Thursday, May 10, 2007
ROUND ONE
The Militant Moderate has dutifully watched most of the first round of democrat and republican presidential primary debates. Before registering more detailed opinions, it must first be said that this was an excellent start toward becoming acquainted with the candidates.
We might wish for mandatory registration and attendance, albeit via mass media, at several debates a a qualification for voting. Our beloved writer of the Declaration of Independence, and ardent advocate of public education and founder of the Univrsity of Virginia, said roughly, "A well informed electorate is necessary to the maintenance of a democracy." Photo-ops, sound bites, and commercials are poor ways of becoming informed.
The democrat debate was a pleasant affair. Most showed up well. Although each candidate may have differed on a couple of views, most of us watching came away convinced that the nation and its freedoms would likely be safe in the hands of seven of the nine on the stage.
Every canddidate seemed empathetic with the problems of common people. With the exception of the issue of illegal immigration, most appeared attuned to the American political mainstream. Off-stage Edwards has lost ground due to the incongruity of his message with his $400 haircut and his $6 million mansion.
The line-up on the republican dais proved a frightening one. As was the case with democrats earlier, some of us thought we knew several of these candidates well enough to be generally positive toward them as persons, if not on certain issues. But the staccato of harsh comments from every candidate on the issues was frightening.
Only occasionally was that machine-gun rattle and rife punctuated with anything resembling an expression of humane concern. Ironically those rare expressions tended to come from the least expected, usually hard-nosed, rear echelon candidates such as Kansas' Brownback or Arkansas' Huckaby.
In a bright moment, only three of the republican candidates rejected the scientifically accepted theory of evolution. But half supported the intrusion of the Congress into the Schiavo case, decided properly by a Florida court.
Even those front runners with a favorable record on women's freedom in childbirth weaseled on the issue. Several actually came out against stem cell research efforts to solve some of our worst medical problems.
All candidates supported continuing Mr. Bush's war, although several were quick to criticize the past conduct of the war. Again, it was only Senator Brownback who offered a real solution, that being the one long advocated by the democrat candidate Senator Biden (and the Militant Moderate), i.e. dividing the country into three thnic entities with a central coordinating government in Baghdad.
Most candidates earned credits for a conservative stance on illegal immigration, but again most appeared unduly harsh in their rhetoric.
Their uniformly bitter personal attacks on Senator Clinton, accompanied by communal good-old-boy chuckles, made them all appear sexist.
The entire panel of republicans appeared to strive for the lowest common denominator of character within their party -- social callousness, religious superstition, rugged individualism, and a government-dominated personal life, void of rights, in the midst of a rapacious business environment.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
