McCain Conciliacons His Way From CPAC To Pennsylvania Avenue
By haystack Posted in 2008 | Democrats | McCain | Republicans — Comments (63) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I do not like John McCain. I never have...going all the way back to his race against Bush in 2000...and before that. I want to say that, NOW, before we get down to the cold hard facts of the matter at hand, and be done with it.
In November 2008, facing the choices of staying home, voting for Clinton or Obama, or pulling "R" (while assuming the letters "J-o-h-n M-c-C-a-i-n" precede that letter), I am going to take two shots of Jose Cuervo hard and fast...and recite my grandmother's words (God rest her soul)...over and over in my head as many times as I have to until it is finished:
NEVER vote the man...ALWAYS vote the party. Men come and go, but the ideas the Party fights for through these men were here LONG before them and will still be here LONG after they're gone.
And, with that [and some angry grumblings under my breath about how, once AGAIN, she's right no matter how hard I try to tell myself otherwise] I will be pulling the lever for John McCain.
I am not going to do so as a Conservative...that dog is dead for the next 4 years on the National playing field of political ideologies. I am not going to do so as a Republican-I resigned from the party a very long time ago. I will do this because I am an American, and it is my civic duty to vote. I am a Conservative and a political Independent, and my reasons are far simpler and uncomplicated: my love of MY country, and the 18 plus children and grandchildren I have helped put on this earth (and what the Democrats would do to their futures) is why...he's not "her" or "him".
I am not going to even TRY to tell anyone else that they have to do the same...God knows, if nothing else I respect our ability to exercise that God-given right to being independent thinkers...and I won't hate anyone in the morning that doesn't line up like good little sheep and do this because the PARTY told you to. I won't even try to discourage you from hitchin' a ride on the Limbaugh hari-kari wagon...hell, Rush is absolutely right that McCain's ideology does nothing to further Conservatism or the Conservatism movement. But I gotta tell ya, for once in my life I think Rush has this all wrong, and he needs to take a big step backwards and re-think his tirade for a moment. To suggest, as Rush has, that we'd be better off getting a Democrat in the White House, only so they can screw things up and Conservatives can once again be seen as the saviors...called back on their white steeds in 2012...only shows he has no kids, and is more worried about the alleged "movement" than the foot soldiers that fight within it.
First of all, there is no such thing as a Conservative "movement." If there was, we wouldn't be sitting around lamenting "where have all the Conservatives gone?" There is no movement, except where the GOP has moved away from sound Conservative principles toward the center in the misinformed belief that they might regain the Power-majority if they act LIKE the majority...and turned it's back on the farther-right-reaching wing of the party...and they have been doing so for quite a few years now.
Secondly, and this is where I [gasp] outright disagree with the Godfather. The idea that Conservatism will suffer with McCain at the head of the PARTY? Rush, my Obi Wan of Conservatives...Conservatism used to BE the Party sir...now we're just relegated to faction status...c'mon-you know this, right? This is a trick question, right?
Conservatism isn't going deeper into the abyss of Hell while McCain makes kissy face with the Democrats. In fact, if he does HALF of what he promised at CPAC, he'll only help buy we purists some time to resist the relentless reshaping of what Conservatism means over the next 4 years. If a Democrat is in the White House, that whole conversation becomes a joke...yawned at and ignored by the media who already THINK Conservatism is dead.
Look-McCain promised to reduce the size of Government, make tax cuts permanent, stick with Iraq til we WIN, and stand up in the face of Iran and others that would see us and our allies destroyed. He even poked at reducing and eliminating entitlements, and took a fairly safe-distanced path around the ponzy scheme that IS Social Security. These issues are eligible for nomination to the list of what Conservatism means...and would all be wiped from the table of ideas worth even a little consideration if we coronate a Democrat.
Even if McCain breaks EVERY promise he made today (and how many of our political heroes do THAT any more in this day and age?), we'll still have the ear of Americans as we continue to insist that Conservatism works every time it's tried, and McCain's potential shortcomings over the next 4 years, worst case, will provide substance and sensibility to that argument.
The "Party" is the problem...its leadership at least, and they need to be dealt with. Punishing McCain (which leaves a Democrat in the White House) is no way to fix the mess the current GOP leadership has made of the party and the country's short-term future. My disdain for these candidates who have argued like little schoolgirls about which one might be able to lay claim to being THE Conservative knows no bounds....but come on...this scenario of a McCain Presidency could be fairly termed "not at ALL what any of us wanted", but it isn't all that difficult to square.
There's nothing wrong with John, per se...certainly nothing more wrong than with any of the rest of us who have ideas and ideals...and who like to pride ourselves on our own definition of purism, whatever the heck that means in politics anymore. He ain't my style of Conservatism, to be sure, but mine ain't his style either...so I guess that makes us even, except for that nagging little detail about him actually HOLDING an elective office, and apparently having done well enough in the eyes of his constituencies over the years to keep getting invited back. So, it's not like it's HIS fault (or mine) that we don't see too many things in the same ways.
I encourage all of you to vote your consciences, including NOT voting if that's your bag...but I have to vote, and even though I had someone different in mind, this is what we get for sitting too far towards the back of the GOP bus in recent years, as the party has insisted on running from the principles that used to have "Republican" and "Conservative" mean the same thing. Maybe a "4-bagger with Mac" will get us moving back in the right direction...hell-maybe it will make Mac move back in that direction.
Whatever you do, do it because it's right...not because you were TOLD to by a machine that could give a flip any more about what the individual concerns of the factions are...THEN, get to work at the State and Local levels and start getting Conservatives into the farm system so that when our Grandchildren are writing here, THEY'll be laughing at how bad we had it...and thankful that WE made things right for THEM.
I'm still wrestling with the whole long-term/short-term/party over principal/principal over party/does McCain 'get even' with conservatives/petulant personality thing, but thanks for giving me more grist to chew on as my Maalox stash becomes increasingly lower and I head back for yet another refill on my Prozac.
"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
damaged by a McCain nomination and has also said that it has been damaged by not having a gop prez that was a conservative movement and had a gop congress that would have to commit political suicide to oppose their president.
But, more importantly, he said that if we lose in November that the blame will lie with the establishment gop, not conservatives like him and us.
Rush is right
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
gamecock, after F. Thompson didn't pan out.
McCain made a good case today using historical face that he was the most conservative of anyone involved on Super Tuesday, and there are conservatives who agree.
Hopefully, these immediate passions will diminish and every party member will take the time to consider this race as it is. It's not ideal, but conservatives have almost never had an ideal candidate.
Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion. You are entitled to yours. I am entitled to mine. Each conservative is entitled to his or her opinion. Hopefully, in the end, most of us will work to put the nominee over the top. I believe we'll see this happen.
The list of McCain's transgressions are too long to put him atop any list of conservatives.
There is no disagreement.
You, I and Rush speak a lot. keep that in mind
and I hear everyting he says being a 24/7 member
the msm picks out sentences out of context
let's not be the rats to their pied piper
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
game
Before we carry Rush to the top of Mt. Conservatism singing hosannas, I don't think we want to really talk or look at how he upholds those very moral and social values that he likes to talk about.
As Rush himself once said, he's an entertainer and commentator, not a policy maker.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
There are fans of both that don't realize its just Entertainment. Well, I think most people understand Wrestling is fake now, but when we were eight that wasn't the case. Just don't use Rush's words as "proof" of anything.
mantle of leader of the movement to his radio colleague after he left the White House. The 1993 GOP congress made Rush an honorary member for his instrumental role (esp highlighting the corrupt House bank)in ending 40 years of Dem majority rule. Rush was crucial in 2004 to Bush's re-election.
Rush is right.
On a personal level, that the man is deaf and still rules an audio medium speaks volumes. That he had to take pain medicine undergoing that ordeal that he became hooked on, and then later beat, shows his great character.
Yes, he is also a three time victim of feminist America when it comes to marriage, but
I now seek my third divorce
just as soon as I marry for the third time!
If Rush isn't on a conservative Olympus, then no Olympus is needed, and
there would be no Redstate unless there were first a Rush.
Hey, why not write a blog of substance? Instead of inspiring pearls of wisdom from Gamecock?
on second thought...
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
in November, the GOP will be blamed AND Conservatives will be called as much, under the Con mantel McCain has sold the media on believing he represents
guilt by association my friend.
Rush is NOT right...I luv ya, but we disagree-supporting a McCain loss hurts MY family, and I won't do it. I'll fight on while Johnny Mac takes "his turn"
Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus
I am a Rush 24/7 member and have all quotes in context.
You said you will vote for McCain. So will I.
We were never given a true worthy conservative vessel. The real issue is why not.
Fred was, but
Mitt may be, but he ran too soon after the epiphany.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Rush said, not quoted, that we'd be better off electing Hillary given the damage McCain will do to the party. I disagree. I believe keeping McCain in, and seeing him win at LEAST allows the discussion about what Conservatism IS or is NOT...to continue.
If the Dems win, that will no longer matter...the MSM will make the Obit for Conservatism, and ring in the birth if McCain Moderates as the NEW Gop.
Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus
nuance.
maybe is a word with meaning
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
If electing McCain causes as much damage . . .
I am positive about the "if"--the rest is paraphrasing
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Rush has made it pretty clear that if it's McCain vs Obama we are in real trouble (of course he also says a lot can change in 9 months). What I walk away with from Rush is the failure we've already been doomed to. Did you see the narrow margins Kerry lost by? Do you really think Obama can't do a little better than that against McCain with or without conservatives (all things being equal)? The real problem Rush emphasizes is how this will all be blamed on conservatives when it wasn't us who doomed the party. It was the country club republicans who did.
"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Yes, he's actually correct in predicting Conservatives will take the fall for this, but thats just because its the base. It would have been blamed for the outcome regardless of who was nominated. I really think McCain is the best match up against any Democrat, but that doesn't mean He's going to win, nor did I vote for him.
Rush and I believe McCain is among the worst choices to actually win the general since you can't convince liberals to vote republican by trying to out-liberal liberals which is what it seems like we might be in store for with McCain. If we actually had a movement leader or someone who could fake it, I think we would have had a real chance.
"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."
Seriously, that was very well and respectfully written. I appreciate that.
I just wish it was convincing. I'll be staying home or writing-in and I respect your decision to vote the line.
Again, well done.
I clearly state how much I respect any who would choose to sit it out. I can not, and this is where I've been brought to by the party that doesn't trust in Conservatism enough to stand up a Conservative candidate that comes even remotely close to what most of us believe that term to mean.
So, I get John, or Hillary or Obama...that's what I get for letting the party take over the platform that gave us Reagan. I'll pull for John, and vow to fight the GOP to make Conservatives THE party once again, rather than this "faction" nonsense they've let us become.
Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus
Party over Man, but not Party over Principle.
A McCain Presidency would make life very hard on Conservative Congressmen. Imagine trying to oppose a sitting President from your own party.
Remember the movie War Games...
The more I think about the ramifications of a McCain Presidency, the more it looks like the only winning option is for me not to play.
McCain still has time to come around. I doubt he will, most candidates move to the middle after winning the nomination. The ball is in his court though - if he wants the Conservative vote, he's got to move to the right.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
Conservatives were never the party in either of our lifetimes. We had liberals all the way back to Lincoln's day.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
Some of the radical Republicans of his day were clearly liberals though, with their grand visions of the State remaking the South into a utopia.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
The definition of Liberal changes through out the ages. But by that measure you'd have to declare our founding fathers liberals.
I call Thomas Jefferson a liberal, maybe Thad Stevens but I'd have to look him up again, and definitely Teddy Roosevelt. But I wouldn't call Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton a liberal.
And I certainly wouldn't call George Washington or John Adams a liberal!
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
But the party was never uniformly conservative. It couldn't be and still build a national majority.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
I intend to post a full diary about this in due course, but I think that all things considered, the choice between McCain and Clinton/Obama is not, as National Review once characterized the 1960 race between Nixon and Kennedy, as a choice between a slow death and a quick death.
As to the three general conservativisms: economic, social, and national-security, what McCain can be reasonably expected to accomplish will not simply represent a slower movement in the "progressive" direction, but some movement in the real progressive direction.
Speaking with reasonable optimism, I think McCain will (1) cut taxes (by making part of the 01-03 tax cuts permanent, (2) slow the growth of entitlements, and (3) abolish earmarks.
He will (4) appoint justices that will move the court back to judicial sanity, and (5) use the bully pulpit (occasionally) on behalf of the unborn.
In addition, he will prosecute the war on terror with vigor and an eye to VICTORY--a word that many liberal Democrats only use with respect to domestic elections, much as the only "enemy" they know are conservative Republicans.
Conversely, a President Obama and Clinton will surely move in precisely the opposite direction--greater taxes, greater entitlements, radical judges, a policy of vacillation in the war on terror, and retreat-and-defeat in the battle of Iraq.
"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke
him now. He's a jerk, but he's our jerk now, and he has a lot of positives.
I am so happy to be free to now defend our vessel from attacks from the left that are coming.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
your enthusiasm positively Reagan-like. The process has been tough on some of us, not everyone got everything the wanted, but we have our nominee and can focus on the good part: winning.
intellectually bankrupt dem party knowing the rot from the inside. With all the gop's and even McCain's flaws, we get the big things. Heck man, I'm a lot like his maverickness!
Yes, to be like Reagan is much the part of the goal. I mean the goal to be like God wants us to be. Reagan was just a man, but what a man, and this from one that read all his letters, etc and only allowed myself to fully appreciate him in 2000. So to me, its like he just left us.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
That's part of the problem.
I don't think I could stay awake through an entire Pres. McCain State of the Union Address. Booorrrring.
The media won. Unbelievable.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Snowe and McCain voted against the 2003 Bush tax cuts. So, they have a history of working well together.
Snowe and McCain were both Gang of 14 members too.
and both were against drilling in ANWR. So, I can see why McCain would want a like-minded Republican like Olympia Snowe to be his Vice Presidential running mate. She would be the Republican party's first female Vice Presidential nominee.
looking for a woman.
Snowe brings no balance to McCain. And he needs that if he has a snowballs chance in Hades of pulling this thing off.
I can't tell if you are being serious or a pain in the posterior.
Neither one of them brings balance.
BALANCE is necessary for Johnny Mac.
Sanford, Pawlenty, they bring balance.
but then again, 3 years ago I would have considered a McCain led ticket to be only worthy of a smack addict.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
it has already begun. Now that he is the ONE, the MSM has started mentioning his temper and his age. It will get ugly. Do you think the NY Times will give him an endorsement in November?
years ago when they were on his side against the repubs he was cursing out
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
stop with the double thumbs up thing immediately.
"The time for honoring yourself will soon be at an end."
- Maximus
Does anyone know if Newt Gingrich is seriously being mentioned as a potential VP?
Christopher C.
At CPAC, McCain "pledged" to fight excessive Gov't Spending.
He voted YES for the $160+ Billion Economic Package. Yes Sir Senator that is the way to stop excessive spending. Spend $160,000,000,000 we have to go out and borrow so votes can be purchased.
I too "get your message" just as you have gotten the conservative message. However our message is NOT Secure the Border first, it is Secure the Border PERIOD!!!
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
Not buying anything from McCain. He has no desire to secure anything but his own persoanl adjenda? No Sale Senator McCain!
I believe Reagan's IRCA was a good compromise, and would have been fine for the country had the pro-amnesty people held up their end of the bargain and been pro-enforcement. Consider that if we *do* secure the border, then it gets that much harder for illegals to leave the country.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
to break without losing his own honor. I will trust but verify, and after we ensure another 20 million aren't coming illegally, I'm open to reasonable regularization, so long as they can only ever vote if they get in the back of the line.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
hard to buy that one.
But there is nothing to worry about because the border will NOT be secured because all three of our choices left do not want to do it. McCain does, HA! since when, he found out he NEEDS Conservatives. I clearly see how McCain has worked for the past 20 years, since Regans Amnesty, to secure the Border. He hasn't. Now he will, Will not happen because he does not believe in it, just examine his past record.
Please use the Reply To This links, or nobody knows what you're talking about. Thank you.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
I listen to him about once a year but I lucked out and heard him on the day following the Bob Dole letter fiasco. He clarified his oft quoted remark
Here's the quote: "If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama, or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit rather than a Republican causing the debacle, and I would prefer not to have conservative Republicans in the House and Congress paralyzed by having to support out of party loyalty a Republican president who is not conservative." I also added one thing that I don't think Mr. Kurtz put in. I said, "Let me give you an example. If Senator McCain is serious about adopting the left's policies and prescriptions to fix the hoax of manmade global warming, an economic disaster will result. I don't want Republicans getting credit for an economic disaster; given one of the central legs of conservatism and that stool I keep talking about, is fiscal conservatism. But I see Schwarzenegger signing on to it, and I see Schwarzenegger endorsing McCain," but the word that's being misinterpreted -- this is not Kurtz's fault. It's nobody else's fault. I should have been a little bit more specific. "If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama, or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit rather than the Republicans cause the debacle." By "if," I meant it's unknown yet. It's in the future. This is February, folks. The general election is November, and what I meant when I told this to Howard Kurtz, "if," parentheses, "down the road I think..." It's an open question yet, and yet everybody reading this thinks that I've just said, "Screw it! I'm voting Hillary or Obama." That's not what that meant to say. I clarify it.
He is going to keep the pressure on Sir John on behalf of those of us who do have essential complaints with Sir John’s policy positions. I’m thankful for Rush. He gives me a lot more hope than RedState does. I am still hoping my premonitions are wrong, but I will become disgusted beyond what I am able to bear if the blam-enabled bot-libelers insult my intelligence further by shoving us all down the chute of JohnBotdom. Respect is a precious commodity that has been swept away – perhaps it was never deserved in the first place – by our season of electile dysfunction. It’s good to see someone hanging onto threads of it.
And Rush…he has earned it more than anybody here at Redstate – though some here have earned it. And Rush still deserves it. That’s my humble opinion for all the self-inflated high and mighty who insult my intelligence whenever I don’t immediately concede to the rational perfection of their narrative.
getting the relevant part of the transcript.
cool man
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Was the '94 revolution inevitable, or did it require a "No new taxes" failure and the subsequent "Ah shucks, look at me! I'm President..."? Certainly "vote party" did not help Dole, and I did my part then. Vote party over the man may be true, but I balk at "vote party" over principal. Namely the principal of self aggrandizement through political backstabbing.
In the course of conservative events, were our greatest successes based on mediocrity? Or did it require a "villain", to get us to pay attention (as a large voting block)?
I don't have the answers, but these questions will not go away in some grand reconciliation within eight months. I am going to place a picture of John, from the early seventies on my desk, then imagine voting for that guy every once in a while. We will see if I can fool myself in time.
Nice post.
"I hope you're all Republicans." R. Reagan
The Inflamitory