Desperation on the Campaign Trail

McCain and Palin have resorted to the most outlandish accusations, baseless and absurd. Their true believers go along with this circus, but I hope no independent, thinking person buys this garbage. A couple of years ago, John McCain and Barack Obama could easily have cooperated on certain pieces of legislation, or at least had a civil disagreement. Now McCain accuses Obama of "socialism," as though we were living in the 1950s, afraid of the Red bogeyman. Obama is about as socialist as Alan Greenspan! His rhetoric, his proposals, his record are all mainstream, moderate, and no more "socialist" than anything or anyone else in the US. Is Medicare or Medicaid socialist? Are farm subsidies socialist? Is the bailout socialist? Is McCain's proposal to buy up bad mortgages and refinance them for the homeowners socialist? Is Social Security socialist? Come on, Sen. McCain.

Many right-wing radio hosts and Republican operatives (including some in this state) accuse Obama of being the "most liberal" Presidential candidate in this country's history. That is a patent lie, and no one who knows the slightest bit of history could say that with a straight face. These people don't even believe it themselves, trust me: they simply hope that throwing around these labels will scare people. They don't have a leg to stand on. Their party is bankrupt. George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the Republican administration in general have finally exposed the GOP as the Greedy Oligarchic Party, the party of utter corporate buyouts and sleaze, the party of aggressive wars on false pretexts. (And yes, there have been Democratic Presidents and legislators guilty of those same sins. But the Democratic Party still has enough true believers, enough true progressives, to not be entirely coated with those stains.)

Now we have Sarah Palin accusing Obama of "palling around with terrorists." Why doesn't she accuse George Bush of palling around with terrorist financiers (his buddies in Saudia Arabia)? Why doesn't she accuse John McCain of palling around with lobbyists (he does and has) and beer heiresses? It's all about as relevant and true, maybe more so in fact. Who cares that Obama served on a board with Bill Ayers or had a conversation with him? Bill Ayers, like many former 60s radicals, is nowadays a fully-integrated member of mainstream American society.

And Palin is even more absurd when she speaks of being in "pro American states" and says that in this campaign, Christianity and religion have been mocked. Again, Obama has far more evidence of being an observant, dedicated Christian church-goer than McCain, and he's more in the mainstream of US religious thought and practice than Gov. Palin.

Tell me now, anyone who is still undecided about whom to vote for this November: would you really go to bed confident and secure knowing that Sarah Palin was a heartbeat away from the Presidency? This candidate has little relevant experience, a record of erratic and somewhat fringe behavior, and no demonstrated ability to speak or think for herself on any of the major issues that we face as a nation and a world. If she is informed or intelligent, she is doing a good job of disguising it. After all, her declared constituency is labelled by her as a beer-swizzling ignoramus who probably argues loudly about politics at the bar or the tailgate party and then half the time doesn't even remember to vote. Joe Six Pack is not what our Founding Fathers envisioned as the noble American citizen. Can you imagine Abraham Lincoln or Theodore Roosevelt or Franklin Roosevelt or Martin Luther King or John F. Kennedy or Dwight Eisenhower addressing "Joe Sixpack"?

If McCain-Palin win this election, I will wash my hands of this American experiment and begin looking for jobs in Canada, Europe . . . or perhaps China, the biggest bank of them all.