• Notes From Dave
  • my thoughts on some of the tough issues of short-term missions
  • God's Politics
  • jim wallis' smart, political, and God centered take on the issues of today
  • Progressive Eruptions
  • the liberal side of politics from shaw kenawe. a daily read of mine.
  • Conservatism With Heart
  • a conservative take on life and politics from a well connected missouri mom
  • Truthdig
  • left of center, and very informative. bob scheer's online journal
  • Coffee Klatch
  • home of the best coffee roaster in So. Cal. and where i learned to love coffee
  • The Coffee Geek
  • everything you need to know about coffee and how to make a great cup o' joe
  • Bleacher Report
  • varied sports blog, lots of attitude, and sometimes i'm a featured writer
  • Aubievegas
  • a mix of sports in general with a bent towards vegas and auburn
My Photo
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

I am a self proclaimed coffee addict and Executive Director of a non profit missions agency working primarily in the Mexican cities of Oaxaca, Guadalajara, and Ensenada. I've been married for over 30 years to Chelle, and we have one grown son, Joseph, a graduate of Auburn University in Alabama.

Powered by Blogger

Saturday, October 04, 2008

And They Both Promised a Positive Campaign!

I've had it. I am sick of politics as usual. I am tired of our Presidential candidates telling me what is wrong with the other guy.

But this disgust is not limited to the candidates themselves. We have in America an entire legion of partisans on both the right and left whose prime directive also seems to be the destruction of the other, rather than the lifting up of your own candidate.

Sensing that he is losing on the issue of the economy, John McCain, a candidate who was a victim of some pretty sleazy tricks in 2000 when he ran against GW Bush, is now himself jumping on the Sleaze Talk Express.

Understand what this means. The Washington Post, quoting an unnamed GOP strategist, is reporting that the McCain campaign has made the decision to question Obama's character and associations.

This is on the heels of Rick Davis', McCain Campaign manager probably being the most honest person in American politics this year with this gem of a quote, "This election is not about issues... This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates."

At least they are honest about it. Obama and his sleazy attack ad on McCain's computer abilities is one of the lowest things I have ever seen. Hey Barack, he doesn't use a computer because he is in constant pain from being tortured for five years!

This stuff is horrible. And yet as much as the American people cringe and recoil when it is done, for some idiotic reason, it works.

It works when GOP partisans cannot watch a debate and see that Sarah Palin, nice as she is, is not qualified to be President, a judgement that must be made of every VP candidate.

It works when Democratic partisans cannot see that Obama's inability to see the political ramifications of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's comments might be a harbinger of his ability to grasp a growing crisis before it is too late.

It works when neither party can be honest and say that both of their candidates were playing politics with the recent so-called Wall Street Bailout.

Doesn't anybody get it? I want the candidates to tell me where they stand. Not their opponent. When you choose to denigrate your opponent and not trust me enough to figure it out on my own, you insult me. And my intelligence.

Barack, I do not care what you have to say about John McCain. And Mr. McCain, my friend, I do not care what you have to say about Barack Obama.

Please, please, please, tell me where you stand on the issues, and trust me enough to figure it out. And tell your partisan supporters to do the same!

Now just in case you can't figure out how to do this, here's a simple guide. If your opponents name is in your advertising, you ain't doin' it.

Both of you are pretty fond of saying that the American people are smart folks. Why don't you treat us as such?

Comments on "And They Both Promised a Positive Campaign!"


Blogger Bullfrog said ... (10:50 AM) : 

I agree with you whole-heartedly that politics is downright frustrating when you want to make an informed decision about the next leader of the free world based on their character and history, and all you get from either candidate is what is wrong with their opponent.

I think they are afraid to just come out and tell the American people where they stand; take a position based on principle and stick to it!

It has been this way for some time, and will continue to be this way until voters demand better and stop compromising because of blind party loyalty.

With our vote, we can send the message that things need to change. As a matter of conscience, I cannot see myself voting for either candidate that the major parties have offered up. Call it a wasted vote if you like, or a vote for the "other guy", but I have to live with myself and stand before God in the end, and I need to do it knowing I did it with integrity.


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (4:56 PM) : 

Bullfrog, I am getting closer and closer to your position.


Blogger Patrick M said ... (8:35 PM) : 

Dave: As for the positive campaign thing, it's October. Not that I think it's a good thing, but this has been standard operating procedure since the 1792 election.

Bullfrog: If there was a third party candidate I could really get behind, I'd be with you.


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (9:49 PM) : 

I am all for a third party person. I think they should let Nader in the debates. He's on every ballot.

What do they have to lose?

At the very least, he'll liven it up.


Blogger Patrick M said ... (6:21 AM) : 

You're forgetting Libertarian party candidate Bob Barr. He was almost my candidate. And he'd make it interesting, unlike Nader, who's Nader and therefore cracked.

But you're right that we should have third party participation in at least one, if not all the debates.


Blogger Bullfrog said ... (7:11 AM) : 

Or, here is an idea put forth by Joseph Farah at WorldNetDaily.com: since Conservatives are REALLY behind Palin more than McCain, write her in. This would be putting their money where their mouth is, while also sending a clear message that politics as usual is not cutting it. I suppose that also assumes Palin is not politics as usual, something which I am not convinced of yet.


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (7:47 AM) : 

Here's my bottom line on Palin. Bullfrog, you are right. Conservatives love her. At least religious conservatives. And why not? She has been successful, has drive, loves God, is patriotic, and has a US view that is shared by a lot of people who are not professional politicians. Many find that attractive.

But from what we have seen, I am not sure she has the chops to step into the Presidency.

And let's face it, many religious conservatives can't seem to wait for that happen, as you have noted.

A write in campaign is going nowhere. I think our best hope will be that many Americans in the 60% middle will get so pissed off that perhaps a saner version of Ross Perot may emerge.

If there was a party that could consistently get 20-30 percent of the vote, it would change politics in America.

I hope I am not tilting at windmills. But I know something has to change.


post a comment