Sunday, October 19, 2008

My Case Against McCain

I've taken quite a few potshots at John McCain in this blog. I reckon it's time I gathered my whole case together and present it for your judgment.

The flag-waving, saber-rattling, pseudo-patriotic, "we are number one" behavior McCain exhibits is just stupid. It's horribly dated and and culturally retarded. Think: when was the last time the United States bullied any other nation into complying with our wishes? We simply do not have the ability to do that sort of thing any more to any nation of any size. It's taken us longer to "conquer" Iraq than it took us to conquer Hitler and Tojo, and at least back then we had a clear victory. Even Dubya doesn't use the words "Iraq" and "victory" in the same sentence any more, instead opting for the euphemism, "success".

Five years of torture makes McCain a true hero, but also must have tweaked his psyche. I don't care who combs his hair, but I care a lot whether he has any residual psycho-ticks. I'm not saying he does, but I'm saying I fear even the possibility.

The same personality characteristics that make someone a great jet jockey disqualify them from the Presidency. He is precipitate in both his thoughts and actions, often shooting form the hip (or lip). That personality in a position like the Presidency can be a recipe for disaster. We need intelligence rather than cleverness, control rather than impetuosity, and wisdom rather than action for action's sake.

It is incredibly easy to listen to McCain speak and hear Dubya saying the same things.

His worldview is anachronistic, simplistic and dangerous, and is far more likely to involve us in another war. Unconditional refusal to talk to potential enemies is almost a guarantee to remove the word "potential". His refusal to talk with potential enemies like Iran is pathological. Even General David Petraeus, our most effective commander in Iraq and new head of the U.S Central Command, thinks we should talk to enemies.

McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate says an awful lot about his character. He treats her like a political accessory, keeping her in the dark on big campaign decisions and refusing to let her be interviewed "unchaperoned" by the press. He clearly did not choose her because he thought she was the second most qualified person to be President.

John McCain has already proven that he sacrifices personal principles for political advantage, with the South Carolina incident as a perfect example. Here is the quote as reported by the New York Times: "I feared that if I answered honestly, I could not win the South Carolina primary," Mr. McCain said. "So I chose to compromise my principles. I broke my promise to always tell the truth."

McCain desires power and influence "for their own sake", and was stupid enough to say that in his own book, the 2002 memoir "Worth the Fighting For". The quote: "I have craved distinction in my life. I have wanted renown and influence for their own sake. That is, of course, the great temptation of public life. ... I have never been able to conquer it permanently, but I have tried."

He's in his 70s and has already had four melanomas surgically removed. If he vapor locked and left us with Palin, could we muddle through? Yes, we could. But why should we have to?

In the face of the biggest economic crisis in a hundred years, McCain's principal campaign tactics appear to be portraying his opponent as a terrorist and as a Muslim. We need "straight talk" about the enormous problems that now confront our nation, not lame, racist attempts to smear Barack Obama.

Finally, on a purely emotional note, I just have to say this: McCain's smile creeps me out. Every time he smiles he looks like he is in pain.

Please...let there be no "Bradley effect" that might put a man like McCain in the White House. The way things appear now, the only thing that could keep Obama from the victory he deserves is if American voters show that the plague of racism is still alive and well.

6 comments:

Lanna said...

So, what's the solution when you don't trust either candidate and fear for the country's future under either a McCain or Obama regime?

Michael Rowland said...

You've got several options:

1) Don't vote. But you lose your whining rights thereby, something I was never able to live with. :-)

2) Write in the name of someone you think would be a better president. This route has salved my conscience twice before. Even though it is practically useless, it does preserve my whining rights after the election and I sleep better.

3) Bite the bullet and vote for the lesser of "the two evils". Done this one before, too, even though I hate to "settle".

One person, one vote. Ain't it grand?

Lanna said...

Hmmm, maybe they should allow more votes allowed for people with higher IQs. :) Just so I make sure I'm included, let's say IQs over 130 get two votes, over 150, three votes and only people with IQs over 170 can even run for president. OK, now I'm getting carried away. As of next May, I'm old enough to run, but alas, I don't meet that 170 IQ threshold. :)

Michael Rowland said...

It's not politically correct to say that only smart people should hold high elected office...but that is exactly my opinion. Nevertheless...

If you want to tinker with the "one man,one vote" sacred cow, why not require everyone to perform one year of some type of government service before the get their franchise? To me it doesn't matter what kind of government service it is: military, social, medical, educational,infrastructure, etc...as long as they learn what it means to put the "people's" interest ahead of their own.

So tell me, what bugs you about Obama?

Lanna said...

More than anything, it's a gut thing. I just don't trust the guy. But in general terms, I'm opposed to big government. I don't think he can make the changes he's proposing without raising taxes significantly. I don't think he's the right guy to be commander in chief to our military. He couches his statements in vagueness, rarely taking a stand on anything that truly matters. I think the Democratic party has specifically groomed him for this job in his short term as senator. What's his voting record? He votes present a lot, but not for or against bills. He faulted Palin for having no beltway experience, but he's maybe only a step or two ahead of her. Isn't that hypocritical? (I'm not saying Palin is the best veep choice, but better than a less than up to par VP than green behind the ears president.) Some of his past associations concern me. He has outright lied about some of them.
I have a laundry list of problems with McCain, too. My first is that he started the mudslinging first. I once voted for a mayoral candidate (Rocky Anderson, SLC mayor) purely on the fact that he did not mudsling in the final days. I lived to regret that decision. He's old. Maybe too old. While I laud his military service, I think he depends too much on it as a campaign platform. I don't think his social security plans will work. Actually, he's so bad at answering debate questions (really, they both are), that it's difficult to know what the plans really are.
I admit that I'm not as educated about either candidate as I could or should be. But, what I've seen so far, despite his narcissism, McCain scares me slightly less. Either way, I'll make sure I have my year's supply. :) Never before have I felt like the writing is on the wall.

Michael Rowland said...

Perhaps I can give you a little hope. :)

First, I recommend you ignore the campaign promises of both candidates. They say whatever they need to say during the campaign. I never believe a word of it.

Second, candidates also try to never say any more than they absolutely have to. This is doubly true if you are the front-runner. Why tie your hands unnecessarily? In this regard, I think Obama is acting intelligently.

Third, presidential candidates historically campaign on the edges during the primaries then dive toward the middle during the general campaign. We certainly saw this pattern repeated in tihs election.

Fourth, and perhaps most hopeful of all, is that elected presidents almost always govern from the center-right or pay a terrible price in the mid-term elections. As backup, I suggest the cover story in the latest Newsweek, "It's Hard Being Blue", wherein some very smart people present factual historical evidence of this pattern. They also opine that America, on the whole, is a center-right country. You can read the article here:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/164656

It would be a mistake to underestimate Obama's native intelligence. Likewise his skills as a communicator--I suspect he may be even better than Reagan by this measure. His calm, reasoned responses to recent events are, to me, terribly impressive for a 40-something. The way he took command of a recent meeting on the economic crisis, where the Fed Chairman, the Treasury Secretary, and several other heavyweight actors were the principal actors, impressed the living daylights out of me. It gave me all the evidence I need to know that he is a capable leader.

So...like you, I'll be increasing my emergency supplies. But I also think there is reason to hope.