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?
That’s my hope too. I’m afraid that a big Obama win would make the RAT party think they have a mandate to gut the force levels in Iraq and throw away all the sacrifices of our brave warfighters. He wasn’t my preference but I’ll have to go with John McCain. From a broken glass Republican to a clothespin Republican.
You write: “Im not trying to be disrespectful, but there are some who would say that the troops already have saluted a cocaine user in Bush.”
Good grief....some people will believe anything they read over at Daily Kos........won’t they........
Iffen you feel that you “gotta” vote for McNut, PLEASE do it on some other line than the GOP’s Republican line.
Vote for him on the Conservative line, or better yet; vote on the most obscure line you can find. Use the Prohibition Party line, or the Whig, or the lefthanded wingbat party.
It can be a way of using your vote and still protest this Anti-Republican Republican.
Me? I’m looking for my tackle box right now.
I attended a meeting Wed. where the speaker was the Texas Sec. of State. He was there not to campaign FOR McCain, but to encourage everyone to hold their noses and back him because we have no choice. I commented that this was a sad state of affairs when we have a such a sorry candidate that the state's high official mucky-mucks have to make the rounds all but begging voters to back the candidate.
“Now: Ill vote for McCain. Without hesitation. For our troops.
As one of the troops, I will not be voting for McCain under any circumstances.
I agree. Nothing will get me to vote for McCain. That ship sailed years ago.
Yes. And before you drag out that tired old nonsense about how their doing something wrong makes McCain's doing the same thing wrong somehow "right," allow me to remind you of the adage regarding two wrongs not making a right.
And let me tell you: you vote in a liberal like McCain (pro-Amnesty, pro-embryonic stem cell research, anti-Second Amendment, anti-First Amendment) and it'll be like the Reagan revolution never happened.
Words have meaning, folks. If you want to vote for a Republican, vote for John McCain--but don't kid yourself. You won't be voting for a conservative.
I wish like heck that people would stop calling him something he's not.
What an asinine thing to post.
Right. Let McCain outlaw tactics like waterboarding, close facitities like Gitmo, and that’s supporting the troops ?
Not in my book.
McCain needs to stop cosying up to Ted Kennedy before he becomes even mildly acceptable.
So instead we get a McCain who abandons Vietnam-era POWs/MIAs at the behest of his buddy Kerry and to stop the release of papers that might prove McCain was not a POW hero ?
Also calling for staying in Iraq for 100 years is not helpful. Do you want troops sent around the world, much as they are now, as the world’s policemen ?
To me that’s not supporting the troops.
And a VP has what power, precisely, other than being a tiebreaker in the Senate ?
And a “maverick”, I know better than you elite liberal, with a history of despising conservatives, will listen to a powerless VP ?
Go ahead, shut your mind off and delude yourself.
With that kind of statement, it is obvious you are a liberal lurker.
What power would a conservative VP have with McCain, well known for thoroughly disliking conservatives ?
No deal. I don’t want an R elected who is easily as stupid as Ted Kennedy and is willing to be a tool used by the left.
He could select a Conservative VP and sign a contract on himself. That might do it.
As stupid as he is he would walk right over the side.
Go ahead, prove these people wrong. They’re waiting.
“John, family members of Vietnam POW/MIA(s) have been waiting for more then 14 years for you to have the courage to face them eye to eye in front of the American Public - Here is your opportunity for some “STRAIGHT TALK.” Stop hiding behind your fabricated “War Hero” persona. You know we can prove your collaborations with declassified government documents . . . It is time for the American people to get to know the REAL John McCain - the John McCain that the POW/MIA families witnessed during the 1991-93 US Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs.”
It’s not just me, pal. Whenever someone proclaims something laudatory about themselves loudly over and over for 40 years and uses it to stifle criticism, my BS meter goes to overload.
We have the advantage.
The double talk express will be kissing Rat a$$ to who held the chunk if he gets into office.
I expect McCain to pick a real conservative to try and “unite”the party. I know the VP has little impact BUT McCain is old and the pressures of the job could do him in prematurely. If either of the rats get in our country is toast! I hate McCain’s liberal policies on immigration and his “lifer” status in the Senate, but I am bound to do my little part to keep the rats out.
And we are at war and McCain is a soldier from a soldier family. And he is PRO-LIFE!
God Bless Ted Sampley for his service to this country and sacrifices, but he needs to stand down on his anti-McCain Crusade. I have seen this stuff around for 30 years and it comes from a small group of dedicated McCain haters.
The problem is the same old one for hypers; once you take the whole context of their favorite McCain clips and statements; it all falls apart for the bashers.
A conservative VP of McCain would be a miserable, abused dog. The contract Republicans would need with McCain is one that would stop him from committing more treachery against us. Three guesses at what he would do with it. But, this is going to be the old geezers last run, his last chance at bathing in power and glory, and he isn’t going to win. All those years of turning against the very people who might -only might- put him over the top are going to come back, and destroy him.
Sorry. A liberal policy signed by a Republican President will not only be very bad for this country, but it will tag Republicans as the responsible party for years to come.
Look at Bush and NCLB - is it called Kennedy’s bill ? No, Bush gets the blame. Prescription drug expansion ? Same. Was the amnesty bill blamed on the Dems ? No, it became Bush’s bill because he supported it.
I would rather blame a liberal with a D than a liberal with an R after his name.
That's like saying the troops are now forced to salute a drunk.
Say that we don't want Obama in office because of his policies. But not because he did some dumb things when he was young. There are many substantive reasons to oppose him.
NO WAY will I vote for McCain. Call it advantage. Time will tell.
Then McCain needs to answer it, and stop having the Pentagon hide the papers on his behalf. Who was McCain to decide that he wanted to shut down the families who were seeking info on their POW/MIA family members because it “wasn’t accomplishing anything” ? Do you support standing in the way of seeing whatever the government knows on these matters ?
I for one am long past tired of our government withholding secrets from us because they don’t think it’s to their benefit. Who works for whom, here ?
Kerry hid his questionable records too, and we all called him on it. But you want to give McCain a pass on the same thing ?
No mas, senor. The “Straight Talk Express” is anything but. I’m not voting another liar into office like the Clintoon.
My son is in the Navy. He despises McCain. Where is this idea coming from that a vote for McCain is a vote for the troops?
Must be what people use to convince themselves to vote for a person who employs Juan Hernandez, and verbally denigrates citizens who wish to protect US sovereignty and close our borders.
I don't either, but that is what we are stuck with, and I will vote against the socialist D for our troops and for my grandchildren. The down ticket is very important to me to keep whoever gets elected in check.
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.