McCain Is The Clear Choice For Change

By Benjamin Davol Published on 6/29/2008

http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=0db...0-68ce3976deac

Barack Obama is the liberal Democratic nominee for president. He is not change. There is nothing un-American or disloyal about being a liberal or a conservative. They are two sides of the same coin.

But Sen. Obama is not about change in our politics. Webster's dictionary defines change as, “to make radically different; transform.” The senator's record on change is not radically different, it is bereft of actions and long on talk.

Sen. Obama's campaign has introduced a vitality and interest in the political process unlike any campaign in recent history. The fact that millions of people have donated and become involved in the public debate is a great advancement for our democracy. And, yes, I take great pride that our democracy has matured to the point that in a nation with an African American population of less than 15 percent we may elect an African American to the presidency.

Is this excitement and new involvement by so many citizens enough to give Sen. Obama the codes to our nuclear arsenal? No.

Sen. Obama's candidacy is; “all hat, no cattle,” “all sizzle, no steak,” “all hammer, no nail.” Get the drift? A review of his brief record of public service shows clearly that Sen. Obama is a pragmatic politician with great ambition. He is not change.

In 1999 in the Illinois legislature Mr. Obama voted “present” 130 times. He did so out of political calculation and to build his bona fides within the Democratic leadership. Again, nothing wrong with that, but it is not change.

It can be said that Sen. Obama's public opposition to the war in Iraq is the foundation from which his campaign grew. Many in the Obama camp have declared Obama's stance opposing the war as “courageous.” Not really. At the time, Obama was running for the U.S. Senate and looking to solidify his Democratic base. To agree with President Bush and the war would, shall we say, not be politically astute.

Since his grand declaration of opposition to the war Sen. Obama has voted to support every war funding bill. A man of true liberal convictions, Sen. Paul Wellstone, a Democrat from Minnesota, who in one of his last votes before he died voted against the Iraq war, would have never voted to fund the war. But Sen. Wellstone wasn't running for president.

Now, after the banners, rallies and high-minded speeches and Sen. Obama's written signature agreeing to public financing of his presidential campaign, he has changed his mind and opted out of public financing. That's not change. It's being a politician. It's what Karl Rove would do.

If change is your thing, then John McCain is your man. Time magazine's James Carney summed up McCain's change record in this way, “He's (McCain) right that he has a far longer, far more substantive record of forging bipartisan consensus - and of resisting the demands of party loyalty - than does Obama. On the environment, energy policy, campaign finance, tobacco, torture, pork-barrel spending, immigration and more, McCain has repeatedly worked against his party or his president, or both.”

There is no example of similar actions by Sen. Obama. In fact, just recently, in an effort to inject some change into the election process, Sen. McCain offered Sen. Obama an opportunity to travel across the nation, together, and conduct joint town hall meetings. The response has been calculating and political. Obama's advisers came back and agreed to one town hall format on July 4th and another four in the traditional format.

Look, I love politics but I like my slow-cooked ribs and cold beer more. The idea of leaving the ribs and suds for a political debate, of any kind, ain't gonna happen. (Particularly on the only birthday I really care about.) The Obama folks know this and know I'm not alone. Bottom line, no one would watch.

Let's be honest with ourselves. If you believe that electing Sen. Obama is change because he is African American I have no quarrel with that. But, it will not be the change so ballyhooed by a media drunk with Obama rhetoric or the liberal elites in the salons of Georgetown and San Francisco. What you will get is a liberal Obama administration replacing a conservative administration. It will be the same teams just different uniforms.

I am selecting my candidate for president based on the criteria put forth by the Rev. Martin Luther King who said he hoped that one day men will “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

When it comes to character, proven leadership and a record of “change” John McCain is the clear choice.

which is why he has no chance. he plays both sides too much and it has made alot of republicans mad. everyone i know that is a republican said they will vote for barr or not vote. alot of people are seeing through it, as recent polls have indicated a growing obama lead.

So you are admitting he is a moderate choice for change, and Obama is the same old tired socialism... Thank you.

Keep the change.

None of the candidates for President (McCain, Obama or Barr) are viable options for change that America needs.

Staying at home, then?

our movement is starting to spread. people are starting to convert over to mccain, not because they like him but because they see the dangers in obama. conservatives are joining together and unifying. the republicans will have a unified party come november, thanks to obama.

__________________

Join Bush Country - PoliticalForum.com's Largest Member Community

"Because he's the hero America deserves,
but not the one it needs right now...
and so we'll hunt him, because he can take it.
Because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian,
a watchful protector...A DARK KNIGHT."

Probably.

I'd prefer to not be held responsible for putting any of those morons into the oval office.

By not voting, you are helping Obama get elected.

‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’

Unfortunately, McCain is the lesser of two democrats. I'd rather not have some rockstar-wannabe in the White House, making socialistic changes to our government.

If I want to live in a socialist nation, I'll move north.

__________________
"It's the rich people's fault they earn more." - Makedde

Both are equally morons IMO.

So voting for either of them wouldn't be very "good" of me. I did my part by voting for Ron Paul in the primary and trying to get his message out and still am doing so (though not necessarily Ron Paul's message now). All I can do for now.