We're the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost. All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT, and KA 2003-2007 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:02:15 Z Movable Type 4.12 en Copyright 2008 http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification [Kat] Well off the track of discussing border security, but shortly to return, in the post on voting for McCain to keep from being subjugated by the Obamanation (pun intended), Kevin of the Paulians appears and expresses his very deep distrust of Senator McCain and his refusal to support him. The Princess of Crabbiness, defending her man (she's partial to sailors and other see going fellows), jumps in and notes Obama's stance on Palestine and Israel. In short, Obama thinks the Israelis are meanies and the Palestinians have been suffering unbearably so he will withdraw any restrictions on aid that... http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:27:28 -0600 McCain choosing Huckabee as a running mate would have me checking flight times on Aer Lingus in preparation for my next career move.....shepherdess. I can not even comtemplate such a horrifying turn of events. Therefore, I will deal with it as I do when such problems arise and tell you "No, that won't happen." and just push forward. LOL It's worked for the last 46 years, I see no reason to stop now. I would prefer McCain pick Romney. I like Guiliani well enough but I don't see which voters Rudi gets McCain that he can't get for himself. Kat - I am a political junkie and even I don't know who the governor of Alaska is..... http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69846 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69846 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 10:47:23 -0600 the Huckster is only being booted around is to placate the "true conservatives". I'm looking for him to choose someone with a little less baggage that will make McCain look conservative. maybe even Giuliani to grab up some of the center folks. or, what would be super cool, is if he reached out for a real conservative woman like the governor of Alaska. Not super well known, but has a solid record and could compete with the whole "breaking the gender and/or race" ceiling. She would be good at pulling the conservatives in because she would strengthen his anti-earmarks, small government position http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69835 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69835 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:24:48 -0600 Maggie, that well may be true, but does that invalidate my original thesis? While one may certainly posit Kerry as a "poseur," does that change the critic with respect to McCain? I can empathize with Kevin to a point; at which point I feel compelled to point out that McCain's "100 year" comment relates back to America's current commitments, including a 60 years (plus!) establishment in Korea, Great Britain, Germany, and Japan. Does anyone here want to claim that the countries mentioned above are in any way repressive or non-democratic? Perhaps fifty years from now Iraq will stand in the same circle... Before one dismisses this proposal, let me remind the reader that (at this point) sixty years ago Germany and Japan were reactionary totalitarian dictatorships, while Korea spent three decades after the Korean War developing her (him?)-self into a free and democratic society. wolfie: I would hope to disagree. I don't think Obama is that dumb, although it is quite possible I am wrong. ;) Certainly FDR gained the presidency with nearly as weak a record (Assistant Secretary to the Navy, and Lieutenant Governor of New York). Perhaps he will gain wisdom. I have to disagree with BillT that Obama is the next "Jimmeh;" that honor should be directed to Mike Huckabee. To be honest, my (nearly) worst nightmare is that McCain names Huckabee as his running mate. That combination would most likely force me to vote Democratic this November... http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69833 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69833 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:51:45 -0600 other post. Try this one: Suck-a-bee as a character in Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale". When he starts in on changing the Constitution to comply with the Bible......my blood runs cold. Kat - While you are correct that I am extremely partial to Sailors, that is not how McCain won my heart. It is not his military background or his time as a POW. I take from those just what you take. Military experience does not make you a leader, but joining the military does in most instances denote a love of country and a willingness to accept responsibility. In McCain's case in particular, I have not heard one "off" note from those who actually served with him. So, in my mind, McCain is a proven leader of men in the Princess of Crabbiness' favorite flavor...excuse me, branch of the military. All that is well and good. If faced with two equally qualilfied candidates, I would lean toward the one with military experience. But that is not what we have here. We have three Seantors and an extra from "Deliverence". Of the three Senators, McCain is head and shoulders above Clinton and Obama for experience. Still, one might overlook experience if one wanted the "change" the Democrats are screaming for. So, once again we are back to triage. What is your single most important issue? Big picture - national security and the threat of radical Islamic terrorists. When I look at the candidates for President I see quite clearly that there is only one who can deliver on my number one issue. McCain is the one person in this election cycle who has the back of the favorite Naval Consort as he paddles around the NAG. It's as simple as that. Washington insider/outsider. Reagan republican/Rockefeller republican. Liberal/Conservative. Young/old. None of that matters. You can work out every issue under the sun, immigration, judicial nominees, 2nd amendment issues, the economy, civil rights, our standing in the world......everything......as long as the CINC keeps us in one piece. As long as the POTUS provides for the common defense. You might want Duncan Hunter or Mitt Romney or a resurrected Ronald Reagan or maybe even the real JFK. But you have to let go of that and look at this cold hard reality. Clinton Obama McCain McCain is the only one who can deliver what you really need.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69832 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69832 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:43:35 -0600 linked to you here.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69831 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69831 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:18:09 -0600 ...the person Obama most reminds me of is a certain Sister Edith Keeler. Better than who he reminds *me* of, more and more each day -- Jimmeh Cottuh. Same flaming idealism, same espousal of the ideas that brought us double-digit inflation, same attitude toward the Near East/Middle East. Let's stick him in a rowboat and launch a cottontail at him to see how he reacts...]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69820 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69820 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:10:08 -0600 "mr. McCain ought to be able to stick it to one pansy "revivalist preacher." Yes, just like McCain stuck it to the US taxpayer as a member of the Keating 5. Or how McCain stuck it to the 1st Ammendment with McCain-Feingold. And of course, how he attempted to stick it to the whole of the US his amnesty program with McCain-Kennedy.... Never mind how he will stick it to 'bomb, bomb, bomb Iran' or sure show those danged buggers in the middle East, even if it takes 100 years or more.... No thanks. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69817 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69817 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:40:19 -0600 Well, frankly, Mccain's military status doesn't do a thing for me beyond let's me know his history. KNowing some military types, I can honestly say that military background does not make one a good leader automatically, not even the acquisition of bars, leaves, eagles or stars. So, I can honestly say I am not attracted to his candidacy due to his military career or even his time as a POW, though it informs me somewhat of his character. In fact, I imagine that the stubborness that the conservatives attribute to his inability to move in their direction was very likely the stubborness that kept him sane and alive to arrive out of Hanoi Hilton. I might like that about the guy even if it means he might stubbornly hold on to ideas and directions that I disagree with. I think he's a fighter, if somewhat older, seasoned and, maybe, a little weary. Still..that 80 year old ex-marine didn't go down in the face of two robbers. mr. McCain ought to be able to stick it to one pansy revivalist preacher. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69816 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69816 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:48:45 -0600 Sister Edith Keeler. And there's a large part of me that fears the real consequences of letting him into the White House would be similar to the fictional alternate timeline from "City on the Edge of Forever." ]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69815 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69815 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:56:18 -0600 Casey, Whatever your point, there is NO comparing Kerry and McCain. Kerry was not anything but a poseur, ever. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69811 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69811 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:47:05 -0600 So, wolfwalker, you see Obama as more Wilsonian than anything else? That's who your post brings to mind. A relatively minor nit to pick re: Godwin's Rule. It is a purely informal Usenet assumption that the first invoker of Godwin's Rule loses the argument, and has no bearing on the discussion in question. What Godwin's Rule actually states is that a Usenet (or internet, now) discussion goes on, the probability of a comparison to Hitler or Nazis approaches 1. Intelligent discussants understand that legitimate citations of the NSDAP are still valid. :) So invoke away! Actually, Hitler is an excellent cite during discussions about whether war heroes make better national leaders. Both Hitler and Mussolini were wounded in action and decorated for bravery during WW1. Both were undoubtedly "war heroes" as the term is commonly used today, but both turned out to be terrible national leaders. QED. I got a lot of "rolls eyes" reactions from folks back in '04 when I brought this up with respect to John Kerry. Ironically enough, it works just as well with respect to McCain. That is, being a fighter jock or decorated war hero is no guarantee that he'll be a good president. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69810 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69810 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:16:57 -0600 Kevin of the Paulians then proceeds to ask where in the constitution does it say that the government has any right to take our money and pay it to other nations? Even for defense and alliances, I might add. Article I, Section 8, clause 18. The "necessary and proper" clause, more cynically known as the "elastic clause," which is often forgotten by strict-constructionists. It's been abused far beyond reason over the last seventy-five years, but things like foreign aid and tribute are exactly what the elastic clause was meant for. If a treaty calls for payment of monies to a foreign government, then Congress can appropriate money for that purpose under the elastic clause. I also notice that under the strict wording of Article II, Section 2, there are no limits placed on the President's treaty-making powers. It appears that a treaty can say anything, and as long as the President signs and the Senate approves, that treaty becomes enforceable law. One can assume that no treaty can violate the Constitution itself by, say, signing away our civil rights -- and I believe the Supreme Court has declared several treaties unconstitutional for just such reasons -- but still that's an interpretation placed on the Constitution, not the literal wording itself. On to your main point, Kat: Amongst all the issues that I have with the Obamanation, maybe that is the one underlying them all. With all his ideology riding on the "hope" band wagon that there is a place for reasonable discussion even with unreasonable men, what will Obama do when he's faced with the multitudes of real problems that face the leader of a nation? I agree. I oppose Obama for several reasons, not least of which is that on domestic policy he's a flaming socialist, but this question is at least as serious and possibly even more so. Obama is a classic idealist. What will happen when that idealism has a head-on collision with reality? Some people adjust to reality by modulating their idealism. Others continue with the same idealistic attitude, hoping somehow that by "setting a good example" or some such rot, they'll miraculously convince reality to change to match their ideals. I've never known the second way to have much chance of success. I don't know which way Obama would follow, but I believe he'd take the second road, down which lies disaster. ]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69791 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/02/when_ideology_m.html#comment-69791 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 07:03:40 -0600