Worse than HRC?
While watching "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" Sunday morning I realized that although I believed Hillary "nightmare for 2008" Clinton was the candidate I would least promote as our next President, a more alarming scenario exists - namely, Mark Warner! On Sunday, George interviewed this Democrat as he concluded his one and only term as the Governor of Virginia. Disqualified from succeeding himself under Virginia law, Warner is now entertaining the possibility of wooing the Democratic nomination and vying for the Presidency in 2008.
Democratic strategist and Kerry’s first presidential campaign manager, Jim Jordan, is quoted as saying “If he gets in, there is a real possibility that he emerges as the primary alternative to Hillary Clinton, and there’s a strong argument to be made that he would be the party’s strongest conceivable general election candidate.”
Other democrats have indicated that their dream ticket would be Clinton-Warner! Who is Mark Warner and what aroused my resistance to his potential candidacy? I must admit, prior to his inadequate performance on Sunday’s show, I was unfamiliar with his stance on international and domestic policy. Oh wait, after the interview, still uniformed…which is precisely my point. Although slight frustration was evident in George’s demeanor, Warner repeatedly failed to offer his firm opinion. Moreover, to most inquiries, his replies implicated an explanation that his preoccupation with running Virginia has not afforded him the opportunity to research the subject/question. He rationed that as he was certain each question deserved a response based on research and analysis, he believe his job responsibilities justified his consistent avoidance and inability to commit. Do our everyday lives and tasks afford us the right to exist as uninformed citizens?
My first reaction was astonishment that one would accept an invitation to be interviewed on a weekend show prided with acquainting national and foreign political issues to the general American public while their internal struggle and identification of a platform remained undetermined. What political advisor approved this? Was he confused? Did he misunderstand the broadcast to be on Virginia cable instead of nationally televised?
Also observed, the topics addressed lacked complication and were not intended to flummox the occupied Governor but rather were simple topics debated over holidays with family or provided as dinner conversation with friends...Alito, wiretapping, the Iraq War. Issues daily brought to light in the news, morning paper, not to mention the right side of any home page. Other red-blooded Americans could summarize their stance instantaneously; it is not a topic we dig deep for at each inquisition. So, why was he avoiding them? Is Warner anticipating that the American people will find his indecision so intriguing that they will be forced to keep him around until his views are as evident as an exposed piñata? Is he waiting to see what typecast remains unfilled as we near the Democratic nomination? Will he fake the future to get what he wants in the present?
I think these questions are easily explained after an examination of his past influence and record. He is a captivating businessman who uncannily managed to be in the right place at just right time. Positioned as a fiscal conservative while a centralist on social issue, he has attempted to avoid all-or-nothing confrontations with the Republican controlled legislation and govern from the center. Some maintain this strategy has enabled him to work across party lines; however, could this instead be another case of lip service to the elected officials just as he provided to the citizens of Virginia when he vowed not to impose new taxes during his tenure? Once elected, taxes did increase and according to The Wall Street Journal, the Virginia state budget expanded by 26% during Warner’s time in office.
A web page promoting his candidacy gives bullets to describe his achievements; I find most mediocre, to say the least. Below are a few examples.
CLAIM: “He ran strong in the cities and connected very well with in rural communities, including the rugged coalfields region of far Southwest Virginia.”
My take: He accomplished this by promising Broadband access in rural communities and his endorsement of NASCAR to the locals. Wow, enlightening?
CLAIM: “An able campaigner, walks a tight rope, navigates well among GOP land mines and is not known for having to apologize for public mistakes.”
My take: The only tight rope he walks is that of lack of knowledge and indecision. Of course he has not been charged to apologize for public mistakes, he avoids taking a stand or voicing beliefs.
The rebuttals to his “Campaign List” are as lengthy as my reservation list to Warner’s ability to run our nation. Although I would appreciate the confidence that the Democrats will get their act together and bring a qualified candidate to the table, I fell compelled to remind them that the time bomb is ticking LOUDLY!
Democratic strategist and Kerry’s first presidential campaign manager, Jim Jordan, is quoted as saying “If he gets in, there is a real possibility that he emerges as the primary alternative to Hillary Clinton, and there’s a strong argument to be made that he would be the party’s strongest conceivable general election candidate.”
Other democrats have indicated that their dream ticket would be Clinton-Warner! Who is Mark Warner and what aroused my resistance to his potential candidacy? I must admit, prior to his inadequate performance on Sunday’s show, I was unfamiliar with his stance on international and domestic policy. Oh wait, after the interview, still uniformed…which is precisely my point. Although slight frustration was evident in George’s demeanor, Warner repeatedly failed to offer his firm opinion. Moreover, to most inquiries, his replies implicated an explanation that his preoccupation with running Virginia has not afforded him the opportunity to research the subject/question. He rationed that as he was certain each question deserved a response based on research and analysis, he believe his job responsibilities justified his consistent avoidance and inability to commit. Do our everyday lives and tasks afford us the right to exist as uninformed citizens?
My first reaction was astonishment that one would accept an invitation to be interviewed on a weekend show prided with acquainting national and foreign political issues to the general American public while their internal struggle and identification of a platform remained undetermined. What political advisor approved this? Was he confused? Did he misunderstand the broadcast to be on Virginia cable instead of nationally televised?
Also observed, the topics addressed lacked complication and were not intended to flummox the occupied Governor but rather were simple topics debated over holidays with family or provided as dinner conversation with friends...Alito, wiretapping, the Iraq War. Issues daily brought to light in the news, morning paper, not to mention the right side of any home page. Other red-blooded Americans could summarize their stance instantaneously; it is not a topic we dig deep for at each inquisition. So, why was he avoiding them? Is Warner anticipating that the American people will find his indecision so intriguing that they will be forced to keep him around until his views are as evident as an exposed piñata? Is he waiting to see what typecast remains unfilled as we near the Democratic nomination? Will he fake the future to get what he wants in the present?
I think these questions are easily explained after an examination of his past influence and record. He is a captivating businessman who uncannily managed to be in the right place at just right time. Positioned as a fiscal conservative while a centralist on social issue, he has attempted to avoid all-or-nothing confrontations with the Republican controlled legislation and govern from the center. Some maintain this strategy has enabled him to work across party lines; however, could this instead be another case of lip service to the elected officials just as he provided to the citizens of Virginia when he vowed not to impose new taxes during his tenure? Once elected, taxes did increase and according to The Wall Street Journal, the Virginia state budget expanded by 26% during Warner’s time in office.
A web page promoting his candidacy gives bullets to describe his achievements; I find most mediocre, to say the least. Below are a few examples.
CLAIM: “He ran strong in the cities and connected very well with in rural communities, including the rugged coalfields region of far Southwest Virginia.”
My take: He accomplished this by promising Broadband access in rural communities and his endorsement of NASCAR to the locals. Wow, enlightening?
CLAIM: “An able campaigner, walks a tight rope, navigates well among GOP land mines and is not known for having to apologize for public mistakes.”
My take: The only tight rope he walks is that of lack of knowledge and indecision. Of course he has not been charged to apologize for public mistakes, he avoids taking a stand or voicing beliefs.
The rebuttals to his “Campaign List” are as lengthy as my reservation list to Warner’s ability to run our nation. Although I would appreciate the confidence that the Democrats will get their act together and bring a qualified candidate to the table, I fell compelled to remind them that the time bomb is ticking LOUDLY!
posted by MY THOUGTS @ 7:07 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home