Scorpio
Where Clinton made much hay out of Obama’s links with Jeremiah Wright, McCain went one better this week by implying that a vote for Obama is a vote for Hamas. And this comes from a man who claims that he is above negative politics. This is the man who saw his own presidential ambitions dashed in 2000 as a result of Bush & Rove’s shameless attempts to turn the Republican primaries into nothing but a smear-fest. Well, he has now shown himself to be no better than they were.
Does it make any sense whatsoever to claim that praise from a terrorist organization somehow calls into question Barack Obama’s fitness for the presidency? If the answer is yes, Obama should hightail it on down to the nearest maximum-security prison and find some murderers and child rapists who support McCain. Then, using the very same logic McCain has stooped to, Obama could say that a vote for McCain is a vote for murder and raping children.
Of course Obama would never consider employing such tactics, because unlike Clinton and McCain, he truly hopes that the country is ready to move beyond the politics of personal destruction. Let’s pray that Obama doesn’t make the same mistake McCain made in 2000 by taking the bait and allowing himself to be dragged down into the mud.
Ultimately, though, its up to us, the American people, to decide whether we are going to reward or punish bad behavior. John McCain was certainly, at one time in his life, a hero who showed tremendous courage and valor. Unfortunately, decades in Washington seem to have turned this once brave man into a run-of-the-mill political hack.
COMMENTS (7)
RATE THIS STORY
Nude photos of the MTV reality star surfaced on the...
Real vampires are used to being eclipsed by the immortal allure of the vampire film....
Comments
Re: Guilt By Association
By Brandon, May 12, 2008 at 08:50So Josh, now that the all-important superdels are starting to swing your way, (indicative of a truer death-knell than the one you were prematurely sounding), are we going to have a double or nothing on the General? Me for McCain, and you for... whomever.
Re: Guilt By Association
By Josh Sidman, May 12, 2008 at 09:09Hey Brandon,
Yeah, I'm willing to go double-or-nothing, but I'm not prepared to offer you 2:1 odds on the general election. Assuming I win the first bet, I'll bet the $100 you owe me (at even odds) that Obama beats McCain.
Deal?
BTW, who will you be voting for if its Obama vs. McCain?
Be well,
Josh
Re: Guilt By Association
By Brandon, May 12, 2008 at 09:34Deal.
Nader.
In all honesty I'm a student of politics - especially political philosophy, and although I find the American political system fascinating - like an oncologist's fascination with a tumor-riddled brain, I really think both parties are the furtherest thing from the kind of governance that would bring the American people anywhere close to justice or happiness. Only Nader makes sense (and a lot of what Ron Paul says is very true as well). All the rest are powermongers incapable of doing anything particularly noteworthy expect for presenting Bills that will be so heavily amended as to be meaningless before being promulgated, or setting budgets that over spend an already exhaustingly over-taxed population.
The truth is, and I had this argument with my Mom (a Vermont Democrat in poll terms) just yesterday (yes that's right, I had the audacity to argue with my lovely mother on mother's day!), I would pick McCain out of the two if I was forced to choose at gunpoint, merely because he's earned it through personal sacrifice. As far as I can tell it means as much as anything. It's my opinion that policy is generally dictated by the times and the undercurrents of the international body politic more than vice versa. They call the way I think it works "constructivism", because I believe that prevailing ideas and broader currents drive decision making - even on a domestic scale. It's an open debate, I admit - many of my friend are Realists - that is, they beleive, as you must, that state actors, such as presidents and prime ministers and tyrants are the movers and shakers.
Lastly, and you should know this because it might taint your view of me altogether - a dual citizen, I choose to live in Canada for the time being; it's cleaner here, though the baseball coverage sucks... of course we've lately discussed a move back to Europe, we're thinking Italy...
Re: Guilt By Association
By Josh Sidman, May 12, 2008 at 10:46Brandon,
It sounds like we've got plenty in common. Like you, I am extremely ambivalent about being a citizen/resident of the USA, and I have seriously considered emigrating. I also share your aversion to both major parties. Until 2004, I refrained from voting at all, because I felt that by playing the "lesser-of-two-evils" game I would be supporting and legitimizing our corrupt political system. I only abandoned that point-of-view when I realized that failure to resist the neo-con agenda has a cost that can be measured in hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. I feel my own responsibility for what our country has done during the past 7 years, and I deeply regret not having cast a vote against Bush in 2000.
This is why I will be voting for Obama rather than Nader (who far more accurately represents my political views). In my opinion, a McCain presidency could very well result in World War III. Therefore, regardless of any other issue that I might or might not agree with Obama on, avoiding the destruction of our planet is a far higher priority. This is why I have jumped whole-heartedly aboard the Obama bandwagon. Yes, he is a part of the corrupt political establishment, but he at least offers a glimmer of hope that he might do something to change the business-as-usual M.O. in Washington.
Regards,
Josh
Re: Guilt By Association
By Brandon, May 12, 2008 at 11:04I hear you, I do. I just believe that if war's coming - then it's coming. I don't believe men start wars, I believe conditions much more deeply rooted and entrenched in the collective unconscious bubble up - obviously there is always a mouthpice, but that just happens to be whatever sucker is sitting on the throne when the tide of war comes in.
If it were true that individuals and not the ebullient waves of human existence caused wars even then, I do verily believe that a man like McCain, who so dearly knows the cost of war, would be less willing to send men to their deaths so callously as has Bush Junior.
Besides, it is for greater men than me to determine the actions of the state. I merely watch, and try to predict. I try not to get emotional about it because there's nothing to be done for it. I do enjoy the campaigning though, and the elections. I both love and hate CNN election coverage. I like it when the Republican party afficionados spout ridiculous but impossible to argue maxims like, "If you hate babies, then by all means vote for Barack. I love babies, and freedom and America which is why I vote Republican. But if you don't, that's fine." I find that shit hilarious. I like to think I understand the mindset of the American people, and predicted both elections in Bush's favour (I got helped out in that first one, but that's all part of it). Of course, most recently I thought Hillary would beat Barack (it's still possible, although it's admittedly getting into the realm of 'real bleak') so what the hell do I know?
Re: Guilt By Association
By Bud Oracle (not verified), May 12, 2008 at 16:53"I just believe that if war's coming - then it's coming. I don't believe men start wars, I believe conditions much more deeply rooted and entrenched in the collective unconscious bubble up"
I've never heard dumber words spoken by someone who claims to be intelligent.
Wars just happen.......? You are not using reason when you make a statement like that. I would like one example of a war just happening, please.
A war is not a living self determining, self replicating entity.
Wars are expressions of human emotions, caused by humans, usually for very base human needs as far as I know. "The tide of war" in Iraq, will also be known in history as the "Tide of morons".
"I do verily believe that a man like McCain, who so dearly knows the cost of war, would be less willing to send men to their deaths so callously as has Bush Junior."
I don't care if you "verily" believe anything. It is due to the low imteligencwe of believers that we are in this mess. Mc.Cain doesn't give a hoot about soldiers he's now in the role of comander in Chief and power hungry Republican towing the Military industrial line.
Please when you go to vote KNOW what you are voting for beliefe belongs in church.
"Besides, it is for greater men than me to determine the actions of the state. I merely watch, and try to predict"
Well there you go. Brandon, you don't know the first thing about democracy. It is not up to "greater men" to take care of things for you. It is your duty to make democracy work as a citizen by finding out who stands for what and what is best, not using belief but actual research work. The the entire idea of democracy rests on each and every voter's sacred moment before the ballet. Democracy depends on a majority making the right decision. Its entire power rests/depends on your shoulders to carry it. Not "greater men"
Re: Guilt By Association
By Bud Oracle (not verified), May 11, 2008 at 00:50victory goes to those who forge the strongest emotional connection with consumers.”
http://www.cbc.ca/ageofpersuasion/
This week Terry O’Reilly “The Age of Persuasion” used the example of how Clinton took the election from Bush Sr. during a debate when an woman asked them both about how the tanking economy would impact each personally. Bush faltered and didn’t reply to the question, where Clinton strode out and connected with her and voters by answering it in a personal way, describing how as Governor the trauma was felt in his office daily as businesses went under and more people were being laid-off. Billy knows about appealing to women (and men) emotionally, where GB Senior’s voice changed as he stammered on about GDP, missing the point.
Elections, especially those in North America, are not won on issues, but emotions.
GWBush’s strategy was to smear and debase, thereby causing half of the electorate to stay home. Then all he had to do was take slightly more than half of those voters left, which he failed to do twice, legally. You can be sure of the low class of politicians running if they go to smearing, and sadly it works in a detrimental way. Like cheating at the Olympics people will do anything to achieve the golden ring.
Obama will draw the rational center, which stays home during the mud slinging, if he rises above it and turns this slimy practice against his opponent. He has the mental capacity, the verbal genius, to pull it off.
Of course the whole world, including Al Quaeda, is holding it breath and hoping for change. To me it says that the “terrorists” would like to have peace through change, too. What is so wrong with that, America? Are these yokels daft or what? Everyone wants peace and McCaine wants 50 more years.