No worries TAA, maybe I will clarify further. Firstly, I am not a partisan and cant stand our system of parties. I never said Obama was a centrist and am fully aware he isnt. Maybe what I should have said, is that it would be wise for the GOP to move to the center which they have through the McCain nomination. That being said, I would still vote for McCain over Hillary if she were to become the nominee. I like Obama, I think we need a breath of fresh air into American government he brings. The other scenario being for me personally a lesser of two evils sort of thing.
I see what you're saying. But the primary problem with the GOP is that it already
hasmoved to the center. In their effort to become a "big tent" party, they've lost the moorings of their underpinning values.
There are two aspects to conservatism: 1) the social aspect and 2) the governmental aspect. I am both. But in truth the first is dependent on the second. If the government would just do it's job, as laid out by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, WE the people as enumerated in the Declaration of Independence would be able to decide more of those social aspects for ourselves, by our choices of how we live, where we live, who we associate with, what we support, etc.
McCain would not be my first candidate of choice, as he has not adhered to the second aspect of the conservative criteria as much as he should have. Part of that is representative of the whole party's move toward the center. The problem is that as this has been happening, the liberal side has been shifting further toward the left. The center line has moved, shifting to the left significantly in the past (ball park time frame!) 20-25 years.
The Contract With America symbolized a concerted effort to pull it back right, focusing on the governmental values that conservatism traditionally embodies. The Republicans failed, becoming more enamored with their power, their position, and their desire "play nice." Instead of standing on the principals that put them there, instead of fighting their battles and winning the hearts and minds of those opposing them, they chose to "play nice", water down the message and just get along.
On the surface, I like Obama, too. He is a new player in the same game, though. I don't think the breath of fresh air experience would last past his inauguration. I see nothing but $$$'s lining up, sucking out of working America's pockets, swirling through the air and sinking in the vast black holes of current government programs, their expansion and the new ones he wants to add. There will be no cleaning up in Washington. It will change, but I truly believe we won't like the changes. This is based on his certifiable record.
Four more years of Clintonism are absolutely unthinkable. The example of her most recent document dump of her records is a great confirmation of that fact. 11,000 documents, for the most part doing nothing to bolster her claims that she would hit the ground ready "from day 1", leaving "at least as many questions as they answer about her statements in the campaign promoting her foreign policy experience. - Pete Yost, AP".
McCain is older than any previous man running for the first term as President. He is not the oldest seeking the office, though. It's always been for four-year terms. I think his critics would be well served to use caution when they try to through up the age issue. First of all, that in itself is discriminatory, as much so as race, religion, creed, etc.
If someone wants to use a situation where he stumbled verbally as justification to question his ability to serve, all I've got to say is they'd better get out a pretty big pencil because the list goes on, and on, and on. ALL these candidates, and those who have fallen by the wayside, have put their proverbial feet in their proverbial mouths.
This points to one other problem: When Republicans mis-speak or act, someone is quick to correct them, point it out, demand apologies, or even their resignation - whatever for the circumstance. When it's a Democrat, their compatriots are quick to smooth things over by always telling us what he or she
really meant in word or deed.
