the campaign's ugly turn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:John Sidney McCain. Isn't Sydney in Australia? And he was born in Panama. So what kind of American is John McCain?

Excellent! LOL!

[Anonymous]

He's an Aussie-liberal-illegal-Panamanian alien supporting Nazis of Bethlehem, PA.

[Anonymous]

Of course Obama shouldn't oppose his party merely to show his independence. However, I think it is pretty impressive when politicians take unpopular stances that may jeopardize their own political futures, such as when McCain supported the surge. I'm just looking for a similar action on Obama's part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course Obama shouldn't oppose his party merely to show his independence. However, I think it is pretty impressive when politicians take unpopular stances that may jeopardize their own political futures, such as when McCain supported the surge. I'm just looking for a similar action on Obama's part.

Okay, put that way it makes sense.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Of course Obama shouldn't oppose his party merely to show his independence. However, I think it is pretty impressive when politicians take unpopular stances that may jeopardize their own political futures, such as when McCain supported the surge. I'm just looking for a similar action on Obama's part.

The perfect example of Obama doing this was his speech opposing the war in 2002. At that time, war opponents were being cast as anti-American and considered not to be serious. Any Democrat who was concerned about his political future supported the war. That's why Hillary, Biden, Edwards, etc. all had their war votes hanging over their necks when they ran for president. They had gone along with the political calculus at the time, expecting a short war ending in victory.

Also, I don't agree that McCain's support for the surge was a brave move. Rather, as he prepared to run for president, his support for the war was a problem just as it was for Hillary and the others. He couldn't very well oppose the war, but standing with Bush was also untenable. The only choice left was to support the war, but oppose how it was being conducted. I don't think he ever thought there would be a surge. He figured he could just campaign on the position that if Bush had listened to him, the war would have gone better. McCain was not the main driver of the surge, that was Kagan and Keane. They coined the term "surge" and McCain only picked it up later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course Obama shouldn't oppose his party merely to show his independence. However, I think it is pretty impressive when politicians take unpopular stances that may jeopardize their own political futures, such as when McCain supported the surge. I'm just looking for a similar action on Obama's part.

Actually I thought his speech on Reverend Wright and race took a lot of guts. This isn't what you're looking for, I know, but many politicians in that situation would have immediately dumped Reverend Wright. I thought Obama tried to honor his relationship with Wright, a former mentor, but also show how he didn't share Wright's views. It seemed like a risky approach but he seemed determined to give a thoughtful, nuanced speech about a complex situation.

Unfortunately, later Wright decided that the whole hoopla was all about him and behaved outrageously at the National Press Club. Then Obama decided to end the relationship. Most politicians would have opted for caution and done it sooner but I think Obama took that path because he thought it was the right thing to do in regard to an old friendship. You don't just turn on people like that -- you try to find a middle way. I found his choice to be very brave and I don't think most politicians would have done it.