Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Does Not McCain Walk the Talk that Obama Proclaims

The Anchoress had a good post called From Romney to Obama in two easy steps. This is in reference to the the whole Catholic Jurist Doug Kmiec endorsing Obama situation . Go to my post Leading Catholic Jurist Endorses Obama for background.

The Anchoress while pointing out the problems in reality with Obama rhetoric and the reality makes the sensible observation that:
"As I responded to the Professor, It doesn’t seem so strange to me. He’s has responded to Obama positively because he’s been attracted by a rhetoric that appeals to most Catholic’s built-in desires for unity and oneness, social equality - all of the enlarging positions that made Catholics, for generations, largely Democrat in political persuasion, before Roe v Wade.........
There is no denying that Obama is a powerful rhetorician and an exceptional orator. A smart Catholic, hearing a man speaking about justice, morality, equality and HOPE - and mentioning Martin Luther King and Dorothy Day in the bargain, can hear such a speech and think: Oh, thank God - rhetoric to admire in an uninspired age!"

Very true and I see that.

However this is what I find ironic. If one is looking for those qualities should we actually look at where those have been exhibited where the the rubber hit the pavement so to speak? To engage in the business of justice, morality, equality and hope means actually taking political risks. It means taking the arrows and being lampooned!!!! Besides some comments from Obama on problems with Teacher Unions and a few nice words about Reagan and conservatives what else is there?

What is ironic is this. John McCain that has come under criticism for a decade from people in his own party and held to ridicule has actually taken those risks

You might disagree with McCain on his advocacy of immigration reform but all that business of justice, morality, equality and Hope were a part of the reasons why he risked bringing up the subject of immigration reform knowing no doubt it could kill his Presidential hopes. Many Conservatives gleefully and wrongfully thought he was dead last August because of it . It appears the people had different ideas.

Shall we talk about the Gang of 14 and McCain reaching out for compromise so not to bring on another crisis? Was he early work on re establishing normal relations with Vietnam and the POW issue not yet another example? His position and his working with John Kerry was not met with universal glee at the time by many in the Republican camp. This all from a man that had to meet with people that gave him years of LIVING HELL.

There were many of instances we could recount. What evidence is there that Obama will have the courage of yes even Bill Clinton that worked with Tent Lott and others on Welfare Reform!!! It should not be forgotten that Clinton took some arrows on that?

Let me put it like this. There are worries that always broadcast as to McCain by certain segments of the Republican party. That is that McCain is too liberal and will be too quick to compromise core values in search of compromise adn "unity" with the democrats. I think those concerns are on the whole not valid. For eight years the "base" of the GOP has gone after Bush because they were only getting 70 percent of that they wanted instead of a hundred percent. Does it not worry anyone that Obama with all his talk of compromise and hope and unity is not getting a similar reaction from the progressive part of the party he represents? Why is that? From my reading of the progressives media and pundits I am not seeing they are prepared to do that.

I suppose my problem with Prof Kimiec is that as a jurist he should appreciate a good "oral argument" aka inspiring political speech. However a Jurist should look at the meat and the words and the evidence. I find his reasons for backing Obama all lacking in that department when I look at Obama as to his political career and yes even his speeches when you read them.

Pro Ecclesia noted this part of the Speech on Race by Obama:

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren’t always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze – a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding...

Pro- Ecclesia then states:
Got that? Blue collar "anger" and "resentment" over race "have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation" - meaning that the conservative ascendency that began with the election of Ronald Reagan was a product of there being a whole lot of angry white male factory workers, whose anger was being misdirected toward black folks and exploited by cynical right-wing operatives "for their own electoral ends".So, in those 3 paragraphs cited above, Obama regurgitates the tired old leftist meme that the only thing that could possibly explain traditional Democrat voters supporting Ronald Reagan - thereby forging the "Reagan Coalition" - was because Reagan "made us comfortable in our prejudices".

Very true. I am not naive by the way. I know there was segment that had the above point of view. But let us remember that there were a ton of other issues and real ideas that really forged it. When i read the above the doubts about Obama and his forging of Unity seem well lacking.

Though I disagree with McCain on some things, I realize that the President of the United States is more than the President of the "base" of the party, or of just conservatives or Liberals , or of party as a whole. He is President of a Nation not just a subset of it. Where as Obama shown that like McCain he will risk his political hide to do that?

As to Catholic issues well Obama is real lacking. Kimec states in his endorsement as to Catholic Fundamentals that are absolute:
In various ways, Sen. Barack Obama and I may disagree on aspects of these important fundamentals, but I am convinced, based upon his public pronouncements and his personal writing, that on each of these questions he is not closed to understanding opposing points of view and, as best as it is humanly possible, he will respect and accommodate them.

What an odd use of words. Does Prof Kmiec really think that Obama will respect the Catholic positon on the Right to Life "as best as it is humanly possible". Perhaps he should rephrase it to as "as best as he can without upsetting the radical Pro-abortion and often hostile to Faith wing of the democratic party and causing him harm"

Are Catholics and Conservatives such Cheap dates that Obama saying that he too thinks abortion is bad thing but then to proceed to to protect it all cost sufficient? What about the other areas of Catholic fundamentals where we are profound disagreement with Obama?

Count me unconvinced.

No comments: