A Leader or a Puppet?

As I've been comparing President Bush to the presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain, it has become some what glaringly clear that they are similar in too many ways, which makes me feel that McCain winning the election will not bode well for the growth of America. I've done this comparison because I really feel that we are heading in the same path by electing McCain. Why? Well because most people agree that Bush was not the force behind the destruction of America even though he is taking the blame. He just isn't smart enough. Plenty of people agree that Bush was not smart enough. Hum...neither is McCain for that matter. That begs for the question that needs an answer: if McCain wins who will really be running the government? Big Business, again? The neocons? The religious right? Dick Cheney? Karl Rove? Or will it be just a joint effort by all of them?

Let's put the ducks in a row and compare President Bush and McCain on several factors with the intent of finding the difference:

1. Educational accomplishments,
2. policies,
3. campaign tactics, and
   
4. speaking capabilities

Let's look at Bush's and McCain's records shall we:

Bush received a C during his tenure at Yale and McCain was 5th from the bottom of his class that had over 800 students during his tenure at the U.S. Naval Academy. It seems they are pretty equal in the educational department.

Overall McCain has voted 95% FOR Bush's policies and in 2007 McCain voted 100% FOR Bush's policies. In fact McCain plans to keep most of Bush's failed policies and give the oil companies and big business more cuts and Tax Breaks. As Glenn Grernwald puts it:

"John McCain delivered what was billed as a "major foreign policy" speech and today, David Brooks gushed that it was "as personal, nuanced and ambitious a speech as any made by a presidential candidate this year." In particular, Brooks said that the speech demonstrates just how different McCain's foreign policy approach is from that of Bush/Cheney: "Anybody who thinks McCain is merely continuing the Bush agenda is not paying attention." The reality is exactly the opposite. Thematically, rhetorically and substantively, McCain's speech, particularly as it concerned the Middle East, was essentially a replica of the speech George Bush has been giving for the last seven years. It trumpeted virtually every tenet of the neoconservative faith: to be safe, the U.S. must slay tyranny around the world, spread democracy, bring freedom to the grateful peoples of the Middle East so they turn towards us and away from the Terrorists, using "more than military force"

As well as Think Progress puts it:

"McCain’s speech last week represented a feeble attempt to distance himself from Bush, something his top surrogate acknowledges is futile. Strangely enough, McCain economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said recently that Obama’s economic polices, not McCain’s, would represent a third Bush term (a claim ultra-conservative Robert Novak even found absurd).

But the simple fact is that Graham is right. McCain is proposing massive tax cuts that primarily benefit higher-income households, ignore other priorities and drive up the national debt by trillions. And McCain’s health care policy would raise costs and abandon the uninsured. That sure sounds like an “extension” and “enhancement” of Bush’s policies."

Just like his predecessor McCain has embarked in running a campaign lacking integrity and substance when it comes to using ads. As Bush had in 2004 against Kerry with the use of the infamous swift boat mudslingers, McCain has his campaign running mudslinging ads as well (the only differences is that Bush was not the one slinging the mud, McCain must have felt that it would be better to cut the middle man out of the picture). The Wall Street Journal writes:

"John McCain has edged toward more negative ads lately – a strategy he took in his previous presidential bid and one that “has been and may still be problematic - if not disastrous,” writes The Huffington Post’s Thomas B. Edsall. “For McCain, negative ads have by and large been poorly conceived and minimally effective. In 2000, his decision to go negative against George W. Bush was a crucial factor in McCain’s eventual defeat.” For those who don’t remember, McCain compared Bush to Bill Clinton, which was “at that moment, beyond the pale,” Edsall notes."

For the final comparison let's just let the visuals do the job:





Enough said, another puppet waiting to get in the White House.