Re: Obama Picks Biden

The following is a response to my post: Obama Picks Biden. Following that will be my counterresponse.

===Response===
First of all, I want to congradulate Biden for his vp nomination. I personally thought that Hillary Clinton could of brought the same message that Biden brought and more. She could of united the Democratic party and could of carried 18 million votes compared to Biden's 5,000. That's my opinion though. Biden is a good man and I respect him.

I want to mention this constant lie that McCain is like Bush. This is my message to Obama and others who think the same. Bush is not running this year, GET OVER IT! On the environment, U.S. diplomacy and nuclear proliferation, McCain has strikingly different views from Bush. And although he shares the president's goals in Iraq, he was always an outspoken critic of the way the war was managed.

Speaking of Iraq, the only reason why the White House now supports a withdrawel plan is because McCain's plan has worked. Obama wanted to pull out troops in a time that many though that Americans were losing the war in Iraq. We are now winning, and the Iraqis are beginning to stabilize the region by themselves, so Obama's plan works well now. The problem is that Obama wanted to pull out during a time that Iraq was in complete chaos. McCain was the first and one of the only men in the senate to push for the idea of the surge, and it now shows that he was right.

Back to the differences between McCain and Bush. McCain advocates the end to the detention of foreign terrorists in Cuba. Bush on the other hand thinks they should remain open. Unlike Bush, McCain is against any forced interrogation methods, such as Water-boarding. A week after the storm, McCain blasted Bush administration for the failed response to Hurricane Katrina.

There are other differences between McCain and Bush, but I think the most important difference is that Bush is clearly incompetent and McCain, though not perfect has shown clear competence. McCain would bring a different style, background and world view to the White House.

Secondly, Joe Biden is a good friend of John McCain. Biden said in many debates that Obama lacked experience. This could hurt the Obama campaign dramatically. He also said HIMSELF that he would be honored to campaign with or against McCain.

Although Biden has good foreign policy experience, he is the vp, not the president. I want a commander in chief, not someone who needs a mentor. Barack Obama is the president and he is going to have to make decisions on his own. He can't ask Biden for advise on every issue.

I will talk more about this topic, but I have to go to work right now.

===My Response===

You are correct that McCain differs from George Bush on diplomacy. Meaning he is even more of a neocon. Bush (or someone in his administration) has finally realized that diplomacy with hostile nations is the only way to solve problems, whereas McCain has repeated the "we deal with hostile nations with bombs not words" rhetoric.

You are also correct that the surge has worked and that McCain was correct about it. You do not remember the point I have made countless times before-that it is not the surge that determines one's judgement, it is the initial decision on the war. Obama stands alone in opposing the war from the beginning. Joe Biden himself has never come out and criticized the president for misleading the country into war, he has done what McCain has done and simply criticized its execution. This war could quite well produce a democratic paradise in Iraq. The country has forgotten that Bush did not take us into war to build a democracy. He took us into war to find weapons of mass destruction that he knew were not there. The tactics of the surge are up to the generals. Having knowledge of military strategy is far from a requirement to be president. I would much rather have someone who listens to advisors and can make a reasoned decision. The decision to go to war in the first place was the one that rested with the president. And Obama was right about that most important decision.

You must realize that calling McCain a Bush clone does not mean every single decision he will make will be the same. It is a way of pointing out McCain's vocal support for many of Bush's policies and his silence in opposing others. Biden today mentioned privatized social security. If you go to McCain's website, you will find that his health care plan is more of Bush's "more options" plan and none of the Democrats' socialized medicine. You will find that McCain wants to reverse the Roe v. Wade decision by appointing conservative judges. You will find that McCain does not support embryonic stem cell research to quickly find new cures for diseases. You will find a tax plan that gives more breaks to the wealthy than to the poor. I will not debate the merits of these positions here but I would like to point out that they look a lot like Bush's policies. On issues such as corruption, the environment, and the general competence of a McCain administration, he is much better than Bush and is as much of a change as Obama is. But those issues are less important than the economy, healthcare, and Iraq in the eyes of the voters. I agree, calling McCain a Bush clone does not do him justice. You could not have said that about the John McCain of 2000 or 2004. But his positions have moved more in line with Bush recently and I am really dismayed that such a great public servant has become the man he is today. McCain=Bush is not completely true. But it's a useful summary of many of his positions and it's good politics. It's better than much of the trash coming from the right.

Biden's past comments will do nothing to hurt Obama. In 1980, George H. W. Bush called Ronald Reagan's economic plan "voodoo economics" before he joined him as his vice president. It didn't hurt Reagan at all. Even though his plan of lowering taxes and increasing spending was total bullshit and eventually led to a HUGE deficit (not nearly Bush-sized), the voters didn't care about Bush 41's comments.

You need to remember that Hillary Clinton comes with a lot of people who hate her simply because she is Hillary Clinton. She comes with a lot more haters than new Obama voters. And she comes with a Bill Clinton who cannot be controlled by Obama. Although she is a great leader, it would not be politically feasible for Obama to pick her as VP. Besides, do you really think Clinton would tolerate being VP? She has much more clout in the Senate where she will most likely rise to leadership after the campaign. You will not catch a Clinton playing second fiddle to anyone.

I challenge you to show me an occasion where Obama has showed ignorance on foreign policy issues. Show me where he has erred (excluding the surge, I already addressed that) and showed that he doesn't know what he's talking about. You don't need to have served for a huge amount of time to know what's going on in the world. That's why the president has such a huge bureaucracy to aid him and give him information. I would much rather have a smart person who has smarter advisors as president. You don't have to know everything. John McCain knows absolutely nothing about the economy and has admitted it many times. Do you hold that against him? Henry Kissinger did pretty much all of Nixon's foreign policy. Does that detract from Nixon's accomplishments (visit to China, end of Vietnam)? You get the same result.

You will have to do better than say "Obama doesn't have experience" to convince me that his views are wrong. If people don't agree with his views, they won't care how much experience McCain has. Bush has one of the most experienced administrations in history. And you know how that turned out. People don't buy the experience argument as much as they used to.