Wriring in the Atlantic, Professor Steven Lansburg writes candidly on why he’s supporting, albeit with “some trepidation” for John McCain. One informative part of his piece comes when he contrasts McCain with Barack Obama as they are compared to George Bush:

This came as a surprise to me. I’d been assuming, in my ill-read, uneducated way, that McCain had been complicit in most of the great travesties of the Bush administration and the execrable Republican Senate. I’ve learned that’s largely untrue. He voted (to my great surprise!) against the prescription drug entitlement, against the Farm Security Bill, against milk subsidies, against Amtrak subsidies, and against highway subsidies.

Obama, by contrast, is in many ways a continuation of Bush. Like Bush (only far more so), Obama is fine with tariffs and subsidies. Like Bush, he wants to send jackbooted thugs into every meatpacking plant in America to rid the American workplace of anyone who happens to have been born on the wrong side of an imaginary line. Like Bush, he wants a more progressive tax code. (It is one of the great myths of 21st century that the Bush tax cuts made the tax code less progressive; the opposite is true. If you are in the bottom 38% of taxpayers, you now pay zero income tax—and therefore have an incentive to support any spending bill that comes down the pike.) Like Bush, he wants more regulation, not less.

The mantra of “four more years of George Bush” might only work with the far left now as a rallying point. And as Landsburg shares my
puzzlement with “the undecided voter”, I must wonder what McCain’s clear record as and independent thinker has on both these voters and those former Clinton supporters like Lynn Forrester de Rothchild.

Posted under Uncategorized