[FoRK] Challenge for McCain critics
owen at permafrost.net
Fri Aug 29 19:40:44 PDT 2008
This email brings up the fundamental problem of voting Republican, i.e. that its basically equivalent to voting, if not for Adolf Hitler, at least for Il Duce. I'd dislike seeing JB hung in a town square. Adhering to party line and economic arguments while accepting torture and mass-murder, is probably not defensible if the other side wins.
From: "Paul Jimenez" <pj at place.org>
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 9:33pm
To: "Friends of Rohit Khare" <fork at xent.com>
Subject: Re: [FoRK] Challenge for McCain critics
Jeff Bone wrote:
> On Aug 28, 2008, at 7:59 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
>> as late as
>> 2000 he could have had his pick of any pragmatic realist in DC of
>> either party to head up his foreign policy operation. McCain was the
>> maverick, remember? He- more than any person in Congress- had the
>> credibility on foreign policy to choose whatever route he wanted to
>> take. And he choose this route.
> I will admit that this is a mystery to me. I feel that he has come to
> believe that he cannot take the office --- will not be allowed to by
> the cabal that controls the GOP --- unless he gives lip service
> various party lines.
This is the scenario I tried to articulate - that he won't be allowed to
take office by the GOP unless he adheres to the party line enough that
he's not different enough from Bush on the big issues of the war and
economy to matter.
> Or perhaps it's an alignment of goals with completely different
> motives. Whatever the case, it is certainly confusing the national
> conversation during this election cycle.
> The key for me is going to be the acceptance speech. If there's even
> a hint at repudiation of Bush, then we'll know the maverick is still
> kicking (as would the choice of an "unconventional running mate" ---
> which his campaign had signaled to the RNC was a possibility, but for
> which no preparations for the backlash have apparently been made.) If
> not, I may have to assume the worst, assume he's been assimilated, and
> then face my own worst, absolutely worst nightmare: neocon vs. marxist.
> In any case, though, as I've mentioned before: it hardly matters.
> The Dems will have a lock in congress, and perhaps a filibuster-proof
> majority in the Senate. Given that, putting ANY Dem in the White
> House is, really, quite unnecessarily risky. Given the hellish choice
> above and the possibility of a trifecta, I'll elect anybody that will
> even apply any check to otherwise unfettered power.
I'm more sanguine about the Obama having good advisors to keep any of
the possible super-marxist ideas he has in check. If you're allowed to
think McCain will buck his GOP-party-line advisors when in office, I'm
allowed to think that Obama will pay attention to his. Also, the Dems
in general seem to be less good at playing hardball to get their
co-party-members to fall in line than the GOP does, so I'm less
concerned about the true effectiveness of the trifecta.
OTOH, I take great solace in the fact that "this too shall pass", and
tend to eschew voting as it only encourages the politicians. I'd be a
single-issue voter on the topic of condorcet voting, but no one seems to
care to make that an issue.
FoRK mailing list
More information about the FoRK