Category — Presidential Race 2008

I came across this article in Politico.com this evening. Not sure whether to laugh or cry. Seems that days after Bush’s endorsement, Rove and Mehlman, and maybe Bartlett and Sara Taylor, are “informally” advising McCain. How stupid would we have to be to let there be a Bush Part III? But Bush parts I and II have proven that we can be pretty damn stupid.

[Editor's Note: What follows is a contribution from Marvin Sussman, an Elmhurst resident, like me, and a WWII veteran. Marvin is concerned that Democrat's will try to run this fall by simply trying to hang Iraq on Repblicans without offering a realistic alternative solution. He thinks that strategy will fail and I think he may be right. Here Marvin offers an alternative with the hope of inspiring a constructive discussion. He says his efforts to present his ideas to Jill Morgenthaler's campaign have, so far, not been met with a response. We think she might just see them here. Thanks, Marvin, for reading and contributing.] [Update 3/6/2008 - Please read Jill Morgenthaler's response following Marvin's post.]

It is absolutely certain that Iraq will be the determining issue facing Obama and McCain.

To win in November, Obama must be absolutely right on this issue.  It is not enough to hang McCain’s record around his neck.  Obama must present a realistic view of Iraq’s future.  He must show how he would leave Iraq with a semblance of long-term stability.

“If elected, I will do my best to bring complete independence to Kurdistan and to guarantee its security as a sovereign nation!  And I will do my best to separate the Sunnis from the Shi’ites and end their perpetual warfare!  I will ask the UN to hold independence plebiscites for each group.  When everyone has their own nation and their own government, the fighting will stop.  I will get all of our troops out of Iraq!”

That’s the kind of promise that will elect Obama.  But no important Democrat has yet seen complete partition as the only realistic and permanent solution to the Iraq crisis.  No, not Senator Biden’s “weak central government” that controls “only” the army and oil revenue!  Complete partition into totally independent nations!

[Read more →]

Ellen of the 10th has a nice post about “The Speech“, Mitt Romney’s “Faith in America“ address at the George Bush Presidential Library on Decmber 6th. I agree with Ellen. The speech was disturbing.

Romney identifies religious liberty as the topic of his address and then sets out to pledge fealty to the establishmentarians of the Christian right while trying to channel John Kennedy in the hopes of appearing statesman-like.

Romney insists that “Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone”, and further “Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government”. Religious liberty for Romney is not liberty at all. And our Constitution, which explicitly prohibits an established religion is of no consequence to him.

If it weren’t bad enough that Republicans like Romney are trying to establish their religion, the religion they want to establish is just so creepy. Basically it amounts to just toeing the line regarding abortion and homosexuality and institutionalizing Christian observances to remind ourselves what a great godly nation we are. Then they’re justified and can go out and invade sovereign nations in the name of God and Freedom and maim and kill their people. And they can ignore all the inconvenient parts of Jesus’ message and engage in their main project of making the rich richer at expense of the poor.

So Peter Roskam has endorsed John McCain, war hero and everybody’s favorite kooky Grandpa, for the Republican nomination. I have to admit that I think Peter made the right call on this one. Don’t get me wrong - I don’t really want to see John McCain anywhere near the oval office but I think he’s a person of substance, unlike the front-runners, and I can’t help but wonder if we wouldn’t be much better off as a nation if McCain and not Bush had won in 2000. I disagree with him more often than not but I like his independence. He’s way too much of a hawk for me, but then so is Hillary Clinton. There are two other Republican candidates I like and respect: Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee, but I’m neither a Baptist nor a Libertarian and I find their views too extreme. So, as much as it pains me to admit it, I think Peter chose wisely. McCain seems the least bad of the Republican contenders. Maybe he’s just less scary because he’s a known quantity. It kind of warms my heart too, to know that James Dobson would never vote for him.