Tom--you bring up a point that is a window on to my exact problem with McCain, beyond policy disagreements. Somewhere between 2000 and 2004, McCain decided that becoming president was the most important thing, and so he began selling out. Exhibit A: he stuck by Bush's side,
after what happened in South Carolina in 2000. Exhibit B: After his laudable denunciation of Falwell, McCain decided he needed those votes and went with his tail between his legs to
Falwell's ridiculous "university" to make nice.
Seems like the "Straight Talk Express" got derailed a long time ago. He was once a rebel; now he's a politician.
2 comments:
2000: mccain votes against bush tax cuts for the rich; 2008: he supports them.
2001: mccain promotes mccain/feingold bill limiting campaign finance abuse; 2008: refused to accept limits offered by mcccain/feingold bill.
1967-2008: mccain opposes US torture (as a torture victim himself); 2008: mccain, although in DC, refuses to vote to limit the CIA to the interrogation techniques in army field manual.
Etc.
my reason for supporting obama/clinton is the judiciary.
the supreme court is at stake in the next election. stevens is 87; ginsburg is 74; breyer is 71; scalia and kennedy, i think, are 71 or 72.
the court is fractured 4-4-1.
with one retirement, it is likely that:
1. privacy in reproductive decisions would be overruled (casey/roe); 2. that the ban on evidence seized in violation of the constitution will be overruled (mapp); 3. that the ban on permitting state's to criminalize private consensual activity will be overruled (lawrence); 4. that the ban on prayers in public school ceremonies will be overruled (lee); 5. that rules of standing allowing citizens to sue for environmental damage will be narrowed to the point of elimination (defenders of wildlife); etc.
i could go on.
the average person HAS NO IDEA how republican judges have sought to radically alter constitutional law in favor of unchecked government power (see extraordinay rendition, wiretaps, gitmo, etc.)
Post a Comment