One thing I love about town hall meetings is that they reveal how much our media limits, filters, and massages public opinion. Real Americans have strong opinions, often very un-politically correct ones, but they are not heard or not heard with the intensity with which they’re felt due to the media. The media gives obscure liberal views the same billing as their conservative counterparts, and entire swaths of conservative opinion, particularly on foreign policy, racial issues, and immigration are often kept at bay all together.
This is particularly amusing in newspaper comment sections which are free-for-alls complete with nastiness, conspiracy theories, and mutual misunderstanding all around. I distinctly remember this opinion gap during the disastrous town hall meeting the Clintons tried to use to sell the Kosovo War on the Ohio State campus; the pacifist and leftist students went nuts on Madeline Albright, and the entire Clinton team left in ignominy.
I’m of course especially happy when John McCain is made uncomfortable due to his attempts to destroy the American people. He is truly one of the most dangerous and nasty people in public life. May immigration be his Waterloo!
Subscribe To This Feed
Good! This is the sort of thing we need to be saying! Down with the bad guys!
To clarify, I loved this post:
I’m of course especially happy when John McCain is made uncomfortable due to his attempts to destroy the American people. He is truly one of the most dangerous and nasty people in public life. May immigration be his Waterloo!
You attacked the enemy, discussed an event where the good guys fought him, and expressed hope for victory. This is what rallies people to fight, and we need to fight like never before!
He is truly one of the most dangerous and nasty people in public life. May immigration be his Waterloo!
I am not from AZ, but didn’t McCain recently win reelection in 2010 by acting like he wanted to enforce the current immigration laws? Are voters that stupid that a guy can be the leader for amnesty in 2006 and 2007, then flip-flop in 2010, and get resoundingly reelected over the true immigration guy in JD Hayworth? And that is not even factoring in his suspicious history such as the S&L scandal in the 1980s.
Unfortunately, immigration won’t be his Waterloo because, a) he might not even run again when his term is up in 2016 since he will be 80, and b) he’ll just flip-flop again if he does.
The guy to keep an eye on is Sen. Graham of South Carolina. He was an amnesty guy in 2006 and 7, yet was reelected in 2008. Let’s see if the voters can throw this bum out in 2014. They should have done so in 2008.
My guess is Graham will talk tough in 2014, the talk radio guys will lecture the voters that we can’t let the dems take that seat since we don’t want anymore laws like Obamacare, and the voters will reelect a guy who essentially wants to elect a new electorate, to paraphrase a catchy line.
I’m willing to be practical and vote for people I agree with 80% of the time or so. But there’s a few non-negotiables for me: gun control, immigration, gay marriage, neoconservative foreign policy, and abortion. Not every issue is a matter of life and death or basic morality. These are. No need to vote for wobbly Republicans and reward the weak-kneed on these matters. McCain was bad on 4 out of 5 by my count, hence, I voted for Chuck Baldwin.
Romney was tougher. He’s kinda weak on immigration and seemed in the orbit of neoconservatives on foreign policy. On other hand, Obama has revealed himself to be a sui generis disaster, and I thought congressional Republicans might keep Romney in line. Finally, I thought him a naturally sensible if unideological guy. Turned out to be a weak candidate. Too bad all his primary competitors were pretty lame too.