July 3, 2008
Another McCain Shake-Up (Peter Fenn)
As they used to say in the Peanuts comic strip, “Good grief, Charlie Brown!”
Here we go again, more shifting of the deck chairs on the Titanic-McCain.
The problem, folks, is not the legion of lobbyist-advisers, the loads of Bush-Cheney-Rove hangers-on who are coming back, the constant “re-tooling” … the problem is John McCain.
He is failing. He is calling the shots on his campaign and on his locked-at-the-hip-with-George Bush policy positions. This one starts at the top, people.
McCain says we are going to Canada and Colombia and Mexico to talk about free trade agreements, when our economy is tanking here at home. He brings his lobbyist aide-de-camp Charlie Black on these trips — since he has lobbied for those foreign interests and knows them so well. Even Charlie is a little dumbfounded by all of this: “John McCain says he wants to go to these places, and we say, of course” (today’s New York Times).
While Obama is in Michigan and Missouri and Ohio, McCain is in Toronto and Cartagena and Mexico City. Gee, that is good strategy.
But, remember, this is the candidate who told the autoworkers of Detroit and those who lost their jobs in Michigan that “these jobs aren’t coming back” and lost to Mitt Romney because of that attitude. Oops, the jobs have gone to Mexico and Colombia. Might as well go and visit them there then!
And this is the candidate who now, you watch, will try to tell us he is an “independent” Republican. Right. With all of Bush and Cheney’s folks taking over, with his economic policies not one iota different from Bushes’ disaster, with his foreign policy, if anything, more Iraq-Iran focused than Afghanistan-Pakistan-al Qaeda-focused than Bush’s. He is the candidate of “change” — no, not even close. And he is still trying to suck up to evangelicals after calling them “agents of intolerance” and telling Republicans what a disaster it was to “pander” to these interests in 2000. Make no mistake, John McCain may try to distance himself from Bush in the next four months, but his policies, his people, and his persona are not really any different.
Bottom line: shake-up or no shake-up, if you liked George Bush, you’ll love John McCain.
Permalink TrackBack
Email This Post
Share this post
What's This 8 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Peter;
Truer words were never spoken. Good post and spot on!
Comment by Mike Coleman — July 3, 2008 @ 11:04 am
Thanks for defining the essence of liberalism. Liberals hang onto notions that are outdated, amongst them that free trade takes jobs. It's just the opposite and precisely why these losers should not be allowed to hang onto power.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — July 3, 2008 @ 11:29 am
Of course, the change we really need is more government spending. Isn't that the change any liberal advocates 24/7? And if we want that change, for sure Barack Hussein Obama with his ACORN community organizing background, pro-reparation friends, legislation to transfer a trillion dollars to UN, and a tax-raising plan he can't keep straight (always a symptom of a careless spender) is the answer. Government knows best, and Barry here who had never held a real job is the man to decide what the government knows. How can one stand this state of affairs?
Comment by Igor R. — July 3, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
Mr Fenn:
The Charlie Black quote is in the context of the change in the campaign where seemingly random trips desired by McCain are about to come to an end under the guidance of Mr. Schmidt. You are being clever.
In addition, for you to state that if one likes Bush one will love McCain shows how little you understand about conservatism and McCain's standing in that community. Have a great 4th.
Comment by JOElias — July 3, 2008 @ 2:01 pm
JOElias, there is no better example to point out the level of confusion that liberals have about conservatism that the following example: last week I heard a liberal caller to a conservative station state that conservatism is discredited because of Bush's spending habits.
Comment by Igor R. — July 3, 2008 @ 3:53 pm
What is really scary is really imagining these guys running the show at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!
The McCain strategy is to throw a bunch of crap at the wall and hope some of it sticks. Even if it does, its still crap!
Rosencrans and Igor with the usual authoritarian drivel.
Of course we're going to have more government spending, you idiots! It's just a question of whether you spend it at 10-12 billion a month on the occupation of Iraq and breaks for the oil barons and the richest among us. Typical Republican fare!
The great American philosophy of rational pragmatism calls for a Keynesian answer to our current economic crisis. I know I would rather have the guys on Obama's team deciding how to spend the dough. And I would have more trust in them working toward a responsible fiscal future as well.
Comment by smilinjack — July 3, 2008 @ 6:28 pm
smilinjack, I'm glad as a non-idiot (in your opinion of course) you're a believer in Keynesian solutions. Others (idiots, obviously) may consider them a Ponzi scheme. And you know what eventually happens to those schemes.
Comment by Igor R. — July 7, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Here is the thing, not everyone in the US agrees GW policies are failures. Being a middle class citizen I do not like the price of Gasoline but by the way it did not go to record heights until DEMS took over, stop blaming one person it is the easy thing to do not the right thing to do, what will you do when the same problems exsist 5 years from now, you will have to stop blaming him, exspecially if it is Obama, so step up and stop pointing and find solutions
Comment by curtis — July 10, 2008 @ 11:49 am