Senator McCain could not have been farther outside of his comfort zone. Staring out into a sea of bearded faces at the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, he admitted that his speech before bikers was something new. “This is my first time here,” he admitted. But as the crowd roared the engines of their machines in approval and appreciation, McCain proved that he had been listening. “I recognize that sound,” McCain declared, “it’s the sound of freedom.”Barack Obama, on the other hand, was being
serenaded by singer Harry Connick Jr. at a $28,500 per seat dinner. The reports on the evening news and in the major newspapers paid scant attention to the McCain event, portraying it as something of a farce. Yet this event encapsulated how John McCain has fought his way back into this race, and how he stands a chance to overturn the once-invincible Obama campaign. Those of you who know bikers understand that the motorcycle represents for them a celebration of their embodiment of what America is all about: freedom. McCain grasped this simple fact. He did this because he reached outside his comfort zone, listened to these folks, he learned, and he found common ground. Those bikers will never forget that.The contrast with Senator Obama is telling. Following his trip to Iraq and Afghanistan, Senator Obama offered no new insights and no new policies, claiming that the trip had only confirmed what he already believed. Ask yourself: have you ever taken any trip, or attended any meeting, having learned nothing new? While holding fast to your position may excite the Democratic base, to independent voters it makes Obama seem inattentive at best, fanatical at worst. As his tour continued, Obama continued to prove himself better at talking than listening, and better at highlighting his differences from working Americans than he was at engaging them. “I know that I don’t look like the Americans who’ve previously spoken in this great city,” Obama reminded voters back home from Berlin, and compounded his distance from his countrymen by asking Europe for forgiveness of his people’s sins. While Obama unveiled his new order to European heads of state and skipped an appointment with wounded soldiers, McCain appeared in grocery stores and restaurants, traveling to where swing voters live and listening to what they think. While Obama reminds voters that he is not like the Presidents on dollar bills, Presidents that Americans saw fit to elect, McCain’s appearances in small venues show voters that he connects to them. Obama claims the mantle of distinction, McCain of commonality.
The reason that the race has tightened is simple: Obama talks, McCain listens. McCain thinks, Obama believes. Obama tells voters that he is different from and better than them. McCain tells voters that he hears and learns from them. McCain builds bridges, Obama builds walls. Obama seeks to transform the people, McCain seeks to represent them.
Is it any wonder, then, that voters are now edging nervously away from Obama? While most Americans believe that their country is in crisis, they don’t generally believe that they themselves are the source of the problem. Rather, all they really want is a government that will listen to them. Is there any wonder, then, that they are realizing that McCain is the better option for them?
August 9, 2008 at 4:04 pm
He did this because he reached outside his comfort zone, listened to these folks, he learned, and he found common ground. ?????
Are you kidding me?
The salty maverick who once called his wife a cu-t in public?
This has been central in McCain’s schtick since he has known as Punk McNasty in high school.
Since he was a raunchy rowdy party boy at ther Naval Academy.
Since he was a hot dog, risk taking, flyboy who lost qite a few Navy war planes before going into the 20 hours of combat that he spun his war hero myth out of.
If John McCain did not have an oil heiress for a mother and a 4 star admiral as a father, he would probably become a biker himself.
August 10, 2008 at 5:19 pm
First of all, thanks for checking my site! Sorry for the slow response, it has been a busy weekend, and rankly I didn’t think anyone would be reading what I posted. I’m glad that you found me, and took the time to post.
There are a couple of problems with your argument. First, you say that my asertion about McCain listening to people is wrong. Then, you say that he could very well have been a biker himself. That is exactly my point.
What would you rather have in a President, a guy who looks at his fellow citizens and thinks “that could very well be me,” or a guy who looks at his fellow citizens and thinks “I’d better take care of this rube, because he can’t take care of himself?”
I also noticed that you did not even bother to claim that Barack Obama listens to voters. If your candidate is so bereft of ideas that you cannot muster an argument in his favor, it is probably time to start looking for another candidate.
Thanks again for reading and responding to this post, feel free to come back any time for some substantive discussion of the issues of this election.
August 10, 2008 at 6:30 pm
I would prefer a President who was Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School and had enough common sense to get it right about the Iraq invasion without special training and experience, who is a cool cerebral poker player.
I would not want a thin skinned, grumpy superstitious compulsive crapshooter with an anger management problem who barely graduated from college.
August 11, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Well, if education is your criteria, you should vote for me. I have more degrees and have definately published more academic papers than your guy. How does one be a professor for 10 years and never publish anything?
Cool cerebral poker player? The guy lost his composure over an interview with his daughters that he himself approved and participated in. “Cool” is one interpretation: “dumb,” “apathetic,” “dead-behind-the-eyes,” and “empty-suit” are other directions you could take that.
What exactly, did your guy get right about the Iraq invasion? Was it the part where he said that “My position is not very different from George Bush’s.” Or was it when he presented his plan for combating the root causes of Islamic fundamentalism without causing change in the Arab world. Oops, we are still waiting for him to do that.
August 12, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Zackary
Education is not my criterion. I have an MD, MBA, am board certified by the American Board of Medical Specialties ,. I was a commisioned line officer in the Navy and I have known many men who did not finish high school who I consider smarter than I.
Teaching Law at University of Chicago was not Obama’s day job. He did publish 3 best sellers.
McCain had the oportunity for a good education and squandered it.
If you think that the Iraq invasion was not a monumental blunder, I really don’t want to argue with you. You are in denial.
If Obama one instance where you could pretend he lost his composure, that is not his usual demeanor.
August 13, 2008 at 1:37 am
The point about Iraq is this: If totalitarianism masquerading as Islam is a problem, and if the problem is rooted in the lack of opportunity and democracy in the Islamic and especially the Arab world, then how do you solve the problem without affecting regime change in the Arab world? How do you attack the root cause? If a stable democracy emerges in Iraq, you have taken a bug step in that direction. Neither Obama or any other Democrat has proposed a solution for combatting the root causes.
You cannot win a war against terrorism in Afghanistan, because of ethnic differencesand the fact that it is historically a nearly ungovernable state. Sanctions don’t change authoritarian regimes, because the well-being of their citizens is at best a secondary concern. What is the solution, then? I’m open to suggestions.
I think you are missing a major factor about McCain’s legendary temper. If you look at the examples of this, they are always directed at peers, never his subordinates. Ask Obama staffers the same thing. What is the better mark of character?
August 13, 2008 at 2:09 pm
The Islamic people have their culture and we have ours. We should show them some respect.
It is their oil under their sand. If we do not want to do business with Mideast oil, we need to find our own sources of enrgy.
McCain no doubt has a cult following in which the Sine qua non is belief in the myth that he is a war hero and can do no wrong.
character?
At the USNA, he did not follow rules and did not do his best academically.
When he commanded the R.A.G. he used his position to violate the UCMJ with adultary and fraternization.
Compusive crap shooting is a characterial flaw.
August 14, 2008 at 12:16 am
I would argue that there is nothing in Islam that precludes democratic government. Ask an Islamic friend of yours whether or not Islamc culture is incompatible with democracy. There are many of Muslims living peacefully in democratic nations, including ours. There is nothing disrespectful about arguing that Muslims deserve to choose their own government, and no respect in arguing that they are unfit for democracy. In our own country, the slave-power in the South deployed the same logic in arguing that the North had no right to limit the expansion of slavery. It was just as bankrupt then as it is now.
I agree about needing to get away from the use of oil. To do that, we need electric cars, and to get those, we need to expand the power grid. That means nuclear power and clean coal, as well as renewable sources. John McCain and Paris Hilton are for that, Barack Obama is opposed.
I think you are misunderstanding the dynamic of McCain voters. I have yet to hear a single McCain voter who believes he can do no wrong, myself included, as evidenced by all of the hand-wringing on blogs and talk radio about his nomination. I don’t think you can tell me that you have never heard an Obama voter claim that he is flawless. Don’t you find that a little scary?
Keep in mind I don’t put you in that category, as you seem pretty reasonable. Anyone who recognizes that the smartest people don’t always go to college has some sense in my book. Do you have a blog that you post at? I would like to see your takes on some of these issues. I’m trying to understand why anybody would actually want Obama to be President, and none of my friends have been able to give me a good reason. If nothing else, I’d like to get some assurance that this guy is not crazy.
August 14, 2008 at 4:13 pm
if you want to see my other posts, go to any of my posts, scroll down to the bottom, there is a link to older posts. Thank you for your interest.
I agree that nothing in Islam precludes democracy.I do not think that the costs of bringing democracy to Iraq were worth it. (If indeed that is the reason we are there.)
I also question if many Americans really want democracy. In the early days of Bush/Cheney when the GOP controled all three branches, many Americans were applauding the arrogant policy of a misfit like GW Bush and calling us who were objecting cowards and traitors.
I was referring to the makeup of McCain’s staff as an explaination for why his staff is so harmonious with him. They apparently give him the adoration that he craves. I think that his staff think that he can do no wrong.
“why anybody would actually want Obama to be President”, ?
I am 69 years old. I have miitary, medical and business training and experience.
The principles and interaction of training, common sense , experience and judgement and success manefest themselves similarly on board a ship, in hospitals and in business situations.
20 years of experience is very different from one year of experience 20 times.
Neither McCain nor Obama have much experience in the way of making something go.
McCain commanded a training unit for one year. He did a fairly good job but used his position to violate the UCMJ with fraternization and adultery.
Senators discuss and vote . They may or may not have command and understanding of issues to be able to manage them in an executive way.
Obama was a neighborhood organizer* for 2 years and has overseen a national campaign with no previous experience that beat both Clintons.
* I believe that all politics is local.
My definition of common sense is to be able to arrive at a vailid conclusion or course of action WITHOUT SPECIAL :TRAINING, EXPERIENCE OR INFORMATION.
In Oct 2002, Obama, using readily available information and without the years of special training and the decades of experience of those who got it wrong not only got it right and said why, but he articulated it in clear, simple and unambiguous terms.
Magna Cum Laude at Harvard Law qualifies him as book smart.
He is a cool poker player as opposed to McCain’s compulsive crap shooting .
He can sink a 40′ threee-pointer with the world watching.
Gotta go.
Smart, common sense, a disciplined legal mind, cool, articulate.
August 15, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Thanks for the tip on the navigation, as I’m sure you can tell I’m newly engaged in this blogging thing. I’d be happy to share some personal info with you as well, except that, as a historian, public association of myself with this blog could have serious repercussions on my career. The experience of Sean Wilentz, a very distinguished historian who made the mistake of openly stumping for Hillary Clinton, has convinced me that I need to stay very deep in the closet if I ever hope to get tenure. Also, let me tell you also thanks for your service in the military and for taking the time to help me try to understand the appeal of this guy.
I disagree with your assessements, though. His 2002 seech on Iraq strikes me as more of an ideological knee jerk reaction rather than a well-crafted vision. He did not then, and has not now, ever provided a constructive vision of how to effectively combat the root causes of the problem. Not to pull a Mao Zedong-style copout here, but I don’t think we can accurately judge whether or not the Iraq war was a mistake until we find out if Iraq becomes a democracy or not. However, I think it is too simplistic to argue that it has been an absolute failure. The fact is that al-Qaeda’s popularity in the Islamic world is in tatters, and that this is as a direct result of their engaging, and ultimately being decimated, in Iraq. This could not have happened in Afghanistan. If Iraq emerges from this as a democracy, I think it is tough to argue that it will fail to have a dramatic effect in the Islamic world. As a result, I’m not as willing to give Obama prescience points yet.
I agree on the Law Degree, but I find it a little disturbing that a man so well-educated holds such orthodox ideological views. You would think that a critical thinker would find some merit in otherwise oppositional thought, and adopt aspects of it. I don’t see it in him, which is odd because he worked with some serious conservative scholars.
I’m also not sure about the poker player analogy. In a year when every single hand should be in his favor, he continues to goof easy plays. He picked an unwinnable fight on the flag pin issuem he never was able to shake off the 3am attack against Clinton, he passed on a great opportunity to win the good will of Clinton voters and Michigan and Florida by refusing to seat their delegations after he basically had things wrapped up, he missed an easy layup on the Rev. Wright problem (if he had simply said that “Of course African Americans are angry, but I don’t believe that the government created AIDS to exterminate people of color” in his big speech that issue would have been dead), his unwillingness to admit that the surge was not a failure has been strange and sloppy, and you need a flowchart to track his responses to the Russia-Georgia issue. None of these were big challenges, but he struggled to respond to them, stubbornly held to untenable ground, and lost votes as a result. In this respect, he behaved quite a bit like W., who I would not consider a good poker player.
When I look at the race, I look at what I consider to be the biggest problems of the country and see how the candidates say they will respond.
Iraq: does it make sense to get out on our timetable, or on the Iraqis. In my view, by going in, we assumed the responsibility for doing what we can to stand them up as a free society. All of the problems of the Iraqi government applied to the South Korean government at one time, and they developed into a thriving democracy and ally. I think we need to give the Iraqis the same chance. Obviously, I think McCain is better on this issue, though Obama’s surrogates have been sending signals that he is moving in this direction. Untill we hear it from him, though, I think we have to be skeptical.
Energy: Conservation is valuable, but I think in order to provide continued long range opportunities for Americans (i.e. economic growth) it is essential to expand the energy grid, especially if we move toward electric cars. Wind and sloar power are good long range plans, and we should use money earned by leasing new drilling sites to subsidize increased development and deployment. In order to transition, we have to have a dramatic expansion of our nuclear power capability. Since McCain is the only candidate who actively pushes nuclear power, I give him the edge, though Obama’s close ties with Illinois utility companies give me some hope.
Economy: Big difference here. I’m not persuaded that raising corporate taxes and imposing windfall profit taxes is a good idea at all. Big companies can easily leverage increased costs by passing the costs on to hostage consumers, small business can’t and go out of businesses, plus increased taxes takes capital out of the banking system and reders it unproductive. Since small business is the mode of social mobility, anything that harms it is bad for the country in my view. I have no problem with common sense regulation as long as it is not used as a sword by big companies against small ones, as in the Progressive era. Obama has way too many big companies behind him to make me think they they will not do this.
Partisan gridlock: no brainer here. Obama not only wants to establish a Democratic supermajority, but he is also leveraging power against Democrats who opposed him. Not the formula for ending the politics-as-jihad era in Washington. Obviously, McCain is not a knee jerk ideologue, and half of his party hates him, which in my book are good things.
Bascially, my quick take is that I’m for McCain because he is bipartisan, promotes an expanded energy grid, favors small business, and will fulfill our committment to Iraq.
Have a good weekend!
August 15, 2008 at 9:16 pm
McCain is no more rigorous in understanding the issues now than he did in his studies when he was at the bottom of his class at USNA .
He is a superstitious compulsive gambler (craps) with an anger management problem . I can see how all of these things would impact on his judgement and decision making.
His top foreign affairs advisor, Randall Scheunemann, has been on the payroll of the Republic of Georgia. he was one of the important forces gettin us in the Iraq war.
In his speech he repeated several times that he was only against dumb wars, not all wars. It does not sound doctrinaire to me. You are entitled to your opinion.
McCain’s salty, belligerent schtick does not impress me.
I do tend to agree with McCain about nuclear.
Those years as a Senator did not call for him making anything go. Senators discuss and vote.
I GUESS THAT OUR VOTES WILL CANCEL EACH OTHER OUT.
I watched in horror when Alfred E. Newman became President in 2000. I hope that we don’t put Yosemite Sam in there now.
August 26, 2008 at 6:46 pm
why will people not vote for him…it’s not the color of the skin — it’s the content of character, of which Barack Obama has none.
August 27, 2008 at 8:22 am
McCain has character?
1. In High School he was “Punk McNasty”
2. At USNA he was a raunchy rowdy underachiever, 895 out of 899.
3. As a flyboy, he was a hot dog riskktaker who lost at least 3 planes .
4. As a POW, he sang like a canary causing US aviators to be shot down.
5. In the one year he ostensibly made something go, he used his position to violate ther UCMJ with fraternisation and adultery.
6. In Senate he was superstitious compulsive gambler with an anger management problem.
7. Made a crude tasteless joke about Chelsea Clinton.
8. Called his wife the “c” word in public.
9. Surrounds himself with the same Neocons who ran GW Bush.
10. A real class act.
September 2, 2008 at 9:56 am
McCain’s character:
1) Put personal disappointment aside after bitter 2000 primaries to do what was best for the country.
2) Bucked his party on taxes.
3) Bucked his party on campaign finance reform.
4) Bucked his party on immigration.
5) Bucked his President on the surge.
6) Bucked his party on his VP pick.
7) Does not accept earmarks because he opposes them.
8) Attacked party colleagues like Ted Stevens on corruption.
9) Respects his staff.
10) Is his own most fearsome critic.
I did not even need to mention the Vietnam thing to get to 10.
Obama’s character:
1) Believes that candidates’ children should be off-limits in campaigns.
Obama character problems:
1) Has held down a number of positions (editor, lecturer, community organizer, board president, state senator, U.S. Senator) in which he can point to no major achievements to justify his paycheck.
2) Gained entry into Chicago politics by kowtowing to the city’s wealthy political elite, including an admitted terrorist.
3) Allied himself to corrupt pols like Rod Blagojevich, Joe Biden and Richard Dailey, and radicals like Luis Gutierrez.
4) Has never bucked his party on any issue, ever.
5) Threw his spiritual mentor and patron under the bus when he became politically inexpedient.
6) Threw a priest who promoted his candidacy under the bus when he became politically inexpedient.
7) Threw Scarlett Johansson under the bus when she became politically inexpedient.
8) Bought property at a vastly reduced rate from an man who had been indicted for corruption, and was later convicted. Dismissed this as a “boneheaded move,” but never actually did anything to remediate the ill-gotten gains.
9) Received sweetheart mortgage rate on home.
10) Spent millions of taxpayer dollars on earmarks for his political friends, allies, and associates.
11) Will not denounce dailykos or other radicals, regardless of what they say or do.
12) Supported campaign finance laws until they became politically inexpedient, then denounced and abandoned them, becoming the first candidate since Nixon to do so.
13) Used influence block research into the only organization he has ever run.
14) Used influence and dirty tricks to disqualify opponents from 1996 state senate ballot. Repeated against Hillary Clinton to DQ Michigan and Florida delegates until he had won enough superdelegates to win.
15) Treats staff and voters like dirt.
16) Did not denounce his campaign staff in Houston for having a large picture of mass-murderer Che Guevara in the office.
17) Refuses to admit when he changes his position on an issue, because he is incapable of admitting that he might be wrong.
18) Does his best writing and gives his best speeches when talking about himself.
19) Has repeatedly referred to women he does not know as “sweetie.”
20) Sends surrogates, including his wife, out to tell voters that they are “lucky to be living in the same time” as him.
I have not even gotten to his dizzying array of policy positions and hypocrisies, but I think the overarching point is made.