2nd Presidential Debate… and My Head Exploded!
Okay — I understand now why McCain wanted the Townhall debate format. He is much, much better in this setting. Yes, he looked extremely stiff — and next to Obama, downright ancient. But McCain’s demeanor, and his answers, were much improved from the last debate.
Furthermore, these questions were exponentially better than we’ve seen to date, and I was thrilled to hear somebody finally start nailing both candidates down on priorities and sacrifice in the face of prior fiscal irresponsibility, heavy debt, and the troubled economy.
Unfortunately, I experienced some mental vapor-lock at the end of the health care topic, when Tom Brokaw asked whether health care was a right or a responsibility. I was sure Obama would see the trap — that there was no way he’d miss the flashing red lights and warning signs — but he stepped right into it.
Barack Obama said he thinks health care should be a right, and my head exploded.
Is this really the path he’d take us down? Modify the Constitution via yet another Amendment? Or are we just gonna jump right off of that life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness thing?
What an appalling can of worms to have opened at this late date. I was horrified… and I have absolutely no idea, again, how I’m going to vote come November.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
61 Responses to “2nd Presidential Debate… and My Head Exploded!”
Stockboy, you're absolutely right to criticize McCain on that mortgage proposal, and if you haven't yet seen it I'm sure you will- that most conservatives are livid over this.
As distasteful as it is to admit it, I now see what Rush Limbaugh meant about his opposition to McCain as the GOP nominee. Instead of providing a clear and rational alternative to doomed liberal economic policies, McCain's trying the “I care too!” approach.
And I was wrong to think that McCain would be the best strategic choice for the GOP because instead of getting credit where it's due for his bipartisanship and pragmatism over ideology, he doesn't get any of the benefit of that but gets all the blame when it goes wrong. Mind you, I still think he would be a good choice for the country as president at this time in our history- but strategically I now think that my former thinking was flawed. On the other hand though, maybe it's just that no one could possibly win from the GOP this cycle.
Stockboy- the point is that anyone who answers the question by saying it's a right had better explain what they mean by that. That's precisely the problem with all entitlements that have come to be thought of as Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Things change man, this world is a whole lot different than it was when the founding fathers founded America. Amend away!
CStanley, re your comment about the mortgage proposal… thanks. I don't really have anything more to add.. except some color…
I firmly and wholeheartedly believe in what Republicans once stood for… the fiscal responsibility…. but the GOP seems more interested in remaining in power and saying whatever it takes to do that, even giving up on their principles. I grew up a Republican (family from the North) in the Democratic South. What's interesting is that as the South turned Republican my family (except my brother) has turned Democratic (though willing to vote for the man, not the party). But the last couple of election cycles the GOP has absolutely thrown away everything that I believe in- fiscal responsibility, smart leadership, and the GOP now caters to the religious right who wants to shove their beliefs on everyone else (I may be in agreement with most of those beliefs but I do not believe in forcing my religious views on others).
The McCain mortgage bill is another example of the GOP giving up their principles of fiscal soundness (and just plain common sense) to try to gain votes. I would have been horrified if Obama had suggested it, but Obama understands the process, has run a great campaign and his decisions on the economy, etc. have been really intelligent (for the most part). McCain is willing to put himself in political peril if he believes he will gain votes. But McCain also gives up his principles. I've commented before that McCain would be doing a lot better if he were the McCain of 2000. I know several people who would have voted for McCain in 2000, and supported McCain going into the GOP primary. But no one knows what McCain stands for (except that he's “not Obama”, which sounds like Bush….. anything but what Clinton supported).
Superdestroyer's schtick is that the GOP is dead (or almost dead). I wouldn't go that far, and I do hope both parties become responsible (the Dems are far from perfect). But the existing GOP is headed for the dust bin. And even though I can't stand the GOP at this point, I do think they are absolutely essential to this country. At least the GOP that once was.
One last comment from on McCain and his $300 bn rescue… McCain was more of a liberal Democrat last night than Obama!
CStanley: re the “right” to healthcare…
I do not believe that healthcare should ba a constitutionally guaranteed right. But I think a prosperous America can afford to offer healthcare to all. After all it is easier to pay for preventative care then for people to show up at the emergency rooms once their illness has blossomed into some horrific disease…
Bottom line is that in this country if you don't have healthcare you are still treated when you go to the emergency room and taxpayers end up paying for your treatment anyway. The cruel and inhuman alternative is that if we don't believe in paying to treat people who are ill then we should start turning away everyone who shows up at an emergency room (including car crash victims who are about to die) without proof of insurance. Obviously I'm not advocating that position…. I'm just stating the alternative (and how cruel it would be) if we don't want to pay to treat uninsured people.
StockboySF:
Good comments, and a lot to discuss there.
First, on the right to healthcare: I fundamentally agree with you (and I think this is Polimom's position too) but there's a very important distinction between Constitutional rights and moral rights. I think most people have forgotten that or younger people have never been taught the difference, and I think that's very dangerous because a lack of understanding makes fiscal responsibility (and keeping the federal govt to a manageable size) impossible.
Do you get my point? And Obama most certainly knows the difference, so I think it's irresponsible of him to not address it.
CStanley: “there's a very important distinction between Constitutional rights and moral rights.”
I absolutely agree with you. There are some things so basic, such as the difference between constitutional rights and moral rights, that I don't think anyone needs to explain. Brokaw didn't ask whether healthcare was a right, privilege or responsibility under the constitution. But I suppose Obama could have spoken about morals and constitutional rights…. (though he probably would have run over his minute limit and been accused of being a long-winded intellectual).
By the way, while we're on the subject, what do you think of McCain's response that healthcare is a responsibility?
CStanley, you have some good comments, thanks! I don't have a lot of time right now to respond to everything but I do want to say that your comment, “…it's more right now than just choosing the particular man that I think is best for each position, it's about considering the balance of power.” Is particularly interesting and I tend to agree… and perhaps that's the ideal. Now having said that I acn't vote for a Republican at this time (though I did vote for Arnold as CA guv) until the GOP does return to some sort of fiscal responsibility and get the rest of their house in order. It's one thing to vote for a man based on his qualifications, but if that person relies upon the GOP establishment (or Dem, as the case may be) then he may be a good candidate, but his foundation and support are from the GOP and their base. If McCain choose Palin over Lieberman because of the influence on the religious right, then that's an example of an otherwise good candidate making a bad decision (I don't mean to discuss whether Palin is ready to be VP or not, that's been argued and according to recent polls over 50% of the American people feel she is unqualified to be VP). So while I think your “balancing” comment is good, it is difficult for me to vote for most GOP candidates because I know many of them will be pressured to make decisions they would not otherwise make. The GOP needs to be fiscally responsible and a fair party fighting for all citizens (and not just the “haves and have mores” who support the religious zealotry). The current incarnation of the GOP, “reducee taxes, go to war and stay in Iraq (with no plan for exit or even telling us what he thinks vistory should be, in McCain's case), raise spending and bailout our Wall St. supporters and fat cats” is not a party I could support.
I can understand your points, but we'll just have to agree to disagree. I guess it comes down to how we relatively judge each party's leadership right now- if I really thought the Dems were capable of decent leadership I'd be willing to risk unbalance in their direction for a while, but I don't think that's the case at all. I think the way they handled the financial crisis was abominable, for example, and my opinion on Iraq is the mirror image of yours.
I guess I see the GOP glass as half full and the Dems half empty, and vice versa for you.
CS
————– Original message ————–
CStanley, yes, I absolutely agree with you that we'll disagree on this.
I see it as a matter of how we prioritize the which get us to this point… I can't force you to have the same priorities (and experiences, thought, etc.) as I do and vice versa. i think we're both right on this. Or maybe I should say that I don't think either of us is wrong. I think a good analogy is this: if two people are talking about the weather- it's 80 degrees and sunny… one person may thing it's the perfect beach weather while another person may think it's too hot and bright. Neither are wrong. And so it is with this discussion….. Thanks, as always!
S-
[...] speaking of Franklin Delano Roosevelt… for those of you who wondered what I was reacting to in last week’s debate? It was rooted in another of his ideas — one that definitely [...]