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!

Mailing List

I got this from the Ohio Republican Party in tonight's email:

Outrageous and offensive.

There’s just no other way to describe the gutter campaign tactic the Obama campaign pulled Sunday.

“I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.” That’s what Obama spokesman Gen. Wesley Clark said Sunday on national television.

Sadly, it’s not the first time the Democrats have tried to smear John McCain’s war record, and it won’t be the last.

Will you contribute $100, $250, or $500 today to help us push back?

We’re building an Ohio defense fund to counter these insidious attacks by Sen. Obama and his supporters.

John McCain spent five years being tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. His heroic service to our nation stands in stark contrast to Sen. Obama’s thin record (that doesn’t contain a single day of military duty).

Please help us fight back.

Your contribution of $100, $250, or $500 will help us build a defense fund here in Ohio so we can counter these slash and burn tactics by a candidate who promised a “new” kind of politics but delivers more of the same.

Kevin DeWine
Deputy Chairman

I don't know what's funnier... that I'm on their mailing list, or that this is considered outrageous and offensive after what the Bush administration did to Gen. Wesley Clark or what Republican Representative Saxby Chambliss did to Vietnam Vet and triple amputee, Max Cleland, or what the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth did to John Kerry or what W's DD214 did for him... oh wait, the department of defense's official records don't count for anything. (Cleland, for those of you who have forgotten this real hero already, left three major body parts in Vietnam then came home to serve as the Georgia Representative until Chambliss, who avoided duty in Vietnam with a bad knee, questioned his patriotism - QUESTIONED HIS PATRIOTISM! and got away with it to beat him for the rep seat.) To me, that kinda makes Clark's comments pretty insignificant, pretty "who gives a shit?" even if I'll admit that I may not have said it out loud myself. Seriously... outrageous and offensive? Just stop.

Before I go on, let me reiterate that I had a lot of respect for Senator McCain as much for his military service as for his bipartisan git r done-ness in the senate. He was one of few congressmen who remembered that he was elected to work for us, not sulk or smirk from one side of the aisle. He put ego and party aside and continued to debate and discuss until compromise was reached and the work got done... but that was before he underwent the transformation to become a national party figure.

NOTE: the following is true of BOTH parties: Apparently rising to the top of national party politics even castrates otherwise hardworking, common sense guys like Sen. McCain. It's sad, really. His purposeful and blatant distancing from Bush made him much more likable a year or two ago than I find him now. I truly felt that for the first time in my voting life I would experience an election that might actually turn out ok for the nation regardless of the winner as opposed to being a matter of desperately pleading on behalf of the lesser of two evils. That all changed as McCain's rhetoric changed to match that of his party. In other words, I was cool with both candidates until McCain opens his mouth lately.

Back to the Ohio Republican Party newsletter: Since Clark's comments were on behalf of the party I'm backing this year, I'll admit that I'm not real proud of what he said. I mean it's something I've always thought - it's not like McCain (or any other detainee or downed fighter pilot) tried to get shot down and become a prisoner (I hope) And how does being shot down qualify one to lead? Right? But even I wouldn't say that out loud in the context of a national campaign. Surviving what McCain did ranks right up close to the ultimate sacrifice. So I wouldn't say what Clark said to the press, from a position of prominence, during a campaign. I'd say it in a bar. In fact, I think I have, seriously... if it were a democrat wouldn't repubs say the same thing? But that don't make it right for a national figure to say publicly during the campaign.

And then there's the whole "smearing a war record" part. Hello, can you say "swift boat veterans?" But what are the Ohio Repubs worried about anyway? War record smearing only hurts Democrats. W's war record didn't even need smearing. The record itself was a smear. The fact that he couldn't even fulfill his National Guard "get of Vietnam free" pass and still got elected twice is a pretty good argument that war records of Republicans will not be considered as detrimental to their careers.

But seriously, Ohio Republican Party... outrageous and offensive? In modern campaign terms? More so than the Swift Boat Veteran ads criticizing a decorated active duty officer while a National Guard deserter gets re-elected? More so than questioning a disabled combat veteran triple amputee congressman's patriotism? Really? No, REALLY?

And how in the hell did I end up on your mailing list? Now that's outrageous! (a guy buys one semi-automatic weapon and suddenly the NRA and the Republican Party assume he'll hand over all his money!)

Luth,
Out

PS I apologize for the previous post - not the content, but the terrible writing. I just couldn't go to bed yet and had to spew something.