Is McCain a Conservative?

...That was the background for conservative John Fund's Wall Street Journal online column the day before Florida voted. Fund wrote that McCain "has told conservatives he would be happy to appoint the likes of Chief Justice Roberts to the Supreme Court. But he indicated he might draw the line on a Samuel Alito because 'he wore his conservatism on his sleeve.' " In a conference call with bloggers that day, McCain said, "I don't recall a conversation where I would have said that." He was "astonished" by the Alito quote, he said, and he repeatedly says at town meetings, "We're going to have justices like Roberts and Alito."

I found what McCain could not remember: a private, informal chat with conservative Republican lawyers shortly after he announced his candidacy in April 2007. I talked to two lawyers who were present whom I have known for years and who have never misled me. One is neutral in the presidential race, and the other recently endorsed Mitt Romney. Both said they were not Fund's source, and neither knew I was talking to the other. They gave me nearly identical accounts, as follows:

"Wouldn't it be great if you get a chance to name somebody like Roberts and Alito?" one lawyer commented. McCain replied, "Well, certainly Roberts." Jaws were described as dropping. My sources cannot remember exactly what McCain said next, but their recollection is that he described Alito as too conservative....

I agree with what you said, and that last point was particularly important.

We don’t have to move left to get support. Just provide good ideals so the left will come to us.

I sure wish the leadership could see that. I’m not convinced they don’t though. I just think our leadership WANTS to do things that conservatives abhore.

They don’t mind breaking conservative cardial rules, ignoring the constitution, big spending, big government, reasoned gun control, disolving borders, global agreements harming our sovereignty...

We see in the early primaries that the rules are set up so democrat cross-overs and independents can affect our nomination process. Why is that?

It has been my contention from the moment Reagan began to catch on in 1980, that the heirarcy was perplexed by him. He wasn’t in their control. He didn’t fit into their game plan.

I think the party is terrified that another Reagan will pop up and I think they’ve taken steps to make sure it won’t happen again.

They don’t want conservatism pulling in people from the left, because they don’t want conservatism.

Well, let me try and speak up for the “I’m gonna stay at home crowd”. Or, more likely, the voting third party crowd.

Yes, you are right that John McCain is more conservative than Hillary or Obama. We’ll stipulate to that. HOWEVER, the question is, what is in the best interests of conservatives, the GOP, and the country? A fluke of circumstances, terribly weak candidates, MSM fawning, and a substantial minority of moderate to liberal, misled, and/or uninformed GOP primary voters have conspired to make Sen. McCain the presumptive GOP nominee. It should be noted that he has managed to become the frontrunner of the party while losing 2/3 of GOP voters in almost every primary state.

John McCain not only supported and promoted amnesty for 10 to 20 million or more illegal aliens, he CONTINUES to do so with a wink and a nod to the liberal media and editorial boards. I have no doubt that if he becomes President, in addition to sabotaging conservatives at every turn, he will DESTROY both the GOP AND the country by legalizing these 20 million plus illegals PLUS the 80 to 100 million more immigrants who will then arrive soon thereafter via chain migration and “family reunification”. This doesn’t even address the tens of millions more children of these illegal aliens.

The results of Sen. McCain’s policy would be the demographic destruction of conservatism and in fact the entire culture of the country as we have previously known it. Iraq, abortion, and spending are also irrelevant if you no longer have a country, and his continuing implicit and explicit support for amnesty is a DEALBREAKER for me and should be for any true conservative. It’s not simply a matter of SAYING “The people don’t trust us” and “I will secure the borders first” (a hollow promise in any event given his clear disdain for even doing the rudimentary things necessary to do so such as building a fence) He needs to ACKNOWLEDGE that our opposition is legitimate, ADDRESS our opposition substantively, MAKE SPECIFIC PROMISES that he will not foist his destructive views on us, and stop treating the 80 percent or so of Republicans that oppose him on this crucial issue as a bunch of racists and yahoos.

The fact that he was for the “surge”, is nominally pro-life, and against excessive spending are nice but SECONDARY to me as a mainstream conservative. On the most important issues, from taxes to judges to immigration to the environment, he is a complete and total liberal panderer.

That being said, I would further add that if McCain is the GOP nominee, and there is any chance of having a united GOP against Hildebeat in November, given his track record, the onus would be on HIM to make amends with conservatives, NOT vice-versa. HE has to show that he would sincerely change from being the “Anti-conservative” he has been since 2000, and that he truly UNDERSTANDS and RESPECTS why most conservatives hold him in such low regard. He will have to do something he has shown a complete unwillingness to do - namely LISTEN to opposing views even if he disagrees with them and work WITH conservatives instead of AGAINST us.

The reality is that Rush and Sean Hannity are not causing the dissension - they are merely REFLECTING the dissension and disenchantment that we conservatives have with McCain. And it should also be noted that Both Sean and Rush’s views on substantive issues are far closer to those of most Republicans on most major issues than John McCain’s views are.

So far, McCain has done NOTHING to mend fences. He has instead shown every indication that he will STILL push for an amnesty bill which will destroy the country, will create a coalition with Democrats and RINO’s rather than work with conservatives, and spend the next 4 years continuing to vindictively sabotage every conservative initiative that may come up. Even on Judges we’re almost certain to get Kennedys and O’Connors instead of Scalias and Alitos.

As horrible as it is to contemplate, like many other conservatives, I feel that at this point the prospect of 4 years of a destructive, liberal Democratic President may in fact be the lesser of two evils.

Hope that helps you understand where we are coming from...

So, or maybe more so, did Bob Dole. That doesn’t give McCain any rights to claims successful and/or recent military commanding experience or credence on being able to understand and react to new and entirely different threats. His entire MO and repertoire of military “solutions” is to put more “BOOTS on the ground” - that is only the recipe for getting more of our troops killed and hastening the calls for withdrawal without accomplishing the mission. He constantly derided Rumsfeld (whose brilliant plan defeated one of the largest conventional armies and took over Baghdad in three weeks before State Dept - infamous Paul Bremer - took over and fubared the original mission) for not listening to generals (especially Shinseki who suggested occupation with 500,000 troops which we didn’t have and could not possibly sustain in personal and financially, but would wind up with far more casualties and eventual defeat,) which was a lie - yet does anybody think that McCain would listen to anybody if he by any improbable chance became CinC?

“Hero” status (deserved or not) or spending 5½ years in brutal prison camp doesn’t a CinC make. McCain using this “hero card” to imply and play up his “competency” in military command or “national security” and inoculating himself from legitimate questions and doubts is not too much different from John Kerry “serving in Vietnam” and “reporting for duty”... and should make anybody think twice or thrice of this man’s character.

His ideas of conservative “solutions” is bigger, more intrusive in private sector, government. I don’t see “Ronald Reagan” mentality anywhere near McCain.

I think the party is terrified that another Reagan will pop up and I think they’ve taken steps to make sure it won’t happen again.

Exactly. Party establishment have been undermining Reagan, while he was in power and his accomplishments and philosophy after. Exact same thing happened with Newt after 1993 elections, party establishment didn't like reestablishment of Reagan principles, even though it led the party to overwhelming victory, which was slowly sabotaged and derailed from within over several years, in favor of "strategery" which led to 2 slim and "squeaky" victories and "redefinition" of conservatism as "kinder and gentler" and bigger, "compassionate conservative," government...

As long as they stay "in business" - preferably in minority because it doesn't really require them to do anything as "what can we do in minority" excuse is good enough for the masses - they are happy to advance their own well being and consolidate their own power in the party...

No wonder there are few of Class of 1994 left in Congress, still all one sees is the "old guard" that's being kept and sent to Washington again and again. Doesn't make for good potential for advancement and grooming of new generation of conservative leaders.

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.