« Give McCain Equal Media Time -- It's Only Fair! | Pangaea's Blog | After McCain's "The One" Video, Obama Endorsed by Holy Trinity »
Rejecting McCain in an Adult and Thoughtful Way
Need a break from screaming and ranting over this week’s campaign nonsense? Are you in search of substantive food on which to mentally chew, versus the empty calories that have been foisted upon us?
If you haven’t already, read The Curious Mind of John McCain in today’s Washington Post. What excellent insight it gives about him. For those of you who don’t have time to read it, here are tidbits:
1) The article quoted from McCain’s book “Worth Fighting For” about why he ran for President in 2000: “I didn’t decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president…. In truth, I’d had the ambition for a long time.”
So much for McCain serving a cause greater than himself. As an example of how his ambition got ahead of his principles, the article cited his flip flop over South Carolina and the Confederate Flag - a decision McCain himself admitted was one of his worst.
2) Here is an excerpt about McCain’s interest in economics: One [expert on financial services] who met with McCain earlier this summer to discuss the subprime lending crisis said McCain spoke about it only “in platitudes,” relying on populist political talking points. McCain did not seem to understand economics, or to be interested in the subject, said this person, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the meeting.
Is this the person we want in charge of our economy?
3) The article shares some of McCain’s thought on the Iraq and Vietnam wars: McCain can be impatient with complicated answers to questions he considers straightforward, with gray when he sees black and white. For example, he sees no gray outcome possible in Iraq: "In war," he has said, "there is no such thing as compromise; you either win or you lose." But he has not defined victory in Iraq, and many wars have ended ambiguously. McCain's commentary on Iraq often echoes his descriptions of the Vietnam War. He can make both sound like classical military confrontations and rarely mentions their political complexities.
Do we want a President who lacks patience and fails to see nuance in complex issues?
The article is well worth reading because it goes beyond Britney, Paris, celebrity, and paper currency. Rather, it offers more profound reasons to reject McCain.
If you haven’t already, read The Curious Mind of John McCain in today’s Washington Post. What excellent insight it gives about him. For those of you who don’t have time to read it, here are tidbits:
1) The article quoted from McCain’s book “Worth Fighting For” about why he ran for President in 2000: “I didn’t decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president…. In truth, I’d had the ambition for a long time.”
So much for McCain serving a cause greater than himself. As an example of how his ambition got ahead of his principles, the article cited his flip flop over South Carolina and the Confederate Flag - a decision McCain himself admitted was one of his worst.
2) Here is an excerpt about McCain’s interest in economics: One [expert on financial services] who met with McCain earlier this summer to discuss the subprime lending crisis said McCain spoke about it only “in platitudes,” relying on populist political talking points. McCain did not seem to understand economics, or to be interested in the subject, said this person, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the meeting.
Is this the person we want in charge of our economy?
3) The article shares some of McCain’s thought on the Iraq and Vietnam wars: McCain can be impatient with complicated answers to questions he considers straightforward, with gray when he sees black and white. For example, he sees no gray outcome possible in Iraq: "In war," he has said, "there is no such thing as compromise; you either win or you lose." But he has not defined victory in Iraq, and many wars have ended ambiguously. McCain's commentary on Iraq often echoes his descriptions of the Vietnam War. He can make both sound like classical military confrontations and rarely mentions their political complexities.
Do we want a President who lacks patience and fails to see nuance in complex issues?
The article is well worth reading because it goes beyond Britney, Paris, celebrity, and paper currency. Rather, it offers more profound reasons to reject McCain.
Advertisement
yes, i read that piece and i thought the article was very negative for mccain....
hmm, i am glad it was not our guy, but still it was not a charming one for mccain...even if the article was genuinly truthful, i didn't find it balanced....surprised not enough people are making a big whoop about this..some damaging stuff, especially the part about him not being able to think through complicated questions and he fact that he is overly emotional (code word-walking time bomb)!!!!
i can't stand injustice of any kind..the article was cruel for mccain, but great fodder for all my arguments against mccain....
August 1, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the article was not particularly flattering about McCain, but I disagree with you that it was not balanced. I think the author tried to present positives as well (e.g., McCain is "thoughtful" and "inquisitive").
I think this article has not gotten as much press because for whatever reason, the media is easier on McCain and the current negativity is much sexier to cover.
August 1, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have relatives his age who aren't allowed near the stove. That's reason enough to reject him. He's 847 years old!
August 1, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
To your point, he is old, but age shouldn't be a limiting factor. Perhaps, were he 900, I would be concerned.
In the spirit of your argument, I posted a newsflash in which Obama has picked up some important endorsements today. If you like the post, recommend it!
August 1, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am amazed you got on the Recommended list with that title, it appears that the voting demographic is definitely changing around here. :-)
August 1, 2008 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not exactly sure what you're implying, but here are some of my thoughts:
1) People (inclusive) are drawn to what is sensational and fantastic. MSM understands this and feeds this public hunger. One of my incredibly intelliegent sisters confesses to picking up People and The National Enquirer while waiting on line at the grocery check out conter.
2) People are also instinctively drawn to rejecting the superficial. Folks know intellectually what is "right."
3) I think (1) and (2) help to explain why there have been more "Recommends" the Comments. It is far easier to opine about "playing the race card" or Britney and Paris than to delve into what makes the candidates tick or following candidates' positions or mindsets.
August 1, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't mean to get into it as deep as you are, it was a joke given the history of the Reader Blogs of the last few months. Guess I presumed you knew, sorry.
I don't necessarily disagree with your points. It was like this: there have actually been quite a few posts and comments on this site since around March that actually pointed out and got into long discussions that inflammatory titles, baiting to incitement (i.e., Hillary is a bitch! Obamabots suck! Where's the outrage?!) got the most recommends (some of those posts nearly scientific in approach.)
And I also know from personal experience that people who dared to use the word "grownup" in expressing their taste in conversation, like I have often done on this site, were sometimes labeled party poopers or schoolmarm types.
But if you want to get serious, I do get that you may be taking a swing at me where you say "opine about "playing the race card" or Britney and Paris than to delve into what makes the candidates tick or following candidates' positions or mindsets. Well let me tell you about that. I gave up on not that long ago. I gave up on that when I saw Josh Marshall in January say that covering candidate issues was not what his site was going about and that he was going to cover horse race because he enjoyed it and not force-feed "spinach" of issues.
Now I myself vastly prefer discussing serious international news and policy over American elections, like used to be done here, pre-2008. But if I am going to get into a site devoted to covering American elections horse race, I must admit I do very much like to partake of discussion about marketing and advertising from time to time, because it has always been a "fun" interest of mine. Like Josh Marshall, though, I am a little elitist about that, I like to do it with people that already know the background and positions of the candidates.
You took it wrong. I did enjoy you pointing out the link. I like when people recommend good articles. I've been blasted for doing that here in the past, too. There's a lot of folks out that that get irritated by that, they want to know your opinion on the article, they seem to like getting added spin with recommend articles.
To get back to initial point: I think it's amazing that your post got recommended, it's not the type of thing that has been popular in the past here. It seems the site is changing, and that's good. Ok?
August 1, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I apologize that I misinterpreted you. It is just that given the atmosphere of the last week or so, it is difficult to discern what is "real" and what is "serious." As of now, I feel fortunate to have escaped the labels of "schoolmarm" and "grownup," especially since the latter may not always apply to me...
My response should not be interpreted as "taking a swing" at you. Thank you for appreciating my link to the article.
To lighten up a little, did you see the video in which McCain labeled Obama as "The One?" After a week of being bombarded with ridiculous negative ads, I couldn't help but post a satirical response. If you enjoy it, please comment and recommend the post.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment.
August 1, 2008 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks.
Oh, and some of your points reminded me of the following thread; thought you might find something informative about how different members think about site use and the relationship of that to the state of the media:
Cafe
TPM Café: Now Part of the Problem
By Dan K - May 23, 2008
August 1, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
That article is a good catch. But when we're appealing to a younger demographic we shouldn't forget that McCain is also a poopyhead.
August 2, 2008 6:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. I will try to take your advice the next time I post.
Regarding appealing to the younger, hipper, internet savvy demographic, I hope you check out my post on the internet-only McCain ad in which he labels Obama "The One." I hope my response is cross generational, appealing to those who reject McCain for either myriad serious reasons, or simply because he is a poopyhead.
August 2, 2008 7:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are opportunities in the next three months for several great speeches from Obama, a last one should be on the topic of his adversary.
Here, the campaign can distill the essential weakness of the McCain candidacy, and present it to the people.
Obviously a dry policy dissertation will not be effective. We might look more toward Shakespeare and Marc Antony's speech.
An "Honorable Man" speech, that both praises and condemns simultaneously. We might use profitably "Good Friend" as the central organization point.
"And McCain has been a good friend of mine. Yes, a good friend...."
"McCain has been a friend not just to me, but to many."
And then begin the sustained criticism, that can bring in the old politics of corruption and obstructionism, of cronyism and partisanship. It can tangle McCain inextricably with all the failed policies and anti-populist features of the last administration and the current RNC.
And never once say a direct critical word of McCain himself.
August 2, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that any speech he gives cannot be dry and boring. After all, that is McCain's specialty...
To your point, it would be entirely appropriate to vividly describe old politics and link McCain to that style with specific examples.
Finally, Obama must disabuse the nation of the emerging conventional wisdom that this election is about him (i.e., if people find him acceptable, he will win; if McCain successfully tars him, he loses) by simply saying, "People say this election is about me. I beg to differ. This election is about you. This election is about our country.
Cue the goose bumps...
August 2, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
Nice!
The last two weeks are crucial. Bring out the very best you have for last.
Unfortunately, fear works better than hope in voter choice. Avoidance of punishment is stronger than seeking out reward when it comes to current American politics.
So bring out the fear of a decayed and decaying American infrastructure, of bridges collapsing, of rusting factories, of off-shored labor, of the selloff of American companies and real estate to affluent foreign interests, of diminished dreams, of failed promises... And tie this litany, supported with visuals, to McCain's candidacy using the clear and repeated unstated communication "look, this is what you are going to get if you vote Republican...fear this and fear the Republicans"
August 2, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I think this Obama quote to reporters, speaking of the Rovians who have taken over McLame's campaign, is a pretty good start:
Zing!
August 2, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent. More, please.
August 2, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
NEVER FORGET: The criticism of "always wanting to be president" was launched at Sen. Clinton. Looks like it was patented by Sen. McCain. Sen. Obama had to be dragged into this election. He wan't being coy, he didn't want it. It's an expensive, demanding, risky proposition to even attempt to become president, and winning seems to be both the good news and the bad news.
I'm saying it straight-up right now: I can't imagine why anyone would want to be president.
August 2, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pangea wrote: "Finally, Obama must disabuse the nation of the emerging conventional wisdom that this election is about him (i.e., if people find him acceptable, he will win; if McCain successfully tars him, he loses) by simply saying, "People say this election is about me. I beg to differ. This election is about you. This election is about our country."
Senator Obama has BEEN saying this repeatedly, since the campaign started. It was this kind of comment that got twisted by Dana Millbank into what was used in the recent McCain ad. Truth has never been Senator McCain's strong suit, other than as a eminently variable concept.
August 2, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good observation, psaltseller!
August 2, 2008 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink