McCain has vastly more international policy experience than either Dem.
- All other social problems require money – health care reform, infrastructure improvements, alternative energy R&D – you name it. McCain will demand we find a way to pay for it other than more borrowing or more taxes. I really fear that left unchecked either Dem will spend without regard for the consequences – taxes and the national debt will continue to rise and we will become weaker as we saddle our children with those costs.
Some people worry about Senator McCain’s temperament and perceived bellicosity, but try a military leader we have elected President who got us into a war. I don’t think there has been one. Military people understand the real cost of war better than the rest of us and work harder to avoid or stop bloodshed. If you are open-minded to this point, read David Brooks today. McCain is no cowboy-war monger.
The Supreme Court argument is the weakest against him. While he talks a good social-conservative game he has a long history of working well with moderate politicians, real social-conservatives know this and don’t trust him, and anyone he nominates has to have the A&C of the Senate, which will probably have 60+ Democratic Senators starting in ’09.
John McCain is a moderate, pragmatic, man who has more practical life and world experience than any candidate in the field. He is remarkably candid for a politician and he doesn’t take himself so seriously that his own opinions become dogma the rest of us have to live with forever. His character has been tested beyond what the average person can even imagine. He is human and flawed – but there is a lot to like and admire about him.
Posts
10 comments:
It's not hard to like the guy. I can sense his transparency. Contrast that with the Clintons and Bush.
Is he going to have to struggle for the center? Have harder line conservatives lost interest in the race and may just stay home. Will McCain have to pick a conservative as running mate? If so, given his age, it will threaten more liberal voters.
David Brooks today said on All Things Considered, the electorate will decide this election on domestic issues, as in the economy, not on Iraq. He did say the democrats can still manage to "fail at running a bordello in a gold rush.'
McCain will get the support of the Republicans no matter which Democrat is selected. A better question is whether the Obama supporters will show up for Clinton if she gets the nod. I doubt that they will. Many people have suggested that Obama will be able to bring the country together. Where is the evidence of that? The more hype I hear about Obama the more suspicious I become. Today I saw a girl with an Obama sticker on her car. There were other stickers too- Free Tibet, peace signs, etc. When I saw her she was smoking a cigarette- did not fit with the image presented by her decals. It made me wonder about the Obama image even more. Is it all just smoke and mirrors? I get the feeling that Obama's image is carefully scripted and that we really do not know what we are going to get. It is designed to win but the real Obama remains a mystery to me. Too much style, not enough substance for me. McCain seems more genuine to me and that is why I will support him. I understand where he stands on the issues and can support 90% of them. I find the calls for Clinton to drop out by the Obama people laughable. She is very much still in the race and many things can happen before the convention that might take some of the brightness off the Obama star. I think that is what frightens the Obama campaign. The Obama people want Clinton to drop out in the name of party unity. Give me a break, they want to give the nomination to Obama as soon as possible and eliminate any possible surprise. I am hoping that by Clinton staying in we will get a clearer picture of the Obama candidacy. It will be better for the country if Clinton, rather than McCain, highlights the controversial issues about Obama. I agree with Bill Clinton's opinion that politics is a tough business and people should not be afraid of Obama and Clinton mixing it up. It helps voters make up their minds about the candidates. That is just politics. I am sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for it to happen.
Woody, does McCain's statement of staying the course in Iraq fall into your 10% of what you don't agree with or the other 90%? If you do feel that it is a civil war sold to us as a strike at the head of terrorism, does that make you question his judgement?
As to your point that Obama is unproven, we will see what the American voters define as the degree of change they want.
What I've heard and have come to agree with is that McCain is, in his heart, a contrarian. He'll find it difficult to be a consensus builder with this modus operandi. I think he'll be a decent president (certainly better than the tool we currently have) but I'm couldn't disagree more with his views on Iraq and the middle east. Read today's NYT column by Gail Collins regarding his views on the economy. Not too encouraging.
As far as Obama goes, choosing a president has always been a leap of faith. (See Ronald Reagan Bill Clinton and George Bush We end up voting for the package that's being sold and hope for the best. Clinton's problem is that we're pretty sure what's actually inside this package and most don't want to buy it again. The problem is that Clinton doesn't really care what happens to the party or to the eventual candidate as long as she gets the nomination. This level of arrogance is pretty stunning.
Kudos to Woody for posting after midnight.
Oh come on Bird, he's been a contrarian for the last 16 years because there have been very good reasons to be that. If he's electred, to who is he going to be contrary?
As for Iraq -- I really don't think we'd be there at all if JM had been President. We should have elected him in 2000.
For those of you who have access to the NY Times, here is the link to Gail Collins piece in today's paper:
click
I know she is from Ohio, but she is as witty as John McCain. Don't try to pull her john thomas, she doesn't suffer fools lightly.
I think if we had elected Topo Gigo as president, he wouldn't have gotten us into Iraq. You guys are so quick to run back under the skirts of the Grand Old Party. One thing: you won't find Larry Craig there!
I am in agreement with the DBs (Blank/Brooks)
Anyone even thinking of raising taxes (that includes not renewing tax cuts)and increasing capital gains tax has no place anywhere near DC.
We need someone who is most likely to return my 401K to the double digit growth i recieved in 2006 and 2007. I need 8 more years of capitalism. After which I will be of full retirement age, and will become a socialist, expecting our Government to take care of me as I have taken care of it for 50 years.
(and yes, I am delusional)
It stings to be accused of being a Republican. More independents support McCain than any other candidate in most polls, or he's close 2nd to Obama. Supporting McCain is not the same thing as being a Republican.
Being a traditional Republican isn't a problem. It is just that the party has been hijacked. I trust government less and less to do the things I felt it should in the past. I do believe the government should control certain things as degradation of the environment. Republicans in the past have stood for less governmental spending. Neither Reagan nor GWB seemed to adhere to this. How much of your children's money do you want to spend on the civil war in Iraq? Will any candidate get the genie back in the bottle?
And deeper:
http://www.theseminal.com
Post a Comment