McCain Impresses a Former Doubter Again
I attended a McCain event in Hollis hosted by the Squires family. This was my second McCain event, and I was invited specifically because I was on record as doubting whether McCain was the same candidate I supported in 2000. I supported him then because I felt he stood out as a man of principle and independent, intelligent pragmatism, something to truly cherish in a politician I think. What I read of his voting record over the years since seemed consistent with that.
A turning point for me came with McCain's appearance at Liberty University in 2006. McCain's characterization of the religious right in 2000 as "agents of intolerance" was completely aligned with my view, and given that that stance cost him valuable support I admired it even more. His decision to appear at Liberty University seemed to me a cave-in to a special interest group, a reversal on an issue dear to me that I could not forgive. He started to drop off of my radar at that moment, an apparently sad victim of the need to pander to special interests in order to get elected.
A friend is an organizer for McCain, and when he heard my comments insisted that I attend a McCain event, then another. I have to admit that my admiration and enthusiasm for this candidate has been rekindled.
McCain touched on several issues briefly before taking questions. I would characterize the crowd as demanding, challenging and certainly not entirely supportive (a far cry from the enforced fawning at a Bush event). McCain handled all questions in a straightforward, very respectful yet non-apologetic way.
On the topic of health care, an issue he called the most important domestic issue, McCain disparaged the Democratic single payer plans. In what I think separates him from some other candidates, McCain did not simply label their plans "socialized medicine", proclaim the U.S. system the best in the world, and leave it at that. Instead, he acknowledged the appropriateness of the goals, but proposed a different way of pursuing them. He is in favor of a base level of coverage for all Americans, for the very pragmatic reason that it impacts anyone who changes jobs (which most of us do multiple times). He's in favor of allowing Medicaid and others to buy drugs from Canada or elsewhere. And most importantly to me, he's in favor of using the marketplace to solve the issue most efficiently, with help from the government to point things in the right direction. I am not a believer that bigger government is better government, so McCain and I are aligned here.
On the topic of spending and deficits, McCain was very hard on Republicans, blaming them for the current fiscal situation. He specifically brought up the Alaskan "bridge to nowhere", sponsored by a Republican Senate colleage, as an example of wasteful spending. He pledged to veto any spending bill with pork barrel earmarks, and to not approve any new programs until it was defined how they would be paid for. On the former, I REALLY admire the sentiment and believe he's sincere, but don't fool myself that one person can completely change the current climate. Any improvement would be welcome, though. On the second point, it's about time; this response is responsible, and he never swore off any new taxes. In fact, he pointed out that he opposed the first Bush tax cuts.
Finally, McCain tackled Iraq. For my part, as a former Poly Sci major, I am acutely aware of how American credibility around the world impacts our ability to influence events in our strategic interest. Much of the rest of the world thinks that America can't be trusted to follow through on our commitments, and I tend to agree. I'm not happy that we're in Iraq, but we are. I'm livid about how Bush has conducted this war, but that's a "sunk cost" at this point, irrelevent to what we do going forward. A weakness of democracies is pandering to the current poll results; those results reflect that even many former supporters of the war have had enough, as if they didn't think Americans would die in Iraq. Our foreign policy can't afford to be that naive, and our credibility DOES matter. I'm not sure what the right answer is here, but the politically expedient stance that we should pull all of our troops out ASAP lacks courage and any strategic vision. Anyone who advocates that should be forced to explain how that will serve our long-term strategic interests. (My personal opinion is that "cut taxes" and "bring the boys home" are perhaps the two least politically couragous stances a candidate can take, with the greatest potential long-term harm to the country. Be wary of anyone who advocates either. We elect our politicians to take the long view, but our system rarely rewards that.)
McCain was challenged very appropriately to explain what the "end game" was for staying in Iraq. He was up front that any satisfactory solution required the Iraq govenment to step up and become effective. I have to say that given our own history, an expectation that an effective democracy could take root in a few years in Iraq also seems naive. I'm in favor of creating conditions that facilitate the ability to get there, which McCain correctly pointed out was about security. We need to demand progress, but we should be realistic about how much time that will take. We will be in Iraq for a long, long time because it's in our interest to do so.
McCain also got questions on campaign finance reform, on which he's been a leader. On immigration, he defended his view that not all illegal aliens can be deported, a view for which he's taken significant political damage (and one that seems so patently obvious that it's hard to understand why); again a reason to admire his political courage to do what he thinks is right.
After the event I researched McCain's visit to Liberty University, and found encouraging information. He never endorsed in any way the religious right, avoiding any of their hot-button issues (and thus not having to compromise any of his views). It was clear from news reports that he has certainly not been embraced by the religious right. He also defended the right of people to challenge our strategy in Iraq, a far cry from the current administration who would label any such dissent "unpatriotic" (a real hot-button issue for me).
All in all, while I don't agree with everything he stands for, I think McCain is the most complete candidate for me. I think I can trust him to do the right thing.