I few weeks ago, I saw a quote from Obama that I liked:
"And I firmly believe that whenever we exaggerate or demonize, or oversimplify or overstate our case, we lose. Whenever we dumb down the political debate, we lose. A polarized electorate that is turned off of politics, and easily dismisses both parties because of the nasty, dishonest tone of the debate, works perfectly well for those who seek to chip away at the very idea of government because, in the end, a cynical electorate is a selfish electorate."
No doubt this doesn't play well with the Randian crowd. But I wound up writing the rant below, mostly in response to various anti-Obama rants I've seen and heard, comparing just the styles of the two major presidential candidates.
I few weeks ago, I saw a quote from Obama that I liked:
"And I firmly believe that whenever we exaggerate or demonize, or oversimplify or overstate our case, we lose. Whenever we dumb down the political debate, we lose. A polarized electorate that is turned off of politics, and easily dismisses both parties because of the nasty, dishonest tone of the debate, works perfectly well for those who seek to chip away at the very idea of government because, in the end, a cynical electorate is a selfish electorate."
No doubt this doesn't play well with the Randian crowd. I wound up writing the rant below, mostly in response to various anti-Obama rants I've seen and heard, comparing just the styles of the two major presidential candidates.
1. Intellect and its use.
Barack Obama was not given the best opportunities. He worked hard, educated himself, performed superbly, got scholarships, and continued to perform superbly even after finishing at Harvard Law, running the Harvard Law Review, where he ran an organization of about a hundred people, looking after an organization of significant complexity and responsibilities.
John McCain was given the best opportunities regardless of his merits and achievements. He went to private schools, and went to the U.S. Naval Academy where he continued to screw up, eventually graduating in the bottom 1% of his class. Multiple public sources familiar with the Academy claim that he would have flunked out on two occasions except for family "pull" or another cadet taking the fall. In spite of his graduating rank, he got into flight school (a perk usually limited to the top quartile of graduates). There he continued his history of underachievement, ultimately cracking up two planes in training, a third in Europe, losing a fourth in the U.S.S. Forrestal fire, and a fifth when he was shot down.
To this day, he continues his habit of underachievement, making decisions with little thought or consideration and hoping for the best, often applying the 'Law of cats and small children' (it's easier to get forgiveness than permission). E.g., and his recent (non) appearance on Letterman.
I don't think it's unfair to say, as a wonk recently did, that the difference between George W. Bush and John McCain is that George W. Bush is a much better pilot.
2. Advisors
This past month, Nature printed a run-down Obama's science and technology advisors. Obama's advisors include well-known scientists, actively working in their fields of expertise. The McCain campaign has not released the names of his science and technology advisors. Overall, known McCain advisors are lobbyists (well over 100 are working for his campaign), defense industry analysts, and high-tech CEOs, including Carly Fiorina. (Ms. Fiorina presided over the Hewlett-Packard Corporation until recently; she was ousted after it was discovered that she had commissioned detectives to investigate her HP executive board members and reporters, including illegally obtaining phone records. Her authoritarian tenure at HP is sordid and well documented.)
Similar patterns obtain in their choices of foreign policy advisors (McCain's advisors include a number of particularly hawkish neo-cons, several of whom have lobbied on behalf of totalitarian foreign governments (Iran, Iraq, Myanmar, ...), and some who were mixed up in Georgia before their invasion of South Ossetia and the subsequent Russian counter-invasion).
Similar patterns obtain in their choices of economic advisors; several of McCain's advisors being particularly central to the recent and ongoing economic earthquake (Phil Gramm for one).
While some of Obama's choices in advisors are, IMO, not the best, I can find very few of McCain's that are even reasonable choices.
3. Campaign organization
The Obama campaign has done a superb job of organizing. Talking to his people on the ground, it's very clear that they've got a large, effective, flexible organization capable of getting people and materiel where they need to be. They've got a consistent message. They've got huge numbers of offices, people, events, &c; they've been canvassing, calling, distributing literature, bringing in contributions, and overall doing everything that needs to be done to run a campaign -- and eventually the country.
The McCain campaign, conversely, has been marked by mis-steps all along. Few offices, inadequate people on the ground (Palin's presence has helped that somewhat in terms of recruiting), many fewer events. Their message at the national level is inconsistent and marked by disorganization. According to recent sources, the campaign's transition team has been put on the back burner; there's been no significant work towards establishing a workable administration should McCain be elected.
FWIW: this is a big deal. A president ultimately runs a huge organization, and needs to provide a consistent message and be a master of organization to run it well (especially given the presence, number, and history of the U.S. government and its various organizations). No president (or even Superman) can deal with everything, making organization and delegation of primary importance in running a country. The running of the campaign is probably the best indicator of the president's style and abilities in running the country.
4. Temperament
This, IMO, is another big deal. For president, I want someone who is intellectually curious, wants to know all the options, is pragmatic rather than ideological, and has a flexible, intelligent approach to problems. I want someone who can take whatever situation has been dealt, and look at it as a whole to extract the best possible outcome, regardless of history.
This is why I went to the NYT article on Obama's time at the University of Chicago Law School and looked at the exams he wrote while there. I think they demonstrate well that Obama has all these qualities: his writing (grammar, spelling, and organization) are superb, and the intellect revealed by them appears substantial. (FWIW, I've not read his books.)
Here again, McCain fails. Even his Republican colleagues have reservations about his temper and decision making style, and this style doesn't seem to have changed since his earliest days. He typically makes decisions without thinking through all the consequences (or even the obvious ones), and is readily influenced by personal considerations rather than facts, even when the two are in obvious conflict.
5. Scandalous associations
I keep reading about Obama's reverend and his "association" with Bill Ayers. But there doesn't seem to be any "there" there. When I look up McCain in comparison, though, I frequently find him actively seeking such associations and endorsements (G. Gordon Liddy, John Singlaub, Bill Donahue, .....) to say nothing of his choice of Sarah Palin and her AIP/John Birch/... connections, his past associations with Charles Keating, and a variety of other convicted felons. [I suppose it must be hard to avoid associating with convicted felons when you're a U.S. Senator.] (And "Joe the Plumber" -- a tax delinquent who is perhaps Charles Keating's son-in-law. You just can't make this stuff up.)
----
Sorry for the length. But I needed to rant/write this stuff down.
Ironically, this doesn't contain a single mention of their relative political positions. I'm sure that would require another post of this size to cover adequately, but again it would be marked by serious deficiencies and inconsistencies in McCain's policies, mostly compared against consistent and consistently on-message positions -- even if often not the positions I would choose or prefer.