Nightmare scenario evolving

Last month I suggested here that "And who knows? If Mr McCain starts regaining his status as a Republican front runner, the earlier Conventional Wisdom - Mrs Clinton vs Mr McCain - would prove to be very perceptive." Based on my reading of the McCain victory in Florida and the expected endorsement by Giuliani as well as the mess among the Democrats -- I'm very doubtful that Obama will win the Democratic nomination -- we'll probably get a Clinton-McCain race, and my guess is that McCain will win. He'll use foreign policy/national security -- especially against the backdrop of a possible confrontation with Iran 9see my earlier post) and the alleged "success" in Iraq -- to bash Hillary and the Democrats as "appeasers" etc. and who in any case don't have any alternative to offer in the Middle East. For those of us who opposed the Iraq War and W's foreign policy – and for opponents of Big Government, in general -- all of this is VERY BAD news. Bush is basically a lazy person with little interest in global affairs and all his warmongering was all about winning elections, not about fighting wars. He really doesn’t like sitting late at night in the Situation Room “managing” a global crisis. He prefers to go to bed (to sleep). But McCain LOVES all of that. Another Cuban-Missile-Crisis-like atmosphere in the White House where he could play the War President. It’s a form of Viagra for this mummy-like creature. It could keep him alive and kicking for eight more years during which the Warfare State will run amok, including the…reinstatement of the draft. Sometime in 2010 we’ll have no choice but to admit that we are really starting to miss W. Finally, I do hope that Dr. Paul runs as a third-party candidate and make it more likely that the Republicans lose, providing them with an opportunity to reinvent themselves.
Update/The McCain coming Administration:

President McCain
Vice-President: Rice or Huckabee or Lieberman.
Pentagon: Giuliani or Rice or Lieberman.
State: Robert Kagan.
AG: Giuliani.
CIA: Giuliani or Gary Schmitt.
Colonial Office: Niall Ferguson.
Treasury: Robert Zoellick.
Representative in Israel: Bibi Netanyahu.


Anonymous said…
Paul should run and attack Hillary from the left on the war and McCain from the right on immigration.
Anonymous said…
Ive tried to tell everyone to get behind Romney at this point, even though he wasn't my favorite candidate at the outset (Thompson was).

He needs money too, like in the next three or four days, because Super Tuesday is next week. This can be done via the Romney website.

Paleocons (like me) are running out of time folks. Demographically the country gets more Democratic every day as we bring in one million legal immigrants EACH YEAR, most of whom vote democratic. McCain's Shamnesty "Comprehensive" Immigration Reform wanted to UP that number to THREE MILLION per year, changing America from all recognition in about one mere decade. It would be FOREVER over for conservatives.

A McCain presidency would be a bad one, and would almost certainly give the Dems the presidency back in 2012, as a hard-headed, tempermental McCain would be almost assured to gaffe a great deal with the public. He'd have no Cheney and a team of handlers to assuage what he says and act as a PR buffer for him, he would eschew that. He will be out front, inserting foot in mouth often---and doing much worse with his policies.

Whether paleoconservatives are excited about him or not, at this point Romney is the horse we literally have to back. Paul and Huckabee are simply too far behind. I DO hope Paul will run as an independent if its McCain vs. Hillary in the general, otherwise I'll skip my first presidential election. I will simply not vote for John McCain, a man who has given the finger to the base repeatedly.

I hate to say this, but Ron Paul's candidacy might have sapped alot of the energy needed to wrest the presidency away from the establishment this time out. If there were no Guliani or McCain in the playing field, it might have been an "indulgence" to get behind Paul, but the country is literally at stake demographically with the "reform" that McCain very well might try to push through EARLY in his presidency (to get it over with early, so he has three years to live it down before the next election). We have had bad presidents since 1992 folks, this will guarantee 20 years of bad executive leadership culturally, financially, politically and demographically. Clock is ticking.
Leon Hadar said…
I agree with the two comments here. But I doubt that Romney will be able to mobilize the anti-McCain forces among Republicans, especially if Huckabee continues running. Romney could have certainly won the southern states if Huckabee had withdrawn. Perhaps he should offer him the VP, but I have a feeling that McCain will do it.
Anonymous said…
You can be the first to write a "I miss W" article in TAC.
Anonymous said…
Dr Hadar,

Remembering your very interesting Tel Aviv versus Jerusalem piece in TAC, I am wondering will Ambassador Netanyahu be more popular in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv? I assume the former, but even though I happily visited (as a Catholic pilgrim) Israel last year, cannot say that I know the very interesting local politics.

Keep up the good work.

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

my new op-ed in Haaretz