23 June 2008
McCain point and counterpoint
Posted by Roy Bischoff under: Presidential Election 2008 .
Here are two contrasting opinions on McCain. The first is using scare tactics to make us think that McCain should become president or Iran will develop nuclear weapons and start bombing our cities. That is not likely to happen if you just stop and think about it. The writer is trying to evoke an emotional response that triggers a response in us that we need McCain. We need to think more clearly than this before voting for president. The second article(?) does the same kind of thing trying to push several buttons such as immigration, a North American union, secret meetings and consorting with “money”.
Courtesy of Cass (selections):
Obama And McCain
By Thomas Sowell
June 5, 2008
Now that the two parties have finally selected their presidential candidates, it is time for a sober– if not grim– assessment of where we are.
Not since 1972 have we been presented with two such painfully inadequate candidates. When Election Day came that year, I could not bring myself to vote for either George McGovern or Richard Nixon. I stayed home.
This year, none of us has that luxury. While all sorts of gushing is going on in the media, and posturing is going on in politics, the biggest national sponsor of terrorism in the world– Iran– is moving step by step toward building a nuclear bomb.
The point when they get that bomb will be the point of no return. Iran’s nuclear bomb will be the terrorists’ nuclear bomb– and they can make 9/11 look like child’s play.
All the options that are on the table right now will be swept off the table forever. Our choices will be to give in to whatever the terrorists demand– however outrageous those demands might be– or to risk seeing American cities start disappearing in radioactive mushroom clouds.
All the things we are preoccupied with today, from the price of gasoline to health care to global warming, will suddenly no longer matter.
Just as the Nazis did not find it enough to simply kill people in their concentration camps, but had to humiliate and dehumanize them first, so we can expect terrorists with nuclear weapons to both humiliate us and force us to humiliate ourselves, before they finally start killing us.
The terrorists have given us as clear a picture of what they are all about as Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did during the 1930’s– and our “leaders” and intelligentsia have ignored the warning signs as resolutely as the “leaders” and intelligentsia of the 1930s downplayed the dangers of Hitler.
What does this have to do with today’s presidential candidates? It has everything to do with them.
One of these candidates will determine what we are going to do to stop Iran from going nuclear– or whether we are going to do anything other than talk, as Western leaders talked in the 1930’s.
There is one big difference between now and the 1930’s. Although the West’s lack of military preparedness and its political irresolution led to three solid years of devastating losses to Nazi Germany and imperial Japan, nevertheless when all the West’s industrial and military forces were finally mobilized, the democracies were able to turn the tide and win decisively.
But you cannot lose a nuclear war for three years and then come back. You cannot even sustain the will to resist for three years when you are first broken down morally by threats and then devastated by nuclear bombs.
Our one window of opportunity to prevent this will occur within the term of whoever becomes President of the United States next January.
At a time like this, we do not have the luxury of waiting for our ideal candidate or of indulging our emotions by voting for some third party candidate to show our displeasure– at the cost of putting someone in the White House who is not up to the job.
Senator John McCain has been criticized in this column many times. But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America.
On the contrary, he has paid a huge price for resisting our enemies, even when they held him prisoner and tortured him. The choice between him and Barack Obama should be a no-brainer.
———————
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Second, Courtesy of Peter Anderson:
For the thinking person, uncertainty begets contingency planning.
Senator McCain met today with Canada’s money stating how he supports NAFA, SPP and to top that off hd a PRIVATE(secret) meeting with a large group of Hispanics in Chicago stating how he is for amnesty. Plus the idiot said the first languge spoken in his State of Arizona was Spanish. What a slam to the native americans that have lived there for centuries before.
Obama is a socialist, McCain is a socialist liar. (no source given)
9 Comments so far...
Matt Says:
23 June 2008 at 9:10 am.
I agree with Roy’s assessment. What the Establishment wants is what will happen with both NAFTA and Iraq. Both candidates sound differently but they would be kept in line as president. Not about every little thing but about the major things.
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 June 2008 at 10:31 am.
If it was between Hillary and McCAin, I would vote for Hillary, since they are much the same in policy, and I want to preserve the Republican party as a bastion of true conservatism.
But between McCain and Barack, I have to support McCain. I agree with what Mr. Sowell says here for the most part.
But I want to add one thing. People have said that isolationism has proven a failed doctrine in WWII. But that was a different world. Terrorists with nukes, and chemical weapons is a new type of threat. Suit case bombs are unprecedented. Most importantly, open boarders amid this threat is just stupid. So it is still hard to support McCain.
Benjamin Says:
23 June 2008 at 11:44 am.
Cave, I like what you said about isolationism. Good point. I do tend to think Obama would be kept in line however. He is a very scary guy though and the bad part is being kept in line means some bad things for average Americans.
Mac Says:
23 June 2008 at 1:41 pm.
They can still have a lot of influence as president even if there are others trying to pull strings. There is a big difference between these two guys.
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 June 2008 at 5:19 pm.
Remember what Rush said. He said it is better for the Dems to take blame the inevitable fall of the economy in the next years.
They said they were going to do something about the price of oil and gasoline. They have had the majority in Congress for 2 years and oversaw the skyrocketing oil and gasoline prices. Weather it was their fault or not, the right can pin blame on them. (and it is the fault of liberals -long term) So maybe in the long term conservatives gain political momentum if Obama takes the white house. But can we survive Obama?
Bryon Says:
23 June 2008 at 5:24 pm.
Why is it that the politicians can only ever see two options? Isolationism or sticking our nose into every thing that happens is one example. There are many other examples.
Today Isolationism would not work. however we neither have the right nor ability (and in my opinion desire) to police the entire world. Every good culture believes family first. A couple of people on the news saying this or that injustice happening in the other country has to be put above every thing going on at home is all it takes to start a riot of movie stars and wealthy people saying we need to support this cause. We need more people looking at America and saying, “Hey! People are using slaves under our noses!” or, “Wow, we are barely making a token effort to stop drug use!”
We need AMERICANS to look into the problems in AMERICA. The politicians say we’ve got to do every thing we can for everybody. They try to ignore the “pick your battles” philosophy but thats not possible. Instead they get us involved in foreign affairs and forget the domestic parts so they don’t look selfish to other countries. Who said they get a vote? The politicians did because they are much smarter and wiser which is why we picked them to make these decisions. (extreme sarcasm)
This brings me to my final note. Why do we, (the people of this nation) no longer have the say in what goes on? We have given the say to the politicians. They can not take that away. We have to give it. Which is why we have elections but the only two choices I’m given suck. How did we stick our selves with a two party system? It sucks! We need twenty more major parties at least in my opinion. Lets change that.
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 June 2008 at 5:53 pm.
I agree that the two party system is broken.
So many people who couldn’t vote for a Mormon voted for Huckabee, or someone else and McCain got the majority, even though he was so many conservatives’ last choice. We should always get it down to two people, and then have a run off between those. We might have had Thompson or Romney. - but for sure not McCain. But now, it comes down to strategy, in stead of the peoples’ choice. So just like in business, the most willing to cheat and lie wins.
Ghost Says:
23 June 2008 at 11:01 pm.
Cave, I wish I didn’t agree with you, especially your last sentence.
Bryon, I can’t believe you are still a teenager. You have a lot of wisdom and fire for one so young. Keep it up.
Nalvy Says:
26 June 2008 at 9:38 pm.
Has anyone ever seen the movie V for Vendetta? Phenominal movie with an even greater message and purpose. The whole movie speaks the truth of People should not fear their Governments, Governments should fear their people. The main character of the movie “V” dresses up as Guy Fawkes the member of the Roman Catholic revolutionaries who conspired to overthrow the regime of King James l by blowing up th Parliament building when any toleration of the Catholics in the country was thrown out at Hampton Court in 1604 when King James l attacked the religious zeal of extreme Protestants and Catholics.
I am not saying anyone should go to the extreme level of protest they attempted, but something MUST be done to save what rights and freedoms we have left. It is no longer a country of freedom of choice and this article pushing for one candidate over another is completely proof of that. The media is being used for both sides to try and herd this country like sheep to slaughter.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.