Even at this early date, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination gets special scrutiny, and of course, special criticism. John Hawkins provides nine reasons NOT to vote for John McCain.

Some of the objections are practical--McCain is no spring chicken and at 72, would be the oldest man to take office in the history of the country. I'm not sure this one has merit--this week, Mike Wallace went into retirement--at 88 year old. I watched a program this weekend hosted by William Shatner who is probably working more now than at any other time in his life--he's 75 this month. Here in Utah, the Mormon church is ably run by a 96 year old man who just had colon surgery, rested a few weeks and just got back from Chile where he dedicated a temple. His wife, the departed Marjorie Hinckley is famous for declaring (while in her nineties), "oh to be 70 again!"

Old age isn't what it used to be.

The question of electability is really what the primaries are designed to answer--Hawkins is concerned that the media who fawn over him now, will turn on him during the campaign. Does this mean that some other Republican candidate could be expected to get a pony ride from the media? The simple fact is that John McCain is popular with the media because he handles the media very well and that is a net asset.

McCain's relationship with Democrats could be seen as both an asset and a liability. Being able to get something done that you otherwise couldn't because of a good relationship is an advantage. I think much of that is due not to McCain's "liberal" proclivities, but his character. In a two-faced world, he is a man of his word. Its the same reason he gets along so well with the media--he takes people seriously and so they take him seriously.

On the downside, McCain actually is a maverick. He did vote against the tax cuts. He is responsible for McCain-Feingold. Democrats love this--conservatives hate it. Its probably the reason McCain won't be the nominee.

I guess what I object to is simply applying a generic litmus test to a candidate. For or against abortion. For or against taxes, etc... Any candidate can simply say the "right thing", but it is much more informative to examine the nuances of their position.

Hawkins asks how anyone can be pro-life and not want to repeal Roe v. Wade. Its not as if repealing Roe v. Wade actually eliminates abortion for all time, and even people of faith consider that there are some circumstances where abortion is justified. Roe v. Wade is simply one element in a larger policy that has to be addressed in a more sophisticated way that simply "for or against abortion".

I am not a John McCain supporter, but I do think he has some interesting qualities as a candidate that need to be discussed and weighed with a little more diligence than a simple litmus test.

For all McCain's weakness, real and perceived, for me he has one overriding advantage--a spine.

There is little doubt that whoever becomes president in 2008 is going to be a war president and that requires a Churchill not a Chamberlain. At the end of the day, nobody can say that John McCain lacks the character to shoulder that burden.