For the past few weeks I have been brooding over my firm belief that a McCain presidency is inevitable and that a war with Iran is inevitable. But I honestly don't follow politics closely enough to make a reasoned argument. So today I decided to see what the pundits have to say. So I googled McCain-presidency-inevitable. Lo and behold as of 5/20 at 11:28 am the first entry that came up was on the inevitability of a war with Iran:
John McCain: Maverick Man who thinks war with Iran is inevitable
The very next article is about the inevitability of a McCain victory in November:
Is the McCain presidency inevitable?
I am not joking or just trying to be an alarmist (or maybe I just am an alarmist). But I don't think this benighted country is ready for anyone but a conservative male heterosexual WASP as president (yes, I know, Kennedy was Catholic - but look what happened to him). And I think the powers that be have always wanted to fix Iran's wagon and it seems they will have to in order to stop Iranian support for the Shiite militias and to prevent them from developing their nuclear program the way North Korea did under the current regime's watch.
Perhaps I should pay more attention to politics. I guess the next time I have some time to read a couple of articles I will see how the inevitable McCain presidency will impact other issues that are important to me - the environment by far topping the list, also some form of universal healthcare that won't bankrupt our economy or beauracratize medical treatment, immigration reform that will provide responsible routes to citizenship and will stop the breaking up of families due to deportations, and also equal rights for those with minority sexual orientations (excluding of course pedophiles and fundamentalist Mormon polygamists and suchlike whose activities harm others and/or are nonconsensual).
Oh, and just to be clear: I am not looking forward to a McCain presidency. I am simply resigned to it - though I'll cast my vote in November to at least do my civic duty and to make sure that it is registered that not all of us are in favor of it. Likewise, whether or not Iran has it coming to them (and to see how thoroughly sick and depraved their society under the Mullahs is read Persepolis or go see the movie) I am convinced that a war against them would not meet the criteria for a just war anymore than the Iraq invasion did, though of course any form of modern warfare violates the tenets of the Western definition of a "just war" so it is virtually impossible for there to ever be a just war in this day and age.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Nothing is inevitable. McCain is a liar, a demagogue, and has flip-flopped on every issue people give him credit for being a 'maverick' about.
If Obama goes down in flames it will be because we have to make a distinction between our leaders and ourselves. We don't want "fearless leaders" riding on white horses, in a democracy we want people who will represent our needs and aspirations. The corporate media is trying to elect McCain because their corporate interests are threatened by genuine reform, are linked to the War, and are linked to the security complex being developed to enforce corporate control over the Government.
However, since we have a lot of corporations, not everyone is backing McCain. And since McBush is a national disaster, and the Democrats are able and willing to compromise with our Corporatist Government, some corporations are backing McCain's opponents and many are hedging their bets. So his election is not assured.
What is needed is better education, more transparency, and some way to break up the elites.
Posted by: Chris at May 20, 2008 12:59 PMWhat Chris said.
And I read daily some progressive sites that keep me sane.
Maybe I'm too idealistic, but I've actually contributed to Obama's campaign and will be registering voters this summer and doing GOTV activities in the fall.
Posted by: Michele at May 20, 2008 01:05 PMLike Reverend Ryuei, I do not pay much
attention these days. For me, there is too much hate speech going on. The idea seems to be to dig up dirt and demonize the opponent.
"a liar, a demagogue, and has flip-flopped on every issue"
demagogue Look up demagogue at Dictionary.com
1648, from Gk. demagogos "leader of the people," from demos "people" (see demotic) + agogos "leader," from agein "to lead" (see act). A term of disparagement ever since it was first used in Athens, 5c. B.C.E.
noun
1. a person, esp. an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people.
Definition of a politician? McCain seems like a pretty good guy to me. He does not arouse my emotions, passions, or prejudices. It amazes me the way people turn pols into heroes, then turn on them. I do not think anyone is qualified to meet the expectations of voters.
If Hillary steals the nomination from Barack, I might vote. She seems like the clearest example of a demagogue left in the race. What I mean is her style is to get people to hate her opponents.
Hatred or fear of the other side does mot strike me as a good reason to vote. McCain and Obama both seem capable of civil discourse. If we expect either of them to be 100% candid or consistent or never damagogue anything, I suspect we might be disappointed.
Posted by: robin at May 20, 2008 05:46 PMRobin, are you saying you won't vote at all? I don't see how conservatives, or anyone, can say they are patriotic, or deride others for being unpatriotic, if they don't vote.
I used to think McCain didn't have a chance because of his support for the war in Iraq. Now I'm not so sure. I hope his attitude toward Iran is just sabre-rattling to intimidate them. I voted for Clinton yesterday but I'm still undecided for the general. Unfortunately this campaign will be about race as much as anything else. But it seems to have gotten many people excited about the election. That's a good thing.
Posted by: Vanya at May 21, 2008 11:01 AMI hadn't see the firedoglake site before, thanks Michelle!
Posted by: J.Stadler at May 21, 2008 02:28 PMThere is no fundemental difference between the two and neither has the wisdom nor power to effect fundemental change. Oil is vanishing and so will the civilization we are accustomed to. Oil hit $134.00 dollars a barrel today. The rain forests are being turned into farms and the soil will be tilled until it becomes useless. The islamic fundementalists through their rabid hatred and indominatable determination will foment a major incident that will hasten a change in civilization as we know it. The causes made for the last 100 years are having their effects and the causes we are making now will have future adverse effects. Those who are strong may survive and those who are weak will perish. Buddhism will spread as it becomes apparent that other solutions are impotent or worse.
Mark
Posted by: Mark Rogow at May 21, 2008 06:38 PMI beg to differ on there being a difference between Obama and McCain. McCain will appoint judges to the Supreme Court similar to Roberts and Alito, who will overturn Roe v. Wade, and make poor decisions, as was made in the Ledbetter case.
Michele
Posted by: Michele at May 22, 2008 07:48 PMThanks, J.
I also watch or podcast an Internet TV show, The Young Turks.
Michele
Posted by: Michele at May 22, 2008 07:49 PMThe type of rhetoric employed by Holte is am example of why I try to stay out of political discussions. I am trying to lat Buddhism effect my intentions. speech, and actions. Buddhism teaches that motives rooted in negative emotions create unwholesome karma.
McCain strikes me as straight of a shooter as we will get in this climate. I think Roe V Wade is bad law, so that counts in his favor. I certainly do not think he is a liar or a demagogue, any more so than Hillary or Barack; possibly less so.
The big issue to me is that we must develop our own energy resources. We need an alternative to gasoline for transportation, to create real price competition. Flex Fuel engines look good to me right now. I think I like the biparttisan Alternative Fuels Act.
We also need to expand the use of coal and nuclear for generating electricity. We also meed bio-degradable alternatives to petro-chemicals, petro fibers, and plastics. I still like Industrial Hemp.
I want the war on drugs ended yesterday.
I think marriage, education, and gun control are state issues.
I oppose tax increases on the wealthy or anyone else.
I like privatized SS accounts, Title I vouchers, and Medical Savings Accounts.
I like Revenue Sharing and Block Grants better than Federal Programs mandates.
I think captured terrorists should be taught vipassana instead of being tortured.
I see Islamic Fundamentalists as a bigger threat than Southern Baptists.
Who should I support?
Posted by: robin at May 23, 2008 06:04 PMOh, I also think Global Warming is fraud; and I oppose the Kyoto Protocols on multiple levels.
I think Clinton and Bush both honestly thought Iraq
had stockpiles of usable YMD; they were simply wrong. Bush did not lie to start a war. He ample reasons w/o the YMD angle.
Hi, Robin - did you mean WMD?
YMD are SGI youth division. Maybe Iraq does have a usable stockpile of them and it just hasn't been covered in the World Tribune. Something for you to ask President Ikeda in a letter, perhaps.
As for the politics, I try not to watch, as it raises my blood pressure.
I wonder if there will be a draft if there is a new front to the war? Seems like those sorts of things skip a generation.
Bye for now. Wahzoh
Posted by: Byrd in LA at May 24, 2008 11:34 AMThe election of an American President in 2008 will have more to do with the perpetuating the military industial complex and capitalism than the "real" winner of the popular vote. Powerful, greed infected interests will pull out all the stops to get their person in office.
If our democratic process is fair, Obama will be the next U.S. president. If the fix is in, the warmonger wins. Granted, there's only so much a president can do to make things right. The legislative branch is the body of self-serving decision makers who have gutted America.
I thoroughly disagree with Robin's conservative politics - always have. He makes it no secret that he's alligned and influenced with Rush Limbaugh. I frequently listen to maha-Rushie and, although I find his humor top notch, from a poltical standpoint, he turns my stomach.
It's time to get the republican's, especially the conservatives, out of office. But if Obama wins the presidency, we may discover that the rising tide of world events is too complex for any one person to navigate.
And, as a side note, to deny the quickening onslaught of climate change is typical. My wife doesn't believe it either. When we start getting our oranges from the Yukon Territory, maybe the ditto-heads and my wife will change their tune.
Charles
Posted by: Charles at May 25, 2008 08:16 AMCharles,
Come to Nome, and then we'll talk oranges.
Actually, in Alaska, overall the climate is changing (the ice pack is declining, and glaciers receding), but it is debatable whether it is "natural" climate change (which is part and parcel of nature, and preserved not only in geological evidence, but historically, too).
Posted by: Kris at May 26, 2008 11:13 AMhttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/demagogue
Main Entry:
1 dem·a·gogue Listen to the pronunciation of 1demagogue
Variant(s): also dem·a·gog Listen to the pronunciation of demagog
\ˈde-mə-ˌgäg\
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek dēmagōgos, from dēmos people (perhaps akin to Greek daiesthai to divide) + agōgos leading, from age in to lead — more at tide, agent
1 : a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power
2 : a leader championing the cause of the common people in ancient times
— dem·a·gogu·ery Listen to the pronunciation of demagoguery
\-ˌgä-g(ə-)rē\ noun
— dem·a·gogy Listen to the pronunciation of demagogy \-ˌgä-gē,
-ˌgä-jē, -ˌgō-jē\ noun
McCain meets definition one, though not the archaic definition #2 though he pretends well.
I'd still admire the man myself if he'd stuck to his guns on his "torture amendment" or joined with Democrats to impeach Yoo, Addington, VP Cheney and others over the Plame Leaks or the administration ordered violation of half a dozen US and international laws about torture; much less other allegations that have surfaced in lawsuits or admission over the past 6 years and recently become public knowledge. But he is deceptive, he decided to accept that the President can redefine torture however he wants to and legalize it. He also has gone back to his Keating 5 roots and decided that party loyalty and money matter more than doing the right thing; breaking his own McCain / Feingold rules, and championing the worst in pro-occupation, pro-violence, and fear-mongering.
Sorry for the rant.
Posted by: chris at May 26, 2008 07:42 PMI beg to differ on the demagogue thing; McCain is very unappealing emotionally. I have never been too high on him, even when he was the hero of the fickle swing voters. I think if the fix is in, Hillary will be the President.
I am not too big on El Rushbo these days, have not been for quite a few years. He lost his edge and freshness a decade ago, and is now too much an apologist for W. His "Operation Chaos" was a hoot though, a parody of the pro-McCain crossover vote that was coordinated by the DNC. This whole campaign is like a real life spoof; tinged with irony.
The really big issue as far as I am concerned, is only being addressed by Ron Paul. The most important matter is enacting the "Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007." Next comes a flex fuels bill. Third, is to end the war on drugs; which only serves the interests of drug lords.
As for Iraq & Iran, I think reality, not dreamy idealism, will determine what happens. Both of the Democrats are being demagogues on that. McCain is actually shooting straight.
Bottom line is that oil finances terror. We need to reduce our consumption drastically. Developing hemp {to replace petroleum based rubber, plastics, textiles, cosmetics, ...} and flex fuel engines are two big ways. Also, nuclear & coal for generating electricity. Forget about windmills and solar.
http://www.ethanolrfa.org/resource/facts/engine/
Producing a gallon of ethanol gas from corn requires 95 percent less
petroleum than producing a gallon from fossil fuels, a new study finds.
In the United States, some 5 million of the cars and trucks on the
road are "flex-fuel," meaning that they can run either on traditional
gasoline or E85, a mix of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.
Converting an automobile to run on flex-fuel costs about $100.
"This is actually one of the cheapest possible transitions you can
make," Kammen said. "It cuts the cost of fuel by half at the pump.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/060126_ethanol_better.html
Texas A&M report clears corn from food price inflation
http://www.foodandfuelamerica.com/2008/04/news-round-up.html
btw:
it takes:
2- 3 Gallons of Water to produce 1 Gallon of Ethanol Versus ...
9.3 gallons of water - one can of vegetables
16.6 gallons of water - one pound of beet sugar
24 gallons of water - one pound of plastic
44 gallons of water - one gallon of refined crude oil
1,500 gallons of water - one barrel of beer
2,075 gallons of water - 4 tires
107,000 gallons of water - average home use in one year
Windmills use way too much space to produce way too little. They are also noisy and dreadfully expensive to maintain, besides the unpredictable out put.
You attack me by name Robin in a rant that;
a; attacked me personally
b; misrepresented the meaning of demagogue to make a point attacking my veracity.
c; misrepresented what I said.
d; Failed to either defend McCain's behavior, refute my statements, or to show why he isn't a demagogue.
What else is new?
Windmills belong in the mix, as does solar, and any other "green" source that works. Noisy? Can anything be more noisy than an oil fired turbine? They put boxes around it so you can't hear it. That's all.
Posted by: Chris at May 29, 2008 01:57 PM