Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Obama VS. McCain..Reduced To The Basics

I had originally planned a piece explaining why ( not without misgivings) I'm supporting John McCain for the presidency. Fortunately, Thomas Sowell did a fine job of articulating one of my two main reasons in superb form- Iran and what I think we're facing in the near future:

"Not since 1972 have we been presented with two such painfully inadequate candidates. When election day came that year, I could not bring myself to vote for either George McGovern or Richard Nixon. I stayed home.

This year, none of us has that luxury. While all sorts of gushing is going on in the media, and posturing is going on in politics, the biggest national sponsor of terrorism in the world-- Iran-- is moving step by step toward building a nuclear bomb.

The point when they get that bomb will be the point of no return. Iran's nuclear bomb will be the terrorists' nuclear bomb-- and they can make 9/11 look like child's play.

All the options that are on the table right now will be swept off the table forever. Our choices will be to give in to whatever the terrorists demand-- however outrageous those demands might be-- or to risk seeing American cities start disappearing in radioactive mushroom clouds.

All the things we are preoccupied with today, from the price of gasoline to health care to global warming, will suddenly no longer matter.{...}

The terrorists have given us as clear a picture of what they are all about as Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did during the 1930s-- and our "leaders" and intelligentsia have ignored the warning signs as resolutely as the "leaders" and intelligentsia of the 1930s downplayed the dangers of Hitler.

We are much like people drifting down the Niagara River, oblivious to the waterfalls up ahead. Once we go over those falls, we cannot come back up again.

What does this have to do with today's presidential candidates? It has everything to do with them.

One of these candidates will determine what we are going to do to stop Iran from going nuclear-- or whether we are going to do anything other than talk, as Western leaders talked in the 1930s.

There is one big difference between now and the 1930s. Although the West's lack of military preparedness and its political irresolution led to three solid years of devastating losses to Nazi Germany and imperial Japan, nevertheless when all the West's industrial and military forces were finally mobilized, the democracies were able to turn the tide and win decisively.

But you cannot lose a nuclear war for three years and then come back. You cannot even sustain the will to resist for three years when you are first broken down morally by threats and then devastated by nuclear bombs.

Our one window of opportunity to prevent this will occur within the term of whoever becomes President of the United States next January.

At a time like this, we do not have the luxury of waiting for our ideal candidate or of indulging our emotions by voting for some third party candidate to show our displeasure-- at the cost of putting someone in the White House who is not up to the job.

Senator John McCain has been criticized in this column many times. But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America.

On the contrary, he has paid a huge price for resisting our enemies, even when they held him prisoner and tortured him. The choice between him and Barack Obama should be a no-brainer."

I heartily concur.

I would also add a second reason to the one Sowell mentions. The next president will likely have at least two Supreme Court justices to appoint. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, one of the most consistently Leftist and activist justices is 75, and her political soulmate Justice Stevens is 88. Justice Stephen Breyer turns 73 this year.

Judges matter. And when it comes to the Supreme Court, they matter for decades.

Let's make no mistake. John McCain might very well appoint some Leftist activist judges to the Court...but I know Barack Hussein Obama will.

And I also would urge people who care about the welfare of the country not to put their heads in the sand but to work to send senators and congressmen to Washington and legislators to their local state houses who are likely to support American sovereignty,fiscal responsibility secure borders, energy independence and a strong defense. They will be needed in the times ahead, regardless.


Unknown said...

That's a persuasive reminder you've got there (about the judges). For a social conservative that's a huge consideration. I wonder how many of us after Bush' appointment of Alito and Roberts have let down our guard about this. Thanks for the reminder, I'm back to supporting McCain now.

Anonymous said...

it still bothers me that these essays always end using the word "should" instead of the word "is" in the no-brainer phrase. they are the ones making such a compeling arguement. why go all weak kneed at the end. i don't know which form of essay writing, pyramid, inverted pyramid, "I" this is, but it just does not sound correct.