Share
Today, Virginians get to vote in the presidential primary.
If you decide to vote Democratic, your choices are between big business candidate Hillary Clinton and "change" candidate Barack Obama. If you decide to vote Republican, your choices are between warmonger John McCain, Christian fundamentalist Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul.
John McCain is no "maverick." Indeed, there are a few issues he's not completely horrible on -- he's pro- campaign finance reform and opposed to torture. But on the wide array of issues, McCain has consistently sided with the forces of injustice. In particular, his strong support for the illegal occupation of Iraq and the so-called "war on terror" are disturbing.
In regard to Iraq, he has stated that it would be "fine" if the U.S. maintained the occupation for the next hundred years. He believes that we should "maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaida is training, recruiting, equipping and motivating people every single day."
The only problem: this is not "fine" with the vast majority of Americans, nor is it "fine" with the vast majority of Iraqis. Upward of 70 percent of Americans consistently state they are opposed to the war in Iraq (despite all the "progress" we've made) and even more Iraqis are opposed to a U.S. military presence in their country -- and that's right now, let alone for the next 100 years.
In addition to that, who decided it should be up to John McCain, or any of us, to maintain the illegal occupation? It should be up to the Iraqis. Only racists and superior-minded westerners believe that we can run Iraq better than the Iraqis. They say they want us out, so let's get out. It's the only democratic thing to do.
Back to McCain's quote, he likes to trumpet around saying we need to fight these "Islamofascists," a made-up term that has no bearing on Al Qaida's actual ideology or goals. McCain seems to think that the more he says we need to stay in Iraq to fight Al Qaida, the more likely that that statement will become the real reason we are there.
But it doesn't take a genius to figure out why we are there -- oil. If Iraq had been in the middle of nowhere with no oil, the U.S. would not have invaded. We're not building an embassy bigger than the Vatican for nothing (which the Iraqis there call "Bush's palace"). Bush recently issued a signing statement, declaring that he doesn't care what Congress says and is going to build permanent bases in Iraq anyway.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that Al Qaida was in Iraq before we invaded. Of course, they are there now, but they are a very substantial minority among all the armed factions -- the chances of Al Qaida taking over are extremely slim. In addition, it is the U.S. presence there that is attracting new recruits. This information is easy to find and uncontroversial. Our presence is the problem, not the solution.
Mike Huckabee is an interesting fellow. His fundamentalist views are a problem with American society generally -- there aren't many places in the industrialized world, for example, where the majority of citizens believe in miracles or angels or whatever other wildly unsubstantiated claims.
But his candidacy did spark fear in the minds of the Republican establishment, for the reason that he can't be controlled.
The Republican Party thought it could court the fundamentalist vote for the longest time, but of course they never wanted one of them to be the nominee.
Leave a comment 7 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
Obama talks about "change" all the time, but what kind of "changes" did he make for the people of Illinois when he was a senator? Did his "changes" make a difference in people's lives?
Reply to this Top
I'm not even really sure where to start criticising this column, because all it seems to contain is a bunch of liberal talking points that have been trumpeted over and over for years. Asserting that the war in Iraq was directed primarily at protecting our oil interests in the region is simply ignorant of how and from where the US draws its oil supply, and also displays ignorance of the horrors the Iraqi people endured under the Hussein regime. While I'll admit that claims that their lives are demonstrably better now than then are prehaps dubious, it seems to me that we have provided them at least a chance at positive change that the Iraqi people did not have before. It troubles me that this column doesn't address any of the questionable policies being bandied about by the Democratic candidates - the specter of socialism looms over our nation and Mr. Morris doesn't even twitch.
Reply to this Top
Kyle's opening sentence pretty much sums it up for me. This is probably the most inaccurate title for an opinion piece I've seen in the CT yet - and that's saying a lot. A better title would have been, "Why the Republicans Suck."
Reply to this Top
Hear hear! (to those below)
Reply to this Top
You are right Kyle. Anytime someone dares to make a statement that goes against the current Bush Administration or the Iraq War or any failed policy we have endured over the past 8 years, is simply classified as "liberal talking points." That is the problem with this country today; we are unable to conduct political dialogue on some of our most important issues because people are so closed-minded and focused on making everything politically-affiliated. What has happened to political discourse in this country? I know where you can find it; his name is Barack Obama. It is up to the citizens of America to accept the fact!
Reply to this Top
If you'll take the time to read my comments, you'll find that I have tremendous respect for people who have real data and real opinions on the matter, even when those opinions run contrary to my own. I have, myself, many criticisms of the Bush administration, not least of which is his handling of the budget and the manner in which the early years of the Iraq war were conducted. My issue with this column is that it simply announces, without any real proof or insight, that the Iraq war was led simply to protect oil interests, that free-market capitalism is damaging to society, that a US withdrawal from the UN would be an act of lunacy. The fact of the matter is, our political system is what makes the 'big decisions' for us - as a result, opinions on these issues are NECESSARILY politically-affiliated because it gives us a way to categorize the candidates in a way that makes sense to ourselves. I'd charge the the discourse, both in this country and on this forum, is certainly wide open - ironically, your charge that I am stifling debate (and, I presume, that I should stop saying things like 'these are liberal talking points') itself supposes that your comments are superior to my own, consequently limiting the political discourse that occurs. Also, I'm not quite sure I understand your final point - Barack Obama is every bit as polarizing a candidate as each of the others. The fact that he's young and trumpets big plans for 'change' (important to note that he never really nails down what he is going to change) doesn't necessarily imply that he is the best candidate for me or anyone else.
Reply to this Top
Wow. This column's fairly sensible title drew me to give it a chance, and all I find is "John McCain is the devil, Mike Huckabee is too Christian, and Ron Paul is nuts" strewn out over 13 or so paragraphs. Mr. Morris had a golden opportunity to be a productive member of the CT staff, using his column to address what the title SHOULD have alluded to. Instead he delivered blatant, shameless candidate bashing. As is, this is another in a long line of recent embarrassing columns and editorials by the Collegiate Times. To make this a perfectly legitimate editorial that would not have retracted from what I THINK Mr. Morris intended to say, would have been to also include criticisms of the Democratic candidates, and to change the headline to "Why Ralph Nader is Still the Best Option."
Reply to this Top