...because I agree with
Andrew Sullivan: "Something has gone seriously wrong with the right when John McCain is not regarded as a conservative."
Especially in comparison with the other front-runners.
Looks like Medved was
right.
Incidentally,
McCain won Florida.
I had similar feelings in 2000 when I voted for McCain - I felt then that he was more conservative than Bush, and I may have been right. I have a number of issues with McCain, but he's not exactly a leftist. His three biggest sins are: opposing the tax cuts, supporting amnesty (yes it was amnesty) and of course McCain-Feingold. But none of the positions he took were necessarily anti-conservative. Even his participation in the Gang of 14 was strategically wrongheaded but not necessarily a sign of apostasy from conservative thinking.
ReplyDeleteI still want Romney to win this thing, but it won't be the end of the world if McCain is the nominee. I believe that Huckabee is the one who is philosophically the least conservative, and he's done.
"His three biggest sins are: opposing the tax cuts, supporting amnesty (yes it was amnesty) and of course McCain-Feingold. But none of the positions he took were necessarily anti-conservative."
ReplyDeleteand black is not necessarily anti-white, sunny is not necessarily anti-cloudy, light is not necessarily anti-dark!
Kathleen:
ReplyDeleteMy point is that there is nothing inherently unconservative about opposing tax cuts. Tax cuts are not always a good idea (though they usually are). Now, I agreed with Bush and disagreed with McCain, and think Bush was right to cut taxes, but there are times when it is not necessary to cut them.
McCain-Feingold is a tougher one. Actually, that one I'll give you. It is inherently unconservative to support government regulation of campaign speech.
Amnesty is a tough one. Again, I'm not sure it betrays conservative principles - just basic common sense.
I think the problem with this race is that all the candidates are not solid conservatives. It is iron mixed with clay.
ReplyDeleteHere is a quote from washington post ( WPO ) currently trading at 744.84
"Upon Edwards' withdrawal, the race between Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) becomes historic, guaranteeing that a major party will nominate someone other than a white man for the nation's highest office. They will debate each other head-to-head for the first time on Thursday in California."
Back to fascism, does this obsession with race concern anyone?
Does it bother anyone to be defined as "white"?
Also, not mentioned here, is the willingness to redefine human life also a concern for anyone?
Do these qualify as fascist warning signs?
The only people I know who are obsessed with race are democrats/liberals. I worked on Ken Blackwell's campaign in '06 because I liked his ideas, not because he was black.
ReplyDeleteRegarding "amnesty": the path to citizenship was much easier under the amnesty plan that Reagan signed than the Bush & McCain plan. So on that issue he's to the right of Reagan.
When I heard Ron Paul was in the race last summer I remember wondering if he'd stick to the libertarian policy of open borders, which he didn't. The whole paleo graft would have ditched the rLOVEution o'wise.
I always wanted to see McCain-Kennedy passed and I still think the anti-immigration pose is a loser position for conservatives in the long haul.
"I still think the anti-immigration pose is a loser position for conservatives in the long haul."
ReplyDeleteI totally disagree. the point crystallized for me when i was in a very rural part of florida and for the first time in a long time saw american looking blue collar white guys paving a road. the blue collar working class has been totally decimated by illegal labor. Their particular skills are devalued (literally) by illegal immigration in this unbalanced, artifically white collar economy. We will regret the wholesale sellout of our manufacturing base soon enough, when the cheapened dollar would render exports profitable but -- doh!--we won't have any. as another example, houses built today are built like crap, built by illegal immigrants who aren't respected enough to be trained for the long term.
I don't support McCain, but I'm tired Limbaugh and all of the talk radio hacks going on about how bad he is. They also hate Huckabee. What's up with that? Is Romney really that much better than either of those other two? Limbaught never complained about Guliani either, who's certainly to the left of McCain, but he talks about McCain like he's the second coming of Stalin. Really: what gives? It's all grown quite tiresome.
ReplyDeleteplease forgive my tyops... writing in a hurry...
ReplyDeleteIs Romney really that much better than either of those other two?
ReplyDeleteYes. Much.
K
ReplyDelete"...saw american looking blue collar white guys paving a road."
Convicts or company owners.
Pauli you forget that it is anti illegal immigration, not anti-immigration. What I would like to see if the rulers decide to punish people who risked their lives to flee the endless poverty of their native land for a job, is they would also punish the politicians and businesses who looked the other way to hire them. Kathleen you are spot on about that they don't care about the people. They are like disposable razors to these companies.
It might be different where you live, but along the border it kind of works in favor of the Mexicans. They can work both sides of the border to make a great living up here and a phenomenal one back home. I think it is really cool since they can float in that gray area, you can see just how well a hardworking person can do when neither government can regulate and control every freaking aspect of their life.
Practically, the rulers need the illegal aliens here permanently because it gives them a tax base to pay for entitlements.
". . .when the cheapened dollar would render exports profitable but -- doh!--we won't have any."
Absolutely brilliant, I heard one of the rulers claiming that exports were up the other day. What is it that we export? I thought. It must be the 787, wait Boeing is only providing project management and design services for that. I guess when the world is run by leftist MBAs this is what you get.
How so Paul Z.?
ReplyDeleteA mature man finally figuring out that abortion is wrong after raising a big family?
I think I prefer someone who didn't really have to flip-flop to position himself. This is my point from earlier, romney is looking for a place to park himself in the ideological spectrum that garners the most votes. It's the shape-shifting that prevents me from voting for him.
You know what would change my mind about romney. If he came out and said that abortion is evil, and that we have killed a generation of human beings in this country for utility. It is a precedent for all kind of other evils, and it needs to be stopped. He would work to end it in the country.
If he said something like that I would vote for him. If he took an ideological stand like that I would reconsider.
"A mature man finally figuring out that abortion is wrong after raising a big family?"
ReplyDeleteI'm quite sure Romney thought abortion was wrong all along. i know this isn't good enough for you. but it works for me since he's running on a prolife platform now.
K
ReplyDeleteIf you have any connections in politics, you might want to pass on this idea.
If Romney wants to earn my respect and vote, all he has to do is state very clearly and in public that he he was wrong on abortion before. Abortion is evil and why it is such. That he is pro-life, and that he will work to end abortion in the country.
No fancy language. No flowery of course I am pro-life, like he and everyone else are pro-children and pro-flowers, and pro-chocolate. He has to state that he is anti-choice and why. Just running on the platform is not good enough.
If he can do that, I will vote for him. If you know any pro-romney people please, please, please, please pass it along.
No fancy language. No flowery of course I am pro-life, like he and everyone else are pro-children and pro-flowers, and pro-chocolate. He has to state that he is anti-choice and why. Just running on the platform is not good enough.
ReplyDeleteHe had already. He has publicly stated why he changed his mind, and he has publicly stated his committment to the pro-life cause. If he hasn't done so in the manner that satisfis your rigorous demands, so be it.
Can anyone tell me where to find this? Can you please show me a quote?
ReplyDeleteCube, you should google it, because this was common knowledge. "romney pro-life governor" or something like that.
ReplyDeleteof course you won't find any recent coverage of Romney -- what is so scandalous is that discussion of Romney is absolutely shut down because they know Romney is dangerous. You all who are going to vote for McCain, doesn't the abnormally enthusiastic celebration of McCain The Straight Talker by the mainstream media give you pause? especially when they wouldn't even mention Romney's name for months (and only now they do it in the context of him having a hard time beating McCain) It's enough to make me believe that the media has some serious dirt on him that they are saving for after McCain's nomination to ensure election of a democrat. I'm afraid you McCain supporters are being led down the primrose path.
to me, McCain is the archetypal Useful Idiot.
Okay my take on the relative merits/demerits of McCain--
ReplyDeleteMcCain was against the tax cut. That's not good.
He's for amnesty. That's not good, but no worse than our current president-- why did Bush pretty much get a pass on this issue from RushHannity et al, but McCain is nailed for it? Where's the consistency there?
He's for campaign finance reform, making it illegal for political ads to be run at certain times, etc. I guess this is a bad thing, but I honestly can't get too worked up about it. This issue is a big snoozer for me. I understand the free speech angle, but it fails to capture my imagination.
He's against drilling for oil in Alaska. I don't really care about that. I wouldn't care if he were for it, either. This issue just isn't on my radar screen.
He brokered the deal to end the judicial filibuster. Really, I don't get the heat he's taking for that. It was a strategic and prudential move, and it worked. Roberts and Alito got in, as did a bunch of lower court judges. If the Democrats are in control and try to push though some pro-Roe black robes, I frickin' well hope the Repubs filibuster some of them...
Why's Romney so much better? He was pro-choice until, like, yesterday when he suddenly saw the light. You don't have to be too cynical to question his "conversion." McCain on the other hand has always been pro-life. Why do big Rush and little Hannity and all of their talk radio clones hate the sincere pro-life guy and love the fraudulent, opportunistic convert to the pro-life cause? Further, why were they so in love with Guliani, a patent social liberal? Again, what gives there?
I'm not pro-war, but all you pro-war folks out there can't have any complaints about McCain. Pat Buchanan called his foriegn policy "Bush on steroids," and he's right.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not voting for McCain; I just think the relentless campaign against him on the part of talk radio and its minions is dubious and suspicious.
i shouldn't even type this but i had a glass of wine so here goes:
ReplyDeletegiuliani, like romney, had the misfortune of living in a blue state. if those 2 wanted to be in state politics in any meaningful capacity, they HAD to be pro-choice. period. a blue state will never have a firmly pro-life officeholder. the blue-state officeholder can be personally against abortion, but he must insist on separating that personal opinion from the question of whether abortion should be legal. while not a defensible position morally or in terms of catholic faith, this is a perfectly defensible position intellectually in a country with no national religious orientation.
If the GOP insists on firmly and forever pro-life candidates, with no conversions allowed, then they will never have another presidential candidate from a blue state with a sizable portion of delegates. that rules out some of the best and brightest republicans in the country (and if i'm in a bad mood approaches outright bigotry against blue staters on the part of religious conservatives). it's a mistake, and a big one -- especially if the blue-state GOPer insists that he will appoint pro-life judges when president. there is no reason to disbelieve him. especially when he is a mormon with 5 kids.
the party in serious danger of disintegrating because of this insistence on ideological purity. and in that case you can kiss the reversal of Roe V Wade goodbye for generations to come.
mccain never had this dilemma being from arizona, but do you believe for ONE SECOND that if he happened to be from, or live in, NY or MA, he would not have taken the same position as giuliani/romney regarding abortion? please.
" I'm not voting for McCain; I just think the relentless campaign against him on the part of talk radio and its minions is dubious and suspicious."
ReplyDeletewow, people defending conservative principals in the context of a candidate like McCain are "dubious and suspicious"? Laura Ingraham said this better than anyone today: if conservatives try to outdo liberals on the compassion and "let's all get along" front, *they will lose to liberals everytime* because that is the motivating force that gave rise to liberalism and gives liberalism continued life. conservatives can't out-liberal liberals.
the party in serious danger of disintegrating because of this insistence on ideological purity
ReplyDeleteThat is true.
Andy, thank you. Good points.
ReplyDeleteHe brokered the deal to end the judicial filibuster. Really, I don't get the heat he's taking for that. It was a strategic and prudential move, and it worked.
Right. What was Frist going to do? He seemed like he was bluffing -- esp. in retrospect -- about the "nuclear option". Like you said, McCain did something that worked and some people threw a fit because he made a deal.
Personally I don't care that Romney wasn't pro-life years ago. It's good enough for me that he is now. I was irritated though when he ran that ad comparing his position now (not on prolife, on something else, can't remember) with Huckabee's position while he was governor when Romney had done the same thing back when he was governor.
I could vote for Mitt Romney, fine. but the polls show Romney getting crushed by Clinton and Obama. I think his inability to connect has been on display for months now and if he gets knocked out better now than in the general.
I don't see McCain connecting at all, he seems like the surly old coot he has the reputation for being. the only reason he is coming out ahead is he gets a ton of fawning media coverage (which is essentially tons of free advertising) and there are too many candidates splitting up the vote who won't bow out. if Romney got the positive coverage McCain got, he would be the clear frontrunner (which is precisely why he doesn't get the positive coverage, or any coverage for that matter).
ReplyDeleteK
ReplyDelete"especially when he is a mormon with 5 kids."
I grew up with Mormon kids. I worked with a ton of Mormons. I live in what used to be an old Mormon neighborhood. (It was when we moved, here now a lot families have moved on. Retirement.) They are not necessarily pro-life. I sat with a table of practicing Mormons at lunch a couple years ago, and they admitted that they will try to discourage a girl from having an abortion, but ultimately it is her choice. I have nothing against them, they serially practice the same nepotism that the Italians and Irish do, they don't mix with non-Mormons just like devout Catholics. They are just good solid people, and I am glad I live where I live, even though the little interaction our kids have will end around puberty. The big family argument doesn't appeal to me, Brad and Angelina have a big family too.
I feel real bad for blue state conservatives. It must be very stressful that they have to shelve their principles and pretend that they are something they are not in order to get ahead.
I still think the anti-immigration pose is a loser position for conservatives in the long haul.
ReplyDeleteI could not agree more.
Diane, third-generation Irish-Italian