@Foxfyre,
Bill Clinton speaking about Sarah Palin this week:
Quote:"I come from Arkansas. I get why she's hot out there, why she's doing well. People look at her, and they say: 'All those kids. Something that happens in everybody's family. I'm glad she loves her daughter and she's not ashamed of her. Glad that girl's going around with her boyfriend. Glad they're going to get married. . . .' [Voters will think] I like that little Down syndrome kid. One of them lives down the street. They're wonderful children. They're wonderful people. And I like the idea that this guy does those long-distance races. Stayed in the race for 500 miles with a broken arm. My kind of guy." From WSJ 9/25/08 issue of “Notable and quotable”
The following is some musings from David Brooks of the NYTimes who is considered a conservative. I find him to be rather level headed towards both sides of the campaign. Though I don't think anyone in this thread will be converted, I do think Brooks sums up my feelings about McCain, Cromwellish warts and all, his ethics, and moral fiber. Brooks, like our fellow poster Asherman, and others, feels disappointment in campaign tactics but points out their inevitability in such a contest but sees the man manifest in words and deeds of the past.
Quote:September 26, 2008
Thinking About McCain
By DAVID BROOKS
I’ve been covering John McCain steadily for a decade. A few years ago, I worked on a book, which I foolishly never completed, on the U.S. Senate with McCain as the central character. So when I step back and think of McCain, even in the heat of this campaign, I still think of him first in the real world of governing, not in the show-business world of the election.
I think first of the personal qualities. He was an unfailingly candid man. When other politicians described a meeting, they always ended up the heroes of the story. But McCain would always describe the meeting straight, emphasizing his own failings with more vigor than his accomplishments.
He is, for a politician, a humble man. The most important legacy of his prisoner-of-war days is that he witnessed others behaving more heroically than he did. This experience has given him a basic honesty when appraising himself.
His mood darkened as the Iraq war deteriorated, but his accomplishments mounted. I don’t think any senator had as impressive a few years as McCain did during this span of time.
He lobbied relentlessly for a change of strategy in Iraq, holding off the tide that would have had us accept defeat and leave Iraq to its genocide. He negotiated a complicated immigration bill with Ted Kennedy. He helped organize the Gang of 14 and helped save the Senate from polarized Armageddon over judicial nominations.
He voted against opportunist bills like the pork-laden energy package and the prescription drug plan. He led a crusade against Jack Abramoff and the sleaze-meisters in his own party and exposed corrupt Pentagon contracts.
I could fill this column with his accomplishments during this period, and not even mention the insights. At a defense conference in Munich, I saw him diagnose and confront Russian hegemony. Week after week, I saw him dissent from G.O.P. colleagues as their party lost its way.
Some people who cover the campaign seem to have no knowledge of anything but the campaign, but I can’t get these events " which were real and required the constant application of judgment, honor and courage " out of my head.
Do I wish he was running a different campaign? Yes.
It’s not that he has changed his political personality that bothers me. I’ve come to accept that in this media-circus environment, you simply cannot run for president as a candid, normal person.
Nor is it, primarily, the dishonest ads he is running. My friends in the Obama cheering section get huffy about them, while filtering from their consciousness all the dishonest ads Obama has run " the demagogic DHL ad, the insulting computer ad, the cynical Rush Limbaugh ad, the misleading Social Security ad and so on. If one candidate has sunk lower than the other at this point, I’ve lost track.
No, what disappoints me about the McCain campaign is it has no central argument. I had hoped that he would create a grand narrative explaining how the United States is fundamentally unprepared for the 21st century and how McCain’s worldview is different.
McCain has not made that sort of all-encompassing argument, so his proposals don’t add up to more than the sum of their parts. Without a groundbreaking argument about why he is different, he’s had to rely on tactical gimmicks to stay afloat. He has no frame to organize his response when financial and other crises pop up.
He has no overarching argument in part because of his Senate training and the tendency to take issues on one at a time " in part, because of the foolish decision to run a traditional right-left campaign against Obama and, in part, because McCain has never really resolved the contradiction between the Barry Goldwater and Teddy Roosevelt sides of his worldview. One day he’s a small-government Western conservative; the next he’s a Bull Moose progressive. The two don’t add up " as we’ve seen in his uneven reaction to the financial crisis.
Nonetheless, when people try to tell me that the McCain on the campaign trail is the real McCain and the one who came before was fake, I just say, baloney. I saw him. A half-century of evidence is there.
If McCain is elected, he will retain his instinct for the hard challenge. With that Greatest Generation style of his, he will run the least partisan administration in recent times. He is not a sophisticated conceptual thinker, but he is a good judge of character. He is not an organized administrator, but he has become a practiced legislative craftsman. He is, above all " and this is completely impossible to convey in the midst of a campaign " a serious man prone to serious things.
Amid the stupidity of this season, it seemed worth stepping back to recall the fundamentals " about McCain today and Obama on some other day in the near future.
Lately many in the press have expressed McCain's possible absence at tonight's debate (apparently he will now attend) and his meeting with Bush, Pelosi, Reid, Obama, et.al. on the financial bailout thing on Thursday as nothing more than a "gamble" and political posturing. I see it as pure McCain trying to do the right thing by the American people. Remember too, Obama was not inclined to go to that meeting until Bush requested that both be present (At this point one could make fun of one of the candidates' voting proclivities). Was it because Obama didn't want to be seen as using the event as a political ploy or because he did not understand the gravity of the situation or, perhaps, both?
If Obama didn't quite understand how serious the financial bailout situation is he can, maybe, be forgiven since he is so young and inexperienced. After all we have at least a generation and a half gap between those who have heard from witnesses or actually experienced The Great Depression. Witness a discussion started by FreeDuck entitled "Let it crash"
http://able2know.org/topic/123012-1
Quote:Yes, I am advocating letting our market crash and heading straight for recession and maybe even the D word. I know, it will suck. We'll all lose a lot. It will have global implications. We'll all get hit hard and lose savings and houses. There will be higher crime and prices and everything will just really really suck.
For a while. But maybe if we take it on the chin now we can save our kids and grandkids from having to take it in the gut later. At some point, our debts will catch up to us and the mess will be too big to clean up. That can be now or it can be later. I'm proposing we suck it now. (please don't take that last bit as a sig line without context)
Who's in?
Can you imagine? Well, apparently FreeDuck and some other posters can't. But perhaps they may be forgiven also because they have not lived through such an apocalyptic event. Neither did I, but I listened intently as both my Mom, Dad, and Grandpop told matter of fact stories that were absolutely hair raising in my eyes. They soldiered dutifully through all the while suffering all manner of indignities today's young adults wouldn't countenance for a minute just to provide for themselves and their families. As a reward for their efforts they were obliged to bail Europe out of WWII, and that was considered better times.
Maybe its the historical disconnect, the European weariness of conflict, that somehow allows many liberals to reject real world threats of Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, Putin, and ,the next big one, Iran. But the aforementioned reasons are luxuries the American or any other democratic nation can not afford. Diplomacy will not be worth the paper it's codified on without the threat of sanctions, both economic and military. Freedom and democracy may be initially won through blood and treasure but those are just the down payment, the initial equity of a free nation. The citizens must forever pay the monthly mortgage of eternal vigilance.
If Liberals wish to forever wallow in the warm fuzziness of Rodney King's "Why can't we all just get along?" , if Harvard, who has banned the ROTC from their campus since 1969, wants to still bask in the opportunity to do so, if Harry Reid and his ilk want to concede the losing of wars in the interests of political expedience they all will have to find American leaders like John McCain that recognize that is nice to be loved but the question that must always be asked first is "Do they respect us?". If we are perceived as weak by the likes of Iran and Putin we might as well place ourselves on the ice flow of historical oblivion.
But if we are lucky, all of us, John McCain will be our next president. Obama's young he could have another chance, meanwhile he can "Watch and Learn".
JM