Why I Will Never, Ever, EVER Vote for John McCain

In the wake of seeing people fawn over that fact that Sen. John McCain dusted off a ten-year-old idea, I thought I'd list some reasons I'd never, ever ever vote for the guy...

John McCain doesn't believe in anything but winning.

Details can be found here. Personally, knowing that McCain, who was tortured, had reversed his stance on waterboarding in order to grab George W. Bush's base would be enough to dismiss him as a viable candidate for our highest office.

John McCain's obsession with Iran mirrors George W. Bush's obsession with Iraq.

Cindy Sheehan once read a quote from George W. Bush in regards to his father's administration. In it, he said that his father's venture into Kuwait gave him a powerful amount of political capital, and it was squandered. He went on to say that if he ever got the chance to invade Iraq, he would waste the potential political capital that came with it.

It's been clear between stories like this, reports of post-9-11/pre-Iraq invasion planning, and the 2004 elections that Iraq was a means to an end for Bush. Whether it was because he really believe Saddam Hussein was the most evil person on earth, or that he wanted to use the conflict to secure himself politically, or that Saddam tried to wack his father and he wanted revenge is still somewhat debatable. What isn't is that Bush was clearly obsessed.Obsessed to the point where any mention of 9/11 was connected to Iraq.

Well now that the war in Iraq is a distant memory, and the occupation of Iraq a miserable failure, John McCain needs a new foreign policy target. Just as Bush blamed Iraq for 9/11, McCain (and others) seemed obsessed with blaming all-things-bad-in-Iraq on Iranian influence. He tries to chalk it up as "gaffes," but time and time and time again, he has "linked" Osama bin Laden' al-Qaeda to Iran. Even if I were to believe that he's simply making (constant) slip-ups even after having time to address the issue, it's still pretty clear that he's at the forefront of the "bomb Iran" movement. How do I know this? Because he said so.

John McCain's lying by giving the impression that he's "corruption free."

Even before the lobbyist thing, there was the Keating Five. Long Story = Short: Ronald Reagan's deregulation movement allowed Savings and Loan companies to go buck wild with risky investments. When the government tried to do it's job (also known as "regulate") Reagan went apeshit and did his darnest to block it. Without proper regulation, a Savings and Loan association run by Mr. Keating went under. But instead of taking responsibility, Keating blamed the agency that Reagan tried to kneecap. Congressional investigations revealed that five senators were...well, bribed to help Keating by aiding in the afore-mentioned kneecapping. One of those Senators was John McCain.

Granted McCain stopped using Keating's money after things got hot, but when you consider that this story involves taking bribes for political favors, turning one part of government against another and ruining the lives of countless working Americans so that a few CEOs can make millions, I just don't see a balance here. But then again, I can't understand why Alan Greenspan, who had to be aware of this, endorsed McCain.

I believe that John McCain has a few screws loose.

While old age may be an important factor, there are other hints that McCain may not be the most stable of choices. For instance, his perception of reality. From pre-war to post-war to the current occupation, John McCain has been 100% Grade-A wrong on Iraq. He endorsed the scam-artist-formerly-known-as Ahmed Chalabi, jumped on the "greeted as liberators" bandwagon, embraced Bush as a war hero, and claimed that Baghdad was safer then neighborhoods in the United States (I wonder if he repeated that one while he was begging for primary votes).

Then there's that "temper" thing. As former rival and current buddy Mitt Romney pointed out, it's "McCain's way." But don't get me wrong. McCain is equal-opportunity...he goes off on Democrats and Republicans alike.

So if you add up these little points (flip-flopping on issues, obsession with a country in the Middle East, mimimizing his role in scandals, being out of touch with the country) you come to my biggest reason:

A John McCain Administration would just be a continuation of the Bush Administration.

President McCain would not bring our troops out of Iraq, let alone redeploy or change course in any significant way. President McCain would not adequately address the recession caused in part by the Bush tax cuts and the occupation of Iraq. President McCain would press to attack Iran, using the Bush Doctrine as a precedent. President McCain will let every scandal committed by the Bush Administration go uninvestigated. President McCain will play lip service (if that) to domestic issues.

In short, I won't vote for John McCain for the some of the same reasons you won't. I just think that we need to remind ourselves every once and awhile.

•  I thought it was Johm McCain

  by notanumber on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:59:58 AM PDT

•  Don't believe the hype...

  McCain is as conservative as they come.

  by Omen on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:00:29 AM PDT

•  I love that last McCain sign.

  Need to make some signs, bumper stickers and T-shirts (with McCain hugging Bush on the back).

  by ryan81 on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:04:52 AM PDT

  •  You Can Make Your Own Sign

    by going here.

    by Omen on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:24:21 AM PDT

    •  Thanks thats great,

      by ryan81 on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 08:11:14 AM PDT

•  Let me count the ways... n/t

  by phrogge prince on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:04:59 AM PDT

•  I want Mc Insane to tell the American people

  about this article that appeared in 2000.  "John McCain's racist remark very troubling".  http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/... John McCain's racist remark very troubling

  Thursday, March 2, 2000

  By KATIE HONG
  SPECIAL TO THE POST-INTELLIGENCER

  On his campaign bus recently, Sen. John McCain told reporters, "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." Although McCain said he was referring only to his prison guards, there are many reasons why his use of the word "gook" is offensive and alarming.

  It is offensive because by using a racial epithet that has historically been used to demean all Asians to describe his captors, McCain failed to make a distinction between his torturers and an entire racial group.

  It is alarming because a major candidate for president publicly used a racial epithet, refused to apologize for doing so and remains a legitimate contender.

  Contrary to McCain's attempt to narrowly define "gook" to mean only his "sadistic" captors, this term has historically been used to describe all Asians. McCain said that "gook" was the most "polite" term he could find to describe his captors, but because it is simply a pejorative term for Asians, he insulted his captors simply by calling them "Asians" -- a clearly disturbing message. To the Asian American community, the term is akin to the racist word "nigger." A friend of mine, a white male Vietnam veteran, pointed out that veterans, especially Vietnam veterans, know how spiteful the term "gook" is. It has everything to do with labeling someone as "other," the enemy and yellow. McCain sent the message that all Asians are foreigners and remain forever the "other" and the enemy.

  The perception of Asians as "foreigners" or "the other" isn't new. This sentiment is what led to passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Japanese American internment during World War II. The internment of Japanese Americans is now recognized as one of the worst civil rights violations in our country's history and a powerful lesson in what can happen when race alone is used as a test for loyalty or who is defined as an American.

  We've made tremendous progress as a nation in overcoming racism. That is why it is so disturbing that a major candidate for the U.S. president can perpetuate the stereotype of Asians as permanent foreigners, hurtling us backward to a time and a place where such racial epithets were an acceptable part of mainstream discourse.

  What makes this incident even more disturbing is how neither the media nor the other presidential candidates have highlighted that his use of a racist term is unacceptable.

  Asian Americans are one of the fastest growing minority populations in the United States. And the media's choice to ignore or excuse McCain's behavior is a painful reminder that Asians remain outsiders on the back steps of national American politics.

  McCain's main campaign message is inclusion. What his actions have told me, however, is that his inclusion does not include people who look like me.

  I love this country just as much as McCain does, and I am committed to serving my community and my country. That is the reason I have entered a career in public service and why I am committed to making America a great country where equal opportunity and justice for everyone is a reality and not just a vision.

  This is also why I am so hurt by McCain's comment: He has reminded me that despite my commitment to serving my country, there are still some people in this country who would first perceive me as the enemy.

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Katie Hong is a Korean American woman who lives in Seattle and works for Washington state government.

  I want to know if he still feels the same about the "Gooks" and if we can expect to hear him refer to Vietnamese people as such.  

  by sugarbaby on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:11:32 AM PDT

•  I wish people were doing more of this and

  less "post partisan" bs.

  I was talking to a young friend last night who told me she thought "all three candidates would be a vast improvement over Bush".  That's a problem.  She really didn't know anything about the REAL John McCain and how different he is from both of our candidates.

  by inclusiveheart on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:14:50 AM PDT

  •  The Keating Five things would be enough for me

    but combined with the constant Middle East mixups? That spells "B-A-D" on both domestic and foreign policies in my book.

    by Omen on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:21:09 AM PDT

    •  The Keating Five would be too complicated

      for her - she is smart and educated, but not well versed in how our government works.  I told her about Iran mostly and the warrior instinct, but also covered a number of points including choice and what a stupid and meaningless idea a tax free day on gasoline really is in the grand scheme of our energy issues in this country - I used that as an example of how the Republican philosophy of governing is short-sighted and mostly full of popular "marketing" gimmicks rather than real solutions to our real problems.

      by inclusiveheart on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 09:16:40 AM PDT

•  Here's some others you might like....

  http://seminoledemocrats.blogspot.co...

  by SemDem on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 07:56:53 AM PDT