From George Will in the Washington Post:
Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.
It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?
Ouch!
There's much in Will's column with which I disagree. I am opposed to nearly all of Will's positions on political issues. I almost never read his column, and I have no idea if Will and McCain are friends, but when a staunch conservative Republican pundit writes such biting words about the Republican candidate for president, people take note. Will cites McCain's temperament as making him unsuitable as president. Watching McCain on TV, one could easily arrive at that conclusion, and his impulsive choice of the unvetted Palin as his VP candidate only confirms it. What kind of Supreme Court justices would he choose?
Could this be the beginning of a substantial loss of support for McCain among Republicans? We can hope.
I hear through the political grapevine that David Brooks is making similar complaints.
ReplyDeleteYes, Mimi, we can hope. Dare we pray? Or is that just too much? Do we put our souls in danger if we do?
ReplyDeleteI hope 'Thy will be done" is sufficient.
Brooks, Will, Gingrich, Kristol... it is very interesting.
ReplyDeleteThe thing is that the true conservatives never had any use for McCain.
Now they have less use for him.
The morons in these dumbed down United States think Palin is great, but the conservatives with intelligence (i may loathe them but i can give them their due) must really think the worst.
But will they vote for Obama?
Mnnnnnn- I don't know.
For Brooks, that would be a true brainfart. His columns are the lamest. How he ever got a gig at the NYT is a deep mystery to me. Quite a few of his columns don't make any sense at all. If he writes against a McCain presidency, let's hope he throws a little clarity into the mix.
ReplyDeleteSusan, "Thy will be done," seems most appropriate.
But will they vote for Obama?
Fran, I don't know, either, but I hope the words of the Republican pundits against McCain count for something in the great land out there.
They won't vote for Obama, that's almost certain. But that doesn't matter, really, as long as they're angry enough to NOT vote for McCain.
ReplyDeleteThat's right. All the neocons have to do is stay home to make this thing work out.
ReplyDeleteI worked for a person who spent some time in the Hanoi Hilton, just 100 days--but the PTSD he suffered from gave him fits so violent and abusive and irrational --even to this day, that working for him was living hell. ---and I have little doubt that Son of Cain suffers likewise.
ReplyDeleteMargaret, I'm sure that time in prison took a heavy toll on McCain.
ReplyDeleteMimi,
ReplyDeleteThe true test of "done for" will be a critical column penned by Charles Krauthammer. Are you blessed with his presence on your op-ed page? That man live in a fantasy world.
George Will always pulls out a few surprises. He certainly criticizes the current administration more than most of the conservative columnists. But I do disagree with him most of the time.
Lynn, we are not blessed with Krauthammer in our newspapers, but I've read enough of him to know that I generally want to avoid his columns. When he turns, that'll be the day.
ReplyDelete