McCain is another 4 years of Bush? Prove it.

It's an easy statement to make, particularly since President Bush has the lowest approval rating of any President in recent history. But why not say, McCain is going to be the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. He was a Republican...beloved by many, including many Democrats. Why not merely say that McCain will bring in the same usual Republican policies as they always do? Maybe it's because Ronald Reagan had one of the highest approval rating of Presidents in recent history.

It would be just as easy to say, and some have, that Barack Obama will just bring back Jimmy Carter policies. And for those not in the know...Jimmy Carter's approval rating was nearly as low as President Bush's.

The truth is, Republican or Democrat, their basic beliefs are typically very different, and typically universal throughout the party. So just as John McCain holds some of the same values that President Bush holds, he also holds some of the same values as Ronald Reagan holds. Likewise, Barack Obama holds some of the same values that Jimmy Carter holds, just as he holds some of the same values as Bill Clinton(who had the highest approval rating of any President at the time they left office).

So then, how do we know if McCain will be another Bush or maybe a Reagan? Other than a crystal ball, we can only know by proving it, i.e. asking the right questions.

In this case, what is making our current situation so dire in the US? The economy and Iraq. It's not enough to say, McCain wants to lower taxes just like Bush does, so he's going to be another Bush. Ronald Reagan, and all Republicans, believe in lower taxes. In most cases, it proves to work. It has been proven to actually increase revenue for the government. It encourages investing (different concept from spending) from corporations all the way down to individuals, which typically leads to lower unemployment. So let's see...less taxes equals more money for the government, more money in individuals pockets, and unemployment goes down?? Yeah, those are all horrible things.

But what's different this time, under President Bush? The housing bubble and subsequent credit crunch, that's what. But who controls that? Well, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, that's who. Now it can certainly be argued that the President appoints the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, so he is still responsible. And I'd say that was partially accurate. The choice for Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is crucial to the economy, so it is a key decision for a President to make.

So simply ask McCain if he believes Ben Bernake (the current Fed Chairman and disgrace to the job) has done a good job. Ask him what he would look for in appointing the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. As McCain has stated, he's not the best on the economy, but it's a surefire way to tell if he'll be more like President Bush or Ronald Reagan. I'd also suggest that the same question be asked of Barack Obama, of course, to see if he understands the concept of how integral the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is.

Then there's the war. Everyone should know how critical John McCain was of President Bush after the Iraq war began. Everyone should know that he was the biggest supporter of the surge. Everyone should know that the surge has worked. Everyone should know that he didn't literally mean that this was going to be a 100-year war, that he meant that he'd like to see us maintain a base in Iraq for the unforeseeable future. Everyone should know that it isn't a big deal to have bases in a country...except that it should be clearer that it is a base and not an "occupation" as many in the middle east try to portray it as. Everyone should know that we have many bases in other countries...many of which we have fought wars in. If you don't know these things, you are uninformed...which is your right, to be uninformed. But it's not smart or dutiful to be making decisions about someone that wants to be President based on uninformed thoughts or theories.

Of course, we do deserve more information about John McCain's thoughts on Iraq, as well. It isn't enough to say, "I hate war". Nearly everyone does. And it definitely isn't enough to say "as long as it takes". Not now anyway. When he made that statement, maybe it was, as the surge had not yet, or maybe just, begun. I don't agree with no timetables. I don't agree that it emboldens our enemy. Not if they know we will come back if we have to and kick ass again...that "shock and awe" will be a drop in the bucket. If not specific timetables, like Barack has done, then we deserve rough guidelines with a list of things that would lengthen those guidelines. That's at the very least.

We deserve those answers, and he deserves the opportunity to provide them. Then, and only then, should a comparison to President Bush be made. Until then, if one was to be fair and/or a "New Age Politician", the most that should be "another Republican with more Republican values" and leave Bush out of it. If one was to be fair, that is.