The Leader with the Experience to Bring Us the Right Kind of Change We Can Believe In

I just watched McCain’s nomination acceptance speech. I thought it was a very good, solid speech, and it definitely made me feel better about the man. We’re lucky to have a choice between two fine men for the top job; I truly believe that we will not be f*cked, no matter which one is elected.

Hey, it’s a big step up from the last eight years, all right?

Here’s the thing: I like John McCain. I wanted him to get the nomination in 2000. I’m delighted that it’s him on the ticket this year and not Huckabee, Giuliani, or Stalin. There are issues on which I agree with McCain (nuclear energy, corporate taxes) and others on which I lean towards Obama (abortion, health care). But here’s why I can't just go down a list of issues and decide, why I’m still not comfortable with McCain.

For the last decade or two, it seems that the Republican Party has increasingly been thinking along these lines: "We’re the right people, and we have the right values. We can only turn these values into policies if we’re in power. Therefore, the purpose of the electoral process is to bring people like us to power and keep us there. Everything else is secondary."

For example: In 1986, Bill Clements ran for the governorship of Texas. Soon before the election, when things were looking difficult for him, a bug was found in the office of his adviser, the young Karl Rove. The scandal gave the race to Clements; many believed that Rove himself planted the device to garner sympathy and defame his client's opponent. During Bill Clinton's terms in office, his political opponents engaged in a savage campaign, not to counter his policies or discredit his ideas, but to destroy him personally. After wide-spread voting irregularities in the presidential election of 2000, the Supreme Court effectively gave the election to Bush. In a show of naked partisanship, the court split along party lines and further declared that its judgement could not be used to set precedent in any future case.

It's not that John McCain has ever been accused of anything nefarious. But in 2000 he ran an independent campaign. He did things his way, and he wasn't afraid to step on toes. Then, some time around 2003 or 2004, he began to give strong support to George Bush, the man and his policies. He's embraced those he once called -- rightly -- "agents of intolerance" and, under political pressure, reversed himself on tax cuts and immigration.

John McCain wised up. He realized that his message was not his party's message, and without his party behind him, he could not advance his career. So he made a common decision: to change the message. He wanted to be president more than he wanted to fight for what had been his values. And it's working. Congratulations.

I can't say that he made the wrong choice. He traded off some important ideals in order to have the chance to implement his ideas in other areas. That's politics; that's life. And when he says that he's a servant of his country, and that he'll do whatever it takes to change her for the better, I trust that he means it. But his words fall flat nonetheless, and not just because his policies on the economy and the wars are nearly identical to those that have failed us under the current president. It's that it all seems just a little too familiar.