I’ve watched the blogs and listened to Hannity and Rush jabber incessantly about how John McCain isn’t a “true conservative.” They recite chapter and verse of John’s deviation from the true path of righteousness, meditating endlessly on the shortcomings and never seeing any justification for his apostasy. They’ve been stuck in a difficult situation. They know that one party or the other will win the election. They know that one option is absolutely abhorrent to their beliefs, yet they express reservations about whether the lesser evil is a viable choice. Compromise of their core belief is unthinkable, but abstinence from voting accomplishes nothing.
The key to understanding McCain, and one which it is difficult to comprehend, is that he is principled almost beyond political understanding. What that means is that he will do whatever he believes it takes to get progress on an issue. That inevitably means conflict with his own party. When he sees a problem, he works toward his best estimate of a solution even if it takes dealing with Ted Kennedy to get it done. That scares folks.
The reality of politics is that the “perfect” solution is too extreme for any problem. The only policy options that are available are the incremental, evolutionary, compromises that can gather a majority consensus. The result is the classical horse designed by a committee. Everyone gets something they want and it is always damaging to the resultant whole.
He recognized that "something" had to be done on immigration and no single thing could adequately address the problem. He bundled swipes at all of the things that needed to be done into a comprehensive plan which then was doomed because it supplied something for everyone to hate rather than something for everyone to approve. It would fail, but he pursued it in an attempt to get the dialog moving and develop understanding of how complex the problem is. He was vilified for the attempt and ostracized by the party faithful. It was much easier to scream “amnesty” than to debate the details of complex policy issues in the public forum.
Everyone seems to believe that money is the root of all political evil. If wealthy interests can contribute vast amounts of money to candidates or issues, the perception is that the process is going to be corrupted. That arguably isn’t so for a lot of reasons, but perception always becomes reality. Free speech on political questions is tightly linked to the ability to financial support candidates to whatever degree one wishes.
Regardless, McCain sought to address the problem. The result was a disastrous piece of legislation, McCain-Feingold. It was the wrong thing, but it was John pushing to do something to solve a problem perceived by a huge majority of the electorate. A desired solution to a non-existent problem. He followed his principles, but defied his base.
In the end, we look at John McCain as a “maverick,” a political iconoclast who isn’t ideologically sound and pays little heed to what the party base thinks. Is that good or bad?
Would we be better off with someone who seeks the perfect solution at the expense of the good? Do we want a government torn between competing partisan interests to the point where no action on anything is ever taken and the animosity festers through the body politic daily? Or, could we tolerate an administration that looks at the complexity of political problems, assesses the possibilities of progress toward solutions that can be agreed to across the partisan aisle for the good of the country and then puts the options before the people?
There is a cliché in leadership that you don’t have to like your leader but you do have to respect him. I’m thinking that while many people have expressed the fact that they don’t like McCain because of his maverick nature, they inevitably must respect him even when he appears to be tilting at some Andalusian windmills. And the contrast with his opponent is quite clear in that regard.
The opponent is someone that everyone seems to like, but increasingly few seem to respect. He has too often chosen to see the windmill but sheath his sword and pass quietly by rather than run the risk of offending any of those people whom he wishes to like him. Voting “present” doesn’t make progress, but at least nothing changes.
5 comments:
Ed writes: "The key to understanding McCain, and one which it is difficult to comprehend, is that he is principled almost beyond political understanding. What that means is that he will do whatever he believes it takes to get progress on an issue. That inevitably means conflict with his own party. When he sees a problem, he works toward his best estimate of a solution even if it takes dealing with Ted Kennedy to get it done. That scares folks. "
I like John McCain. I liked his speech the other night. He said what I wanted to hear. This in itself, however, needs to be looked at. I need to know a few things:
1. What motivates John McCane? What pushes him? What does he need or want day-to-day, and what does he want as his legacy?
2. The way he took over the primaries (remember the way he used Huckabee to knock Romney out of the race in WV?)--McCane's shrewd, I should say "brilliant" choice of the populist Sarah Palin . . . these things lead me to believe that John is one heck of a masterful politican. Underscore that: a masterful politician. Hmmpf. That's what scares me--the fact that he is making such excellent moves. That very good speech--and Palin's too--exactly what I wanted to hear (except for the rough hockey mom/pitbull joke).
Can we trust him? That is, how far should we trust him?
C
I have NEVER before read something that gave me an understanding of why people like McCain (other than my own simplistic assumptions -- POW, blunt, friendly if he likes you). Very interesting.
I just have too many differences with Mr. McCain to be a full fledged supporter, of course of the two presidential candidates he is hands down no question (not even a flicker of doubt) the better choice. In my life there has not been a Dem, that I would even have considered voting for.
McCain worries me on things like his McCain-Feingold work, and his stance on the 2nd amendment and of course his take on Amnesty for illegals.
I think he and I differ on too many issues for me to really be "happy" with him, and I do resent the fact that he is basically the Republican candidate essentially because of crossover voters dems and libs pretending to be Repugs to influence which candidate was selected. (Rush's counter effort was just fair play to balance things out.) McCain did however do well with his VP selection and I could actually see Sarah Palin being the first Woman President, but it does disturb me that there doesn't seem to be a male candidate out there that really matches up with all my desires in a president, Where are all the Reagan types?
"There I was..." Middle of the night on the ramp at U-Tapao RTAB about 1969. The airplane we were supposed to fly out that night was, literally, in pieces all over the ramp. Major mechanical problems- hydraulic leaks of undetermined origin, engine guys banging on the #1 engine with large ball peen hammers, another guy changing a generator...well, you get the drift.
Up drives this rumpled, round Colonel who looks at me (the backup navigator, BTW, not even on the primary crew) and says, "I want this airplane airborne in an hour!" I gave him a quick rundown of the maintenance situation and told him how waaay far down the decision-making food chain I was.
He looked at me real hard, poked me in the chest with his handheld radio antenna and said. " You don't understand, if this airplane isn't airborne in an hour, I'm gonna have your ass!" He then jumped into the staff car and sped off.
"Ready!" "Fire!" "Aim!"
The John McCain school of problem solving at work.
I'm voting for McCain, but only to get Palin ready for 2012.
Jjet and everyone, read this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/09/09/do0904.xml
Im thinking she might just be the best man for the job, since no republican man seems to have stepped up to the plate like this. At least to my knowledge. Perhaps Palin is a valid choice for 2012 or 2016
Post a Comment