A Philosopher's Blog

Philosophical Essays on Many Subjects

mccain

ISIS

by 20 Comments

ISIS (or ISIL) got America’s attention and now the war of rhetoric has begun in ernest. While the Republicans seem generally pleased that we are saddling up again, they have raised some criticism against President Obama’s strategy. Interestingly, many of these criticisms have been aimed at Obama’s word choices.

I recently heard an interview with Senator Marco Rubio on NPR. Rubio’s main criticism seemed to be that Obama was unwilling to commit to destroying ISIS completely.  The interviewer pointed out that such groups tend to reform or create spin-off groups rather than be destroyed. When the interviewer asked him if that goal was realistic or not, Rubio responded by saying that it could be done and gave an example of how the group that became ISIS had been destroyed previously. The interviewer politely noted that Rubio had actually supported his (the interviewer’s) point, but let Rubio ignore his own example and switch quickly to another issue.

As a general rule, it seems difficult to bomb such groups out of existence, mainly because the groups are defined by ideas and killing old members tends to merely attract new members. Obviously, this method could work-with enough killing a group would run out of possible members. However, the history of radicalism and America’s attempts to kill its way out of a problem show that destroying a group by bombing seems unrealistic. After all, we are still fighting Al Qaeda and ISIS can be plausibly seen as a new brand of Al Qaeda.

Another common criticism of Obama’s words is that he did not say that he would do whatever it takes to destroy ISIS. He merely said he would do what it takes to do so. On the one hand, this could be seen as a petty semantic point, a mere whining about words. On the other hand, this could be taken as a more substantial point. After struggling to end the Afghanistan and Iraq wars that he inherited, Obama has been reluctant to get the United States into yet another costly, protracted and likely futile ground war in the Middle East. As such, when he has acted, he has done so with limited goals and minimal engagement. Interestingly, the results have been somewhat similar: we dumped billions into Iraq and ended up with a chaotic mess. We dumped far less into Libya and ended up with a chaotic mess. I suppose that it is better to get a mess on the cheap than for a high price.

Obama, I think, is wise to keep American involvement limited. The hawks crying for war seem to have amnesia regarding our last few adventures since Viet Nam. Unfortunately, escalating involvement (trying to do whatever it takes) has never paid off. It seems unlikely that this time will be the charm.

The obvious reply is that we have to do something, we cannot just let ISIS behead Americans and establish a state. I agree. My concern is the obvious one: doing something is not a good strategy and neither is doing whatever it takes. We should be honest and admit that we have not gotten it right in the past and that doing the same damn thing will not result in different results.

I am not going to tell McCain or Cheney to shut up-they have every right to express their views. However, they have no credibility left. So, they should talk-but it would be unwise to listen.

How Obama Won

by Leave a Comment

Historians and pundits will be picking through the 2008 election for years, but there seem to be four main factors that made an Obama win possible.

First, there is Obama himself. He put together an excellent team, developed an effective strategy, and was a master at presenting himself. He also excelled at damage control. Further, he has the traits that Americans are looking for in a leader: he is calm, rational, competent and confident. He also seems to be willing to take steps to bring Americans together, even to the point of possibly including Republicans in his cabinet.

Second, there was McCain and Palin. McCain has many virtues, but the ability to run an effective and strategic campaign is not among them. As the pundits pointed out, he had no overall strategy and seemed to lurch from tactic to tactic based on what day of the week it was and what tape or rumor  about Obama happened to surface. Palin also seems to have been a slight drag on the ticket. Perhaps not enough to make a major difference, but enough to take votes away from McCain. Of course, it was impressive to see McCain keeping his campaign going. It was like watching a pilot somehow keeping a bullet ridden and burning plane in the air.

Third, there was the economy. As the pundits have said, if the economy was doing well and the #1 issue was security, McCain would have most likely won. However, McCain came across as weak on the economy and fumbled badly when the crisis arose. Obama handled the situation with more skill and succeeded in coming across as confident. Further, concern about the economy no doubt helped erode concerns about race. This is, of course, the classic foxhole effect. In times of such worry people care less about factors like race and more about whether someone can help them out. Obama did an excellent job convincing the American people that he can handle this crisis while McCain did not. Hence, the tanking economy gave Obama a critical boost by switching the race to McCain’s weak point and also dampening concerns about race.

Fourth, there was George Bush and the Republicans. Their actions  lead to incredibly low approval ratings and to a damaged Republican brand. McCain not only had to run against Obama, he also had to run against the damage done by his own party. If McCain had been able to do more to separate himself from Bush, then he might have had a better chance. Amazingly, calling himself a maverick did not do this. Of course, McCain was in a difficult situation: he had to cozy up to the party to get the support and funds he needed, but had to distance himself from that party to avoid being dragged down. In the end, he was unable to make it work.

The Attack that Wasn’t

by Leave a Comment

A young McCain campaign worker was recently the center of a rather odd incident.  The gist of the story is that she told the police she had been attacked by a black man because of her McCain sticker. According to her initial story, the man “wrote” a backwards B on her face using a dull knife. As it turns out, she later admitted that nothing of the sort happened-she saw that she had the B on her face and simply made up the story. Not surprisingly, the police have recently said that she has a history of mental problems.

The evidence seems to be that this was not a calculated attack against Obama’s campaign. Instead, it seems to be an unfortunate incident involving someone who clearly seems to be in need of help. Naturally, some people will make note of the fact that the imaginary attacker was said to be a black man and interpret this as involving racism. Some might also suspect that this was not just an unfortunate incident, but that the woman intended to launch an attack on Obama that would stir up the old fears of black men attacking white women.

Interestingly, I do suspect that some people will believe that the attack was real, much as some folks still think that Obama is a Muslim or an Arab. I’m reasonably confident that emails and rumors are already going around that Obama’s supporters (especially black men) are targeting McCain supporters (especially young white women) for violence. I’m confident that McCain does not support such tactics. He certainly seemed genuinely disgusted with and tired of the unfounded attacks on Obama. Of course, the negative tactics that his campaign have adopted certainly have not helped matters.

Fortunately, while we Americans often disagree in very heated ways when it comes to politics, we generally do not enage in politically inspired violence against one another. Not to say that it never happens, of course.

In any case, I hope the woman gets the help she needs.

Is the Real McCain Coming Back?

by Leave a Comment

The campaign has taken some nasty turns lately. The crowds at Republican events have contained a few very angry an hateful people-some of whom have called for Obama’s death. McCain himself was recently booed for quelling such behavior.

While this action earned him boos, he is doing the right thing. Virtue is not alway appreciated or rewarded by others; that is why it must be its own reward so often.

It is good to see McCain acting in accord with good principles. His actions have helped restore some of my hope in the political process. I hope Obama will follow his lead and they can both pull this campaign up out of the muck. In this time of crisis, we need leadership and virtue. We do not need hatred, petty attacks, and malice. Yes, we do and should disagree. But, we should do it as Americans with a common cause, a common fate, and (hopefully) a common set of key values. McCain has shown that he is a better man and so should we.

While it might sound a bit corny (or , as some might say, Republican), I believe in America and think that we stand for many good things. Yes, we have done terrible things, but we have done many great and noble things as well. We can do those noble and great things once more, but is not just up to the man who will be in the White House One person can lead the way, but he cannot do it alone.

Hatred, Racism and the Campaign

by Leave a Comment

American politics is no stranger to negative ads, anger, hatred and racism. However, I had been hoping that were were moving away from that sort of evil. However, the Republican campaign has been stirring up quite a frenzy at its events. Recently, it has been reported that people at Republican rallies have been calling Obama a terrorist, making racist remarks to a black cameraman, and even calling out “kill him” in reference to Obama. It must be noted that the Republican campaign is not officially encouraging racism. But, as I write this, nothing is being done to rein in that sort of behavior.

The evidence seems to be that McCain is not behind this trend. He is gererally regarded as an honorable man and his adopted daughter is black. MCain also seems uncomfortable with personally attacking Obama. He has even been condemned by the right for not bringing up the Ayers connection at the debate. Hence, I do not think that he intends for his campaign to take a racist turn and I think her would prefer to run a cleaner contest. However, little (or nothing) is being done to rein in and condemn such behavior. McCain should take a clear a stand against these sort of remarks and respond to them in no uncertain terms. He is a better man than this current trend indicates and, I believe, the vast majority of Republicans are better than that.

It is no doubt tempting to tap into religious and racist fears. However, this leads us away from the people we can be and should be. McCain can show what sort of man he really is by taking firm action against this hateful trend.

I used to think you were a good man, John. Show me that I wasn’t wrong.

Is the White House Ready for Black Man?

by 2 Comments

While Obama is enjoying a growing lead in the polls, my students still ask me if I think that America is ready for a black President. Some of them also express concerns that the election will be stolen from Obama or that he might be assassinated if elected. While these are both legitimate worries, I will just focus on the first concern in this blog.

The question “is America ready for a black President?” can be taken as meaning many things. When people ask it now, they often seem to really be asking “will Obama win?” The answer seems to be: it is possible.

The question can also be taken as asking whether the majority of Americans are willing and able to set aside the consideration of race when voting for President. The answer to this could be yes, but Obama could still lose.

Interestingly, some people I have spoken with about this think that unless a person votes for Obama, that person must not be ready for a black man in the White House. However, this need not be the case. After all, a person could set aside consideration of race and still prefer McCain to Obama (or another non-black candidate to a black candidate). For example, a voter might believe that McCain can keep America safer than Obama or she might be pro-life and consider that a decisive issue. In this case, it is not that the person must not be ready for a black President. She just prefers McCain to Obama.

Obviously, if someone votes against Obama because he is black, then he would not be ready for a black man in the White House. As such, you would have to know why a person did not vote for Obama to know whether they were ready for black man as President or not. Naturally, this will be a hard thing to determine: few people will come out and say that they vote based on race.

One obvious way to get some insight into whether America is ready for a black President or not is to look at how the election turns out. If Obama wins, then the answer would seem to be yes. If Obama does not win, then things are far less clear. The explanation for such a hypothetical loss could be race or perhaps not.

Since people are unlikely to admit to racism, one method that can be employed if Obama loses is to compare the election results with the poll results. If the poll results indicated a commanding lead and then Obama does not win, then one explantion could be the Bradley Effect: Some voters say (in polls and surveys) they will vote for the black candidate, but cannot overcome their views of race and actually vote against him/her. If this is how it turns out, then this would indicate that America seemed to be ready for a black President but was not. Of course, this would be a fairly weakly supported conclusion. White candidates running against white candidates sometimes poll well and then lose the actual election (like Kerry) and that obviously cannot be attributed to racism. The same factors that lead to such situations for white candidates could occur for a black candidate and race need not be a factor at all.

So, if Obama wins, the answer to the question would be a clear “yes.” If he does not win, then the answer is less clear. Perhaps America is ready for a black President, but perhaps not enough people want that black President to be Obama.

%d bloggers like this: