Thursday, October 09, 2008

McCain is Bush Three

I don't generally watch the debates. It makes me nervous. And, frankly, the whole situation can make me squirm a bit. I'm not a person who likes conflict and so I stay away from it. Debates are, by definition, about conflict.

I wait until it's over and flip on the news so I can watch the debate about the debate. Then I watch the debate on a rerun.

As a result, the first reference I heard/saw to "that one" last night was on twitter. Then I saw another one. Then another one. Then someone posted a link to this graphic.

This graphic is from the Daily Kos. It was up only a short while after Senator McCain's reference to Senator Obama as "that one." While it's one of those comments that seems offhand, the attitude in which it was uttered says a lot about the personality of John McCain, I think.

In case you didn't catch it...

As my seventh grade English teacher, Miss Fenwick, would have said, "I don't care for your tone."

Of course McCain is angry
Much has been made of John McCain's "angry" personality. Well, you know what, the man was a prisoner of war for years. He has a right to be angry. I'm not surprised he's angry. It would be bizarre if he weren't angry. However, I'm not sure that's a good qualification for being president. Do we want an angry president? I don't think so.

Also, frankly, I'm sick of hearing about his time as a POW. I respect it, but it was more than a few years ago. Can we please move on? Can we talk about something else? Can we address the wars we're in now? Or the fact that our economy is in the tank?

I don't think the fact that he was in the military gives him any special qualifications to be president. In fact, I contend it could well be a detriment.

Hasn't he done anything in the last 26 years in the Senate that's noteworthy? He keeps going back to his military service prior to that. What about the last two and a half decades?

Are you better off?
The old Ronald Reagan question is a valid one in any election, I think - are you better off now than you were four years ago? In this case, eight years ago?


That's the answer for most Americans - at least those of us who don't happen to be heavily invested in oil and gas.

McCain is just Bush Three
So, what does that mean? Well, what it means is if you're not better off, you should vote for something different. McCain would just be Bush Three. Good heavens, we've had Bush one, and Bush two, haven't we learned enough to not have Bush three.

McCain has voted with George Bush 90% of the time. What could that be but Bush Three?

I have had more than enough of Bush. We have gone from a country with a budget surplus to a huge deficit. We're at war - a war that seems to have no end. We have an economy in the worst shape since the depression.

Can we Afford this?
In all of this financial news, people keep telling us we should ask ourselves, "Can we afford this?" A friend suggested to me the other day that as a nation we should ask that question, too. Can we afford this war? Obviously not. We're going into debt more every day to fight it. Can we afford this bailout? No. We're borrowing to do it. Can we afford another Republican administration? NO.

Why is the economy in such a mess? The one reason that no one is talking about is that the Bush administration failed to do what would have grown our economy. Every 8-10 years you need an infusion of new jobs to keep the economy growing. In the Clinton years it was the technology sector. The last few years the obvious growth was in alternative energy. But the Bush administration chose not to encourage that - perhaps because so many of them are heavily invested in oil and gas.

And how does this relate to McCain? Because McCain is Bush in a different suit. McCain has been a senior member of the senate and could have pushed for alternative energy. He did not. Suddenly now he's decided it's something he wants. That's such BS it smells, even through the computer screen.

How Republicans See the Economy
When McCain talks about change of any sort I just laugh. What else can you do? He's been in DC for 26 freaking years. He's had plenty of time to change anything he didn't like. What he has changed is regulation. He wanted to get rid of all kinds of regulation to make things friendlier for business. He is part of what created the situation where executives at big companies are running them into the ground but then getting multi-million dollar "golden parachutes" for their reward as their employees are left destitute and you and I are left holding the bill.

That's what republicans want - benefits for the rich.

Someone recently told me her husband was a Republican because he believed that those who worked hard deserved to be rewarded with financial gain.

Are you actually suggesting that the people working at McDonalds or Target or Applebees aren't working hard? Are you saying that the CNAs taking care of your loved ones in nursing homes and getting paid minimum wage are not working hard? Are you saying school teachers aren't working hard? That those guys climbing poles during ice storms aren't working hard? Do you think the people cleaning your kid's school aren't working hard? Do you think folks in chicken processing plants aren't working hard? Are you suggesting family farmers are slacking?

I don't know what his definition of working hard is, but I'll put the work day of the average nurse's aide up against his any day. I'll daresay it's far more physically, mentally and emotionally challenging. Yeah, sure, I'm mentally tired at the end of a day sometimes, but I always remind myself that by and large I'm sitting behind a desk in climate controlled comfort, pushing paper and talking on the phone. It's not the hardest work I've ever done in my life. Not by a long shot.

I'm not dealing with people's bodily fluids, lifting people into wheelchairs and on my feet multiple hours a day - not to mention worrying about if I'm doing all I can to keep people comfortable. Lets keep things in perspective. Are you really suggesting those folks aren't working hard?

If that's the only basis on which we determine financial reward then a whole bunch of professional athletes are going to need bailouts and a large crew of lower/middle-income folks are shopping for new homes. Nice, new homes. Fortunately, they're cheap right now thanks to the sucky economy.

Those people are all the middle class people. Some of them are aspiring to be middle class. John McCain can't even bring himself to say the phrase "middle class" in a whole debate. Why? Because he has no concept of what that is. He has lost that perspective. He has said having $500,000 makes one rich. A half million dollars? That's rich, so I guess below that is middle class - the class he can't even acknowledge. In his world, everyone has a half million dollars or more. In my world that's not the case.

Negative Campaigning
Multiple people were talking last night about Obama's demeanor during the debates. Obama said in an interview that he was surprised McCain "wasn't willing to say it to my face," referencing the negative ads. The Obama campaign has said they will not initiate any negative ads, but they're not going to roll over when they're attacked - they're going to answer it. Thank goodness. I've been waiting for a democrat that would do that. Hallelujah.

I am sick of democrats just being "nice" and getting "swift-boated." McCain is scared, with good reason, and he's getting nastier every day - living up to his Senate nickname of McNasty. At the moment, 100% of McCain's TV ads are negative. Obama is running about 30% negative - answering those.

Do you want another New Orleans?
Well, I could go on and on and on, but I'm going to stop there for tonight. I've got much more to say.

If you thought watching the people of New Orleans die in the streets, begging for food and water, while our government sat idly by was one of our finer moments as a nation, then vote McCain.

Do you remember what McCain was doing that day? I do. He was celebrating his birthday with President Bush.

Yes, while the people of New Orleans were fighting for their lives, some losing that battle, Bush and McCain were holding a birthday cake up for the cameras to celebrate McCain's 69th birthday.

That's what you get with a vote for McCain - more of the same. Another president who thinks this is an appropriate way to act. Another president who sees no reason to be concerned about the average citizen - the middle class, or heaven forbid, the lower socio-economic class.

That's what republicans have given us. And what they'll give us more of.

If you want something different, vote Obama.

You may say I'm being overly simplistic, but it really is that simple. One is a government of compassion. One is a government that thinks the fact that citizens are dying in the streets is no reason to delay a birthday party photo-op.

I've had more than enough of this.

I'm voting for compassion. For change. For the future. For Obama.

Check for the blog, art, and more. Friend me on, Follow me at

I am looking for book clubs willing to read and critique my novel when it's completed. If your book club is interested, please email me at Thanks!


Anonymous said...

Nice article. I found your site via google alerts using the keywords "twitter follow me and twitter". While I agree that McCain is a horrible candidate I can't say much for Obama. One of my biggest concerns is the fact that Obama's foreign policy advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, was pivotal in creating the Taliban. I'm not a neo-con trying to associate Obama with terrorists, I'm just wondering why Obama would have a person such as Brzezinski as his foreign policy advisor.

Here is a video about the Zbigniew Brzezinski link to the Taliban.

Trust me, I can't stand McInsane anymore. If you want I have plenty of dirt on McCain that you probably havn't heard about McCain. Out of the 2 party system for republicans I would have liked to seen Ron Paul in, and for the democrats I would have liked to seen either Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel (who I interviewed when he was in Detroit for like 1/2 minute). The problem is people vote for the lesser of 2 evils. Americans need to stand up or we will soon see an erosion of all of our 'god given' rights.

Here is a link of material to question about Obama (note: not all of it is correct in my opinion...but there is enough to make you think).

Either way, we need more people to question what is on the mainstream media. Children in America have been misguided for quite some time. We have focused too much on "producing" at a mass quantity that we have neglected to produced stuff of quality. America is producing worker bees out of the children when we could be producing future scientists, inventors, doctors and artists. Please check my fathers blog @ He was awarded Michigan's 2007 Hispanic Artist of the Year award for his work with his students in the inner city of detroit.

Btw, I like your art.


Anonymous said...

I have two quick comments. The first is I've never been fond of stereotypes. I don't know how many times I've heard people go on about "right wing fanatics" and then they'll pull Fred Phelps name out as proof. Only Fred is a lifelong Democrat, ran for office on the Democratic ticket and threw a fundraiser which Al Gore attended while running for President. I don't believe that makes Al Gore a Fred Phelps supporter at all.

All of this is just an example of why I'm not fond of stereotypes.

During a campaign or on a political topic, I've seen a lot of "drive by" people who claim to be this or that and say the worst things and then are never heard from again. They could be anybody, with any agenda they want to promote, including one which says the group they claim to be a part is militant or angry or dangerous. Drive by people aren't reputable IMHO. On either side.

Which brings me to my second point. Ron Paul and his promotion on the blogosphere with very little knowledge of the man in real life situations. Ron Paul's district borders the district I live in and during Hurricane Ike, his district had heavy damage. It includes the coastal districts of Texas of Freeport, Surfside Beach, Galveston Island and much of the landscape between the coast and Houston.

Ron Paul made the photo op when President Bush was in Galveston Island and then returned to his office. When asked if he'd toured Galveston Island and seen the damage he said "no". When asked if he'd toured Chambers County (also his district) and seen the damage he said "no".

Then he voted against disaster relief for his own district. When asked for a comment, he refused comment for the media and others who asked. His office isn't returning phone calls.

The Mayor of Galveston had to go to the Senate Subcommittee to ask for federal funds to help with the ports, infrastructure and a hospital. You would think this would be Ron Paul's job but since he doesn't believe is asking for federal help, he didn't do it.

Now I can respect standing on principle but I don't respect hiding in your office and refusing to see the people in your district when you make a decision which affects their lives after a major hurricane.

I'd much rather have either McCain or Obama than Ron Paul. They are both flawed as candidates but neither of them hide behind their office door instead of facing people when the chips are down.

If you want to lead, you have to show up on the days when the chips are down.

Patsy Terrell said...

Hi Antonio, thanks for reading. I will take a look at your dad's blog. I soooo wish we spent more time trying to encourage children to be thinkers - and then they could go in any direction. Unfortunately, we just teach them to test. Pity.