Multiple Enthusiasms

Infinite jest. Excellent fancy. Flashes of merriment.

Tag: president

A rather brilliant critique of John McCain in the most recent Rolling Stone. Money quote:

This is the story of the real John McCain, the one who has been hiding in plain sight. It is the story of a man who has consistently put his own advancement above all else, a man willing to say and do anything to achieve his ultimate ambition: to become commander in chief, ascending to the one position that would finally enable him to outrank his four-star father and grandfather.

In its broad strokes, McCain’s life story is oddly similar to that of the current occupant of the White House. John Sidney McCain III and George Walker Bush both represent the third generation of American dynasties. Both were born into positions of privilege against which they rebelled into mediocrity. Both developed an uncanny social intelligence that allowed them to skate by with a minimum of mental exertion. Both struggled with booze and loutish behavior. At each step, with the aid of their fathers’ powerful friends, both failed upward. And both shed their skins as Episcopalian members of the Washington elite to build political careers as self-styled, ranch-inhabiting Westerners who pray to Jesus in their wives’ evangelical churches.

In one vital respect, however, the comparison is deeply unfair to the current president: George W. Bush was a much better pilot.

I’ve discussed this a few times in the past few days (elsewhere, obviously). I’ve found myself living in what is, by most accounts, a battleground state, even though no less a Republican spin-meister than Karl Rove predicts all of Colorado’s 9 electoral votes, as well as 264 others, will go to Barack Obama as he swings a full-on awesome 273 electoral votes and wins the presidency. Yes, that Karl Rove. The same one who said that McCain’s lies have gone too far.

When Karl Rove calls you a liar, you’re way deep in it.

Continue reading

The most amusing search WordPress has recorded in a while:

I wouldn’t say I have political aspirations, mind you, but neither would I say I’d turn the job down.

It’s worth remembering I’m only thirty, of course. So I’m not eligible for another five years at least.

And hopefully, by then, we’ll be smack in the middle of an Obama administration by then.

That’s my hope, anyway.

Because, seriously, I’m not sure I would have been able to hold back from striding onto that stage and, after McCain’s first response, looking the camera dead in its little electronic eye and saying:

“You’re serious? You’re really not sure whether to vote for this guy or for me? You’ve noticed he’s got a notebook full of letters three feet high because otherwise he can’t remember what he wants to say and they’re not big enough for him to see? You don’t see right through his pathetic ploys to dead soldiers, which he trots out during every media interview he engages in?

Look: I want to help you. I want to cut your taxes and get us through these difficult times. I’m a better candidate because I care about you.

But if you don’t realize that, I can’t help you.

I want to help you, but I can’t if you won’t let me.”

Because seriously, tonight’s debate confirmed all my suspicions. If McCain isn’t completely senile he’s simply incompetent.

Simply substitute “McCain” for “Rumson,” I think.

It’s also why I’m voting for Obama. Not just that I think he could deliver a speech like that one, but because he just seems that honest. He seems like the kind of guy who would man up when required, the sort who would say, “You know, I thought this was a good idea, but I’ve reconsidered because it’s just politics as usual and it ain’t gonna work. I pledged to you that I would serve you well, and act in your best interest, and I think rejecting this bill is in your best interest.”

I can’t imagine McCain saying anything remotely similar. All I can imagine McCain saying is, “You know, the situation is complicated, and I have a lot of great advisors I lend credence to–”

(and as a sidenote: since when does ‘advisor’ contain an ‘e’? Is that a British thing, like ‘grey’ versus ‘gray’? Because spellcheck keeps underlining advisor and I keep thinking, ‘No, it’s not, in fact, adviser,’ and I don’t really listen because, come on, spellcheck underlines ‘spellcheck,’ which just seems silly)

Point is, this is the wire, and we’re down to it. You can either vote for an old man who thinks that things are fine and he can make them finer and his Caribou Barbie sidekick who’s a joke of a woman, much less political candidate, or you can vote for someone who’s going to bring the change we want to see in the world.

Gandhi said we must be the change we want to see in the world, and now I say we must vote for it.

Lots of major political happenings the past few days. Obama accepted the nomination on Thursday, right down the street from me, but I deliberately avoided any and all proceedings related to the DNC (I have issues with crowds. And crowd control, which seems an oxymoron).

I watched his speech on Thursday. I wasn’t nearly as moved by his as by Hillary’s, but then again, I think that might be for the better. I’ve heard some people complain that it lacked his usual passion and rhetorical flair, but I have to wonder if that would have been the right place for either. I thought it was a basically nuts-and-bolts speech in which he accepted the nomination and then indicated what he planned to do. One of the biggest complaints against him (besides “arrogance,” but don’t even get me started on that) is that many people felt they didn’t know what he was running for or promising. They didn’t know what his policies were going to be.

I think we have a better idea now. We might not yet know how he plans to accomplish his plans, but at least we know he’s got them, and I think that’s the important part for anyone who was undecided, which is really who that speech was addressed to. I was going to be voting for him anyway, regardless of what he said, because really the other choice is a senile old man, and I think that his speech was for everyone who hadn’t already been swayed by his brilliant rhetoric and bombastic charisma.

And how about that senile old man? McCain’s the other big news with his choice of Sarah Palin, the Tina Fey-lookalike Alaskan governor nobody besides Alaskans had ever heard of before yesterday, to be his vice-presidential candidate.

So, basically, I think McCain believes that all the disenfranchised Hillaristas who are so upset Obama beat their candidate, hands down, are voting based on gender and not ideas or politics, so anyone in a skirt will appease most of them. I can’t think of any other reason. His most oft-repeated criticism of Obama is that Obama lacks experience; meanwhile, Palin’s been governor for less than two years, and of a state whose total population is less than that of Brooklyn. One could argue that she, as a governor, has more executive experience, but if one really wants to make that argument, she technically has more experience than any other candidate, none of whom have political experience outside of the Senate.

I wouldn’t make that argument. I think she’s totally crazy and completely scary. She’s anti-abortion rights. She believes Creationism should be taught alongside evolution in school.

And most of all: do you know that average life expectancy for an American man is 75.6 years? McCain turned 72 yesterday. Which means that, if he’s elected, and if he actually manages to live through his first term, it will actually be unexpected. And this is a man who’s battled malignant melanoma four times between 1993 and 2002.

So on one ticket we have a senile old man who wants to bomb Iran and his conservative, Evangelical Christian running mate who’s been a governor for only slightly less time than McCain is yet expected to live.

On the other, we have a man with solid integrity who seems utterly committed to uniting America in the change he sees as a vision for the future, and his senior Senator running mate.

It really should be no contest, and it’s a damned shame it’s not.

I just watched the nation’s first female presidential candidate endorse the nation’s first black presidential candidate.

And yes, I cried as I did so.

I’m an Eagle Scout. On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country.

And man, at this moment, am I ever proud of my country.

Rock on, Hillary Rodham Clinton. What a brilliantly, beautifully dignified legacy you have. What a brilliant, beautiful speech you made on this, the anniversary of our country’s finally recognizing women’s right to vote.

You have not done your gender proud.

You have done our country proud. You have made me proud to be an American.

For that, I thank you. For that, I will be forever grateful.

CNN projects that, for the first time in American history, we have a black candidate for president, as Barack Obama surpasses the 2,118 delegates needed to secure the Democratic nomination.

This is, of course, not really news to anyone who’s been paying attention; Hillary became an also-ran as many as weeks ago. If I say that she desperately clung to mathematically impossible odds, though, instead of saying that she fought the good fight, I’ll probably be accused of misogynism, so I won’t.

Instead I’ll just say I’m both relieved and excited.

Lots of talk, now, about VPs. CNN notes that “the pressure is on” Obama, now, which I find rather odd, especially considering that, so far as I know (and I’d hope I would), McCain still hasn’t chosen a veep, though he secured the nom months ago.

I’ve heard several potential candidates mentioned. Three interested me. Edwards was the first.

Today, I read someone mention Gore. I’m not sure Gore would accept, though; he already was VP for eight years, and then had a failed presidential bid. He does bring both added cache (now that he’s got both an Oscar and a Nobel Peace prize) and experience, but… yeah, just not sure.

And then, of course, there’s Hillary.

Obama has said he admired Lincoln’s cabinet because Lincoln filled it with people he didn’t necessarily agree with; given that, maybe he would ask Clinton to run with him.

But then again, given Hillary’s performance in this primary, I’m not sure I’d want to run with her, were I Obama. She made it nasty. She made it personal. She attacked and went negative, and I’m just not sure that’s the sort of politician Obama would want to associate himself with.