Monday, July 28, 2008

Toeing the Party Line*

I'm truly curious about some of the new ideas John McCain has embraced now that he's the national party's presumptive nominee for president. I say "truly" because I really want to know how these changes came about. What new information has he become privy to that changed his mind. Perhaps mine will be changed too. It's happened. I've always argued that there's an important distinction between "flip-floppery" and growth. (an argument I often lost when using John Kerry as the example)

I also fully understand that when a politician makes his way from independent local maverick to national party nominee, he's got to take on some of the party's planks even if they conflict with his (or her) long-held or at least -espoused beliefs. So I'm really not being facetious here, but rather, seeking to understand better how someone like Senator McCain, for whom I've professed my love as an independent, non-partisan, roll up the sleeves and get to work, servant of the American public many times before, can do 180s on some issues I would have thought he'd hold onto regardless of party pressures.

Let's start with abortion. McCain's shifted position on this issue is dear to my heart precisely because it's the last thing that should ever come up in a presidential campaign featuring two male candidates. Yep, you've heard me say it before and I'll say it again, abortion is the last issue I'd ever ask about when vetting a presidential candidate. When I run for president, I'll refuse to comment on it. The immediate issues facing the world's most powerful leader render the abortion debate senseless, moot, irrelevant. Stupid to even bring it up. And since it's a non issue, I'd think McCain would just keep to himself about it. Or at least keep to what he used to say he believed about it. After all, these are usually very personal, private, deeply held beliefs, not something subject to change based solely on elect-ablility. So I'm curious as to what the National Republican Party placed before him to change his mind. Perhaps, contrary to what President Bush says about diplomacy, there's an argument I haven't heard. I'm nothing if not curious.

Likewise, his stance on gay marriage seems to be evolving. He voted against a constitutional ban on gay marriage and he supported California's Prop 8 to allow gay marriage in that state, yet he's sounding more and more like the party line against it these days adding "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman" whenever he talks about it and arguing in favor of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy in spite of recognizing the need for more troops as well as being extremely proud, in his own words, of ALL of our troops. I'll buy his "it's an issue best left to the states" argument on the marriage part, but when it comes to everything concerning the rights of gay people, I not only need to know what changed McCain's mind, but where his mind might eventually settle. We'll leave that one out for now.

The last and most important issue now, but one that will be completely irrelevant in just a few more months, was McCain's position on running a positive, clean campaign. Let's argue our own merits and platforms and leave the other guy to argue for his own is what he used to profess and yet, the last two commercials McCain's campaign has aired, at least in my part of the country spend 25 of their 30 seconds talking about Obama. McCain has criticized something Obama has done on the campaign trail in every speech I've seen aired for the last two weeks. In fact, after concluding his own Middle Eastern and European tour, McCain now criticizes Obama for doing the same thing, making many of the same stops. Not only has he changed his mind about running a positive campaign, he seems to have changed his mind about where a candidate is allowed to visit as well. I expect such hypocrisy from the Party in general, but not from the maverick from Arizona! This guy didn't cave after 5 years of torture and enslavement, but he folds to his sometimes party like a well worn laundry?!

I'm suddenly changing my mind about this election being the first in my lifetime that offers something better than just the lesser of two evils. McCain's lack of focus, infamous temper, and sudden willingness to conform to his party's every whim in spite of his successful career based on just the opposite have all but convinced me the man is not fit for the White House. I can't tell you how disappointed I am to actually begin considering this after the hope with which I began watching this race unfold.

What kills me now is, how is McCain even remaining as close to Obama as he is? The conservatives don't like him. No one seems to like the Republican Party anymore. His campaign has suffered key personnel losses and a seeming lack of focus and yet he's trailing Mr. Charisma and the finest tuned campaign since Reagan's by only a few points. Do people still believe Obama's a Muslim contracted to infiltrate us? Or are we really that racist yet? Do folks not understand that he trailed Hillary's political experience by only one year? Does the fact that the most sought after Harvard Law graduate gave up offers from prestigious firms to go back and work to reclaim the neighborhoods where he grew up in Chicago not counter the specious cries of "elitist?" And even if it doesn't, haven't we learned that an elite president might just be a little more effective than "the one you'd rather have a beer with?"

Go Tribe!
(yeah, I've seen their record... this will very shortly be replaced with Go Browns!)

Luth,
Out

*look it up... although this is the original figure of speech, what McCain is doing these days is more closely described by the mistaken "towing the line." Ha, that's pretty funny!

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Many of us wonder about McCain. He burned alot of bridges for various reasons and his changes now really bring into question whether or not he can be trusted. I'm really surprised the Democrats haven't thrown the flipflop label around more.

But, one thing that bothers me is when someone like McCain does not toe the party line and gains the reputation of being a maverick that is seen as a good thing by those on the left. But, when a Lieberman crosses from the left to the right to join forces with more conservative elements, he is seen as a pariah. Why is that? Isn't that being two faced?

Luth said...

No doubt brother... happens all over the spectrum. I liked Lieberman for a lot of reasons, not the least of which was his selective conservativism - a man after my own heart even if we don't always agree on what to be conservative about. The one changed opinion of his I simply can't abide, the deal breaker for me, was the war. (I'm sure you saw that coming.) He's never explained that in a way that made any sense to me and it's an opinion I simply haven't heard enough evidence to support. I was really sad to see him go. Kind of like Senator McCain now that I think about it.

How's your summer going?

Anonymous said...

I'm getting worried, we seem to be agreeing too much lately. Now even with politics.

The summer is going too quickly. I'll be somewhat in your neck of the woods in a couple weeks - headed to Columbus for a couple days.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of flip flopping. This is from my brother-in-law's blog.

phlip-phlop
Posted on July 31st, 2008 by Rupert
At the post office this morning {7-28-2008}, I had one of those profound thoughts {questions?} that only comes once in a lifetime.

Since the place was quiet and not busy, I was able to hear a flapping sound. I turned around to see what was causing the noise. A lady, wearing flip-flops, had just entered the post office

I wondered what caused the “flapping” sound. Was it the flip or was it the flap? When I got home, I asked “the” LV. “What causes the flapping noise in flip-flops?”

Her answer came so quickly that I did not trust it. I decided to get a second opinion.

That evening as we walked in the mall, I asked two young women that question. {note: it is at times such as these that “the” LV leaves me.} Have you ever looked into someones face for about 30 seconds and seen human emotions? questioning, confusion, fear, pity, compassion, etc. I saw them all and they were looking at me.

When I finished explaining the nature of my research to them, they both relaxed . They answered the question. But I made them promise not to say anything bad about me after I left.

As “the” LV and I left the mall, I said, “You were right.”

“About what?”

“Where the sound of flapping comes from. I really don’t know if you are right but two women I asked agree with you.”

I got that “Oh, brother!” look.

Anonymous said...

I forgot to post the rest of it...

Me: But, is the root cause different based on political persuasion? Do liberals flip and conservatives flop?

Dear Ray,
this is a very perceptive question on your part. Although I had not wanted to get into it because I did not think that anyone but myself would see the problem clearly. But, again, I was wrong.
It is even more political than you might think. Let me explain. If a people have a strong right lean as they walk, this warps the normal flip-flop. And if a they have a strong left lean, there is also flip-flop warping. What happens because of this warping is that the flapper becomes disoriented.
The flipping and flopping tend to flip-flop; this often results in a flop followed by a flip; this is repeated 3 times. Then it goes back to the basic pattern. What really complicates the situation is that it varies depending upon who is listening.
I hope I have helped you, Ray. I know you are probably thinking, ” I never thought of it that way.” Well, Ray, who gets the big bucks?

Luth said...

I'm submitting a grant application to verify these findings. You both have me engrossed and I can't think of a more important use of our tax dollars right now!