| | For those of you who haven't seen it yet, the first presidential debate between McCain and Obama is online on youtube. The transcript for the debate is also available on CNN.
I definitely thought Obama did better on the economy and the bailout. He offered more concrete points and really addressed tax payers' concerns. On foreign policy and Iraq, the two differ fundamentally that debating is like 雞同鴨講 (chicken talking to a duck). McCain favours the hawkish force projection strategy, and Obama favours dialogue. McCain tried to hammer Obama on wasteful spending, but I thought Obama defended well enough. On this I probably agree with McCain more than I do with Obama. But Obama makes a good point in saying that McCain wants to solve this problem by "using a hatchet". I'm disappointed that both candidate are automatically taking the pro-NATO stance on Russia and it was never even brought up that Georgia was, in fact, the aggressor in this when it sent armed forces into two regions that had been de-facto independent for years. I'm not surprised by McCain's stance, but I'm especially disappointed in Obama and the Democrat base's support of NATO and Georgia's side in the conflict.
I'm not a particularly strong Obama supporter. But in the end, I am worried how McCain's hawkish foreign policy will affect the world. I cannot disagree more with his emphasis on using the military and force projection. Also, if the government is going to be wasting my tax dollars anyway, I'd rather have them wasted domestically than in nation-building overseas. And with the way that McCain is always metaphorically sucking General Patraeus' dick, I wouldn't be surprised if he would actually raise taxes for everybody if that was necessary to fund whatever course of action Patraeus suggests. Don't get me wrong - Patraeus does a great job. But there's a reason we don't just make him president. Our military actions - and so by extension military spending - must be dictated by a civilian government.
But I also completely understand that military operations do not function well on a time table. So I wish our two presidential candidates aren't so polarised in how to handle Iraq. I don't think staying in Iraq for "100 years" is a good idea, nor do I want a time table for withdrawal. I'm in agreement with Tammy Duckworth on Iraq - that what we're doing in Iraq is no longer fighting terrorism, it is now about controlling sectarian violence. And hell, was it ever really about fighting terrorism? Al Qaeda wasn't even in Iraq until we went in. Duckworth also wants more accountability in what we're doing in Iraq, and she basically said that if Iraqi forces are able to do the job of one American soldier, then that's one American soldier we should be sending home.
Another thing that has now made me definitely anti-McCain - the fact that Sarah Palin may actually become president is an absolutely scary thought. She is an idiot. I have no idea how it is that people might actually think that it is good to have a "hocky mom" in the White House. Why is that a good thing? I want somebody that's extremely educated and intelligent for the job, and not somebody whose background can be boiled down to that of a moose-hunting "hockey mom". Sure, some hockey moms are probably very intelligent and educated. But unfortunately, that is not Palin.
I will, however, be anxiously awaiting the Palin vs. Biden debate. With popcorn.
|
| | Posted 9/28/2008 10:35 PM - 24 Views - 0 eProps - 0 comments
- recommend
  - recs0
- share
- email
 - sent0
|
