Anyone can cut and paste a biography of there aspirant candidate and hide behind a landslide of sham legislative accomplishments but this is not a dick-sizing contest. (Although I am sure Obama would win that, you know what they say)
No one is arguing that McCain did not rise above and beyond the call of duty and serve his country in the most admirable of ways. This does not equate to a presidential resume. Unless he will be a naval aviator in Afghanistan or a Bush approved instrument of torture where he can train our military personal the best practices in extracting information through pain and suffering this all adds up to an amazing lifetime of military service that he should be planting himself on a porch somewhere, with a grandkid on his lap, relaying to them what Grandpa went through in the old days.
And I know, it has become cliché to say that beltway insiders, those party heads that have been in Washington too long, have inundated our politics with special interest groups, lobbyist and corporate fuck heads that limit our ability to get things done as a nation. It is not as simple as reaching across the aisle. It is about removing them from the process. Is John “I have been in Washington for 100 years” McCain going to revolutionize Washington? No. He will aid the same people that polluted the Clinton’s and receive aid from the same people that drive Bush now.
As your favorite Commander in Chief, Bush pointed out several times during the bloody primary in 2000:
Sen. McCain has said, "At no time have I ever done anything to betray the public trust." In 1990, McCain, as one of the Keating Five (and as a close friend of Charles Keating), was involved in a savings-and-loan scandal that cost taxpayers $2.6 billion and cost investors $190 million.
In the years leading up to the scandal, McCain received $112,000 in campaign contributions from Keating and accepted nine family trips to the Bahamas from Keating.
I think this is small potatoes and in a lot of ways think McCain is cleaner then many that have been there for years. Now he's just another hungry politician, happy to pander if it helps him win. Which eliminates the very reason people, hell even I were excited about him in 2000 - his honesty.
And that is the problem with John McCain. He is pandering his beliefs that made him a great politician in years past. Why else have you not supported him until this year. Well I know why:
1) He believes in Global Warming although for some odd reason he isn’t talking about that now.
2) In 1999: "Certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade , which would then force x number of women in America to illegal and dangerous operations," In 2007: "I do not support Roe vs. Wade . It should be overturned."
3) He was for the tax cuts because they screwed the middle and lower class: "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief," Now that he needs that upper class corporate campaign money he is for the tax cuts
4) Don’t even get me started on immigration and his mind boggling excuses for flip flopping….
5) He went to an Episcopalian high school. For at least 15 years, he has been listed as an Episcopalian in authoritative directories such as the Almanac of American Politics and Congressional Quarterly's Politics in America 2008. Suddenly, in September 2007, he's campaigning in South Carolina, the heavily Baptist state where George W. Bush barely managed to stop McCain's presidential campaign 8 years ago. And guess what? McCain tells a reporter "By the way, I'm not Episcopalian. I'm Baptist."
6) And the one that disgust me the most! He has been an avid supporter of torture ban as well as closing GITMO. But he didn't even show up when congress voted to ban water torture. The one thing i loved about him...he had been through torture and it disgusted him...and he didn't even show up! Why? Well, he can't piss off all his new neocon friends now can he? This compromise is UNFORGIVABLE.
And on and on....
So this is what 26 years of experience in Washington produces??…umm…No Thanks!
But lets examine Presidential experience in a deeper, more intellectual way. Experience is developed and filtered through a person’s character. Experience never exists in isolation but involves and needs character, it seems to me — not just what they've done but how they've done it and what they've learned from doing it.
Presidential experience means a familiarity with the levers and dials of government, knowing how to deal with congress from an executive level, understanding when to differ to your staff and when to call on the National Security Council. But if knowing the system is so useful, then second term presidents would be more successful then first term. Instead the bulk of presidents lose there effectiveness as they go along, thus the lame duck theories. Was it FDR’s experience as governor of NY that he called upon to lead this nation in it’s darkest hour, an hour darker then any “Islamic” threat we currently are involved in? Or was he drawing on his experience with his battle with polio that allowed him a unique view into despair and how to overcome it? Lincoln with 2 years of experience often summoned lessons he learned on the farm in addressing his presidential duties. Richard Nixon served as Congressman, Senator and Vice President; a resume far outdoing McCain’s and watched from the front row as Eisenhower assembled one of the best organized administrations in American history (Civil rights, highways, Social Security). When his turn came his CORE character and “experience” led him to create a White House doomed by it’s own dysfunction.
More recently Ronald Regan, who never served in Washington, and who you hold so dear famously quoted:
“There is no such thing as presidential experience outside of the office itself.”
In my view it will take a lot more then touting credentials and military experience to convince me that he is a more ready president then Obama. Our history has shown that some of the greatest presidents we have had are limited in there government experience. And some of the worst have had an abundance.
George Washington had zero years experience and Lincoln had 2. Obama is in good company….
No comments:
Post a Comment