jeudi, mars 27, 2008

The sign (s) of McCain

So what do you know about Senator John McCain?

A war hero. Yes. But so was John Kerry.

An Episcopalian who now says he is Baptist, or it the other way around?

A member of the Senate who has missed a lot of important votes this year because he was campaigning-OK, so did Obama and Hillary.

A lawman who was against tax cuts for the wealthy before he was for them.

A Senator who indulged in a flirtation with the Democrats about becoming Vice President, who now says he is a conservative Republican.

A man who thinks we need to stay in Iraq until we "win."

A candidate who thinks those suckers with mortgages staring foreclosure in the face should drown, and the banks should be helped-because why feel sorry for people who got themselves into this mess to begin with...

In other words, a former member of the Straight Talk Express who has now veered off the tracks so that he can look more like a conservative, and less like a man with a conscience that bridges party lines. McCain might look good to independents right now-we'll see what happens when he debates Obama, and his views are defined...or redefined, for us, the voters.

3 commentaires:

Anonyme a dit…

As is often true, voting for a representative is an exercise in deselection, rather than selection. The question is not "whether to vote for a candidate" but "whether the candidate is the best of the lot."

In the instant case, I face two such tests:

1. As a Casey Dem, I have to select between Clinton and Obama. Which is worse? Haven't made up my mind yet.

2. Come Nov, I will have to select between McCain and the Dem nominee. Which will be worse? I don't yet have any idea.

One thing is certain though, I will not be so much voting FOR a candidate as AGAINST.


Offcenter a dit…

I well understand the conundrum of the Casey Democrat. My own feeling about this is that George Bush has yanked this country so far to the right that it needs a course correction. But there is no anti-abortion candidate-if that's what makes you a Casey Dem, G-Veg

Anonyme a dit…

At least in my case, being a "Casey Democrat" is a label that I accept because the broader umbrella of the Democratic Party is unsettling.

In general, I think that US power can be a force for great good and, properly employed, can be transformative. While I would not call myself an "hawk," I acknowledge that I have greater faith in the utility of a military response to aggression. Perhaps I would be willing to go further and say that an enemy that believes the US to be unable to stomache conflict is likely to attack.

I am, as the label implies, a "traditionalist" as well.

I believe that the Establishment Clause did not create a secular state in opposition to organized religion. In a related vein, the Majority has a right to the instruments of power to define the institutions that the State determines to be of value such as marriage.

None of this is to say that I don't respect Individualism. The difference in my view to that of the broader culture, and the Democratic Base in particular, is that I don't deify Individualism. In short, I consider Individualism to be an "interest" for the state because broad-based liberties encourage creativity and flexibility in society which is good for the larger community.

Of course believing that life begins at the moment of conception and is protected by the US and all of states' constitutions defines my political leanings as a "conservative;" as does my belief that support from the State, beyond a "safety net," is detrimental to the person and larger culture.

As for traditional "liberal" causes, I ascribe to the belief that the death penalty is only "just" where no other alternatives exist such as lifetime incarceration. I also believe that the State has no legitimate interest in "morals" legislation such as sodomy laws. So too, I believe that the right to enjoy the fruits of the unrestricted free market fails when, as the financial industry has, corporations act irresponsibly.

Does this all make more sense then?