Skip to main content.

Back to: >> Editorial

Editorial

On The Issues has informed information on the presidential candidates. It is a great place to start, especially for individual histories. What follows are some issues of importance to peace. Either of these candidates towers above the current incumbent on some or most issues. One towers much higher than the other.

John Mc Cain | Barack Obama

Lord Acton:
A wise person does at once, what a fool does at last.
Both do the same thing; only at different times.

ASSESSING CANDIDATES ON PEACE ISSUES

ISSUE MC CAIN OBAMA
Imperial/Unitary Presidency
Close to Bush Distant from Bush
Faith-Based Initiatives
Fewer Than Bush Era Fewer Than Bush Era
Special Interests
Relies On Introduced Bill to Limit
Immigration
Certify Border is Secure
Then Allow Guest Workers
Have Border Patrolled, Surveillance,
Deploy Technology
Social Insight
Superficial Deep
Stem-cell Rsearch
Favors-Palin does Not! Favors
Leadership Style
Moderately Divisive Inclusionary
Outreach
None to Adversaries Will Practice Dialogue
Environment
Less Radical than Bush Responsible to Humanity
Economy
Reduce Government Spending
Low Taxes, Low Interest Rates
Tax Relief; Technology Development
Balance Budget
Equal Pay For Women
Opposes
Favors
Exiting Iraq
50-100 Years Soon But Responsibly
Flip Flops
Pragmatic Pragmatic

Neither candidate has his feet cast in concrete; each adjusts easily to changes in the wind; we are blessed on the flip-flop point. There are a number of issues beyond these to be considered. See Browser's Hub for several more.

As for age, it may be unfair to raise it, but one fact of life is somewhere along about age 50-60 most people slow down a bit, both physically and mentally. These features show in sharp relief in competitive sports and board games. Obama is coming up on the period as McCain has already passed it. In counter point, aging usually imparts wisdom. On one hand we are left with evaluating whether the wisdom McCain has gained offsets the youthfulness and creativity of the younger Obama. That we see as possibly a tilt one way or the other. As for the physical strength and stamina the job requires, Obama wins handily. We hate taking this position as much as the next person does. It just happens to be the way of nature; we can only face up to it.

As for the future, only Obama offers potential for significant change in the long view. Expedient solutions have worked poorly if at all in all of human history, and they are not his style.

Moreover, Obama has risen above the racism and sexism spewed by others. When he stood up to the Minister who married him and Michelle, he proved he is his own man in matters that matter if peace is ever to come. Sexism and racism are just two of the many rocks in the road to peace. They are now an overt part of the 2008 presidential race. Obama didn't make them an issue. He rose above such pettiness.

Finally, only Obama offers any break-out potential to change the myopic outlook of the last Administration. Obama is a healer by nature and practice. His career, his campaign, both show that particular strength. Furthermore, being creative, he is willing to try new things, indeed he has just completed the most innovative primary campaign in American history. Some in the media claim his campaign will prove revolutionary, even reshape American politics. Ducking special interests, Obama appealed directly to Americans, and found grass-roots support way beyond all expectations. If he wins the presidency and ultimately fails to stir the citizens of the world, it will not be because he didn't try. But it is high time someone of world stature made the attempt. We vote for giving Obama that chance. Obama will restore the respect America once held throughout the world.


Lord Acton had it right!
Which camp are we in?

In large measure, if Obama wins the presidency, his subsequent success depends on us--and our fellow citizens everywhere.

If Mc Cain wins, we will have a problem of a different sort, essentially with the continuation of the status quo equivalent to another Bush term.

Each has credibility in Europe, so our foreign policy should be more effective than we have been used to.

Comments

Considering the record turnouts, any Democrat should win in Nov. But Obama made a special effort in reaching out to the next generation of voters, and was a strong factor in creating the record turn out.

You can go to a town meeting with either candidate, ask your question and hopefully get an answer.

Or failing that, one can look between the lines, at their styles, and at their more philosophical statements, to infer what they might do outside the fish-bowls of the elections campaigns. Looking between the lines is no better than our own projections unless we are aware of them and consciously compensate--no easy matter!

Soaring oratory may or may not mean much. In Obama's case, look at the moments when he gets an unexpected question and observe how he handles them; compare his open style with that of his competition. Does he try to give it an honest shot, or does he find platitudes, politically correct or dogmatic statements in reply. On this particular measure, McCain and Obama compare quite favorably with Bush. We will be on the lookout for this during the campaign.

Another key is to try to sense how comfortable the candidate is hearing and answering the question. Body language is often a dead give away. However it fails in the case where the candidate is a classical psychopath who has no conscience. Bush is in this class. A psychopath may be so glib and smooth s/he could take in the devil himself not to mention saints!!! In that case, see if what a candidate says resonates with what s/he does. The only place Bush resonates is on the subjects of war and torture. That is enough for too many people.

Posted by RoadToPeace on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 19:12:29

To be able to post comments, please register on the site.