California Conservative

One of the biggest problems facing Sen. Obama is that he can’t tell people what he really believes. That’s because he’d lose badly if he told people what he’s voted against. The bad news for Sen. Obama is that John McCain is using his weekly radio addresses to put the spotlight on those things. This week’s address was no different. Here’s one such thing Sen. McCain focused on:

Often, too, Senator Obama’s carefully hedged answers obscure more than they explain, and this was the case in his conversation with Rick Warren. Listening to my opponent at Saddleback, you would never know that this is a politician who long since left behind any middle ground on the abortion issue. He is against parental notification laws, and against restrictions on taxpayer funding for abortions. In the Illinois Senate, a bipartisan majority passed legislation to prevent the horrific practice of partial-birth abortion. Senator Obama opposed that bill, voting against it in committee and voting “present” on the Senate floor.

It’s possible to be considered mainstream while being pro-choice. It isn’t possible to be considered mainstream if you’re vehemently pro-choice, anti-parental notification. It isn’t possible to be considered mainstream if you’ve voted to keep partial birth abortion intact. It certainly isn’t mainstream to vote against the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act. That’s a more militant position than Barbara Boxer’s and Ted Kennedy’s. Forgive me if I don’t consider Sen. Boxer’s and Sen. Kennedy’s positions on abortion rights mainstream.

In 2002, Congress unanimously passed a federal law to require medical care for babies who survive abortions - living, breathing babies whom Senator Obama described as, quote, “previable.” This merciful law was called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Illinois had a version of the same law, and Barack Obama voted against it. (more…)

Now that the news is out about the Obama-Biden ticket, it’s time to ask what Sen. Biden adds to the ticket.

The instant Sen. Biden joined the ticket, he became the foreign policy expert of the ticket. That isn’t just a compliment. When the man that put together a plan that would’ve divided a sovereign nation into three countries is the foreign policy expert, you know that the ticket doesn’t have much foreign policy credentials. What makes Sen. Biden’s plan worse is the fact that he tried forcing this down the throats of a nation that we hope becomes an important ally in the Middle East.

This also underscores the fact that Sen. Obama’s foreign policy resume is the thinnest of any presidential candidate in my lifetime. I can’t confirm this but I think Sen. Obama holds the distinction of being the only senator in history to chair a subcommittee that didn’t call a policy hearing of that committee. I’m referring to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on European Affairs. Here’s what Salon.com said about that subcommittee’s responsibilities: (more…)

According to this ABCNews article, it appears as though Joe Biden is Sen. Obama’s running mate. Here’s what ABC is reporting:

The United States Secret Service has dispatched a protective detail to assume the immediate protection of Sen. Joseph Biden, (D-DE), a source tells ABC News, indicating in all likelihood that Biden has been officially notified that Sen. Barack Obama, (D-IL), has selected him to be his running mate.

Sources also tell ABC News that two others said to be finalists for the position of Obama’s running mate, Sen. Evan Bayh, (D-IN), and Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, have been told they have not been selected for the vice presidential slot.

Kaine flew to Denver earlier today, is in Denver tonight and has no plans to leave in the next 24 hours. Bayh is at his Washington, DC, home with his family.

Biden was last seen minutes ago at his Wilmington estate where his extended brood is gathering. (more…)

Susan Rice is one of Barack Obama’s top national security advisers. She might also be Karl Rove’s implant in the Obama campaign. Every time she ‘defends’ Sen. Obama’s foreign policy record, she causes more harm than good. Every time she critiques Sen. McCain’s foreign policy acumen, she highlights McCain’s expertise. Such is the case here:

Coinciding with a new poll suggesting McCain has overhauled Obama among voters nationally, Obama’s senior foreign policy adviser Susan Rice portrayed the Republican as a hot-head who could not be trusted to stay cool under fire.

McCain’s “tendency is to shoot first and to ask questions later,” she said on a conference call alongside former White House anti-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke, who called the Republican “trigger-happy” and “reckless.”

McCain, according to Rice, “cheer-led (President George W.) Bush’s decision to take our eye off the ball and start a war in Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11.”

“This is a record that belies anything approaching sound judgment,” she said.

Ms. Rice obviously wants us to ignore that Sen. McCain was right in his first statement about Putin’s invasion of Georgia. Ms. Rice also wants us to ignore Sen. McCain’s being right about the surge. (more…)

During one of his campaign stops yesterday, Sen. Obama complained that Sen. McCain had changed his mind about offshore drilling:

“McCain says ‘Here’s my plan, I’m going to drill here, drill now which is something he only came up with two months ago when he started looking at polling,” Obama said of McCain’s energy policy.

The GOP hopeful has become a vocal proponent of offshore oil drilling as a way to ease U.S. dependence on foreign oil and has criticized Obama for failing to embrace it as a way to help bring down oil prices. Obama noted that McCain had long opposed lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling.

back in late June, I noted John Meynard Keynes’ famous quote:

When asked why he changed his position on an issue, John Maynard Keynes said: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”

It isn’t entirely clear why that hasn’t sunken in with Sen. Obama. for that matter, it isn’t clear that the Democratic majorities in the House or Senate have figured things out with regard to energy policy.

Sen. McCain changed his mind when gas reached $4/gallon. Sen. McCain changed his mind because he knew that high gas prices had the potential of tanking the economy. He knew that high gas prices were causing unbearable inflation for consumers. I’d say that those are pretty solid reasons for changing one’s mind. I’m betting that most people would agree. (more…)

People are taking notice that John McCain knows what he’s talking about on national security matters. Recent polling shows Sen. McCain opening a significant gap over Sen. Obama on national security:

The reemergence of the national security gap comes amid the first headline-grabbing world conflict of the 2008 campaign, the Russian invasion of Georgia that highlights the potential for a dramatic military event to upend the political landscape, and likely aid McCain.

July’s NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll found that three in four Americans believe McCain can “handle” the role of commander in chief, while only 19 percent said he “cannot,” compared to a 50 percent to 42 percent split for Obama.

I can tell you from reading more than a few polls that having a +50-someting point gap between favorable vs. unfavorable is almost unheard of. Having a +8 is commonplace.

David Paul Kuhn makes a special note of Sen. McCain’s initial statement when Russia invaded Georgia vs. Sen. Obama’s neutral initial statement:

When violence between Russia and Georgia escalated to war earlier this month, McCain’s first statement demanded that “Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory.”

Obama’s first statement, by contrast, delicately avoided the question of responsibility. “Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full-scale war,” he said. Later that day, Obama blamed Russia for the invasion. By Saturday, the Democrat had moved still closer to McCain’s position: “Russia has escalated the crisis in Georgia through its clear and continued violation of Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Sen. McCain’s initial statement showed the world that he understood that the invasion was Putin’s Russia flexing its muscles in an attempt to reconstruct the old Soviet empire. Sen. McCain’s statement was forceful and direct. (more…)

When fighting broke out last week, John McCain got on the phone to Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili to find out what was happening in the tiny democratic nation. Sen. McCain then said that the Russians were the aggressors and that their actions needed to stop. Three statements and a day later, presumptive Democratic nominee caught up with where McCain was from the start.

Proving yet again that he’s the adult in the room, McCain has just said that he’d back Georgia’s bid to join NATO if he’s elected:

“I would move forward at the right time with the application for membership in NATO by Georgia,” McCain told Fox News television. “As you know, through the NATO membership, that if a member nation is attacked, it is viewed as an attack on all,” said the Arizona senator, alluding to Russia’s military aggression on Georgia. “We don’t have, I think, right now, the ability to intervene in any way except in a humanitarian, economic way, and do what we can to help the Georgians,” he added.

The thought of that happening frightens Russia because, like Sen. McCain says, an attack against one is an attack against all. In fact, admitting all of the former Soviet satellite nations into NATO, starting with Ukraine, would undoubtedly give Putin pause.

Meanwhile, here’s how Sen. Obama responded today:

Obama, on vacation in Hawaii, on Tuesday read a statement blaming Russia for increasing tensions in the Caucasus.

“No matter how this conflict started, Russia has escalated it well beyond the dispute over South Ossetia and invaded another country,” said Obama, 47. “There is no possible justification for these attacks,” he added.

“No matter how this conflict started”? Sen. Obama still can’t quite get past that moral equivalency thing. Sen. McCain gave a lengthy, detailed speech on what’s happening in Georgia today. Sen. Obama issued a brief statement, then got back to the sand & surf with his family. (more…)

Here’s the text of Sen. McCain’s statement on the Georgian-Russian War as reported in the NY Times:

“Americans wishing to spend August vacationing with their families or watching the Olympics may wonder why their newspapers and television screens are filled with images of war in the small country of Georgia.
Concerns about what occurs there might seem distant and unrelated to the many other interests America has around the world. And yet Russian aggression against Georgia is both a matter of urgent moral and strategic importance to the United States of America. Georgia is an ancient country at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and one of the world’s first nations to adopt Christianity as an official religion. After a brief period of independence following the Russian revolution, the Red Army forced Georgia to join the Soviet Union in 1922. As the Soviet Union crumbled at the end of the Cold War, Georgia regained its independence in 1991.
But its early years were marked by instability, corruption and economic crises. Following fraudulent parliamentary elections in 2003, a peaceful Democratic revolution took place. Led by the US educated lawyer, Mikheil Saakashvili, the Rose revolution changed things dramatically and following his election, President Saakashvili embarked on a series of wide ranging and successful reforms. I’ve met with President Saakashvili many times, including several trips to Georgia. What the people of Georgia have accomplished in terms of Democratic governance, Western orientation and domestic reform, is nothing short of remarkable. That makes Russia’s recent actions against the Georgians all the more alarming. In the face of Russian aggression, the very existence of independent Georgia and the survival of its democratically elected government are at stake. In recent days Moscow has sent its tanks and troops across the internationally recognized border into the Georgian region of South Ossetia. Statements by Moscow that it was merely aiding the Ossetians are belied by reports of Russian troops in the region of Abkhazia, repeated Russian bombing raids across Georgia, and reports of a de facto Russian naval blockade of the Georgian coast. Whatever tensions and hostilities might have existed between Georgians and Ossetians, they in no way justify Moscow’s path of violent aggression. Russian actions in clear violation of international law have no place in 21st century Europe. (more…)

Over the weekend, some bizarre things happened in connection to Russia’s military invasion of Georgia. There are lots of things to be learned from this weekend’s developments. The biggest lesson to be re-inforced is that we shouldn’t abandon our democratic allies. That’s essentially what President Saakhashvili’s op-ed reminds us of. What’s eye-opening about President Saakhashvilil’s op-ed is the provocative language contained in it. Here’s what I’m talking about:

The Kremlin designed this war. Earlier this year, Russia tried to provoke Georgia by effectively annexing another of our separatist territories, Abkhazia. When we responded with restraint, Moscow brought the fight to South Ossetia.

Ostensibly, this war is about an unresolved separatist conflict. Yet in reality, it is a war about the independence and the future of Georgia. And above all, it is a war over the kind of Europe our children will live in. Let us be frank: This conflict is about the future of freedom in Europe.

No country of the former Soviet Union has made more progress toward consolidating democracy, eradicating corruption and building an independent foreign policy than Georgia. This is precisely what Russia seeks to crush.

This conflict is therefore about our common trans-Atlantic values of liberty and democracy. It is about the right of small nations to live freely and determine their own future. It is about the great power struggles for influence of the 20th century, versus the path of integration and unity defined by the European Union of the 21st. Georgia has made its choice.

Russia has sought to control its former ‘colonies’ throughout Putin’s time in office. Let’s remember how he tried installing a pro-Moscow candidate in the Ukraine through fraud in 2004. The thought of Ukraine having its own foreign policy threatened Putin.

Don’t think that it’s coincidence that Viktor Yushchenko was poisoned during the campaign. But I digress. (more…)

One of the central questions this election is what type of foreign policy we want. Based on their competing statements, it’s apparent that an Obama administration wouldn’t assign blame to aggressors. Actually, an Obama administration would assign blame on aggressors and victims. John Hinderaker’s post at Powerlineblog shows the intellectual incoherence of Sen. Obama’s foreign policy and the comprehensive grasp of geopolitical factors to be weighed of Sen. McCain’s foreign policy. Here’s one of Sen. Obama’s statements on the Russian-Georgian conflict:

“I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict,” Obama said in a written statement. “Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint and to avoid an escalation to full-scale war. Georgia’s territorial integrity must be respected.”

Saying that Georgia “should show restraint” is like telling Kuwait in 1990 to show restraint after Iraq invaded. Here’s Sen. McCain’s statement:

“[T]he news reports indicate that Russian military forces crossed an internationally recognized border into the sovereign territory of Georgia. Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory. (more…)