NEW YORK POST ENDORSES JOHN MCCAIN
September 8, 2008
THE Post today enthusiastically urges the election of Sen. John S. McCain as the 44th president of the United States.
McCain's lifelong record of service to America, his battle-tested courage, unshakeable devotion to principle and clear grasp of the dangers and opportunities now facing the nation stand in dramatic contrast to the tissue-paper-thin résumé of his Democratic opponent, freshman Sen. Barack Obama.
McCain has been in Washington for many years now, but he is not of Washington. He knows where the levers of power are located - and how to manipulate them - but he is not controlled by them.
McCain's selection of the charming, but rock-solid, outsider Sarah Palin as his running mate underscores the point.
Neither plays well with others.
And this is an unalloyed asset at a time when special interests - lobbyists, lawyers and organized labor chief among them - wield enormous influence in the nation's capital.
McCain's Democratic opponents, Obama and Sen. Joseph Biden, lead a party constructed of special interests - public-employee unionists in particular.
There are many reasons to support the McCain-Palin ticket. Here are but a few:
* National security: The differences between McCain and Obama are especially stark.
McCain says 9/11 represented a two-decade "failure . . . to respond to . . . a [growing] global terror network." He understood that Iraq is a critical front in the war on terror - and he urged perseverance even in the dark days that preceded the success of "the surge."
Obama backed policies that would have abandoned Iraq to its fate, he bitterly opposed the surge, and once insisted that US forces invade Pakistan in search of Osama bin Laden - seemingly without regard for the potential consequences of attacking a nuclear-armed nation, ally or not.
Regarding a nuclear Iran, McCain has pushed for the strongest possible international sanctions and diplomatic pressure. Obama opposes sanctions.
And, when Russia invaded the former Soviet republic of Georgia, threatening a return to the Cold War, McCain reacted with stern disapprobation: "We must remind Russia's leaders that the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world require their respect for the values, stability and peace of that world."
Obama called for UN action - unaware, apparently, that Russia's Security Council veto would have prevented any.
* Taxes: McCain knows that when government absorbs ever-larger shares of national income, the economy suffers.
High tax rates diminish investment, killing jobs and stunting growth.
And while Obama promises tax cuts for "95 percent" of Americans, what he actually is proposing is some $650 billion in tax-credit-driven hikes in entitlement and other spending, to be paid for with heavier imposts across the board, but especially on investment - like a sharply higher capital-gains tax.
This is bad news for the millions of ordinary Americans who own stocks, either personally or through pension funds or who plan someday to sell their homes or other real property.
McCain, wisely, vows to keep capital-gains taxes at 15 percent and to keep the Bush-era tax cuts in place - understanding that new growth will boost revenue, and promising to make up the rest with spending restraint.
And he's called for a one-year freeze on most discretionary spending and an end to pork-barrel giveaways.
* Trade: "I object when Senator Obama and others preach the false virtues of economic isolationism," says McCain - noting that "globalization is an opportunity" for US workers. He adds that while emerging economies like those of China and India are worrisome, the answer is competition informed by education and innovation - not protectionism.
* Energy: On the economic issue most vexing Americans today - energy prices - McCain is aggressive
He is a strong convert to offshore drilling: "We have trillions of dollars' worth of oil and gas reserves in the US at a time we are exporting hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas to buy energy."
He also strongly backs nuclear power - a carbon-free form of energy that America can produce relatively cheaply.
Obama, meanwhile, hews to the Democratic Party line on energy: no nukes, no drilling and no comprehension of the consequences of such policies.
None of this implies an iota of disrespect toward Obama. It took a formidable candidacy to defeat Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton - a candidacy, by the way, which we strongly supported earlier this year.
And the intelligence, the organizational skills and the ability to communicate that Obama demonstrated from the beginning dramatically underscore the history that is being made by the first African-American to head a major-party presidential ticket.
He should be around for a long time, and we hope that he is.
In the end, though, sound security, economic and energy policies - plus allegiance to principle - are critical to keeping America safe and strong.
On all counts, John McCain and Sarah Palin understand this - and that's why we're in their corner to the finish.
noso, I don't know. I don't follow politics as closely as you do. I am puzzled why a hard core capitalist such as S would back Obama. It was a geniune question. I wasn't out to trick you :-)
bluecurrent 发表评论于
回复noso的评论:
转贴说言极对！我完全同意。
奥巴马是个非常阴险和危险的人物，哈哈，如果他上台，美国倒霉，全世界其他国家高兴。
noso 发表评论于
ZT
奥巴马真的是理想主义者吗？ by Styx
看奥巴马在民主党大会的演讲，哪怕我再不赞同他的政治主张，也不得不赞叹他的演讲才份。看他眼神神圣空洞地游离，缓缓扫过如痴如醉忘记了欢呼的人群，带着与上帝对话的姿态高呼”hope and change” 时，如果没有了解任何此次选举的其他背景，在此情此景的当下，谁都会把他看作上帝派来清扫华盛顿政坛污垢和解救美国人民于内政外交忧患的使者了吧？
奥巴马貌似清新的形象（right, that was what his running mate Biden said, clean），或许可以让他可以胜任薄荷口香糖的代言人， 但他却绝非人们想象的理想主义者，哪怕经验不足，却凭着一腔变革的热情可以为人民鞠躬尽瘁死而后已。
第二，奥巴马在成年后的重要导师和“朋友”们无一例外是共产党、极左恐怖分子、或者极度憎恨美国特别是美国白人的黑人优越论者。如是一两个例子或者还是偶然，但是这些人物一个个浮出水面，却让人对奥巴马自己的真正“信仰”深表怀疑。当你看到他庄严神圣像一个真正的总统一样以“God bless America” 结束他的演讲时，难道脑子里不会浮现出他的黑人牧师Rev. Jeremiah Wright 歇斯底里的仇恨呼叫，“God D*** America”吗？他在他的教堂听他布道２０年，却宣称从来没有意识到这位牧师有如此反美和仇恨白人的观点言论。那被捧为神子一般的奥巴马对上帝和教堂也太不敬了吧！事实上，每当一个他的亲密朋友卷入官司或被揭出丑闻时，这位干干净净的候选人总是说，”this is not the ***** I used to know”. Well, 看来我们只好真的相信他是如此简单不知世事的理想主义者，连基本的善恶都一而再再而三地不能分清。美国需要这样的“理想主义者”做总统吗？
第三，披着这样“理想主义者”外衣的奥巴马从个人操守来说其实是相当危险的。看他极富煽动性的演讲，不仅让人想起８年前的那个陈水扁，一样的情辞意以变革为题把民意玩得晕头转向。如果奥巴马上台，陈水扁的今天或许就是他的明天。我没有夸张其辞。奥巴马的另外一个多年好友，芝加哥地产商，Tony Rezko 在06年因操纵地方选举和信用欺诈入狱。而奥巴马夫妇在案发之前不久从他手里低价买入了他现在的百万豪宅！Rezko 同时还为奥巴马的竞选多次募捐，是他在芝加哥的重要筹款人之一！作为回报，Rezko 控制了当时芝加哥和公共医疗事业相关的地产开发。而当时奥巴马是州议会公共健康和人道服务委员会的主席！难道不会有人怀疑这中间的联系吗？但是奥巴马在接受采访时却极力撇清和Rezko的关系，称只是普通认识，从他那里买房完全合法。只是他也暗示他们的妻子间交往可能多一些，这简直是陈水扁吴淑珍的美国版了！if that’s not enough for your nerve，Rezko 的资金中还有很大的中东背景。和他同时被捕的就有一个是伊拉克的商人。这样奥巴马何以在短短两年内从岌岌无闻的州议员变成全国政治明星，他的背景和资金来源就相当可疑。好一个从芝加哥黑金政治泥潭中熏染出来的“理想主义者”！
第四，奥巴马以理想主义者的姿态在他的施政纲领中诉求美国的经济公正（”economic justice”）和社会正义（”social justice”），其实质一是推行社会主义式的财富再分配，二是为他的黑人弟兄们向美国社会“讨债”来了。他在演讲中一再强调，他的税收改革＂will benefit 95% working families in the United States”, 不知就里的大多数华人听了还心花怒放，对啊，我们夫妇都起早贪黑为公司卖命，不就是” working family” 嘛！错了，奥巴马自己很早就给working class 下了定义，家庭年可税收入在５万美元以下！美国这样的家庭现在交的税是多少呢？接近于０！这样奥巴马的税收政策真的是劫富济贫，让财富从富有阶层（当然他自己是人民公仆，虽然住着百万豪宅，是不能算入内的）和中产阶级（包括像我住着公寓干一天挣一天的口粮，却被他的计算法摒出了劳动人民阶层的）向低收入阶层（包括大量躺在政府救济上过日子的黑人和拉美裔）无偿流动！这样的劫富济贫对经济活力的损害是不用多说的，而对低收入阶层是否是真的帮助呢？否！更多的政府补贴只会让本来有工作的低收入者完全退出劳动力市场，他们的生活也就逐渐变成完全仰仗政府恩惠，他们对“富人”也会更加虎视眈眈地仇恨，只想通过政府从他们那儿得到更多，而不是通过教育和努力工作改善处境，加入“富人”之列。真正的收益人是谁呢？是奥巴马这样的“理想主义者”，“社会正义”执行者！因为只有不断地投票给他们，穷人们才能保住不用工作生活无虞的眼前利益，而在这样的政策下，穷人群体只会迅速扩大，他们的票仓也就保住了！适时美国将提前实现“各尽所能，按需分配”的共产主义理想，而离沦入欧洲加拿大一类的二流国家为时也不远了。对奥巴马自己来说，这也许是他“理想主义”的实现和升华，对数代美国人来说，这个代价是不是大了一点呢？
