Skip to comments.A contract I wish John McCain would sign
Posted on 02/15/2008 6:15:23 AM PST by jdm
It's all but settled. John McCain will be the Republican Party nominee for president in 2008. That has caused much anguish among many conservatives who knew Ronald Reagan - who was a friend of theirs. And Senator, you're no Ronald Reagan, or words to that effect.
Nevertheless, conservative realists recognize that despite all the chinks in the right side of his armor, John McCain still is far more conservative than either Hillary or B.O. But when President Bush declared that John McCain was a "true conservative" this week - which was kinda like Joan Crawford declaring that Britney Spears was a good mom - true, true conservatives said "Huh?"
After seven years of excess spending and rampant government growth (Homeland Security, No Child Left Behind, Medicare prescription drugs, etc.) under "compassionate conservative" governance, the right ain't readin' anybody's lips again. Trust, but verify. And this time they want it in writing. Preferably in blood.
GOPUSA.com has drafted a "Contract with Conservatives" that it hopes the Republican presidential nominee will embrace. "Conservatives need something more than simple assurances," writes GOPUSA's publisher, Bobby Eberle. "For our time, effort, money, and votes, we need a pledge. We need a pledge from our presidential nominee to uphold the core Republican values that built this party, and which have taken a backseat to politics in recent years."
Right-footed GOP foot-soldiers are flocking to GOPUSA's Web site to sign the online petition declaring that they "will support our presidential nominee and other candidates for high office, only if they uphold the Contract with Conservatives." An extraordinary declaration of grassroots independence. The Contract includes:
Immigration Reform: No "comprehensive" plan. Border security first. THEN we can talk about the rest. And when it comes to dealing with illegal aliens already in the country, they "should not be given special consideration for citizenship and should not be put ahead of those seeking to come to America legally." Pretty reasonable.
Tax Reform: Support for not only lowering taxes, but reforming the tax system to make it simpler. And stop using the tax code "for social engineering." Hard to argue with that.
Limited Government: SHRINK the size and scope of the federal government, not just slow its growth. Earmarks and pork should be eliminated. Limit the government to doing "only those core jobs enumerated in the Constitution." What a radical notion.
Judges: Select judicial nominees who will "follow the law rather than make new laws from the bench." And make sure they get up-or-down votes in a timely fashion - a clear shot at Sen. McCain and his "Gang of 14" that prevented Republicans from breaking Harry Reid's judicial filibusters a couple years back.
Life: Support overturning Roe vs. Wade and oppose embryonic stem cell research. Of course, this is where fiscal conservatives and social conservatives divide their forces, which is how Sen. McCain ended up winning the GOP presidential nomination in the first place. Thanks, Mike Huckabee.
Free Speech: Repeal McCain-Feingold. I suspect this one just might be a bit hard for Sen. McCain to swallow.
All in all, a pretty good treatise. Sen. McCain won't embrace all of it, but then again, no one really expects him to. All this does is put a possible President McCain on notice that conservatives will not support him blindly the way they often did President Bush when W wandered too far off the left side of the conservative reservation.
Fool conservatives once, shame on you; fool conservatives twice, shame on us. We won't get fooled again.
This voter has come around.
I wanted Duncan Hunter. I moved to Romney. Now: Ill vote for McCain.
For our troops.
If John McCain would just promise to limit spending growth to 2%, I would vote for him. Look what happened under Bush, our Budget swelled from $2 Trillion to $3 Trillion. Utterly ridiculous. If Bush could have just kept spending to a reasonable growth level, we could have easily have a $2.5 billion budget this year and a budget surplus. Really, if McCain would just promise to be a small government Republican and strictly limit government growth, I think that would be enough to win many conservatives over.
You write: This voter has come around. I wanted Duncan Hunter. I moved to Romney. Now: Ill vote for McCain. Without hesitation. For our troops.”
I agree. Vote McCain FOR THE TROOPS.
Don’t put them in the position of having to salute a Pres. Obama or Clinton by your thinking you are sending some kind of “message” to the GOP by staying home 11/4/08.
It would take a lot of convincing, and I’m not sure McCain can win me over because I would want more than words...which at this point in the campaign is all he can offer.
Don’t blame Bush for the spending increases alone. Our country’s citizens have become accustomed to having it all and that thinking permeates all the way through Government.
Whenever you are waffling on voting for McCain; just picture a President Obama strutting across an aircraft carrier deck with the troops being forced to salute a cocaine user.
“This voter has come around”
Me too but I hope he picks a REAL conservative for VP.
I wrote to my congressman to support the Enumerated Powers Act,
he, being a dhimmicrat, wrote back that the Supreme Court has ruled that the interstate commerce clause co-exists with the enumerated powers,
basically telling me that he believes the Federal Government can do anything it damn well pleases.
What is the point of supporting our troops overseas when their families suffer rape, murder, theft and stolen identities by the illegal invaders that McCain and his staffer Juan Hernandez support? (And yes, that Juan Hernandez is the same Juan Hernandez who served on Vicente Fox's American Reconquista Council.)
Add to that mix the remarks of La Raza's own Felipe Calderon who just yesterday remarked, "It seems to me that the most radical and anti-illegal alien immigrant candidates have been left behind and have been put in their place by their own electorate."[*]
It's more than obvious that McCain will (as he did with McCain-Kennedy) once more put the wants of illegals ahead of the needs of American citizens; particularly the families of our troops.
I cannot go along with that. I just can't.
Me too but I hope he picks a REAL conservative for VP.
Now why would McCain do that when he already knows he doesn't have to earn your vote? He could pick Hillary or Obama as his running mate and knows that you'd still bend over for his liberal agenda.
So we win the distant war, but lose the battle here at home?
All of the Dems are on record in the debates, that they won’t pull out of Iraq before 2012. They wanted Bush to lose.
I’m sorry, but I wouldn’t believe John McCain if he told me the sky was blue and that grass was green.
I’m not trying to be disrespectful, but there are some who would say that the troops already have saluted a cocaine user in Bush. I remember that allegation being tossed around in 2000 continuously and I’m not saying I buy into it, but it’s an argument that cuts both ways.
I don’t support Obama, but I don’t support McCain either.
I’m not waffling, I’m pretty solid on my intention to not vote for McCain.
I respect those who can stomach McCain, but there isn’t enough antiacid in the universe for my stomach to take John McCain.
Or picture Madame President Clinton...
I like the idea of a “Contract with Conservatives” for some reason, but as I have proposed in the past, it needs to be signed and dated prior to the Candidate’s being presented the coveted “R” to put beside his/her name.
Take the test, pass the evaluation, sign the contract, get the “R”, then go out and “win one for the Gipper” and America.
you really don’t have to worry about that issue. He does not go for Bush’s compassionate ‘conservatism’ at all.
mcCain’s biggest problem is regulation. That comes from his teddy roosevelt side...
did you support reagan and Bush?
Why would McCain feel bound by some unenforceable contract with his political enemies when he gleefully flouts the U.S. Constitution in broad daylight?