Individual Liberty — Individual Responsibility 

Easier to tear down than build up

Negative campaigning is easy, all you have to do is dig up dirt about your opponent. That shouldn't be too hard because we're all only human and humans are flawed creatures. If you can't find any dirt, make some up. As long as it sounds likely, some people will believe it. Besides, often in politics its the seriousness of the charge rather than the nature of the evidence that matters.

If you don't want to engage in mudslinging, there are still other ways to engage in negative campaigning that are easier than running a positive campaign. Examine the record of your opponent and use it against him or her. This works too, if you know how to spin things. After all, your opponent voted against measures that you and your likely constituents support right? If they don't have enough of a record to attack, attack their lack of experience.

I don't like negative campaigning. I'm never thrilled by attack ads run by a candidates campaign. As I've indicated in a few posts recently, I'd much rather have someone tell me why I should vote FOR a candidate as opposed to voting AGAINST another candidate. I've offered up the challenge to friends, coworkers, and other bloggers and NO ONE has risen to it.

I think I know why. One reason is, it's not easy to come up with a persuasive argument why someone should vote FOR someone. Another, is because I said I don't want platitudes or bumper sticker arguments. One of my coworkers came up with yet another a couple of days ago — it's why he hasn't responded, when he knows that he's one of the people the challenge was specifically directed at. When you know that there's going to be a discussion of the merits of your reasons to vote FOR someone, you know that the responses are going to be reasons to vote AGAINST that someone. Fear that those arguments will overwhelm your arguments can be discouraging.

Shouldn't we consider those arguments though? Shouldn't we look at why we want to vote FOR a candidate when we're choosing one? Shouldn't we feel confident enough in our choice and our reasoning that we're willing to defend that choice against people that hold different views? If we can't, then why are we going to vote the way we're going to anyway?

Are we all Kool-aid drinkers?

So… Here are a few reasons why I'm going to vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin. This isn't an exhaustive list, but it's a start. I know that there are arguments against these reasons and that some of these reasons might strain credulity a bit (especially in view of my opinions about some of the support for them). I hope to see your counter arguments in reply. Even more though, I'd like to see YOUR arguments for YOUR candidates.

• John McCain is a man of character. He has served his country in the military and in politics for many years. He has served honorably. When he was a prisoner of the Vietnamese he was offered the opportunity to be sent home. He refused in support of his fellow prisoners, and for that he suffered.
• John McCain understands what it is to be tortured. He was tortured in Vietnam. He was broken by his torturers, and yet his fellow prisoners helped him to regain his dignity and honor. He knows his weaknesses and his strengths, and he knows the value of friendship in overcoming adversity.
• John McCain understands that you don't win a war by surrendering. He understands that the only way to truly win a war is through victory. Defeat your enemies or they will come back to do harm to you another day.
• John McCain is a reformer. He fights against corruption in our federal government and in politics. Say what you will about the unconstitutionality of McCain-Feingold (and there is much to be said about it), John McCain sponsored it and pushed for it to fight the corrupting influence of money in politics.
• John McCain is a reformer. He fights against earmarks or pork-barrel spending in Congress. Yes, I know that earmarks account for only a tiny percentage of our federal budget, and it might seem like tilting at windmills, but pork-barrel spending is to politicians like Marijuana is to rebellious youth. It's a gateway drug to even more serious addictions. For politicians pork-barrel spending is the gateway to even more big-government spending. It's a corrupting influence in other ways too, corrupting the electorate. Getting money for your State from the federal budget seems like a good thing — until you realize that the money may have been taken from your State in the first place and that you're getting less back than was taken when you consider the middle man.
• John McCain is a truly compassionate man. If he isn't, he supports his wife's compassion at the least. His family has adopted children from terrible circumstances and given them love and support. That's above reproach — especially when he doesn't talk much about it. Compassion has more meaning when it's not merely for public display.
• John McCain is a bipartisan candidate. He's been known to reach out to Democrats and seek compromise on many occasions, even when it has hurt his own party. Rather than staking out the most extreme positions in controversies over such things as judicial confirmation, he sought ways to avoid the potential consequences of turning the “nuclear option” against his party when majorities turned the other way.
• Sarah Palin has executive experience. Being a mayor was all the qualification Rudy Giuliani needed when he ran for the Republican Presidential nomination. Sarah Palin was a well liked mayor. Being a governor is an excellent qualification. Most of our better Presidents have been governors rather than rising up through Congress or the Senate. As a governor, Sarah Palin is the commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard. Should, God forbid, the worst happen to John McCain and he die in office, Sarah Palin would be ready on day one to step in as commander in chief.
• Sarah Palin is a reformer. She fought against corruption in her own party, and ran against a sitting governor, both for her party's nomination and for election — and won. She fought crony capitalism in the State of Alaska, fighting against “big oil” and sweetheart deals over the pipeline. She ousted the Public Safety Commissioner over insubordination on budget matters.

Now I know that there are plenty of reasons NOT to vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin. I also know that these are not the strongest of reasons to vote FOR them either. I expect argument, and I expect that some of my reasons FOR these two candidates might be used as reasons AGAINST them by their opponents (and even their supporters).

What you should note here though is I have not said a single word AGAINST Barack Obama and Joe Biden in this post. I have not attacked their character. I have not attacked their records. I have not even attacked their policies. That's easy to do. Just as I'm sure that John McCain and Sarah Palin's opponents can find it easy to do the same with them.

My challenge still stands. If you support Barack Obama and Joe Biden — and I know many of you do, especially where I work — Tell me WHY you SUPPORT them. Don't be afraid — unless you're just drinking the Kool-aid.

I'm not.

It's easy to tear down your opponents. Can you build your side up instead?

This linkfest is for the 9th of October, 2008. If you have something interesting you'd like to share, feel free to link it here and leave a trackback. Just remember the trackback policy.

For the best exposure, go to the blogger's oasis and use the linkfest chooser to choose the posts you'd like to hook up with.