Tag Archives: John McCain

“The Will of the People”

The will of the people.”  Sen. John McCain said it yesterday talking about responding to the will of the people and their concerns about jobs, the economy and spending, based on the outcome of the 2010 election.  Of course immediately following that remark he was willing to ignore “the will of the people” and our concerns about two costly wars that were never paid for because “a continued presence in Afghanistan is necessary.”

It is perfectly clear to me that the oft used phrase “the will of the people” is simply Republican code for the will of my supporters and funders.  They are talking about their own people, their own like minded followers.  They have no more concern for the true will of the American people than I have concern for what happens to the contestants on, well, really any reality show on TV.

If the will of the American people was such a concern, why were Republicans so combative with President Barack Obama from 2008 to 2010?  Wasn’t it by the “will of the people” that he was elected?  A majority of Americans think we should stop spending 100-200 billion dollars a year to fight two unwise wars.  Where is the importance of “the will of the people” there?  A majority of the people think the tax should pay a little more in taxes.  Hello, “will of the people?”

This current crop of Republicans leaders doesn’t care about the will of the people.  I’m not even sure they care about the people.  They care about donors, pledges and interest groups.  On the other hand, when Democrats talk about working for the American people they are talking about everybody, including the unemployed factory worker who usually votes Republicans, that homeless guy on the corner who doesn’t vote, the small business owner struggling to get by and the older woman in the Senior high rise who is reminded weekly right now about why she became a Democrat in the 1930s.  It doesn’t matter who “the people” are, because generally Democrats have empathy, compassion and a desire to make life better and easier for all of us, not just some of us. 

Paul Wellstone often said “we all do better when we all do better.”  I want a Republican who thinks that “we all do better when the rich pay less in taxes” to look me in the eye, and honestly tell me that I will do better if the Walton family or the Koch family has another million dollars in their investment portfolio, and can explain to me how that helps me or any one of my neighbors.

Advertisements

A Democrat’s take on the 2012 GOP Presidential Field

 

Last week, the FOX network continued its push to replace President Obama with its first official piece of business, the first FOX Republican Presidential candidate debate.  While many of the top contenders decided not to attend, five middle and lower tier candidates showed up and excited national Republican political junkies.

Despite the low candidate turnout, and the absence of the most controversial candidates, this particular debate was a bit controversial.  Not just controversial in that 4 of the 5 candidates in attendance said they would support torture as a President… (pause for shake of head)… but it was controversial in that the Associated Press and Reuters chose not to attend because of restrictions placed by the FOX Network on other news gathering organizations.  I guess it just proves that Sirius/XM was correct in their recent reclassification moving FOX “News” from the News station category to the Political station category.

Anyway, it was the first event of the 2012 presidential race.  We will have a better picture of what to expect as we approach the summer and fall. There should be candidates beating down the door to take on President Obama the way Republicans talk about how bad a President he is. I think the reality is that potential candidates realize it would have been really hard to beat Barack Obama even before the recent political events.

Here is my uneducated take on the field of Obama’s potential challengers.

The Serious Presidential Challengers:
Mitt Romney
Former Governor of Massachusetts, dogged within the party for RomneyCare and past “liberal” stances. Most recent polls have him closely behind poll leader Mike Huckabee, second, just like he was to John McCain.  Romney lost to Ted Kennedy in a Senate race not long ago.  In that race Senator Kennedy joked that Romeny flipped and flopped so much that if the election lasted long enough, Mitt would vote for Kennedy instead of himself. Ted Kennedy also joked saying “I am pro choice, Mitt is multiple choice.” I think that flip-flop aspect of his history will keep him in second, regardless of who wins the nomination.  But, if he gets the nomination, he might have a better chance of winning than a lot of these candidates.

Jeb Bush
I included Jeb Bush in the serious challenger list, but not Mike Huckabee, go figure.  Huckabee is obviously a serious contender, I’m just unsure he will run.  I think Jeb will run.  He is obviously hurt by Bush 43 as well as Bush 41, by 43’s policies and result, and 41 along with 43 by the monarchal aspect of a third Bush as a President.  Those are the only reasons he wouldn’t run, but if he jumps in, especially at the last minute into a crowd of dull, lifeless contenders, he immediately becomes a star.  I don’t think he can win the presidency because of 41 and 43, but he could easily get the nomination. 

The Dark Horses:
Paul Ryan
Like Bush, he isn’t necessarily an expected candidate, but neither was Barack Obama.  He is a Midwesterner liked by Tea Party and Republicans, and he has already established a fiscal campaign against Obama. He is technically a dark horse because he isn’t a candidate yet. If he jumped in, I think he would move to the serious challenger level and be labeled by some the second coming of Ronald Reagan (which would be completely inaccurate, don’t get me started.)

Tim Pawlenty
He seemed to be the winner in the recent FOX Network debate according to other’s accounts.  He could win by default because he is non-controversial nationally, yes, he did raise his hand in support of torture.  Of course, how he left the State of Minnesota could really hurt him in a national debate.  But if Mike Huckabee stays out of the race, and he wins Iowa.  He could run away with the nomination a la Bill Clinton. 

Mitch Daniels
Ditto on Tim Pawlenty, but he actually did the things Pawlenty didn’t, like solving a state budget deficit. He also is seen as a little more independent that would appeal to moderates with his decision to avoid controversial social wedge issues, which is a negative to hard core Republicans.  Maybe a good national pick, but might have a hard time getting the Republican nomination.

Michelle Bachmann
I know she got a zero in a recent Iowa poll, but ths is a very shrewd and hard working politician. I consider her a dark horse, not because I think she can win, but because she can get some serious attention and raise a lot of money.  The problem is she has a really good thing going where she is right now, so I question whether she would want to leave the House, especially if her district borders remain unchanged as they appear to be in the first redistricting attempt. On the other hand, if she does enter the race and doesn’t win the nomination, she is poised to fully concentrate on taking on Sen. Al Franken in 2014.  That makes me think she might not mind getting in.

The Not So Likely:
Newt Gingrich
He announced he is in today.  He is a fundraising powerhouse and he WAS a political powerhouse. I think the “was” aspect is weighing on his ego.  He can make a run, and if he loses, but does well, he gets the extra attention to sell books and continues to get calls from the FOX network to be an analyst.  If he happens to win, even better for Newt.

Herman Cain
Herman Cain was the fan favorite at the FOX Network debate, and to his credit, he was the only candidate who said he would not support torture.  He doesn’t have much of a chance.

Sarah Palin
Fierce loyalty among fans, but doesn’t seem to the have the skills or desire to seriously compete for the GOP nomination, let alone the Presidency. Plus, a bad loss would seriously diminish her ability to be taken seriously on the FOX network…

Ron Paul
Might have a better chance to win the presidency than some of these guys, but he can’t win the GOP nomination.  Plus, there is his son…

The Jokes:
Donald Trump
He was a registered Democrat, vied to run as the Reform Party candidate for president, toyed with running for New York Governor, and now is threatening to toss his hair in the ring this year for President. It is all a publicity stunt to increase his wealth. After all, is the country really going to elect a man who started life with $400 million that his father left him and has been bankrupt 3 times since, divorced twice, had an affair, and thinks he has the right to judge other’s moral and financial decisions?  Recent polls have put him in his place, close to last.

Rick Santorum
Just Google Rick Santorum quotes. No change. Nothing more to say.

Sarah Palin
Could be included here too.

The could haves, but have better things to do:
Mike Huckabee
He has a good gig going. If he gets in he is a “challenger” but I’ve read that he isn’t necessarily interested.  He leads in the current polls, and he might be the only current potential candidate (not including Bush or Ryan) at the top of the list who could unite the Republican base and challenge Obama. 

Haley Barbour
Already out. He is old and wants to spend the rest of his life enjoying it.  The funny thing is that I read he might be Mike Huckabee’s running mate if he runs.  His exit from the race adds to my feeling that Huckabee is out too.

Overall, at this point in the race it seems like a pretty weak pack. If I were betting, and Huckabee stays out, I would put my money on Pawlenty.  But if Bush or Ryan get in, Pawlenty is toast.  They are probably all toast if Huckabee gets in.

Fill me with soma and let the corporations decide what to do with me.

Where are all the cries coming from right-wingers about activist judges?  Our politicians are already overly influenced by corporations, now they are going to be selected by corporations too.  Great!  And it isn’t just GE, Exxon, Citibank, Wal-Mart or UnitedHealth we need to worry about.  There is nothing to stop a Saudi or Chinese corporation from buying ads to influence our elections now.  Thanks Supreme Court. 

Thanks for setting the course for all those sci-fi movies and futuristic books with mega-corporations running the world.   When do they start determining who costs too much to live – oh wait, insurance companies already do!  Pfizer can start feeding us soma to keep us happy, Wal-Mart can instruct us in what is OK to buy, and UnitedHealth can start eliminating the surplus population that costs us a little too much as a society.

Do you think I am overreacting?  Think about a local election.  The total campaign expenditures in 2008 for both candidates in my house district 36B was under $50,000.  What is stopping a company from spending $50,000 or $100,000 on one candidate to send their own henchman to the State House?  How much do they spend on lobbyists?  Who needs a lobbyist when a company can have their own Joe Leiberman.

And what about the cost of ads now?  With the influx of spending, the cost will go up.  It’s called supply and demand.  That will make it harder for a local candidate to afford to advertise.  It will make running a campaign even more expensive, thus more beholden to big money.

Let’s be honest.  Republicans have got to be most happy about this decision.  Not because they will likely benefit from more corporate spending than Democrats, but because the onslaught of commercials will just turn more people off to politics.  The fewer people engaged the better Republicans do.  Suppressing the number of voters is good news for the GOP.

Republican leadership is spewing first amendment talking point trash, but the only ‘persons” who will soon have first amendment rights will be “persons” with money.  John McCain has every right to be “disappointed” Mitch McConnell.

Smilin’ John Kline

While John McCain found this Lakeville woman to be so wrong that he took the microphone from her and defended Barack Obama from her comments, John Kline (sitting right next to her, looking up admiringly) really seemed to like her.

It doesn’t surprise me. John Kline is the epitome of what is wrong with the Republican party over the last 10 years. He doesn’t think he needs to represent anybody that does not support him. He, well, really I should say Kline’s staff, because I have never talked to him, disregard comments that don’t align with Republican positions as un-American, leftist or simply wrong.

I think he agrees with the Lakeville rally woman 100%, and he and Michelle Bachmann (see her Chris Matthews interview 10/17) would love to join together and expose all of the anti-American, leftists in the US in a Joe McCarthy style hearing.

I think John Kline loves sleazy election tactics. I already know his staff loves name calling, and I’m sure bat-crazy, uninformed, Lakeville rally lady is a big supporter of his, and he loves it, look at that smile on his face.

John McCain’s Ability to Multitask In Question

Should we be worried about John McCain’s ability to multitask? Or should we be worried that he is so inept when it comes to economic issues, that he can’t think of anything else because it is too much for his brain? Either one is a little worrisome.

John McCain said that he is going to suspend his campaign to deal with the financial crisis, and he wants to postpone the debate scheduled for Friday night because of it. McCain stated that he has to concentrate on the economic crisis, despite the fact that he admitted a few months ago that he does not know much about economics.

I was skeptical about the whole delaying the Republican convention for the first day because of hurricane Gustave, and my skepticism was well founded, as neither he nor his VP candidate suspended their campaign when a stronger hurricane (Ike) was bearing down on Texas a couple weeks later.

So which is it, is it a political ploy in an attempt to avoid the debates, or is it that he can’t handle two things at once?

I am going to assume that he is unable to handle two things at once. This economic crisis is not going to go away, and for at least the next year, if McCain is elected president, he is going to have to deal with the economy and North Korea, or the economy and a natural disasters, or the economy and terrorism. If he can’t do both as a candidate, how is he going to do it as a president when he has even more responsibilities?

Barack Obama has made it clear that with about six weeks left until the election, there is no better time to let the people decide who will be the leader to deal with this crisis, and this is a prime example of who is better able to make leadership decisions come January 20th.