We’re all certainly entitled to have fears about what we think a candidate might do, regardless of what he says he will do (this is largely what’s behind the Republicans claim that Obama will raise taxes, despite the fact that he says he won’t for most Americans). But my point is just that when criticizing a speech, it’s not really fair to inject what we think he will do rather than what he said. If we do that, then there really isn’t a speech he could give that would be liked by those who already have their own ideas about what he would do. Personally, I’m tired of hearing pundits give reactions that sound as if they could have been written before the speech was actually given, so I’m sensitive the distinction between criticizing a candidate and criticizing a speech.

But in the actual speech (regardless of what you think he really means) he clearly stated that there are many good ways to serve and didn’t attempt to rank which ways are better.

Agreed on that. Still, I fear he could be hinting at the draft. Maybe that’s just my own personal fears, but given that he’s talked about more wars being a reality, it keeps my on point. :-)

Personally, I would love to see a year of national service for every man and woman to our country to help those folks who are in need. It certainly wouldn’t be military service, but it would be a boon to our collective understanding that ALL need to help out to make this country great.

But that idea is so politically unpopular that it’ll never fly.

Oh well.

As a side note, I’m tired of people commenting on the speech they expected to hear, instead of the one he actually gave, especially when those people get paid to do it on TV. I’m starting to think people come up with their reactions before hearing the speech. Some of the lines I’ve heard:

“McCain just talked about drilling.” Not true, he also mentioned wind, natural gas, nuclear, and many other forms of energy, making clear that he believes they are all important, contrary to what some say (that republicans think we can “drill our way out of this problem”. His website also makes it clear that this is his position.

“McCain didn’t offer any specifics.” The conversation about the “wage insurance” is proof of that there was at least one specific. Although I agree that there wasn’t a lot, but there typically isn’t in acceptable speeches.

And, in response to Gaucho regarding service:

“If you’re disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist in our Armed Forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed. Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.”

I didn’t feel he was trying to rank the ways to serve the country. Certainly he considers joining the military as a very good way to serve. But in the actual speech (regardless of what you think he really means) he clearly stated that there are many good ways to serve and didn’t attempt to rank which ways are better.

One, when mccain speaks of national service i am not particularly enthused. Partly it is because of his heavy focus on the military. Maybe he does not believe that the military is the only way to serve the country but i bet he thinks it is the best way. Also disconcerting to me is the way he wraps up his service talk with all the disparagement of Obama’s patriotism. He builds his service into essentially the concept of fighting the war in Iraq. There was that awkward answer to the lady about he return of the draft. I can see McCain justifying a return of the draft as just making sure every one serves their country.

Second i have seen the wage insurance stuff thrown out there a couple times on the net. It is bait. He has no intention of following through with it. it is a ploy to see if he can burnish his maverickness during the election. It is a purely political move and if people start to applaud him for doing nothing more than including it in his speech than that will have been effective.