Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Elephant in the Room: McCain must change views on social issues (Rick Santorum)
Philly.com ^ | 3/13/08 | Rick Santorum

Posted on 03/13/2008 11:19:50 AM PDT by NormsRevenge

I attended the Council for National Policy meeting last week in New Orleans and listened to John McCain address the who's who of Hillary Rodham Clinton's vast right-wing conspiracy. It was another chance for McCain to, in his words, "not just unite, but reignite the base." How did the crowd think he did? Let's just say it's hard to ignite anything with cold water and no fire.

He talked about two legs of the Republican stool - spending/taxes and national security. But the third leg - social issues - went unmentioned. When questioned, he failed to connect with the people who care as much about why you vote the way you do as about how you vote.

The vast majority of the people at the meeting and in the conservative movement will vote for McCain. I will. But will the people who make up the backbone of the get-out-the vote effort go to work for him?

Only if he demonstrates that his vaunted pragmatism and open-mindedness will lead him to different positions on some issues.

Consider immigration and the extension of the Bush tax cuts. McCain says he "got the message." He's accepted the political reality of the need to secure our borders first and not increase people's taxes in a slow economy. That's great, but these conservatives are less interested in conversions based on politics than in decisions based on sound policy.

On other issues, more than better explanations will be needed.

McCain has opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment in the past because he said states could handle the assault on marriage. Have they? No. Although some state courts have sided with the voters' wishes in their states, courts in other states have forced same-sex marriage and civil-union laws on the public. A hodgepodge of laws is forcing other state courts to rule on the divorces of Massachusetts marriages and the breakups of civil unions from the nine states that permit them. It's an alternative route to forcing same-sex marriages and civil unions by making other state courts recognize these unions.

We also have gained a better understanding of the consequences of court ordered same-sex marriages. In Massachusetts, some public schools have introduced a fairy tale in which a prince marries another prince as part of a lesson on marriage - for second-graders. One superintendent said the district was "committed to teaching children about the world they live in." Interesting.

McCain, who recently supported a state constitutional amendment favoring traditional marriage in Arizona, needs to take these changes into account and outline a strategy that pushes some form of Federal Marriage Amendment or sets forth the conditions that would prompt his call for the amendment.

McCain also has been a proponent of capping carbon emissions to stop global warming. Yet last year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the environmentalists' gold standard, dramatically scaled back its doom-and-gloom predictions. At the same time, hundreds of respected scientists went public to question the validity of man-made global warming.

If the science is changing, so are temperatures. Yes, 1998 was the warmest year since 1938, but every year since has been cooler, and we just learned that 2007 was the coldest year since 1966.

Let's put these inconvenient truths aside and assume man-made global warming exists. The fact is, McCain's legislation would cost hundreds of billions and have almost no effect on global temperature.

In his New Orleans speech, McCain asked what was wrong with investing in green technologies, reducing fossil-fuels consumption, boosting Earth-friendly energy alternatives and creating a cleaner environment. Nothing. Count me in. But his global-warming legislation does much more than that and would hurt the U.S. economy. At the very least, McCain should require full global participation - China and India - before the United States implements these climate-change initiatives.

New science also has upended the debate over federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research. It is now clear that the pursuit of federal funds for embryonic stem-cell research is not only unnecessary, but with the advent of embryonic-like adult stem cells, it is now counterproductive, since it would displace money for more promising research. One of the scientists responsible for recent adult stem-cell advances predicted an end to our stem-cell wars. As James Thompson told the New York Times: "A decade from now, this will be just a funny historical footnote."

When McCain voted to support federal research that destroys human embryos, things were different. The science - and the moral components of the debate - have changed. Can he?

Social conservatives see all three issues as moral issues. Yes, even global warming. Why? Because too many global-warming zealots appear to worship the creation instead of the Creator and view man and his actions as only suspect disrupters of nature.

I've known John McCain for almost two decades. Honor and integrity underlie everything he does. I can testify it's hard to persuade him that there is another way when he believes he has taken the honorable position. He is stubborn in the best sense of the word.

Conservatives are not asking him to execute a series of 180s. We're looking for policy adjustments that show he has the independent spirit and pragmatic sense to change prior stands not simply because of new political realities, but new facts. Facts - which, as Ronald Reagan used to say, are also stubborn things.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: changeviews; elephant; mccain; santorum; socialissues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

1 posted on 03/13/2008 11:19:51 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Now that’s what I call whistling in the dark. McCain the RINO doesn’t represent me. Nor will he ever.


2 posted on 03/13/2008 11:23:52 AM PDT by Noumenon (The only thing that prevents liberals from loading us all into cattle cars is the power to do it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: NormsRevenge

I thought conservativism meant Federalism and now Rick Santorum wants the Feds to dictate to the State aboout marriage.

Why not leave it up to the States?


4 posted on 03/13/2008 11:24:21 AM PDT by Perdogg (Reagan would have never said "She's my girl")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek


5 posted on 03/13/2008 11:26:41 AM PDT by JaneNC (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
He needs to change, so he can win the election, like me.

Oh.
Nevermind....

6 posted on 03/13/2008 11:29:17 AM PDT by steve-b (Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. --RAH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Correction.

Mccain must change views period. Not only that, he must prove it.

He can start by embracing the word “fence” and appointing Tancredo or Sheriff Joe as his “Immigration Czar”


7 posted on 03/13/2008 11:30:22 AM PDT by wilco200
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
conservatives are less interested in conversions based on politics than in decisions based on sound policy

This succintly states why I cannot and will not vote for McCain. Any issue that he now "agrees" with me (a conservative) (e.g. taxes, supreme court nominations & immigration) is because of politics.

Santorum lists many issues where McCain does not agree with me/conservatives and I'm not at all interested in political year conversions.

8 posted on 03/13/2008 11:30:34 AM PDT by Floyd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

because federalism isn’t an item on single issue voter checklists


9 posted on 03/13/2008 11:31:03 AM PDT by ari-freedom (McCain must pick a conservative VP if he wants conservative support)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
McCain also has been a proponent of capping carbon emissions to stop global warming.

Worried about global warming? I suggest trusting in the Lord will do a lot more than reducing your carbon emissions. Fear God, not global warming.

10 posted on 03/13/2008 11:31:04 AM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
I thought conservativism meant Federalism and now Rick Santorum wants the Feds to dictate to the State aboout marriage.

Because Rick and others are smart enough to realize that eventually, the actions of derelict states like Massachusetts will make the butt-sex marriage issue a federal one. Better to head it off now.
11 posted on 03/13/2008 11:31:51 AM PDT by Antoninus (Tell us how you came to Barack?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

I thought that Reagan was in favor of limited Federal Govt yet some want unlimited Federal Govt in the name of Reagan when it comes to promoting certain social policies.


12 posted on 03/13/2008 11:33:20 AM PDT by Perdogg (Reagan would have never said "She's my girl")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Why is the government involved in marriage at all? Are we really FREE when we to have to get a license from the government to get married? Why not a license to have children? Replace the word “license” with “permission” and see how that feels.
13 posted on 03/13/2008 11:34:18 AM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

That’s up to the people of the Commonweath of Massachusetts, not to the Federal govt.


14 posted on 03/13/2008 11:36:07 AM PDT by Perdogg (Reagan would have never said "She's my girl")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Why now would any one expect lord McCain to view ‘social’ issues as part of his electorate..... That vast most fittest to survive elitist moderates above it allllllll now control the party. I am content sit back and watch to see how things play out for their supremacy.
15 posted on 03/13/2008 11:37:51 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Isa.3:4 And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

not just that but in the name of conservatism they want the govt to impose trade barriers on our allies and non-enemies, a Japan style industrial policy, ethanol and other agricultural subsidies and all kinds of defense projects that the military doesn’t need in the name of creating jobs.


16 posted on 03/13/2008 11:38:00 AM PDT by ari-freedom (McCain must pick a conservative VP if he wants conservative support)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I ran across this by accident today..make up your own minds folks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003141_2.html


17 posted on 03/13/2008 11:39:20 AM PDT by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

what the federal govt should do is ensure that other states are not forced to accept MA’s gay marriage.


18 posted on 03/13/2008 11:39:44 AM PDT by ari-freedom (McCain must pick a conservative VP if he wants conservative support)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Santorum nails it.

McCain will get votes but he will not get volunteers and effort from citizens.

It will NOT be “YEAH! vote McCain!”

it WILL be “whatever, vote mcain.”

THIS is the danger for the DOWN TICKET.


19 posted on 03/13/2008 11:39:59 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

I can’t even get to the “whatever, vote McCain’ part.
The man is as uninspiring as a doorknob.


20 posted on 03/13/2008 11:42:47 AM PDT by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I've known John McCain for almost two decades. Honor and integrity underlie everything he does.

Baloney.

21 posted on 03/13/2008 11:44:08 AM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

McCain is running like a Democrat. His positions are off limits and we aren’t supposed to be talking about them. 2012 can’t come soon enough, is Amerika is still here, of course.


22 posted on 03/13/2008 11:45:32 AM PDT by Sybeck1 (It's truly bad when your Savior in November is Judas Himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Because marriage is a federal issue. Have you ever heard of a person who says, "I am married in the state of ." If marriage wasn't a federal issue, then someone wouldn't have broken a law by marrying one person in New York and one person in California.

One state recogtnizinf homosexual marriage will eventually force all 50 to.

23 posted on 03/13/2008 11:47:00 AM PDT by nickcarraway (I didn't leave the Republican Party, it left me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Who wants unlimited government except for McCain?


24 posted on 03/13/2008 11:48:01 AM PDT by nickcarraway (I didn't leave the Republican Party, it left me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I don't care if India and China do join in on the Global Warming nonsense... why should a non-threat be regulated that will harm our economy, expose us to international laws, and accomplish the greatest amount of wealth-redistribution in history? These folks(R+D) have to be stopped.

Some video of McCain at youtube::

McCain vs. (Ret. Adm. Conrad) Lautenbacher

McCain shows his zeal for global warming regulations (and is a pompous, arrogant, disrespectful jerk) at the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, June 8 2005.
"...single most important issue affecting the world - climate change... "
Sen. John McCain refutes a global warming denier
“Debate is over... solution is through development of technologies that will help our economy... cap-and-trade ... climate change is real... an obligation of the stewardship of the earth ... In my view, the debate is over.”
John McCain on Global Warming
In this video, he says while Kyoto was opposed, if China and India would join, the US should consider a global agreement.
(”overwhelming evidence....” yada yada...)

25 posted on 03/13/2008 11:48:58 AM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Why not leave it up to the States?

I think because the Uniform Code Law requires that states accept and recognize the laws of other states. That would mean that non-same-sex marriage states would have to accept same-sex unions granted by another state.

26 posted on 03/13/2008 11:50:44 AM PDT by DallasDeb ((a.k.a. USAFA2006Mom!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
First I was told McCain was the big dog.
I thought that was a name given because his nose is always so far up the rear of all the Democrats.

Now I hear he's the elephant in the room?

Could be, I may have to hold my nose to vote for the McTurd, but I sure as hell don't have to claim to like him when I don't.

Still hoping for the best, meaning natural causes takes him out and we can substitute a real candidate.

If not for the two Marxist running on the Democrat side, no way I'd vote McTurd.

27 posted on 03/13/2008 11:51:17 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Santorum in ‘12


28 posted on 03/13/2008 11:52:26 AM PDT by Lurking in Kansas (Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

If anyone knows about winning an election, it’s Rick Santorum, right?


29 posted on 03/13/2008 11:52:56 AM PDT by mountainbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
So if two gays ‘marry’ in Mass., and move to Texas, what happens if they want a ‘divorce’ in Texas? How does the division of property go? What if there are children? There has to be laws or at least guidelines.

That is why it is a Federal matter.

30 posted on 03/13/2008 11:55:33 AM PDT by NathanR ( Duncan Hunter for SecDef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

So, Rick Santorum thinks that McCain can make up for his extremely faulty reasoning by speechifying? McCain has been poking conservatives in the eyes for so long that it’s going to take more than words to convince.


31 posted on 03/13/2008 11:57:33 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Don't trust anyone who can''t take a joke. [Congressman BillyBob])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rrrod

Barral is quite the good commie, isn’t he? Here is a five pager of the interview that was published back in 1970.

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/declassified_fernando_interview_1_24_1970.pdf

This document is a transcript of an “exclusive” interview of POW John McCain by Spanish psychiatrist Dr. Fernando Barral. The meeting between Barral and POW McCain took [place] away from the POW camp in an office of the Committee for Foreign Cultural Relations in Hanoi. The interview was published January 24, 1970 in Havana, Cuba.


32 posted on 03/13/2008 12:00:24 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mountainbunny

How true, if Rick had morphed into another Snarlin Arlen, he might be in the senate right now.


33 posted on 03/13/2008 12:06:15 PM PDT by Sybeck1 (It's truly bad when your Savior in November is Judas Himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Hey, Rick Santorum, how is your support for Arlen Specter working out for you?

Does Arlen call? Does he write?


34 posted on 03/13/2008 12:06:55 PM PDT by donna (Before they gave us McCain, they tried to give us Rudy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas

Because marriage is a legal contract like any other.


35 posted on 03/13/2008 12:09:25 PM PDT by donna (Before they gave us McCain, they tried to give us Rudy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Bingo. McKook’s version of reaching across the aisle.

Before September, we need a new nominee.


36 posted on 03/13/2008 12:13:51 PM PDT by exit82 (People get the government they deserve. And they are about to get it--in spades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Santorum’s displeased because McCain doesn’t want to run on the queers and mexicans platform.


37 posted on 03/13/2008 12:14:56 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
That’s up to the people of the Commonweath of Massachusetts, not to the Federal govt.

Just wait until a federal court decides that every state must recognize butt-sex marriages blessed by MA. Then it will be a federal issue and it'll be to d@mned late to do anything about it.
38 posted on 03/13/2008 12:16:23 PM PDT by Antoninus (Tell us how you came to Barack?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rrrod

If I have a choice of believing McCain or a communist, I’ll believe McCain easily.


39 posted on 03/13/2008 12:16:42 PM PDT by donna (Before they gave us McCain, they tried to give us Rudy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: donna

Do you need a license to buy a house? A car? Accept a job? All legal contracts. Try again.


40 posted on 03/13/2008 12:25:16 PM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Generally, Conservatism is about federalism and states rights. But there are some things that are too important to be left up to the states; for example, issues of morality (marriage [gay marriage, polygamy], assisted suicide [Oregon]), social and individual well-being (legalizing marijuana and other drugs [California]), government (banking, coining money, war and peace).

Conservatives realize that when issues like these arise and states want to pass state laws that are immoral or should be illegal, the power of the Federal Government is needed to prevent states from committing these wrongs (as happened with the Shiavo case).


41 posted on 03/13/2008 12:29:17 PM PDT by FFranco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas

Deed of Trust, Car registration, employment contract.


42 posted on 03/13/2008 12:30:17 PM PDT by donna (Before they gave us McCain, they tried to give us Rudy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: donna
Hey, Rick Santorum, how is your support for Arlen Specter working out for you? Does Arlen call? Does he write?

I think I'm seeing a new "syndrome": BLS (battered legislator syndrome)

Perhaps we could start a new party and offer counseling services.

43 posted on 03/13/2008 12:31:32 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: donna
A Deed of Trust is an instrument between the lender and the borrower which is kept at the county records office. It is not a government license to purchase a house. You do not need to register a car to purchase a car, although it is advisable.

The point is, our founders set up government to avoid the nanny state we have now. To allow choice. If Mass. wants to license marriage, and they want to include homosexuals, fine. If Texas doesn't, fine also. If you are moving from one state to another, learn the laws and either accept them, work to change them, or don't go there. If your state enacts laws you disagree with, move.

We are free people and we should not have to get our government's permission to get married, buy a house or move. THAT is what sets us apart from the rest of the world. At least, it used to.

44 posted on 03/13/2008 12:37:56 PM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: FFranco

Everything you said is so unconstitutional.

The feds are not supposed to be involved in any of those things. The judiciary has overstepped it’s bounds and interfered in all those things. The fed government redistributes tax money based on marriage status - it’s all wrong.

Santorum and those that agree with him want to correct the judiciary by passing more laws. I have little hope that any of it will work.

Bottom line, the federal government is evil. You cannot depend on it to decide moral issues. That is the opposite of what the founders intended.

We have 60,000,000 dead babies to prove it.


45 posted on 03/13/2008 12:39:00 PM PDT by donna (Before they gave us McCain, they tried to give us Rudy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

McCain will not change and I will not vote for him....even if he said he did.


46 posted on 03/13/2008 12:41:57 PM PDT by cowdog77 (Circle the Wagons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna

fair enough!


47 posted on 03/13/2008 12:50:15 PM PDT by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: donna

I disagree. You say the federal government is evil. Does that mean state governments are good?

Do you realize that if Roe vs. Wade is overturned abortion will be legal in many states? Aren’t those state governments evil? That is why even if Roe vs. Wade is overturned we will need a federal statute making abortion illegal. Plus all the other immoral or illegal acts state governments sometimes try to legalize.

The federal government represents all the people of our nation, not just the people of one area like state governments. That is why it is up to the federal government to enforce American morality and legality when state governments fail.


48 posted on 03/13/2008 12:52:35 PM PDT by FFranco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
Why is the government involved in marriage at all? Are we really FREE when we to have to get a license from the government to get married? Why not a license to have children? Replace the word “license” with “permission” and see how that feels.

I came to the same conclusion a while back.

The government needs to be out of the marriage business - we as a people need to demand it. It's doubtful that this will happen, however, because people now look to the government for approval and protection.

Ironically, for those concerned about such things, government involvement in marriage won't prevent gay marriage - at some point it will help facilitate it.

Continued government regulation of marriage simply means that in addition to gay marriage, the government will have an excuse to further regulate our private lives.

49 posted on 03/13/2008 1:03:07 PM PDT by mountainbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Mclaim is the giant Weasleosuraus in the room..
When he turns on you he knocks things over..

And the groupie Weasnicks make excuses for him..
Leaving the room is the only way to regain any self respect..

Amazingly some will sacrifice all self respect at the polls in Nov..

50 posted on 03/13/2008 1:18:30 PM PDT by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson