the mccain problem (part 1)

[space--do not delete]

is ann coulter serious when she says that if mccain gets the republican nomination she'll support hillary over him?

with her you've always gotta wonder, but yeah, i actually think she might be--she is that anti-mccain, and she's far from alone among conservatives in that regard.

so why do they hate him--a fellow republican--so much? oh, there are all kinds of typical-republican reasons, such as:

• his distaste for the religious right
• his "soft" stance on terror (because he opposes waterboarding and other forms of torture, and advocates closing guantanamo)
  
• his criticism of rumsfeld (yeah, seriously)
  
• his co-authorship--along with a liberal anti-war democrat--of campaign-reform legislation

in addition they have a couple of, to my mind, seriously legitimate gripes against the guy:

• his votes against bush's middle-class tax cuts
• his collaboration with ted kennedy on a de facto amnesty bill for illegal immigrants

so basically, the right sees mccain as a maverick that can't be controlled or counted on to put his party's interests first--i.e., basically the same way the dems saw lieberman. normally, this independent streak would elevate a candidate in my estimation, but not in the case of mccain; on the contrary, i see him as by far the most dangerous of the four remaining viable candidates--and for some reasons that nobody seems to be talking about.

until tomorrow, anyway.

from the "takes one to know one" file

test
"I pity the guy who takes Rudy for vice-anything; he'll need a food taster."

Al Sharpton, 1997

words to the wise, all i'm sayin.

the fatal four

let's handicap the republicans first:

john mccain

• strengths: most experienced, seasoned insider, war hero, reputation as a straight shooter and bipartisan coalition-builder, stalwart in the war against terror.
  

• fatal flaws: despised as a turncoat and closet liberal by his own party's base (even rush limbaugh hates him); seen as old, out-of-touch and a probable continuation of the bush administration by most everybody else.

mitt romney

• strengths: smart, accomplished, god-fearing, self-made man, superb executive, grasp of world economy, reputation as problem-solver, impeccable personal and business history, great hair, profile fit for a coin, picture-postcard family.

• fatal flaws: mormon, branded as untrustworthy by left and right alike due to blatant and unconvincing shape-shifting from massachusetts social-progressive to red-state conservative, mormon, off-putting elitist persona--and did i mention his religion?

and now, the democrats:

barack obama

• strengths: smart, sexy (around here, he's barack obaby), accomplished, idealistic, passionate, seen as anti-iraq-war visionary, articulate sweet-talker, charismatic as all get-out, great wife and kids--and that momentum.

• fatal flaws: black, young, scary-inexperienced, unproven, unseasoned--and that name (especially the middle one).

hillary clinton

• strengths: smart, seasoned, powerful, policy-savvy, husband's legacy, high profile, inevitability factor.

• fatal flaws: female, alienating persona, husband's demagoguery, the fact that she's hillary clinton.

bottom line? given all the variables, and regardless of which horse i might personally back, i can see only one sure-fire winner come november--one truly inevitable candidate.

and his name is al gore.

history may not repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme

Herbert Hoover--only nine months into his presidency--assembled leaders from the public and private sectors to create an economic-stimulus package. Among the measures, Time magazine reported at the time, was a promise from Congress to offer bipartisan support for a tax-cut package.

excerpt from an interesting little article by michael kitchen over at marketwatch pointing out the similarities between what happened in 1929 and what's happening now. because, as he points out, the great depression didn't just suddenly begin full-blown with the october crash--it was only seen that way in retrospect. in actuality, our gradual slide into depression took place over the course of a couple years, marked by the same sorts of events we are seeing today.

definitely worth reading even if you're not an impending-doom junkie like me.