Posted on 02/08/2008 6:29:14 AM PST by cgk
 |
 |
February 08, 2008, 0:00 a.m.
McCain Disdain
Why some Republicans won't vote for the senator.
By Mona Charen
I posted a squib on National Review Online about a robo call I received from John McCain (Virginia’s primary is Tuesday). The call stressed that he would, if elected, be a down-the-line limited-government conservative who would never raise taxes, would defend life, would enforce immigration laws, and would win the war on terror. The candidate is trying, I said, to meet conservatives “more than halfway.”
The response of readers was, shall we say, emphatic. One lady wrote that she would never vote for him as “he is the most disloyal, ill-tempered man and he brings out the worse [sic] in all of us.” Several readers made the point that after decades of suffering abuse at McCain’s hands, conservatives are not going to fall into line for him now no matter what blandishments he offers.
I know how they feel. The problem with John McCain is not just that he strays. George Bush has strayed from conservatism too. So has Fred Thompson, and certainly, Mitt Romney has as well. But Senator McCain has a knack for saying things in just the tones and accents that liberals prefer.
In 2000, he condemned the late Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson as “agents of intolerance.” In 2004, when Sen. John Kerry was getting his comeuppance from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, vets whom he had known during the war and who couldn’t remain silent as the Democratic nominee distorted his war record, John McCain weighed in by calling them “dishonorable and dishonest.” When the Bush Administration was being vilified as a nest of Torquemadas for using waterboarding on three occasions, McCain came forward to condemn waterboarding as torture.
Senator McCain was a Vietnam hero. Conservatives, in particular, revere him for this. Indeed, his return from the political grave can probably be traced to the moment (October 22) when he joshingly referred to having missed the Woodstock music festival in 1969 because “I was tied up at the time.” In that instant he came to personify (for many) the conservative side of the great 1960s chasm that (Obama’s irenic rhetoric notwithstanding) continues to divide our society. Not only was he not smoking pot and lolling in the mud with his girlfriend, you could almost hear Republicans telling themselves that he was standing up to torture at the hands of America’s enemies.
And yet, a better man would not stoop to suggesting that military service is the only way to show love of country and sneer that — unlike Mitt Romney — he served for “patriotism not profit.” Profit is a four letter word in the McCain vocabulary, whether applied to “Big Pharma” or other businesses.
McCain reaches too hard and too transparently to turn everything into a contest about military service. When Romney observed that Bob Dole wouldn’t necessarily be the one he’d want an endorsement from, McCain pronounced himself “very sad and disappointed to see that kind of comment about a person who was an American war hero” and demanded that Romney apologize.
There is a strutting self-righteousness about McCain that goes hand-in-hand with a nitroglycerin temper. He flatters himself that his colleagues in the Senate dislike him because he stands up for principle, while they sell their souls for pork. Not exactly. He is disliked because on many, many occasions he has been disrespectful, belligerent, and vulgar to those who differ with him.
Bradley Smith, former commissioner of the Federal Election Commission and the leading legal scholar on campaign-finance issues, experienced the McCain treatment firsthand. Because Smith opposed limits on political speech, he was denounced as “corrupt” by the senator (as was Commissioner Ellen Weintraub). Smith, who lives modestly, jokes that his wife has complained about the absence of jewels and furs. Though he served on the commission for five years and made several attempts to meet with McCain to discuss the issues, Smith was rebuffed.
The two did accidentally meet outside a hearing room in 2004 when they were both scheduled to testify before the Senate rules committee. At first, McCain grasped Smith’s outstretched hand (Smith was in a wheelchair recovering from surgery), but when he recognized his campaign finance opponent he snatched his hand back, snarling “I’m not going to shake your hand. You’re a bully. You have no regard for the Constitution. You’re corrupt.”
Smith, a soft-spoken scholar, ardent patriot, and lifelong conservative Republican, cannot pull the lever for McCain. He is far from alone, and that is the Republican Party’s heartbreak in 2008.
— Mona Charen is a syndicated columnist and political commentator.
Everything else you said I have heard or thought before, but the above was a light bulb going on for me. Could you expand your thoughts on that?
I believe McCain has been running for president for at least ten years and has never stopped. Everything he has done has to be viewed in that context. He knows he is the favorite of the media and wanted to make the media stronger in future campaigns by making paid political speech more difficult. This has the bonus effect of ingratiating him even more with the media and guaranteeing him more free media coverage, which he has used to great effect.
The guy is not stupid.
So basically you are saying 'conservatives' put some ice on it come November you'll see things my way... How very Bill Clinton of you... 'you know'.
“My Country is at stake. Can I trust one man that I despise who represents my Party or sit on my hands on 11/8 and allow socialism overtake our society”
Methinks you have answered your own question!
- John
How 'bout this for a drastic idea: Instead of seeing the economic pie as fix and the only way to make one group better is to take something away from another group, why not create a business environment (cut taxes on business and consumers, less regulation, etc.) where the size of the pie gets bigger. A rising tide lifts all boats.
Hillary, by her own words, takes the Marxist view of income redistribution, as evidenced by her own words. Alas, McCain seems to have the same view of the world. How sad for the rest of us productive members of this society.
Amen. I think John McCain is dangerous and unbalanced and unprincipled. I cannot in good conscience vote for him, and nobody will convince me to. My opinion about him was formed a long time ago and nothing he has done since has improved it, only made it worse. America survived four years of Jimmy Carter with 5,000 Soviet nukes pointed at us, 12% inflation, gas lines, and hostages taken in Iran. We will survive four years of Clinton or Obama. I am not succumbing to the Republican politics of fear.
I agree with you - I was always the one to say that people shouldn’t throw away their vote on a third party, write-in, etc.
But I’ve reached my limit. How far should I stretch, or ignore, my principles? The left is just itching for us all - the talk radio crowd, the FReepers, etc. to back McCain - they’ll never let us hear the end of it! Win or lose in 2008, any time Conservatives make an argument about immigration, civil rights for terrorists, global warming, judges, taxes, etc., the response will be “well, it must not be that important to you, since your own candidate, whom you nominated and supported, disagrees with you.”
I’m sticking to my principles - in the end it’s all we have.
Sadly, I believe that McCain has only a slightly better chance of being elected president in 2008 than you or I do in any event.
The government should not regulate the political content of broadcasts. Period.
I prefer to vote 3rd party. Libertarian or Constitution. Let the GOP work to get my vote back.
GHWB, Dole, Bush, McCain. It gets worse each cycle. None of these guys are philosophical conservatives.
WE ALL KNOW GOOD AND WELL THAT MCCAIN WILL THROW US UNDER THE BUS.
When do we start advancing instead of retreating? We've been on the defensive since RR. These "Republicans" are worthless. We haven't accomplished a thing. I want to win, not play prevent defense.
This is the man John McCain chose to be his "Hispanic Outreach Director." Hernandez is a verified traitor. Born in Dallas he decided as an adult to become a dual-national Mexican citizen. His last job was serving as Mexican President Vicente Fox's "American Reconquista Director."
Hernandez believes all Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in the USA should become dual citizens and consider themselves Mexicans first, "to the 8th generation."
The "New American Pioneers" proclaimed in his book are the illegal alien invaders he urges to become settlers in the USA.
And this is the man McCain chose for his "Hispanic Outreach Director." In the past week he was asked about this choice, and he said he chose Hernandez because he agrees with his positions.
Yet out of the other side of his mouth he says "He has heard us" and he will "Secure the border first."
Juan Shamnesty McCain is precisely a treacherous liar.
I will vote for president but not for McCain or, obviously, any Democrat.
I dunno. Maybe the concepts of additction are applicable here. Republicans are addicted to the Beltway, establishment, “get along with the Democrats” drug. Voting for them makes us enablers. Maybe it’s time for an intervention - a crisis point for everyone. Maybe the addict listens, or maybe not. Maybe the family suffers greatly in the short term. But it brings the crisis to a head, and forces changes.
Again, I dunno. But if we all swallow McCain as nominee, who will the RINOs shove down our throats next time? I’d half expect Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol to be telling us in 2012 that the Republicans should nominate Hillary because she’s the only one who can bring in the moderates to defeat President Obama. Really, how much is too much?
As I said, I’m at my limit. I know others disagree, strongly.
McCain rhymes with Disdain. Nice catch Mona.
McCain was in Vietnam? Who would have guessed it?
Spoken like a true McCain believer.
Excellent commentary by Ms. Charen. As usual, she hits the nail on the head.
Mentioning that Smith was in a wheel chair at the time is as manipulative as mentioning that Romney gave McCain a high hand shake at the debate, despite the pain it may have caused McCain to his crippled arms.
But it also brings up a very serious point about the Republican Party itself. McTemperTM got his real momentum from the states with open primaries. I don't think he would have done this without them.
Thus the question: What kind of political party allows its opponents to choose its candidate? It's lunacy, plain and simple.
Conservatives that thought we had wrested control on the party for the NE libs back in the 90s were deluding themselves. We should have made it a war to oust them at that time. If they want to emulate Democrats we should have told them to hit the liberal highway. Big mistake not to do so.
On another issue, McCain voted for Breyer and Ginsburg?
Terrific!
She has put into words the exact things about McCain that are so irritating to us on the personal level and so dangerous in a man claiming to represent millions of conservatives.
How can it be that the republican party has been reduced to having a second rate man like McCain become the standard bearer?
How far we have fallen! And we have yet to hit the bottom.
>given the stark difference in the choices.
I’m trying to look at this situation clearly.
It’s hard for me to understand how the difference is “stark”. The media will try to portary it as stark, simply because the only thing the media knows how to do is portray every matter of public controversy as a Manichaean struggle, devoid of subtlety or contingencies. I agree that by November, more people will regard the choice as “stark” simply because the election will be framed as such.
Nonetheless, in both policy matters and temperament it is difficult to distinguish between McCain and McClinton. A centrist authoritarian and a leftist authoritarian, who appear to agree more than they disagree.
A McCain presidency would accelerate the slide into welfare-state corporatism with conservatives divided and disaffected; under a McClinton or Obama presidency, the Right would be united, and would fight every battle vigorously.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.