McCain the Stalwart
Charles Krauthammer
Friday, October 24, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Contrarian that I am, I'm voting for John McCain. I'm not talking about bucking the polls or the media consensus that it's over before it's over. I'm talking about bucking the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama before they're left out in the cold without a single state dinner for the next four years.
I stand athwart the rush of conservative ship-jumpers of every stripe -- neo (Ken Adelman), moderate (Colin Powell), genetic/ironic (Christopher Buckley) and socialist/atheist (Christopher Hitchens) -- yelling "Stop!" I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I'd rather lose an election than lose my bearings.
First, I'll have no truck with the phony case ginned up to rationalize voting for the most liberal and inexperienced presidential nominee in living memory. The "erratic" temperament issue, for example. As if McCain's risky and unsuccessful but in no way irrational attempt to tactically maneuver his way through the economic tsunami that came crashing down a month ago renders unfit for office a man who demonstrated the most admirable equanimity and courage in the face of unimaginable pressures as a prisoner of war, and who later steadily navigated innumerable challenges and setbacks, not the least of which was the collapse of his campaign just a year ago.
McCain the "erratic" is a cheap Obama talking point. The 40-year record testifies to McCain the stalwart.
Nor will I countenance the "dirty campaign" pretense. The double standard here is stunning. Obama ran a scurrilous Spanish-language ad falsely associating McCain with anti-Hispanic slurs. Another ad falsely claimed McCain supports "cutting Social Security benefits in half." And for months Democrats insisted that McCain sought 100 years of war in Iraq.
McCain's critics are offended that he raised the issue of William Ayers. What's astonishing is that Obama was himself not offended by William Ayers.
Moreover, the most remarkable of all tactical choices of this election season is the attack that never was. Out of extreme (and unnecessary) conscientiousness, McCain refused to raise the legitimate issue of Obama's most egregious association -- with the race-baiting Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Dirty campaigning, indeed.
The case for McCain is straightforward. The financial crisis has made us forget, or just blindly deny, how dangerous the world out there is. We have a generations-long struggle with Islamic jihadism. An apocalyptic soon-to-be-nuclear Iran. A nuclear-armed Pakistan in danger of fragmentation. A rising Russia pushing the limits of revanchism. Plus the sure-to-come Falklands-like surprise popping out of nowhere.
Who do you want answering that phone at 3 a.m.? A man who's been cramming on these issues for the last year, who's never had to make an executive decision affecting so much as a city, let alone the world? A foreign policy novice instinctively inclined to the flabbiest, most vaporous multilateralism (e.g., the Berlin Wall came down because of "a world that stands as one"), and who refers to the most deliberate act of war since Pearl Harbor as "the tragedy of 9/11," a term more appropriate for a bus accident?
Or do you want a man who is the most prepared, most knowledgeable, most serious foreign policy thinker in the United States Senate? A man who not only has the best instincts, but has the honor and the courage to, yes, put country first, as when he carried the lonely fight for the surge that turned Iraq from catastrophic defeat into achievable strategic victory?
There's just no comparison. Obama's own running mate warned this week that Obama's youth and inexperience will invite a crisis -- indeed a crisis "generated" precisely to test him. Can you be serious about national security and vote on Nov. 4 to invite that test?
And how will he pass it? Well, how has he fared on the only two significant foreign policy tests he has faced since he's been in the Senate? The first was the surge. Obama failed spectacularly. He not only opposed it. He tried to denigrate it, stop it and, finally, deny its success.
The second test was Georgia, to which Obama responded instinctively with evenhanded moral equivalence, urging restraint on both sides. McCain did not have to consult his advisers to instantly identify the aggressor.
Today's economic crisis, like every other in our history, will in time pass. But the barbarians will still be at the gates. Whom do you want on the parapet? I'm for the guy who can tell the lion from the lamb.
Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are over 25 comments to this post, your eventual comment will no longer trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically








Man, I thought we were going to lose the good Dr. to Obama along with the other intellectual crowd who fears of not being with the 'in' crowd.
EB, I'm glad I tagged you quite a while back regarding the 6 words to describe yourself.....yours "Paratus Ad Vitem Paratus Ad Mortis"...."Prepared for Life, Prepared for Death" may be the best one ever and I think of it daily. Just a quick note to say thanks.
Comment by Joe Gringo— 2008/10/24 @ 11:29 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/24 @ 01:06 PM — (Reply)
Comment by jim— 2008/10/24 @ 02:29 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/24 @ 03:32 PM — (Reply)
One of my friends has written:
John McCain is not a perfect man, nor is he without justifiable criticism of his previous positions; but John McCain is an open book. His service to his country and his associations has been honorable, and trustworthy.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/24 @ 03:36 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/24 @ 03:38 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/24 @ 03:50 PM — (Reply)
On the other hand, we have the Democratic exemplars: domestic and international terrorists, convicted felons, Chicago gangsters, racists, separatists, and ACORN affiliates.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/25 @ 06:06 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/24 @ 03:52 PM — (Reply)
Re: Acorn. My question is based on the word affilate. That whole litany sounds like so many buzzwords for other things.
Isn't the GILF allied allegedly with Alaska separatists? In my mind, that type of innuendo doesn't disqualify her from office.
Do you have a friend who claims Obama is a muslim? I would enjoy reading some "facts" from one of your friends on that subject.
Speaking of "friends".....are you John McCain playing at blogging?
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/25 @ 01:37 PM — (Reply)
Palin and the Alaskan Separatists?
Have you read the goals of said group? All they want is the vote they were entitled to.
from Wikipedia
The Alaskan Independence Party is a political party in the U.S. state of Alaska that advocates an in-state referendum which includes the option of Alaska becoming an independent nation. The party also advocates positions similar to those of the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party, supporting gun rights, privatization, home schooling, and limited government. The party has appeared on the ballot in Alaska in all state elections since 1970.
The Alaskan Independence Party was originally founded with the goal of getting Alaskans a right to vote on their statehood, much the same way Puerto Rico has a vote on its statehood. Referring to Alaska's 1959 admission to the union, the AIP charter states: "The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four choices:
Remain a Territory.
Become a separate and Independent Nation.
Accept Commonwealth status.
Become a State.
The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, which was for Alaskans to achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences." [3].
Since its founding, the AIP has radically changed with respect to the issue of secession. At present, it does not support secession, though, at its founding, it did.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/27 @ 05:55 AM — (Reply)
Regarding the alleged "powerful figures" who have endorsed McCain, even Fox News hasn't given them 15 minutes? Why? Because the vast majority of the public could care less about their partisan opinions. The interesting thing about Powell is that the public perceives him as nonpartisan and rightly so in my opinion. Therefore, his commentary has more merit based on that as well as his resume.
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/27 @ 08:33 AM — (Reply)
The pastor you're referring to was John Hagee and it wasn't because he was racist. The press didn't think his remarks on gays were PC enough. McCain never attended Hagee's church for 20 years or even ever for that matter. So there's a big difference there. McCain never said Hagee was like a relative to him like Obama and Wright.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/27 @ 10:09 AM — (Reply)
Hagee also apologized for his remarks, did Wright do that? NOPE...got on the boob tube and embarrassed not only himself but Obama all over again.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/27 @ 10:12 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/27 @ 10:19 AM — (Reply)
POTIVS MORI QVAM FOEDARI - My FILs
ACTA NON VERBA - Mine
Comment by FJ— 2008/10/25 @ 03:00 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/25 @ 04:51 PM — (Reply)
Read carefully Ed he calls Obama none of these, he's referring to his associates
On the other hand, we have the Democratic exemplars:
domestic and international terrorists - Bill Ayers, Hamas et al also support him
convicted felons - Tony Rezko
Chicago gangsters - The Daly's
racists and separatists - Father Pfleger and Reverend Wright
ACORN affiliates - has represented them and given them money
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/25 @ 06:29 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/25 @ 06:31 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/25 @ 06:38 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/26 @ 05:38 AM — (Reply)
Are Colin Powell, Alan Greenspan, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and T. Boone Pickens "known communists as well?
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/26 @ 07:07 AM — (Reply)
NO they're not, but if you read Powell's reasons for supporting Obama you'll see that he gave reasons like he's got good rhetoric. Doesn't seem like reason enough to me.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/26 @ 09:42 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/26 @ 09:46 AM — (Reply)
4 former Sec. of State have endorsed McCain...did they get 30 minutes to provide a McCain commercial like Powell did on Meet the Press for Obama?
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/26 @ 10:05 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/26 @ 10:45 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/26 @ 11:30 AM — (Reply)
THERE's the retort of the whole thread here..WHY, indeed? Great question.
McCain actually mentioned that this morning with Mumblin' Brokaw .... "so many past generals and Sec of Defenses, etc., are supporting me.."
The media doesn't care...truth makes no matter; full disclosure makes no matter, etc etc. THIS IS AMERICA? WHAT HAPPENED!?
Comment by Z— 2008/10/26 @ 06:34 PM — (Reply)
THERE's the retort of the whole thread here..WHY, indeed? Great question.
McCain actually mentioned that this morning with Mumblin' Brokaw .... "so many past generals and Sec of Defenses, etc., are supporting me.."
The media doesn't care...truth makes no matter; full disclosure makes no matter, etc etc. THIS IS AMERICA? WHAT HAPPENED!?
Comment by Z— 2008/10/26 @ 06:35 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/27 @ 01:46 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/27 @ 05:57 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/26 @ 11:08 AM — (Reply)
I've not called him a communist nor a muslim..these are strawmen. I believe he's a leftist. He has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.
Yes he's guilty by association. Those associates have bombed our government buildings, gone unrepentant and uncharged for those actions. Davis is a hard core communist and Obama calls him his mentor. That concerns me. What also concerns me is that Obama isn't embarrassed by these associations and that the media has been culpable in ignoring them. A mentor is someone who helps you form ideas, is a wise and trusted counselor or teacher. That means that policies and Supreme Court justices would be affected by these associations. Justices that would affect law for the next generation. I didn't spend 20 years in the service trying to keep socialists out of the country just to see one voted in.
I mean no disrespect to you Ed or Barry.
Now I think the media covered Powell's endorsement because it was a poke in the Bush Administrations eye and by extension the media toady's push Obama's rhetoric that Bush = McCain.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/26 @ 11:29 AM — (Reply)
BG
Comment by Barry G.— 2008/10/26 @ 12:31 PM — (Reply)
Ed, so very little is known in the way of how Obama thinks. His career has been so meteoric that his associations become glimpses into his ideology. As well as his comments.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
most often attributed to Karl Marx
"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance at success, too. And I think that when we spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Barrack Obama in reply to Joe the Plumber
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2008/10/27 @ 05:44 AM — (Reply)
Very impressive latin Mr. FJ. However, it appears to have no relation to the context of the commentary.
Not your commentary, anyways... btw/fyi - You might want to note that: A) This isn't your blog and B) Your not the only one making comments. My post was in response to Joe Gringo's post #1.
Comment by FJ— 2008/10/27 @ 05:28 AM — (Reply)
That's going to be one helluva tatt. EB, got to see photo!
Comment by Joe Gringo— 2008/10/27 @ 09:03 AM — (Reply)