Back to Clive Crook's blog homepage
John McCain’s speech
September 5, 2008
Even allowing for the fact that one does not expect soaring oratory from John McCain, his closing speech to the convention was disappointing. He had a hard act to follow after Sarah Palin, but that is no excuse because there was no need to match that for excitement. Instead he had to do two main things, in my view, each of them readily achievable. First and most important, he had to affirm the party’s appeal for votes to the wide middle of the US electorate. Second, he needed to offer some specific domestic policies, and contrast them favourably with the Democratic agenda. He gestured vaguely in both directions, but nothing more.
The speech concentrated mainly on his biography—again. One hesitates to say this because McCain is an authentic hero; his bravery is something that very few of us, least of all this writer, could ever aspire to match; and knowing what inner resources he brings to his candidacy is of course an essential part of his appeal—but how many times does this story need to be told? This week his audience has heard it over and over again. Endless repetition must eventually dull its impact. His heroism and his capacity for sacrifice in the service of his country are unquestioned. By the end of the week, it could have been left at that.
Reaching out to the centre should have been regarded as a priority because of the Palin nomination. For the moment, that looks like a great success: she gave an amazing speech and, to the consternation of the Democrats and a large part of the US media, triumphantly vindicated McCain’s decision to select her. But Palin is a social conservative. Yes, maybe she can bring in centrists as well: that possibility makes her an instant force to be reckoned with in American politics. But right now it is no more than a possibility. She has energised the base—that much is certain—but her views on abortion and other social issues will alarm many centrists who might have been leaning to McCain. Having delighted the base, he needed to rebalance the ticket by moving deftly to the centre himself. Securing the base was necessary but not sufficient: the Republicans cannot win without independents.
Mr McCain, one imagines, would prefer victory to glorious defeat. Yet his centrist gestures were confined mostly to underlining his maverick instincts, his taste for bipartisanship, his willingness to go against party orthodoxy, and his appealingly frank criticisms of what the Republicans had achieved, or failed to, during the Bush years. All that was fine, as far as it went, but much too general. Give us examples. Offer some reassurance that this will not be the right-wing ticket that the Palin nomination suggests it could be. Yes, that would have risked disappointing the hall, but the hall has been very well catered to this week and it was a risk worth taking.
More detail was needed in its own right, too, not just to rebalance the ticket. Once Palin blew the doors off the convention on Wednesday, bringing the torrent of derision over her nomination to an abrupt halt, lack of specific proposals in the Republican platform became the principal line of criticism—and unlike the response to the VP pick, this was a well-aimed attack. In his own superb speech at the end of the Democrats’ convention, Obama took pains to list a series of specific policies. McCain needed to match that or better. He not only failed to do so, but he made the gap all the more obtrusive with the part of his speech that mentioned by name families and individuals that were struggling for one reason or another. McCain said he would honour them and work for them. Good, but how, exactly?
Not for the first time, it occurred to me that McCain’s biggest mistake in this campaign has been in failing to develop a market-friendly proposal for universal health care. Mitt Romney did it in Massachusetts so do not tell me a Republican cannot go there. That plus Palin would have given him a shot at the base and at independents too. It would have cemented his appeal to middle America, which is much preoccupied with the worsening failure of the US health care system. Not to mention, it would have been the right thing to propose on the merits. If he had done this, I think I would be betting on McCain-Palin right now. Ceding the issue to the Democrats, in my view, was a mistake in every way. And I groaned to hear his attack on Obama’s health plan, falling back on the old “socialised medicine” line, which is a travesty.
“McCain is an authentic hero” consequently, one must hesitate before criticizing him for placing too much emphasis on “his biography”. Indeed, perhaps an impartial observer would be keen to learn more details of McCain’s military service in Vietnam. What precisely was heroic about his role in bombing targets, both military and civilian, in a war of aggression against a vastly less technologically sophisticated enemy?
Or, is the thesis that “his capacity for sacrifice in the service of his country” instantly classifies him as “heroic”? If so, it has worrying consequences for the mutability of heroism as an admirable concept. Presumably, if one were to accept this definition, it would be remiss not to laud the “sacrifice” and “bravery” of Russian soldiers in Afghanistan (or indeed in South Ossetian), likewise the French in Algeria…the list is rather lengthy and unsavory.
When is it noble to “sacrifice” for your country, and when is it misguided and indeed abhorrent? On the subject of his incarceration and torture; his survival certainly reflects a great deal of determination and mental strength. However, I am certainly not the first to opine that the deep and lasting psychological effects of torture may not be the best preparation for the role of president.
Rather than simply asserting McCain’s status as a war hero, I would appreciate a more detailed analysis of his role in one of the most destructive invasions of the 20th century.
Posted by: Marc Liam Toolan | September 5th, 2008 at 12:31 pm | Report this commentVery disappointing observations, Clive Crook.
I agree with the comment above about his “heroism.”
Actually, I don’t see it at all, and I am truly tired of hearing about this one problematic claim to fame.
Even were he a genuine hero, what does that have to do with being president? Absolutely nothing.
As General Clark said ,”Getting shot down in Vietnam does not qualify you for president.”
But Americans are so immersed in mindless, rah-rah patriotism all the time, many of them just do not even think when it comes to such matters.
From the beginning, America has time and again looked for the general on the white horse as leader. It is both dangerous and foolish.
Some of its worst, most incompetent leaders were generals or veterans.
As far as the rest of McCain weak rhetoric, yuch.
Obama is regularly criticized for generalities, but McCain and Palin have uttered absolutely nothing but attacks and one-liners against vague forces out there somewhere.
Vacuity and paranoia.
McCain’s own party has controlled the White House for eight years, so what change is he talking about?
If he’s disowning Bush, he should say so. Palin didn’t even mention him. Seems to me this approach is actually a bit cowardly.
The selection of Palin goes against McCain’s own generalities completely. She’s mentally in the 1890s.
What’s more, Palin, as her speech showed, is truly a nasty piece of work. How does that jive with his soft-voice goals for a higher approach?
This man is either cynical beyond measure or suffers from multiple personality syndrome. He has selected a genuinely dangerous person as his running mate.
The one good thing is that it really shows his weakness within his own party. He needed this grotesque person to cement relations with the fundamentalist base, but in doing so, he has thrown overboard all meaningful claim to being a maverick or agent of change.
Indeed, he has put his country and the world at risk so that he can have the support of his party.
This woman is literally the Christian equivalent of a member of al Qaeda being placed a heartbeat away from the presidency by a man whose heart could stop anytime.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | September 5th, 2008 at 2:27 pm | Report this commentAs someone who is always open to be enlightened more from regular folk here I am yet to see how fast bloggers like RCS, JBP etal… will come off their blocks…on your marks…set….where are they?
Can you please stand up or what? we need to hear your views about the best solution for america. We all heard the speech yesterday. It is the best speech ever, with a lot of vision, substance, and does point the way for a better america, and world. I am on clould 72 and mesmerized NOT.
Posted by: Steven | September 5th, 2008 at 2:49 pm | Report this commentSpot on Clive Crook, a rational analysis, but immaterial because the Right knows the American voter being undereducated to think rationally, increasingly makes decisions based on emotions. Their work place, their church, their families and friends’ opinions often based on hearsay and little factual information are their primary sources of information. Moreover, people preoccupied with eking out a living have little to no time to read, to watch debates, to listen to convention speeches. Appeals to their emotions work. Fear of islamo fascists, fear of losing their guns, fear of losing religious freedom manipulate their choices. If you are unconvinced, listen to American talk radio sometime. Listen to the fear mongering hosts. Listen to the callers calling in to second their opinions after a diatribe by the radio host: Hannity, Mark Levine, Rush, and the like. Things will get worse in America, not better thanks to the mediocre level of education in American schools.
Posted by: claudia | September 5th, 2008 at 3:33 pm | Report this commentJohn McCain is typically more reticent in his descriptions of his ordeal in the prison camp. I’m not sure he was comfortable extolling those experiences. His speaking style does not work well with huge crowds and the need to orate. He seems to work better in town hall environments where there is give and take and he doesn’t need to stick to a script, but that wasn’t possible in that venue.
It’s interesting that the idea that his appeal is only to the “…American voter being undereducated to think rationally, increasingly makes decisions based on emotions…” I’m a lifetime Democrat, with an advanced degree and professional career and I’m looking for a candidate to vote for this fall.
I’m also a lifetime volunteer who is very concerned at the lack of service to community and country be so many people. John McCain appeals to me for his service and his call to service. I disagree with him on some issues, but at least I’m confident that John and Cindy really do know about service to causes greater than oneself.
Some of that attraction may be based on a generational appeal, but I do believe that they make long term commitments to service and spend the time needed to help make a change.
Posted by: annetta | September 5th, 2008 at 4:14 pm | Report this commentMcCain’s speech was, in general, what it should have been. He put himself, not his party platform, on offer to the people he hopes to lead. His was not anybody else’s speech, and the American people could see Mr. McCain’s personality and political philosophy for themselves. Unlike most politicians, perhaps, they are difficult to separate. It was refreshing to see that Mr. McCain would not cap his candidacy by making a show of carrying water for the party’s stage managers. Instead, he actually raised the bar for Mr. Obama in several respects, most notably by raising the consciousness of Americans who have yet to grasp the sea change in the competitive landscape that globalization and the collapse of the Cold War have wrought. It appears Mr. Obama’s frequent prayers for a debate about national security, etc. were answered. If so, Mr. McCain has done us all an inestimable service and the Obama campaign should very quickly set terms for the presidential debates accordingly. We could all be in for a real treat if these two men get the chance to talk about the world as it is this fall.
Posted by: Randy Stortroen | September 5th, 2008 at 4:25 pm | Report this commentThat said, for all its high school earnestness, the speech lacked the quality of gravitas that the majority expects from finalists in presidential sweepstakes. At the same time, he took pains to dampen the effect that his party’s operatives have been reaching for, namely to diminish his opponent and the electoral process in general. These do not constitute a winning strategy for McCain as president but if we read between the lines, it is pretty obvious that, if a President Obama finds himself looking for help across the aisle, he should turn first to Mr. McCain.
The man is a “war hero”? How many enemies did he kill? How many bridges did he blow up? Etc.
Posted by: Sorensen | September 5th, 2008 at 5:13 pm | Report this commentHe was number 5 from the bottom in his class at
the naval academy. He would never have made admiral. Not that that necessarily means anything.
He is an old airbag and a cynical, dishonest
politician. Even Bush would be more qualified.
Apart from that and Palin, he is O.K.
Anetta in this instance what would you call three years of Obama’s community service? Or that is nothing; it never changed people’s lives? I am a lifetime volunteer too; but I believe you as a lifetime volunteer too should know more better than that. Anetta said,
“I’m also a lifetime volunteer who is very concerned at the lack of service to community and country be so many people. John McCain appeals to me for his service and his call to service. I disagree with him on some issues, but at least I’m confident that John and Cindy really do know about service to causes greater than oneself”.
Military service to country is great; if it were a measure for presidency, believe me our fore fathers would have put it into the constitution. Please stop peddling this as the only measure for someone to lead the United States of America; There is more to that. How many veterans have argued that point and HAVE been propelled to executive offices only to be total failures?
No american is less an american; as simple as that. stop the fear and war mongering. And please do not politicise defending the nation in terms of someone serving in the military as the only dimension or perspective we have to look at. We are facing an array of problems that cannot be addressed simply because someone was shot down on a mission, held captive to mention but a few; no disrespect here; but if one signs up to serve the country you have signed up to give up your life for the country, and YES I SALUTE THAT.
But guess what? we can fight all long or maybe be war monegrs until when you and I get grey; However the problems that linger in the world today are much more than you may think than just mere gung ho advocating for fighting. How can we ensure we have a better U.S.A? This is a question we need to address. And please enlighten I might be wrong what service did Cindy McCain do?
Posted by: Steven | September 5th, 2008 at 6:14 pm | Report this comment“Rather than simply asserting McCain’s status as a war hero, I would appreciate a more detailed analysis of his role in one of the most destructive invasions of the 20th century.”
People tend to simply accept the moniker applied to Senator McCain as a “war hero”. Several problems with this:
1. The fact is Senator McCain was dropping bombs over Vietnam, killing average men, women and children and destroying their homes, places of business and landscape. How is that heroism?
2. The reference to Senator McCain’s capture and imprisonment in Vietnam has been based on Senator McCain’s perspective only. I think it is abundantly clear that Senator McCain is the last person to rely upon for a trustworthy retelling of anything.
3. From every perspective it is remarkable that Senator McCain survived his ordeal at any time from the disabling of his plane through his imprisonment. That he was not torn limb from limb by those who found him is extraordinary. As someone noted elsewhere, can one imagine the fate of a Vietnamese pilot caught in similar circumstances after bombing any area in the USA South: Georgia or Texas for example?
“Not for the first time, it occurred to me that McCain’s biggest mistake in this campaign has been in failing to develop a market-friendly proposal for universal health care.”
Mr. Crook - for all his good qualities - clearly does not understand health policy issues. Senator McCain could win the election now if he were willing to do three things - all of which I put under the heading of “Nixon goes to China”:
1. Propose universal health insurance/financing coverage for USA residents by establishing a single payer/insurer system
2. Acknowledge the utter folly of the invasion and occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan and the need for the USA to acknowledge its failure and its mistaken policies of supporting repressive regimes everywhere in Muslim countries to ensure a flow of oil
3. Admit to a mistake in nominating Governor Palin, request her withdrawal and nominate Senator Clinton instead.
Barring those moves, he will lose.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | September 5th, 2008 at 6:21 pm | Report this commentAnother thought; and this is just a thought I am tired of people who say I am a democrat (the Liebermans of this era) Or I am a republican; yet such people say or I can’t vote my party. Hullo! your party is decided and that is why there is all this nomination process. Maybe it comes to a point that as a personality you are yet to find out who you are. Might this kind of wavering tell us how ethical we are? Maybe the inner traits are coming out in broad day light. er…are you racist? well thats is an issue with folk here however sweet you disguise it.
Posted by: Steven | September 5th, 2008 at 6:21 pm | Report this commentThe GOP proudly takes custody of the title “The Nasty Party” from the UK Conservatives. What a spectacle of hatred and bile from the angry right.
The quality of public discourse seems at such a low point in this US election (principally from the GOP) that democracy itself is a sham. The most depressing part of it is that a large segment of the electorate will not (cannot?) deliberate intelligently on the consequences of each candidate winning. I never cease to be amazed how American voters are able to vote against their own best interest.
As for the hero thing - who cares? Oh yeah, millions of “patriotic” Americans.
Posted by: d shah | September 5th, 2008 at 6:25 pm | Report this comment“John McCain appeals to me for his service and his call to service. I disagree with him on some issues, but at least I’m confident that John and Cindy really do know about service to causes greater than oneself.”
And THAT was the point of the speech. To say why he believes as he does, and thus add credibility when he claims to believe that.
Note that it is the classical story of redemption: the cocky, prideful, sinner, brought to the uttermost level of degradation – but saved by, in this case, the idea of America and the reality of his fellow Americans.
That is an enormously powerful story, and if the political class cannot understand that, they have lost touch, not with their countrymen in the Midwest, but with human nature itself.
He certainly should not have wasted an opportunity to say that, simply to make a proposal on health-care reform or suchlike, that could go perfectly well into a press release.
Most voters are in no position to examine the claims and plans put forth by a candidate. They all have to ask themselves: do I want this person to make decisions on my behalf? What they need is a reason to trust in his loyalty to them, and their country.
Posted by: ad | September 5th, 2008 at 9:03 pm | Report this commentMy intentions in praising the McCains’ service was not to criticize Senator Obama’s experience as a community organizer, although I can understand that assumption might have been made and I’m sorry for not being more specific in my comment.
I was thinking of the many people I’ve known over the years who have told me that when they retired they would volunteer as I do. I worked for a living, raised a child as a single mother, and yet found time to try to improve my community. My feeling is that in retirement we do whatever we did before, and if volunteering isn’t a part of your life before retirement I am not sure it will be a primary cause after retirement.
I was hoping that through the McCains’ challenge that some people, who from external appearances could, would give a few hours a month to a food bank, a church, a homeless shelter, or an animal welfare agency. There is a lot of human capital and we could solve so many problems if we each contributed a little of our selves.
Posted by: annetta | September 5th, 2008 at 9:22 pm | Report this commentBravo, d shah. No one could have said it any better. I have been watching Americans vote in favor of a hero (or movie star, or just plain politician) and against their own economic interests ever since Eisenhower was elected president while I was in high school, and I still cannot figure out why. As long as this continues, I will have to agree with you that American democracy is a sham.
Posted by: algasema | September 5th, 2008 at 10:24 pm | Report this commentWhat ELSE would a Republican candidate talk about, if NOT heroes? The Republican brain is wired for 3 things:
1) God.
2) Fear of “those people”.
3) Worship of Authority.
The first is taken care of by Palin.
The second one is taken care of by Obama.
McCain - as the hero - takes care of the third.
You Euro “Intellectuals” need to get out into the real America a bit more. America is a country of semi-literate nearly psychotic peasants. They actually think that other voice in their head IS god. Plus, they vote how their imaginary-friend tells them.
I betting McCain will win; in another close one.
Posted by: John | September 5th, 2008 at 10:53 pm | Report this commentSteven,
“what would you call three years of Obama’s community service?”
I think the word in his ward is a “(blanking) swindle”
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 6th, 2008 at 12:27 am | Report this commentJohn,
One day you will get to meet your Maker- GOD, I do hope you are friends with your maker for your sake!
Posted by: JP | September 6th, 2008 at 8:04 am | Report this commentJohn,
Is it true that the Founding Fathers of the good ol USA were all God Loving Christians?
If this is true than these God Loving Christians were led by God to do GREAT Work for the United States of America, would you not agree!
Posted by: JP | September 6th, 2008 at 8:09 am | Report this commentMcCain’s selection of Palin is actually a sign of his weakness, weakness within his own party.
In selecting her to reinforce his position with the religious right, McCain has weakened considerably his appeal to others.
I am more convinced than ever that Obama will win, and by an unexpectedly large margin.
He offers everything America truly needs as well as what the world needs from America.
Tired old McCain and fanatic nutcase Palin offer nothing but a freshened-up version of George Bush’s administration.
To mention change and the names of McCain or Palin in the same statement is simply ridiculous.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | September 6th, 2008 at 1:24 pm | Report this commentAlmost not a single one of the leading Founding Fathers was a Christian.
Patrick Henry, not a Founding Father, was a Christian, and Jefferson described him as a “volcano of emotions with no guiding intelligence.”
Washington, Madison, Franklin, Morris, Adams, and many others were Deists at best, in the late 18th century intellectual traditions of England and France. Jefferson was a complete skeptic, many at the time considered him an atheist.
Many of these figures were Freemasons which in the 18th century was definitely a kind of humanistic quasi-church organization, much disliked by traditional establishment figures.
Christianity had no influence whatsoever in the founding of the U.S., except as it created a reaction to some of its excesses. Indeed, it is thanks to Jefferson in large part, that there is separation of church and state.
Jefferson, a very dark figure in some areas of government and human rights, was in this one area absolutely admirable. He considered his establishment of religious freedom in Virginia as one of his greatest achievements, and it is duly noted on his tombstone.
Fundamentalists today stupidly forget the hard-fought battle for religious freedom that was fought in the 18th century.
Jefferson actually made alliances with the likes of Anabaptists in an effort to free people from a legally established church at the time, one to whose support all residents of whatever faith were required to pay tithes.
Now, such fundamentalists want themselves to impose their views on society. Simply ridiculous. People like Palin have an innate tendency to tell others what to do and to believe that they themselves know the only truth.
I said fundamentalists “forget,” but that is not accurate. It is actually ignorance, deliberate ignorance. They choose to believe myths about the religious founding of America and choose never to inform themselves by reading some hard history. Worse still, they go around preaching the myth as though it were true.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | September 6th, 2008 at 1:43 pm | Report this commentWM,
“Senator McCain could win the election now if he were willing to do three things - all of which I put under the heading of “Nixon goes to China”:”
Wendell, please remind me if I ever so much as decide to run for Cook County Dog Catcher, to not hire you as a political consultant.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 6th, 2008 at 3:47 pm | Report this commentChuckman,
You should probably check in with Charles Carroll or his cousin Archbishop Carroll the next time you are at the library reading about the Founding Fathers.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 6th, 2008 at 3:51 pm | Report this commentPowers,
Go read some serious books before commenting on a subject you clearly know little about.
I’d pass along a list excellent ones if I didn’t know it would be a wasted effort.
Implicit in your statement is the typical grade-eight civics-class understanding of the origins of America.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | September 6th, 2008 at 5:32 pm | Report this comment“Note that it is the classical story of redemption: the cocky, prideful, sinner, brought to the uttermost level of degradation – but saved by, in this case, the idea of America and the reality of his fellow Americans.”
It’s a great tale, and it appears to be based on a true story. The problem is that after his “redemption”, he cheated on his wife (this he cited as his greatest moral failing ever which doesn’t fit the timeline for this narrative), and before he was a “cocky, prideful sinner”, he enlisted despite a privileged upbringing.
Trying to shoehorn McCain’s bio into a biblical framework is perhaps touching and will play well to his base, but it seems awfully off message.
The Republicans missed their best opportunity to make a case for their domestic and economic policies. They have an economic plan, but they aren’t willing to present their argument for it, which has the effect of conceding that issue to the democrats.
On health care and the economy, they throw up a white flag - it was barely mentioned at the convention. From the convention alone, one could be forgiven for thinking that they simply don’t have a policy on health care (or anything besides tax cuts). McCain makes a passing mention to various citizens, Toni, Jake, Matthew, Bill and Sue who are experiencing hardship, but he wasn’t effective at explaining how his policies are going to help these people.
Posted by: Elflord | September 6th, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Report this commentI know I can always count on JBP’s amusing comments when I need a break from work.
Senator McCain might be able convince Senator Clinton to join him under the right circumstances, but that would not make the Christian Right very happy. On the other hand who else will the Christian Right vote for?
Regarding condemnation of irresponsible belligerence - now that would mark a true maverick. Of course Senator McCain is not a maverick at all, but if he wanted to attach some reality to the myth…
The same goes for a single payer/insurer system of financing medical services. Senator McCain has a natural ally in much of business, certainly executives in big business who mostly constitute the country-club Republican set. It is in business’s collective interest to support the creation of such a system. The current private insurance and employer-financed system leaves business with no control whatsoever over medical service costs - their current level and their rate of increase. The price level is twice the level it should be.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | September 6th, 2008 at 11:07 pm | Report this commentAlso, please keep up the excellent commentary, Mr. Chuckman, but never expect, as you surely know as well as I, that dogmatic, “Christian” right-wingers have an interest in reality or the truth based on facts. What good is that when they have the divine word of God - the fundamentalist Christian one of course, not the non-fundamentalist Christian or Jewish or Muslim or Olympian or whatever myriad other gods there are out there - telling them what is truth and not?
Posted by: Wendell Murray | September 6th, 2008 at 11:14 pm | Report this commentAm I the only one who thinks it odd, that the vicious scaremongering John McCain indulges in, regarding a supposed “threat” from Iran, gets so little challenge in the American media? By now, McCain should be aware that the invasion of Iraq was knowingly based on intentionally falsified intelligence. Would it occur to the man the same game is again in play, but with Iran as the target of the warmongers?
Posted by: James Canning | September 6th, 2008 at 11:59 pm | Report this commentMcCain’s speech was a disappointment primarily because it failed to call-out Obama on his plans to turn the middle class into welfare tarts. At least Obama is true to his marxist roots. And the deal about McCain’s biography being over-sold, I disagree. Most Americans were not fully familiar with the details of his heroism and once they learn the full story, he gains admiration and votes.
Posted by: mark costello | September 7th, 2008 at 12:47 am | Report this comment1) McCain may have served in Vietnam - but it was the Democrats who took us into that pointless and awful war.
2) 45 years of affirmative action, welfare and left-liberal policies have dulled America’s sharp edge. Think that today’s America could complete a Hoover Dam 2 years ahead of schedule? Fat chance - they’d be wasting too much time and money on “diversity seminars”.
3) Obama is motivated by personal ambition and vanity: this will become quickly apparent should he become President. America beware!
Posted by: Shevvers | September 7th, 2008 at 5:15 am | Report this commentShevvers, John McCain even now argues that the US could have “won” the Vietnam War. By this, he means that the artificially-created client state of “South” Vietnam could have been propped up for many more years, at a fantastic cost in blood and treasure. McCain fails to comprehend the war should not have been fought in the first place. UK intelligence and the CIA saw no threat to US national security as arising from a reunification of Vietnam under the communists (who of course were nationalists).
Posted by: James Canning | September 7th, 2008 at 6:43 pm | Report this commentAn excellent commentary, Mr. Crook! The Liberals that control the Democrat party have nothing but disdain for the average American. While most Americans send their children to state universities, Liberals only recognize Harvard. While most Americans are not attorneys (Thank God!) Liberals believe that only attorneys are worthwhile politicians. I was once an over-educated “Liberal Elite,” buying the dogma that Americans are mainly peasants. Then I moved to the exurbs, and found a different kind of savvy. A patriotic savvy. A belief that hard work makes success. I firmly believe that the student makes the school — the school does not make the student. Liberals have no respect for hard-working, patriotic Americans. They therefore do not like the majority of Americans. That’s why they only have one two-term president since World War II.
Posted by: Lynn | September 8th, 2008 at 6:29 pm | Report this commentI just watched McCain’s acceptance speech for the first time. All 56 minutes of it and not one dull moment. An excellent speech, his integrity and bright personality shown through. I think this is what tipped the opinion polls.
McCain painted with a wide brush, which is fitting for such a venue (it would of been wonderful if you could have UK style policy discussions in America, but alas, such is not the case). But McCain did not shirk from presenting his policies, I cannot disagree more with Clive Crook. He showed what he is for. He is for good old commonsensical Reagan Republicanism.
In the final analysis it is not detailed policy proposals which are important — any candidate can hire think tankers to draft those for him (and that is not to say that Obama has ever superseded McCain in presenting substance –far from it). There are two important tests for a presidential candidate: 1) one is his general orientation and ideology, 2) two is his personality and character. McCain shines on both counts.
Stand up! Stand up for your rights! Stand up for your Country! Help John McCain win this election for the benefit of America and the security of our world!
Posted by: RCS | September 8th, 2008 at 9:53 pm | Report this commentOBAMA = BETRAYAL
Posted by: Howard | September 19th, 2008 at 4:17 pm | Report this commentObama supporters are foolish to think that he will never betray them.
Obama was a close friend of Pastor Wright for TWENTY YEARS.
Obama threw Wright under the bus for personal ambition.
McCain would not betray his country even after 5 years of torture.
You can put lipstick on a traitor, but he’s still a traitor.
Lynn’s rant against her fellow Americans who may, in her view, have too much education, and Howard’s rant calling Obama a traitor because of his former connection with a pastor who (like Sarah Palin) has some extreme views but who, (unlike anyone likely to wind up on a Republican ticket for many years to come) is black, both show more than anything else what is wrong with America.
Not that RCS’s post praising McCain’s half senile meanderings st the Republican convention (go ahead - call me “ageist”, even though I am almost as old as McCain) is much more related to reality either. But at least RCS, as he has informed us to the great relief of all of us who want real, not only 10 per cent, change from eight years of Bush/Cheney, cannot vote in this election.
Posted by: algasema | September 19th, 2008 at 4:36 pm | Report this comment