laneys.info Beware of Yankees, drunks, and loose women.

Nearly a year ago, USA Today published an article cowritten by Cal Thomas, a conservative columnist, and Bob Beckel, a liberal Democratic strategist.  They talked about the 2008 election cycle, which had already begun even then, and how while character does matter, there are still some things that should be off limits.  Several things struck me as interesting.

First is how often the hypocrisy shows up at the party.  Hillary Clinton, the author of the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" line, has shown remarkable restraint so far in not hitting Obama with personal attacks.  However, whether on their own or as part of a larger campaign strategy, those around her, including her husband, show no such trepidation.  Comments have even included references to drug use, despite the fact that these attacks are on behalf of someone who has seen firsthand the damage that personal attacks can do, including those of drug use.

Democrats who spent the first six years of President Bush's administration fillibustering and stonewalling him on his judicial nominees later took up the case of the ousted federal prosecutors, and one Congressional Democrat actually had the temerity to say, "the judiciary should be above partisan politics."

The same open-minded individuals who are so quick to point out people who deal in stereotypes, gay-bashing, racism, and other issues of surface-level discrimination (defined as discriminating against someone based on perceived items, such as skin color, instead of getting to know the person well enough to discriminate based on character) are the same people who take great delight in criticising President Bush for his odd vocabulary ("nukular," "strategery") and plain-spoken ways.

Republicans criticised Bill Clinton for relaxing the standards for gays in the military and wanted him to listen to the will of the people, then they spent the rest of his administration talking about how all he did was "sway in the wind of popular opinion."   Democrats thought Bill Clinton was brave for that same action, because he was standing against the popular opinion of a large part of the country, but they think George W. Bush is irresponsible and inflexible because he makes a decision based on what he thinks is right and won't change his mind just because it's unpopular.

What really matters in a President?  Do we want someone who gives us what we want, or someone who forces us to grow and take on the hard choices even when we don't want to do it?  Do we want someone who does what is right, or someone who is focused on right here and now?

As I've described before, I'm a moderate.  But to be more specific, I'm a social moderate and a fiscal conservative.  I supported John McCain during the 2000 Presidential primary, and I support him now.  I like that he doesn't walk in lock-step with the Republican party.  I like that he works across the aisle.  I like that he takes stands on issues based on his conviction.  I like that he fights against big-monied interests and pork-barrel spending.  I look forward to him whipping some of the mealy-mouthed pansies in Congress and the Department of Justice over their shameful dance around the issue of torture. But mostly, I like John McCain because I believe that he is focused on what is right, and will make us take that long, hard look at ourselves in the mirror and decide the tough choices when we'd rather wuss out.  To me, that is what being President is about, because that is true leadership.