POLL: Is Obama Qualified Even Without Experience?

Truth of the matter is, folks, NOBODY has the experience of being President of the United States unless they HAVE BEEN President of the United States.  But a topic of debate has been Obama’s youth and relative inexperience on the global stage. I just want to know where you stand on the issue (and because I wanted to play with PollDaddy).

Another Worrisome McCain Trait

In this campaign season, there has been a general sense of excitement and momentum behind one candidate or the other.  But–and I’m ashamed to admit this–I knew there was something missing from the rhetoric, propaganda and mudslinging, that was just out of my mind’s reach.  Barack Obama made a comment in the Nashville debate that jarred my consciousness.  Until Obama stated his three priorities–Energy, Health Care, and Education (doh!)–I couldn’t figure out that we have dealt with clear, but present dangers, such as the credit crisis, the energy crisis and the fronts in Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan/Israel/Palestine…but haven’t really dealt with the most important domestic issue we have, for the sake of our future.  Educating our children should be a matter of national security, and an important topic for any presidential candidates.

I believe in what you’d call almost the stock definition of elitist–The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. I don’t think it’s a crime to believe, especially, that the most intelligent among us deserve the keys to the kingdom. Our children can be highly competitive with the rest of the world, if we’re ready to really invest in their education.  After all, where will the engineers and scientists of the next generation come from, if not from humble beginnings in the American educational system?

This has not been a talking point in much of the large arena from the Democratic or Republican nominee. It has been said that Obama has positive views on funding education, especially Early Childhood and Higher education, but even he has not made more than ten significant statements since the beginning of 2008. McCain, however…

…is rated 45% by the NEA, indicating a mixed record on public education. He did not even make the first public statement (which I know is not necessarily policy) concerning education, until June of this year, although he had some really good ideas…in 1999, before No Child Left Behind (NCLB) complicated things. Even still, he managed to have voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. As posted by The Democratic Strategist concerning his comments about porkbarrel spending and earmarks for $3,000,000 projector in a Chigago planetarium:

 Does anyone else out there find it a little odd that Senator McCain is so obsessed with trashing planetariums? I understand that a hefty portion of his base harbors a medieval suspicion of science education in general. But you would think that a Senator, a former pilot at that, who prides himself in being a strong champion of our national security would at least get it that teaching young people about the cosmos is a good way to get them interested in physics, rocket science and the like.

The final paragraph summed it up nicely:

What is even more worrisome is the subtext behind McCain’s contempt for planetariums. It’s not just a reactionary attitude toward science. He has never placed much value on education in general and sees federal investment in education as a waste. If elected, he and Palin could do serious damage to America’s ability to compete in the years ahead with other nations which are making major investments in upgrading their educational systems. It would be hard to devise a quicker way to turn America into a second-rate power than electing the pair of them. One more reason to write another check for Obama.

What about education? If the common response from the Republican side of the fence is, “Who cares? We can’t focus on that until we finish this war…” we are in more trouble than I originally thought.

What Mud Slinging REALLY produces

I originally posted this on my tumblr site…but it’s important enough (I think) to repost again, and again, and again ad nauseum.

If John McCain would really like to bring up skeletons in the closet of Barack Obama (for acts which the unsavory guy, Ayers was involved in when Obama was 8), maybe we should focus on some more of his own.

http://www.whackarnolds.com/2008/10/07/john-mccain-former-member-of-the-us-council-for-world-freedom/ 

Check it out.

A really useful site

This is non-partisan, and a great fact-checking source!!!

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

The Company They Keep

The old saying goes, “You can tell a lot about a man, based on the company that he keeps.”  Recognizing that politicians cannot be experts in everything (just like the rest of us) is important.  That fact makes me more aware that, for those areas where they have weaknesses, they must choose a knowledgable person to advise them.  While this choice might be motivated by little more than selfish ambition, the best past and present examples of national leaders have obviously chosen their closest “disciples” with care.  The advisor’s traits matter to these politicians, visionaries and social reformers who have sought advice from people that they felt represented their values and that were knowledgable where the national leaders were not as strong.

Take, for instance, a candidate that is well-versed in foreign policy and domestic education issues, but lacking in Economics and Supreme Court Legislation.  The best candidate (read: human being) would seek the advice of a person that shares the same basic principles–but also could fill in the gaps with economical statistics and strategies, or share their knowledge of constitutional law.  If the campaign staff is filled with virtuous, talented people, then it stands to reason that the campaign will be run with virtue.  If the campaign staff filled with cut-throat or less-than-honest characters…well, you get the idea. 

I think that our presidential nominees’ choices–from their vice president, all the way through their list of campaign advisors–should be a good indicator of their judgement abilities.  The selection of Biden and Palin speak for themselves…Palin is a moron…but I searched the internet for a list of Obama and McCain’s staff. The only place I found them listed all together was on the BBC NEWS site, which was useful because the BBC listed the advisors side by side, in their respective roles.

View the post here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7642256.stm
…but there are two choices in particular, that caught my eye.

The McCain campain chose chief operating officer, Steve Schmidt, who worked with Karl Rove in George Bush’s election campaign team. The BBC states that he brings an “attacking style” to the campaign. This concerns me, because I’ve felt that the attacks on Obama have been shallow. Obama’s campaign chose his long-standing campaign manager, David Axelrod, who managed his Senate bid in 2004, and worked for John Edwards in the 2004 presidential election. The same Edwards that cheated on his cancer-stricken wife (although this might not be indicative of David’s qualities, read the first sentence of this post again).

In light of our foreign difficulties, Obama’s choice for chief foreign policy advisers are Susan Rice and Tony Lake, respectively assistant secretary of state for African affairs, and National Security Adviser under Clinton. Both opposed the Iraq war, although some critics will say that the Clinton Administration got us into this mess in the first place. I can’t really agree with that, though. Senator McCain’s advisors are cause for more concern–neo-Conservatives who back pre-emptive action, including chief foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann, and former CIA boss James Woolsey.

Make your own choice, keeping in mind that the candidates have chosen this group of people to help them get elected.  It is reasonable to assume Obama and McCain are actively using their advisors’ views and strategies, so be sure you agree with more of the campaign than the candidates themselves.