Jamie

Weinstein

Read Jamie's bio and previous columns

September 1, 2008

Aside from Flash, Barack Obama is Nothing New

DENVER – To say that Barack Obama's speech at Invesco Field in Denver didn't live up to the billing should be to state the obvious. But, unfortunately, too many Obamamaniacs have drunk so much of the Great One's Kool-Aid that he could have come onstage naked and they would have praised his magnificent clothes. 

The speech was rhetorically solid, though not rhetorically brilliant like some of Obama's other orations. Substantively, Obama didn't offer anything novel. It was the standard liberal fare. I think I was owed a bit more for having waited two hours in line to get into the stadium.

I was most interested, however, in Obama's attempt to scrape away at John McCain's maverick image. This was, in fact, one of the themes of the Democratic National Convention. Speaker after speaker, including Obama, suggested that McCain's independent persona was a mirage. Depending on the speaker, McCain has voted with the Bush Administration 90 percent of the time, over 90 percent of the time or even 95 percent of the time.

This is what George W. Bush would call fuzzy math, and what I would call a terrible thematic strategy for the Democrats.

McCain is known too well for people to believe he is a rubber stamp for conservative causes. When this issue comes up in the presidential debates, it will not be John McCain who is on the defensive. McCain will shoot off a litany of high profile policies he has pushed in the Senate much to the chagrin of the Bush Administration. There is, of course, the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill, the McCain-Lieberman global warming bill and the McCain-Edwards-Kennedy Patients' Bill of Rights bill. McCain teamed up with Ted Kennedy to support President Bush's immigration proposal, a move that alienated much of the conservative base. McCain was also a member of the Gang of 14, a bi-partisan compromise on judges.

These are just a few proposals McCain has supported that one could aptly term as "maverick."  This is not to say that I agree with all of these proposals. I oppose many of them. But who could in all seriousness say that McCain a sycophant of George W. Bush or a blind partisan of conservative causes? The Maverick from Arizona time and time again has worked with members on the opposite side of the aisle to push legislation through Congress, or at least attempt to.

No, the senator who will be on the defensive when this issue is brought up during the presidential debates will not be Sen. McCain of Arizona, but Senator Hope and Change of Illinois. Obama has marketed his himself as a new kind of politician. While there is much rhetoric to support this, there is little evidence of action.

Unlike the small snapshot of McCain's Senate voting record that Obama and the other Democrats used in Denver to try to paint McCain as, well, President Bush, the totality of Obama's voting record in the Senate shows that he voted with the Democrats just about 97 percent of the time. Doesn't this make Senator Hope and Change a blind partisan?

I think Obama's most telling votes are the ones he cast against the confirmation of both John Roberts and Sam Alito to the Supreme Court. These were two extraordinarily qualified individuals with judicial records that were exemplary. President Bush has the prerogative of sending who he wants to the Senate for confirmation to the Supreme Court. Traditionally, senators vote to confirm these nominations unless there is something grossly wrong with the nomination. Only a blind partisan stuck in the old ways of politics would vote against both Roberts and Alito. After all, McCain (and nearly every other Republican) voted to confirm Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court in 1993 even though he surely didn't agree with her judicial philosophy.

This election comes down to rhetoric vs. action. Barack Obama talks a big game. He talks about how he will change politics, how he is a new type of politician. Where's the beef? Where's the evidence? Where are the revolutionary policy proposals? 

John McCain, on the other hand, is in actuality a different breed of politician. McCain has alienated members of his own party by fighting pork barrel spending. He has partnered with Democrats to move legislation through the Senate. He has taken positions that were anything but politically expedient. In fact, his support of the surge in Iraq and a temporary worker program for illegal aliens almost doomed his campaign. While McCain has a strong conservative voting record, he has proven the maverick label true time and time again. He isn't just rhetoric. He has a record of action.

Obama and his Democratic friends were full of fancy words in Denver. For those impressed with rhetoric alone, by all means vote for Barack Obama. If you believe in liberal causes and liberal policy proposals, there is no doubt that Barack Obama is the candidate for you. But don't vote for Barack Obama because you think he is some type of revolutionary politician. There is nothing to back that up.

© 2008 North Star Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.

This is column # JW031. Request permission to publish here.