Disgusting . . .

Is anyone else as as disgusted as I am at all the presidential campaigns for using the tragic assassination of Benazir Bhutto as a way to  shamelessly tout their own supposed foreign policy credentials?

These guys (and a gal) have spent the last two days knocking each other over to get before a camera or a mic to pontificate about something they obviously know very little about.  Unless you are already in the White House and privy to hard intelligence, you probably don't know squat about what really happened and who did the dastardly deed

The most egregious examples so far are ambulance-chaser turned senator, John Edwards telling the faithful at a political rally that he just got off the phone with President Musharraf in Islamabad.  Can't you just see that conversation from Musharraf's end?  He's in a high-level meeting with his nation exploding all around him and an aide walks in and says, "Mr. President . . .  There's a John Edwards on the phone for you.  He says its important . . ."  Can't you just imagine Musharraf's reaction.  "Who?"

Then there is John McCain.  "I knew Benazir Bhutto.  I've known Musharraf for years.  I've talked with general so and so . . .  I talked with Moses and Abraham."  And then McCain has the nerve to tell American voters what Musharraf should do, as if McCain was a candidate for Pakistani generalissimo.  McCain's an America hero, but recounting the names in his address book on camera to jump-start his campaign is pretty cynical.

Huckabee didn't even know martial law in Pakistan had been suspended.  Hillary tells us she knew Bhutto well, but only because Hillary had contact with her as first-lady, not in any meaningful political/policy sense.  Now Hillary wants an "international investigation."  Like the UN is competent to investigate this . . . 

Yes, I know American voters benefit by seeing their presidential candidates react under pressure and respond to world events.  But so far I'm not impressed with any of them.

The only candidate who has made any sense to me on this is Ron Paul.  "Why should we be telling the Pakistanis what to do?  Pakistan is a sovereign nation."  And Ron Paul is not exactly what you'd call "presidential" nor is he remotely electable.

And we wonder why less than 50% of Americans vote?  The cynicism shown by the lot of them is disgusting to me.  And just why is it that we are going through this eleven months before the election?

Comments

[MGB]

That's why it's hard to take American politics seriously, especially the presidential race.

[reg]

Amen.
Sad to say but the nation was better served when candidates were selected in "smoke filled rooms" rather than in endless caucuses and primaries. We have lost the middle of the political spectrum since the advent of popular beauty contests. Unfortunately it is another hangover from the "power to the people" euphoria of the '60's. The political assassinations and the futile war of that era and the over the top reaction they generated (of which I was a part) unfortunately continue to haunt our nation.

Also core convictions and putting the interests of the nation above partisan political interests no longer seem to exist in our politcal class.

[George van Popta]

The Canadian system is far from perfect, but at least our election campaigns only last 30 days. That's long enough to get your fill of political blather about "how good I am" and "how bad the other guys are."

[PB]

Well we're stuck with the lot of them on both sides of the aisle, unfortunately. Not tipping my hand as to who I support, BTW, but I'm not bowled over by anyone. Not that living in MA my vote really matters in any event - the result's pretty well a foregone conclusion.
PS - It's "martial" law.<grin>

[Kim Riddlebarger]

PB:

Yup, me and Huckabee . . . Confused about everything.

The older I get, the harder it is to proof-read my own stuff!

[Larry]

"And Ron Paul is not exactly what you'd call "presidential"..."

Praise God for that, that's why I'm voting for him given what that term has meant for the last 50 or so years.

BTW, I disagree that he's not electable. He will struggle mightily to get the nomination away from the power elites in the republican party for sure but if he were nominated I believe he'd be elected by a wide margin.

[carolyn]

Actually, internet polls are showing Ron Paul way ahead.

These are all internet, and I am sure many potential 2008 votors are not sitting at the computer much. But it's interesting. No way the MSM will tell you how far ahead he is even in informal polls.

I for one seriously dislike some things about RP. But in all honesty I must admit that we are supposed to be a republic, not a democracy. A republic is under the rule of law, not mob vote. And RP is the only guy who seems like a straight arrow to obey the constitution and bill of rights. And where I don't like him, I've had to face that I don't like what the founding fathers wrote. So at this point he has my vote unless Huck beats him.


http://www.yahooka.com/forum/politics-current-affairs/124351-massive-list-polls-all-you-poll-junkies.html

ABC NEWS Poll - FINALLY includes Dr. Ron Paul after censoring only him and deleting/censoring his user comments.
C-SPAN Capital News 1st Debate Poll - The real conservative Ron Paul leading the field with upwards of 70% of the vote!
MSNBC - Debate Categories Poll - Ron Paul besting the competition!
MSNBC - Rate The Candidates - Ron Paul gets HUGE post-debate surge, with the lowest negatives and highest positives of all candidates.
Ventura County Star - Ron Paul way ahead of the pack!
US Chamber of Commerce Poll - Ron Paul capturing over 85% of votes!
Conservatives Betrayed Poll - Ron Paul with nearly 80% support!
Pajamas Media Poll - Nearly 50% favor Ron Paul!
Michael Savage - Ron Paul still on top!
New 2008 Horse Race Poll - Ron Paul~95% of votes (note these folks have been known to tinker with Ron's numbers to keep Ron down).

[David]

Who will best serve the Common Good?
http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=26301&page=1

[Ann Addison]

I'm not convinced on any candidate, but I DO think Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul are both electable. I'm leaning toward Ron Paul. From listening to NPR and my non-Christian, left-leaning, barely-twenty-year-old nephew... Ron Paul is attractive to many liberals as well. Who doesn't want to be free? Yet, I'm still not convinced. He is so radical, he scares me. But, perhaps that's what we need. Oh, what to do? :)

[wayde]

"And Ron Paul is not exactly what you'd call 'presidential' nor is he remotely electable."

"Presidential" as in what sense? Maybe if you mean with regards to foreign policy, sound money and the idea of a limited government.

Unelectable though? I totally disagree. I've blogged about this on numerous occasions ... there are a slew of reasons to be optimistic.

The perception he cannot win the nomination seems primarily driven by mainstream media polls. But should they be trusted? Many have been fixed to not include RP as an option ... many only query Republicans who have voted along party lines in previous elections. But MSM has effectively used the polls nonetheless in a way to move the herd where they want. Instead of Americans voting their convictions, they are led to vote for the lesser of two evils.

Btw, there are PLENTY of polls that rank RP in the top 3 consistently. No, these aren't the polls of CNN, FOX or any other of the big media guns ... but, I think its readily visible that these guys are hardly objective (much less "fair and balanced").

I say vote your convictions ... not for whom Fox News says is electable. If you like Ron Paul, go register with the Republican party in your state and vote in the primaries. Unless folks actually act, then yah, he is not electable.

[Rob]

Actually, I think the only candidate who is remotely presidential is Ron Paul. He's a seasoned veteran of domestic politics, is an accomplished economist and seems to have a very good grasp of foreign affairs. Yes, he looks like a country grandfather and speaks like one, too, but I've watched a few hours of Ron Paul video and find that his mind is sharp and wise. As a Reformed Christian, I'm impressed. I think a Ron Paul presidency would be a breath of fresh air for the whole world. A humbler, less interventionist America would be good for everyone - including us folks up in Canada who get tired of the arrogance of the American empire. When it comes to government, less is more and that's why, if I were an American, I'd promote the candidacy of Ron Paul

[Walt]

The presidential campaign has left me with the distinct feeling that the US is in deep decline. Huckabee and McCain sicken me the most, Ron Paul the least.

I too was disgusted by the 'candidates' capitalizing on Bhutto's death.

[Jared S.]

Ron Paul is the only one worth voting for. I particularly find his stance on marriage very interesting...it's not a government function, but a religious one. You didn't always have to get a marriage license and before that started we did just fine. www.ronpaul2008.com for more spicy info.

Thanks for the sweet blog, my wife and I very much appreciate it.