A Tale of Two Candidates
If one was to look at the tale of two crises and how our respective candidates reacted to them, the difference between them becomes clear.
In the Georgia/Russia scuffles, McCain immediately reacted speaking out against Russia’s aggression. Obama, in brief, did and said nothing of any note for quite some time, until the dust mostly settled and then … asked for a UN security resolution against the act (somehow overlooking the fact that any resolution would have to pass a Russian Federation veto).
In the current AIG/Merril/Banking crises, Mr McCain has asked for the retirement of the SEC head. He has suggested some regulatory mechanisms which he thinks might be helpful, and pointed out that he was warning about a upcoming crises of this sort for some time. Mr Obama has criticised everyone else, but has not actually suggested anything … yet. Like the above, it would be my bet that when a (liberal) consensus of “what to do” has arisen in his camp, he will put forward a relatively useless and vanilla proposal.
Mr Obama, I suggest, is not a leader. He may someday grow to be one after all he is young an inexperienced and has much learning and growth in the poitical process yet ahead of him. But he has not (ever?) demonstrated any leadership qualities. He may be able divise and find a consensus in within a party which has substantial agreement on the basics. But he has not demonstrated he can take the risks and gambles necessary to lead.
Mr McCain is a more instinctive leader, he may lead you astray sometimes, he may not. But he will lead. And that is an important quality in a leader.
Filed under: Democrats • Mark O. • Politics • Republicans
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
For many of us – we who don’t trust gov’t enough to let its leaders to go charging off half-cocked “leading” us to their shoot-from-the-hip, gut-feeling, best guess “solution” – who desperately WANT a leader who will not jump into action. Hasty answers often result in poor solutions.
Or none at all.
But he will lead. And that is an important quality in a leader.
So is prudence, and one that should be valued by conservatives.
Dan,
Ah, so with Mr Obama, and Georgia, waiting and them coming up with no solution or meaningful suggestion at all … that was better?
Better than what? A semi-socialist gov’t buy out of a bunch of rich corporations to ease their pain? Massive corporate welfare on a economy-shattering level? Invading Russia?
What are you suggesting BE done?
These are complex problems and, no, I don’t want an answer that someone can think up in a day or two. Responses should begin immediately, but that response might well be, “we need to look at this closely and cautiously.”
Prudence demands patience.
Dan,
McCain did not suggest invading Russia and you know that.
Yes, you don’t want answers someone can think up in a day. You want answers which take weeks to think up, but are worse than the ideas you can think up in a day. Gotcha.
I did not say that McCain suggested that and you know that.
And what I want are reasonable, effective answers that have a chance at succeeding. You have any?
Dan,
How am I to interpret your remark, “Invading Russia”?
It seems to me you did suggest that.
Are you asking if I have suggestions, which is largely irrelevant.
There have been none at all from Mr Obama. Are you going to express disappointment in your candidate? If not, why not?
Re: There have been none at all from Obama:
fact check
Dan,
Why do you link to a piece which says he has not laid out any plans, if you are contending he has indeed laid out plans?