McCain: “It’s not social issues I care about”; Update: McCain leads Mitt by 20, by nine among … conservatives

posted at 2:57 pm on February 3, 2008 by Allahpundit

Well, me neither for the most part, but many of our readers disagree so here’s a little more chum in the water.

McCain seems distinctly uninterested when asked questions concerning abortion and gay rights. While campaigning in South Carolina, he told reporters riding with him on his bus that he was comfortable pledging to appoint judges who would strictly interpret the Constitution in part because it would reassure conservatives who might otherwise distrust him.

“It’s not social issues I care about,” he explained.

That’s not breaking news, but some of our more diehard McCain-hating commenters accused me of being biased in his favor this week simply for objecting to Drudge digging up old stories about him and presenting them as if they’re new. So here you go — even more and tastier chum, from Vanity Fair’s profile of him last January. Same article, in fact, in which he made his infamous sneering remark about the “goddamned fence”:

“Yes, he’s a social conservative, but his heart isn’t in this stuff,” one former aide told me, referring to McCain’s instinctual unwillingness to impose on others his personal views about issues such as religion, sexuality, and abortion. “But he has to pretend [that it is], and he’s not a good enough actor to pull it off. He just can’t fake it well enough.”

I guess he decided it’s now safe again for “straight talk.” Any of this stuff penetrating at all into voters’ heads? Nope:

abc3.png

Take heart. Mitt’s going to California with an aching in his heart.

Update: Again, whatever the effect or lack thereof of this stuff on the electorate, CPAC will be fun.

Update: Drink a lot today during the game. You’ll need it.

pew.png


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Keep the taxes low and everything else will work itself out. Voters have repeatedly shown their unwillingness to accept tax increases. That’s why CA’s health bill failed; Oregon and other states as well.

You can’t socialize programs if people are unwilling to have their taxes raised to pay for them.

lorien1973 on February 3, 2008 at 3:06 PM

There’s no accounting for public intelligence as a whole. They first be given information – like “It’s not social issues I care about” from the press in a fair and honest way – to become knowledgeable about an issue. The press has been carrying McCain&Able/Huckster’s weight for two solid months. Even when Romney had the lead the Press failed to call him “the leader.” The press HATES Romney because they know he lives the values he preaches!

Firsties!

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 3:07 PM

McCain: “It’s not social issues I care about. It’s courting liberals I care about.

Updated.

CABE on February 3, 2008 at 3:07 PM

At least Mac’s voting record on these issues is solid. Look at Romney’s record as governor and tell me he’s a diehard social conservative.

packsoldier on February 3, 2008 at 3:08 PM

A couple of weeks ago Andy McCarthy discussed McCain filing a amicus curiae brief. Re: McCain and Wisconsin Right to Life:

Senator McCain was not a party to the dispute between Wisconsin Right to Life and the Federal Election Commission. He claims to be a stalwart right to life partisan. He is, beyond peradventure, a political-speech suppression activist. In the dispute, these two values were in conflict. This is unavoidable in life, in politics, and in law. But if you’re not a party to a particular dispute, you needn’t involve yourself — you get to sit it out and let the concerned parties make their case to a neutral arbiter. That is what most of us do when two things we care about are in counterpoise — we may offer a stray opinion here or there, but for the most part we stay out of the fray and depend on the court to sort it out fairly.

The other approach is to decide which value is more important to you and become a partisan. That is what Senator McCain did.

…McCain’s actual choice was: What’s more important to me, defending life or defending the suppression of political speech? He chose to defend the suppression of political speech.

He could have stayed out of it entirely. Or, choosing to involve himself, he could have filed an amicus brief in support of Wisconsin Right to Life, arguing for the urgency of permitting its message to be heard. He chose, instead, to support restrictions on speech for the benefit of incumbents — particularly, his co-crusader against the First Amendment, Sen. Russ Feingold.

That is a fact. Add all the context you’d like — it’ll still be a fact.

INC on February 3, 2008 at 3:11 PM

If McCain doesn’t care about social issues like abortion and gay marriage, then why is Huckabee set to endorse him if he drops out? Wouldn’t those be the issues that the evangelicals care most about?

eclark1849 on February 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM

what else do you expect romney to do with one of the most liberal states in the union, packsoldier?

blatantblue on February 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM

McCarthy made another point in this post at the Corner:

I think I’ve failed to make the most obvious, most important point on this: Judicial philosophy.

Sen. McCain may claim, to try to appease his critics, that he would appoint originalist judges. But the blunt fact is that such judges would be innately hostile to the “living constitution” — meaning they would be suspicious not only of Roe v. Wade but of schemes like campaign finance reform, a signature McCain issue. It is not for nothing that Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito were in the majority ruling against McCain’s side in the Wisconsin Right to Life case last term.

But it’s important to bear in mind that the Court invited more campaign finance cases in its decision. This issue is going to come up again.

So, let’s say Justice Stevens retires. Whom does a President McCain appoint to the Supreme Court? Will he be more inclined to nominate originalist judges or judges who would uphold the suppression of core political speech rights? They are, after all, not likely to be one and the same.

Based on what he did in Wisconsin Right to Life — choosing, when he was under no obligation to do so, to jump in on the side of speech suppression against the pro-life message — why should anyone believe McCain would appoint originalist judges?

INC on February 3, 2008 at 3:17 PM

Calling McCain a Libertarian, (as on the front page; eve with a question mark) is an insult to all Libertarians…. Heck, it is even an undeserved insult to that nutbag Ron Paul.

LegendHasIt on February 3, 2008 at 3:17 PM

If McCain doesn’t care about social issues like abortion and gay marriage, then why is Huckabee set to endorse him if he drops out? Wouldn’t those be the issues that the evangelicals care most about?

eclark1849 on February 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM

IS Huckster a preacher or a politician? Apparently the later, since he’s willing to compromise his religious values and his country’s security to spite a Mormon and keep the borders open.

Your argument has no value, sorry. You use false logic to try to make a point.

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 3:17 PM

Remember, “social issues” is short hand for abortion and gay marriage. And in this regards, McCain is certainly NOT concerned with those “issues.” The problem is, we have compartmentalized our thinking to view taxes as “economic policy” rather than social policy. Is there any way to think of taxation without the inextricable link to society as a whole?

I know that with the way we discuss politics, McCain can be said to be unconcerned with “social issues,” but in reality that cannot be said about him. Again, this is nothing really new to those who read this site, but it is always helpful to be reminded. Candidates may run in a compartmentalized fashion, but their governing is always “holistic” for lack of a better word. In other words, we may vote for “part” of McCain, but rest assured, we will get all of him.

Weight of Glory on February 3, 2008 at 3:23 PM

Scroll Down to the Bottom and look at the Charts
McCain And Romney are Exactly the Same..
All this Fighting is ludicrous.

http://www.ontheissues.org/John_McCain.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/Mitt_Romney.htm

here are just the pictures

McCain’s
http://i32.tinypic.com/2gwvwpi.jpg

Romney’s
http://i32.tinypic.com/2s1nhg3.jpg

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Any of this stuff penetrating at all into voters’ heads? Nope:

Again, some of use get it but are underwhelmed by the alternatives too. For all those examples I still think McCain is more genuine than Mitt.

Dash on February 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM

McCain’s
http://i32.tinypic.com/2gwvwpi.jpg

Romney’s
http://i32.tinypic.com/2s1nhg3.jpg

As you can see, it all comes out in the wash.

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Same, same..

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:28 PM

http://www.ontheissues.org/Mitt_Romney.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/John_McCain.htm

Both are exactly the same on the chart.

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:30 PM

Social consevatism doesn’t stir me, either. I’m a conservative in foriegn policy and fiscal areas. I don’t know if the term “South Park Conservative” is used much any more, but that describes me best.

That said, is there any way I can find common cause with many people on this board, or is the conservative movement well and truly split?

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

foreign policy, that is …

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:32 PM

You don’t have to give a rat’s ass about “social issues” to respect the constitution.

I can say that with some authority since it’s pretty much the way I look at it. That’s why I was always so comfortable with Rudy. I got the feeling he looked at it the same way.

McCain? No. Not really. He’s not going to fight his lovers on the left to sit the next justice; the one that will determine the tilt of the court for years, and especially not since if that justice is true to the constitution his beloved “campaign finance reform” will get the trip to the dumpster it so richly deserves.

I’m honestly not all that sure Mitt will either though. I don’t really think he has conservative ideals and a respect for the constitution hard-wired into him so much as he just knows he’s the guy we need to “fix things” just like Ross Perot knew he was, and he figured/figures the best coaltion he can ride into the Oval Office Garage is the one no one else seems to be using.

*Sigh*

My thinking is we had our chance, and we blew it.

Typhoon on February 3, 2008 at 3:35 PM

i find it deeply disturbing that mccain isn’t paying fealty to the ted haggard vote.

jummy on February 3, 2008 at 3:36 PM

Typhoon..

John McCain

Supports repealing Roe v. Wade. (May 2007)

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:36 PM

Mitt Romney is Multiple Choice on the Issue..

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:37 PM

That said, is there any way I can find common cause with many people on this board, or is the conservative movement well and truly split?

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

Yes, and here is where we can find the common cause. Just because McCain isn’t classified as a “social conservative” doesn’t mean he’ll “let you be.” Both the social conservative and the non-social conservative, who view the federal govt. as the appropriate level to solve most of the issues our country faces, are to be feared. The place we can unite is at the state level. To encourage governors and state legislatures to do what is in the best interests of their states, always trying to pull the reigns from the Feds.

Weight of Glory on February 3, 2008 at 3:39 PM

AP, are you trying to get me to like McCain? It’s working. If you keep this up, I could even end voting for him–no matter how much I threaten to vote for Obama. When will these so called social cons get into their head that they have already lost the gay issue? Gay marriage is simply a matter of time. Every time I meet a right-wing young person who opposes gay marriage, it turns out that they support “domestic partnerships” or gay marriage by another name. Of course, I really welcome the social cons continuing to fight this issue as it discredits them some on the abortion issue.

On the other hand, there is the question of what is a social issue? Part of the reason I oppose illegal immigration is to preserve our culture–which I’m pretty sure makes me cultural conservative on that issue. And it’s around this bit of social conservativism that I tend to not want to vote for McCain, not vote for him at all.

thuja on February 3, 2008 at 3:41 PM

Illegal immigration isn’t a social issue, it’s an economic and national security issue.

SouthernGent on February 3, 2008 at 3:43 PM

McCain’s instinctual unwillingness to impose on others his personal views about issues such as religion, sexuality, and abortion.

How unconservative. Heretic!

Alan on February 3, 2008 at 3:43 PM

As you can see, it all comes out in the wash.

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Either way, I still feel dirty.

Kini on February 3, 2008 at 3:43 PM

Well I finally got exposed to the Mitt machine today. I used to live in West Virginia and have connects to the Rpublican party there.

This is an email I got from and an invite to watch a tailored video. Is rove backing Mitt this looks like his work ? Rove like to decompartmentalize voters on issues and release one grand video to appeal to each group.

Please copy and paste this link into your browser window, to watch a special message for you, from Governor Mitt Romney.

http://blip.tv/file/635769

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 3:47 PM

I pay thousands of dollars in state taxes to support illegal immigrants because of dumbass libertarian open border policies. Why must libertarianism require me to support people from other countries here illegally? Libertarianism sounds more like anarchy, too me.

Blake on February 3, 2008 at 3:49 PM

Typhoon..

John McCain

Supports repealing Roe v. Wade. (May 2007)

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:36 PM

But that isn’t the point, now is it?

Sure, he can say that.

So?

What’s going to happen is that right after the next President is elected Stephens–who I have the feeling is hanging onto both his seat and perhaps even his life in the hopes a Democrat or anyone but Bush will get to nominate his replacement–will step down.

He’s a reliably liberal voice. You replace him with a Roberts/Scalia/Thomas/Alito and baby it’s 5-4 good guys for a long, long time.

Years–years–of judicial activism on all sorts of issues could be rolled back.

You think the left doesn’t know that?

If we were lucky enough to get a President who would nominate a proven strict-constructionist with a record and paper trail the fight would make the Bork hearing look like a love-fest.

The Dems in the Senate and the MSM would pull out every single stop, every trick, every smear, every villification.

And the same philosophy that would view Roe as horrendous law not based on the morality of it but of the purely flawed consitutional reasoning of it would most likely look exactly the same way on McCain-Feingold.

McCacin will consult with Teddy the K, Hero of Chappaquidick, and Pat Leahy, and come up with some nice, solid, bi-partisan, middle-of-the-road choice.

And the chance of a f**cking lifetime will be gone.

At least for this lifetime.

We blew it.

Typhoon on February 3, 2008 at 3:49 PM

Update: Again, whatever the effect or lack thereof of this stuff on the electorate, CPAC will be fun.

You telling us that they invited you?? That doesn’t surprise me so much as the thought of you venturing out of your “comfort zone.”

Blake on February 3, 2008 at 3:53 PM

Thanks for the replies, Typhoon and Weight of Glory.

My bottom lines are preserving the progress we’ve made in Iraq and protecting the Constitution against those who see it as a “living, breathing document” to be changed depending on the shifting political winds.

McCain is (at best) my third-choice candidate, behind Rudy and Fred, but at least he’ll get 1 out of 2 of these right, and may surprise us all and get closer to getting them both, whereas Billary or (God forbid) Obama would be disasters in both spheres, foreign and domestic.

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:53 PM

In fairness to McCain he is pro life and he is against gun laws so those are two social issues he is very strong on even more than Mitt.

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 3:55 PM

“South Park Conservative”

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

Don’t get this. All I get when I read this is “Kenny is dead!” What’s the definition – equating trash-brain mentality with conservatism?

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 4:00 PM

In fairness to McCain he is pro life and he is against gun laws so those are two social issues he is very strong on even more than Mitt.

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 3:55 PM

*Banging my head on the edge of the couch*

Do you get that it doesn’t matter?

All a President can do about either of those issues is appoint judges. That’s all.

McCain may have those positions but is he going to fight the fight with all the people on the left that love him to seat the judge that will make a difference?

C’mon.

He doesn’t even have to try. The people that give a damn about that–us–already don’t like him. he gets elected, he owes us zip.

Romney at least does, and we’d be reasonably expected to hold him to his word.

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:53 PM

I know. And I actually pretty much agree. I’m just pissed.

Typhoon on February 3, 2008 at 4:04 PM

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:36 PM

That’s right, good comrade. Keep saying the same thing over and over and eventually you’ll make people sick with not-caring and they’ll cave in – just like all those “moderates” you hear about.

Dude – your loyalty to McCain is akin to the brainwashing he underwent in ‘Nam.

McCain is the Hanoi Candidate – a traitor to vanity and pride like Benedict Arnold. Anti-free speech – open borders – screw him.

This message approved by McCain/Kerry ’08 campaign!

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 4:05 PM

He may not be invested in social issues, but no way in hell is he a libertarian. Libertarians by and large don’t believe in raping the first amendment, or hobbling the economy to appease the jetset liberals on global warming, or playing Robin Hood by scapegoating corporations.

Mark V. on February 3, 2008 at 4:05 PM

In fairness to McCain he is pro life and he is against gun laws so those are two social issues he is very strong on even more than Mitt.

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 3:55 PM

SInce when – this morning?

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 4:06 PM

McCain: “It’s not social issues I care about”

He cares about getting elected and will say anything to achieve it. In my view, he should be running as a democrap.

Zorro on February 3, 2008 at 4:08 PM

McCain will consult with Teddy the K, Hero of Chappaquidick, and Pat Leahy, and come up with some nice, solid, bi-partisan, middle-of-the-road choice.

And the chance of a f**cking lifetime will be gone.

At least for this lifetime.

We blew it.

Typhoon on February 3, 2008 at 3:49 PM

EXACTUMATELY!!!!

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 4:09 PM

“Goddamned Fence” would be a good name for a rock band…

mikeyboss on February 3, 2008 at 4:14 PM

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 4:00 PM

I suggest you learn a little about “south park conservatives” – its more or less a different phrase for libertarian. Definitely not brain dead.

lorien1973 on February 3, 2008 at 4:16 PM

I will give Romney and his campaign kudos for one thing. Of the 3 candidates, Romney is the only one who has really put any real effort into finding out exactly what makes conservatives tick. Newly conservative or no, this could benefit him in the future, if not this time around.

Connie on February 3, 2008 at 4:24 PM

I will give Romney and his campaign kudos for one thing. Of the 3 candidates, Romney is the only one who has really put any real effort into finding out exactly what makes conservatives tick. Newly conservative or no, this could benefit him in the future, if not this time around.

Connie on February 3, 2008 at 4:24 PM

True Mitt made the effort to work to become a better conservative. Is funny how Fred just smoothly without effort came accross as conservative while Mitt had to work at it. Fred needed Mitt’s work ethic and Mitt needed to ba as comfortible at being a conservative as Fred was.

Always another day I guess.

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 4:31 PM

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 4:31 PM

Conservatism isn’t just a set of beliefs. It’s an attitude. ;)

Connie on February 3, 2008 at 4:44 PM

True Mitt made the effort to work to become a better conservative. Is funny how Fred just smoothly without effort came accross as conservative while Mitt had to work at it. Fred needed Mitt’s work ethic and Mitt needed to ba as comfortible at being a conservative as Fred was.

Always another day I guess.

William Amos on February 3, 2008 at 4:31 PM

but sadly lacking in intellect. you don’t start a campaign by riding a golf cart while wearing Gucci loafers at an Iowa State Fair. You just don’t. Apart from what we all thought he stood for (I signed up for Fred08 the minute I found his web site) he was too d*mn lazy to inspire much loyalty.

Onager on February 3, 2008 at 4:45 PM

Well, me neither for the most part, but many of our readers disagree so here’s a little more chum in the water. – AP

And that about sums up both Hot Air and Allahpundit. You’re a clever fellow, Allah.

The only dog you have in this hunt is the number of hits this site gets each day. Nothing gets the site meter clicking better than a feeding frenzy, and what better way to start a feeding frenzy then chumming the waters? First Fred, then Mitt. When it’s McCain vs Hillary you’ll be dumping barrels of chum and pallets of bloody steaks….anything to get that meter clicking.

It has ever and always been about the cash, Allah, and if the Lizard Queen does slither into the Oval Office, your only concern will be finding a bigger scoop to dole out the chum.

Nicely done.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 4:45 PM

I think you guys need to ask yourselves, why in the middle of a very time sensitive initiative to crown Romeny president of the conservative movement, Rush took Friday off?

bnelson44 on February 3, 2008 at 5:03 PM

“South Park Conservative”

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Don’t get this. All I get when I read this is “Kenny is dead!” What’s the definition – equating trash-brain mentality with conservatism?

mksmithwriter on February 3, 2008 at 4:00 PM

Parker and Stone (the guys behind South Park) are very smart, can be hilariously funny, and come from a basically consevative/libertarian viewpoint, which is a rarity in the entertainment biz.

I don’t have cable any more, so I hevn’t seen show in a while, but I have seen them rip Al Gore (watch the “man-bear-pig) episode) and nanny-statism in general pretty regularly. They were also virtually the only Americans to stand up in the Mohammed cartoon hubbub, creating an episode in which they showed an image of Mohammed, which the Cartoon Network didn’t have the courage to air.

Sometimes they go over the top even in my jaded perspective, but that may be a generational thing. On the other hand, my wife’s parents are fans of the show.

IIRC, the “OMG, they killed Kenny” schtick kinda faded after the first year or two … not that they haven’t done things that would be considered even more offensive since … maybe if we called ourselves “Dennis Miller Consevatives” the tent could be a little bigger?

docob on February 3, 2008 at 5:08 PM

It has ever and always been about the cash, Allah, and if the Lizard Queen does slither into the Oval Office, your only concern will be finding a bigger scoop to dole out the chum.

Nicely done.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 4:45 PM

This has to be the most lunatic accusation against AP and Hotair that I’ve seen. Conservative economics has the implication that every once in a while people make money doing what they want to do. And what Allahpundit and Bryan want to do is to advance conservatism. Bryan is more pure of conservative under certain current popular culture assumptions, but there is an ebb and tide in both the left and the right. We must remember conservatism is a modest ideology. It admits an occasional error and it permits a democracy try to correct those errors. It’s about small changes–not the zero change of death. Allahpundit is a strong conservative under the larger view.

thuja on February 3, 2008 at 5:09 PM

I think you guys need to ask yourselves, why in the middle of a very time sensitive initiative to crown Romeny president of the conservative movement, Rush took Friday off? – bnelson44 on February 3, 2008 at 5:03 PM

Probably to get an early jump on the Super Bowl weekend. Rush does love his football, after all. Do yourself a favor and disabuse yourself of the notion that Limbaugh is losing a wink of sleep over this election – his feverishly sincere conservative pitch notwithstanding.

It’s all about the Arbitron ratings. Rush is a billionaire, God bless him. He earned every penny of it and continues to do so by dint of the most successful radio talk show in the history of the medium. Hillary’s election to the presidency will be excellent grist for a very, very profitable mill.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 5:16 PM

Social consevatism doesn’t stir me, either. I’m a conservative in foriegn policy and fiscal areas. I don’t know if the term “South Park Conservative” is used much any more, but that describes me best.

That said, is there any way I can find common cause with many people on this board, or is the conservative movement well and truly split?

docob on February 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

Judging by this board in the last few days? It’s done. The schism is there and it’s going to get repaired.

Vyce on February 3, 2008 at 5:18 PM

Actually I think McCain’s up by 11 among conservatives, not 9.

Vizzini on February 3, 2008 at 5:27 PM

This has to be the most lunatic accusation against AP and Hotair that I’ve seen.

I leveled no accusation, Thuja. I simply reported an observation.

Conservative economics has the implication that every once in a while people make money doing what they want to do.

I begrudge no one the profit derived from their labors, least of all Allah. He is a clever, intelligent,hardworking fellow who understands human nature. He knows what makes people tick and what ticks them off. He then furnishes them with an exclusive, members-only forum in which to vent spleens that he cleverly inflames. Like I said before: nicely done.

And what Allahpundit and Bryan want to do is to advance conservatism… Allahpundit is a strong conservative under the larger view.

Have another glass of Kool-Aid, Thuja. Your fever has rendered you parched.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 5:30 PM

Well, I’m beyond hating McLiarliarpantsonfire just for the sake of it. I don’t care much about the social issues either.

His contempt for conservatives makes me sick. His flip-flopping on taxes, justices, and amnesty make him the least conservative of the candidates. His use of his endorsements when he is busted on his weak conservative history is so blatantly obvious that it is an insult to conservatives.

But, Tuesday is just around the corner and I’m not gonna pop a cork over it. I survived Clinton twice and Carter and I certainly will survive McCain or any of the dems.

csdeven on February 3, 2008 at 5:36 PM

I survived Clinton twice and Carter and I certainly will survive McCain or any of the dems. – csdeven on February 3, 2008 at 5:36 PM

That’s the spirit, csd! The challenge is to find a comfortable niche that will enable you to make a profit both in spite of and because of whoever occupies the Oval Office.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 5:43 PM

CNN.com has a screaming banner announcing Mitt’s big win in Maine…nary a mention of it on FOXNews.com…hmmmm. No McCain bias whatsoever!

SouthernGent on February 3, 2008 at 6:10 PM

CNN.com has a screaming banner announcing Mitt’s big win in Maine…nary a mention of it on FOXNews.com…hmmmm. No McCain bias whatsoever! – SouthernGent on February 3, 2008 at 6:10 PM

If one has a dog in the hunt he makes certain not to feed any of the other dogs.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 6:17 PM

CNN.com has a screaming banner announcing Mitt’s big win in Maine…

SouthernGent on February 3, 2008 at 6:10 PM

It wasn’t a big win. He won an uncontested contest to gain uncommitted delegates. In other words he did not win any delegates. No delegates, no win.

bnelson44 on February 3, 2008 at 6:19 PM

It wasn’t a big win. He won an uncontested contest to gain uncommitted delegates. In other words he did not win any delegates. No delegates, no win. – bnelson44 on February 3, 2008 at 6:19 PM

If the polls are any indicator, the crew have already begun to abandon the good ship Romney in the hope of securing a warm, comfortable berth aboard the S.S. McCain, blissfully unaware (or, perhaps, suicidally aware) that its captain has charted a collision course with what can be truly described as an iceberg in every sense of the word.

In much the same manner as the disaster that befell Titanic nearly a century ago, there will be too few lifeboats, and these will be filled with the well-heeled. The hoi polloi will go down with the ship.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 6:51 PM

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 6:51 PM

Not to knock your passion but if your profile at Townhall is the same one with this handle you have voted in one presidential election. It is not quite as dire as you paint. It could be the last gasp of the conservative hold on the party as it leans more moderate.

It is however humorous watching the mental gymnastics many at this site and others are going through compared to the post 06 results. At that point the very republic was going to fall with the dreaded democrats in charge and the safety of the troops in peril. Now that a moderate could be the front runner the troops no longer matter and a democratic WH is really not that bad of a thing.

Bradky on February 3, 2008 at 6:59 PM

McCain is about as “conservative” as Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Shovelling lies to get elected then betraying the principles espoused to pander to middling weaselocracy.

One more old boy in the network.

Which will be so distasteful to the voters that they’ll DOLE him.

profitsbeard on February 3, 2008 at 7:10 PM

I am voting against McCain. This week, and in eight months.
I cannot wait to vote against McCain. I am motivated to vote more than ever.

saved on February 3, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Bradky on February 3, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Yep. I am the Nemo of whom you speak. Actually, I voted in every presidential election since first casting a ballot for Reagan in 1980. Since then, my outlook has become increasingly jaded and in the past few months it has gone from St. Ambrose of Milan to Ambrose Bierce.

As a serious student of history I am compelled to accept that this republic will eventually do what all republics throughout history have done: it will become bloated, corrupt and thoroughly decadent before it collapses and history once more takes the stage to re-enact the same scene all over again – this time with new actors, new costumes and a new set – but the same, tired script.

The challenge for me lies not in saving this republic – it is beyond the pale of anything short of Divine redemption. Rather, my quest is to find a measure of worldy success that is relatively immune to the capricious winds and devastating tides that seem to always precede and follow every political tempest.

Hence the reason I salute Allah, Rush, Hannity and so many others who figured out long ago that the safest cabin on any cruise ship is on a cruise ship that you own.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 7:21 PM

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 7:21 PM

Maybe Rush or Hannity will purchase a ship for you.

Bradky on February 3, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Shovelling lies to get elected then betraying the principles espoused to pander to middling weaselocracy. One more old boy in the network. Which will be so distasteful to the voters that they’ll DOLE him. – profitsbeard on February 3, 2008 at 7:10 PM

“Heh heh heh,” cackled Emperor Palpatine as he gleefully rubbed together his gnarled hands. “Good! Use your aggresive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.”

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 7:35 PM

Bradky on February 3, 2008 at 7:26 PM

I doubt it, Bradster. Theirs is a gospel of rugged self-reliance and, to be honest, it is my gospel as well. This is one luxury vessel I’ll have to build and launch myself.

S’ok…I’m already working on it.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 7:39 PM

Chakra Hammer on February 3, 2008 at 3:25 PM

I prefer this

Troy Rasmussen on February 3, 2008 at 7:42 PM

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 7:39 PM

You may be capable but the pampered, perfumed princes and princesses of the talk radio and tv circuit couldn’t steer a ship to save their life. Otherwise they would have made the effort to run for office to really make a difference.
They only get rich selling the idea not living it.

Bradky on February 3, 2008 at 7:46 PM

No need to feign support for Jonny Mac Allahpundit: admittedly you’ve shown less evidence of McCain Derangement Syndrome than Brian, but that doesn’t mean that this site has provided anything less than extreme bias towards Romney while spewing poison towards the Mac.

There is no issue here: McCain has a very clear and virtually unblemished record of supporting pro-life initiatives and heterosexual marriage. His stance has always been federalist, like Fred Thompson, supporting gay marriage ban in Arizona state when the bill came round.

Compare this with Mitt Con-mey, who has flip-flopped on both abortion and gay ‘rights’ and you begin to realise the shameless hypocrisy of the anti-McCain demagogues. I have nothing but contempt for Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter and other charlatans who put their egos before the good of the GOP. The voters will not be fooled.

McCain is the best candidate on either side to heal the red-blue chasm that has fractured this nation since the Clinton years. Independents are well aware of this, which is why the McCain haters are increasingly an irrelevance: stay at home if you will; there are enough independents to cancel out all your non-votes. And if you do betray the party by voting for the extreme liberals, do us a favor and keep your shameless demagoguery to yourself.

Pax americana on February 3, 2008 at 8:05 PM

He doesn’t care about social issues. He admittedly doesn’t know a damned thing about the economy. He is ashamed of Guantanamo, and wants to confer constitutional rights on non-citizen terrorists. He wants to give citizenship to illegal law breaking aliens. Tell me again why this guy is the front runner in a republican party nomination race?

paulsur on February 3, 2008 at 8:07 PM

They only get rich selling the idea not living it. – Bradky on February 3, 2008 at 7:46 PM

Hence my initial post, directed at none other than Allah himself. The pampered, perfumed princes and princesses to whom you refer (nice alliteration, by the way) are responsible for steering no one’s ship but their own – as are all of us.

Moreover, not everyone has the mettle to meddle in the malarial political swamp – if you doubt that, just ask Fred Dalton Thompson, whose poll numbers went down faster than Larry Craig in a Minnesota men’s room.

Nor do I begrudge the conservative doyens and doyennes of television, radio and the blogosphere their share of hard-earned loot. Suckers like you and me – who listen to Rush and waste precious living hours engaged in pointless political persiflage here at Hot Air and elsewhere – make their success possible.

And what do they care if you vent your scorn? As Salvador Dali once remarked, “Success is receiving checks.”

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 8:09 PM

Pax americana on February 3, 2008 at 8:05 PM

Have another drink, Paxi. I suggest you book a stateroom close to the lifeboat station but not too far from the bar. This arrangement will enable you to grab another drink, plop in a chunk of ice (there will be a lot of it on deck after the collision) and then make a mad dash for one of the boats. With luck, you may get a spot next to Molly Brown.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 8:16 PM

McCain is a die hard liberaltarian on a search and destroy mission to kill American sovereignty and usher in the North American Union. Orwell told me so.

Buzzy on February 3, 2008 at 9:21 PM

McCain is a die hard liberaltarian on a search and destroy mission to kill American sovereignty and usher in the North American Union. Orwell told me so.

Sounds like the same argument the founders of our constitution faced. The states thought the forming of an American Union would reduce the powers of each state.

They wanted each state to be its own country. They wanted New York to have to keep track of how much stuff they imported from New Jersey or Connecticut.

The reality is that once you do the math, having a flat economic board from the equator to the pole does much more good than harm. Because then, economically, a plant moving from the US to Mexico is no different than a plant moving from New York to Arkansas. It still remains in the overall economy.

Not to mention that if you add the economies of Canada, the US, and Mexico together you have the worlds largest oil producer.

crosspatch on February 3, 2008 at 9:52 PM

Not to mention that if you add the economies of Canada, the US, and Mexico together you have the worlds largest oil producer. – crosspatch on February 3, 2008 at 9:52 PM

As long as you are in on the fix and have a stake in the prize, it’s all good.

NemoParticularis on February 3, 2008 at 9:55 PM

Second look at McCain?

I don’t want another president who wastes all his political capital on gay marriage.

amkun on February 3, 2008 at 10:49 PM

Mitt’s going to California with an aching in his heart.

Further insight into the mystery that is AllahPundit — he’s older than I thought, or retro in his musical tastes. But which?

Amkun, I agree on your point, but “another”? Whom might you be speaking of?

Jaibones on February 3, 2008 at 10:57 PM

Allah,

It’s funny, I read that Vanity Fair story just yesterday – came across it as a link at Wiki. This was the paragraph which stood out for me as it speaks to his temperament, and gives insight into his relationship with Weaver, who we are told acted as his ambassador to the Democratic Party:

Moments later, McCain remounts the stage for the program’s final segment, and he bores into Weaver, standing quietly in the wings, with a cold look that seems to mingle irritation at Weaver’s whispered advice with regret that he took it, and demands, almost hisses, “Did I fix it? Did I fix it?”

Buy Danish on February 3, 2008 at 11:23 PM

CBS Poll: McCain 46, Romney 23, Huckabee 12

bnelson44 on February 3, 2008 at 11:27 PM

Amkun, I agree on your point, but “another”? Whom might you be speaking of?

Jaibones on February 3, 2008 at 10:57 PM

Bush should’ve fought for social security again or tax reform/breaks, whatever, but he fought for an issue he knew he couldn’t win. And then I suppose he blew the rest of it on amnesty.

amkun on February 4, 2008 at 12:42 AM

The reality is that once you do the math, having a flat economic board from the equator to the pole does much more good than harm. Because then, economically, a plant moving from the US to Mexico is no different than a plant moving from New York to Arkansas. It still remains in the overall economy.

Not to mention that if you add the economies of Canada, the US, and Mexico together you have the worlds largest oil producer.

crosspatch on February 3, 2008 at 9:52 PM

And like my forefathers before me sir, I say “OVER MY DEAD BODY“.

The difference between those who would sell this nation for economic gain and those like myself is that I am willing to die for the soverignity of the United States of America. Are you willing to die for money?

Buzzy on February 4, 2008 at 1:26 AM

Here’s what I don’t get: McCain takes great pride in being the “Great Compromiser.” This gives him full latitude to change his position, once elected, on any of these promises, stands or commitments. Why would ANYONE vote for him based on ANY position, knowing he’s already said he’s willing to CHANGE that position if he deems necessary??? I still believe the ONLY reason people are voting for him is because they believe he’s the only one who can beat Hillary/Obama. (Anyone else notice all the other candidates are running by their last name, but Hillary is not running as Clinton?)

ncpatriot on February 4, 2008 at 7:42 AM

McCain is the best candidate on either side to heal the red-blue chasm that has fractured this nation since the Clinton years.
Pax americana on February 3, 2008 at 8:05 PM

There is no red-blue chasm, there is a substantive distinction in world views. One side, apparently yours, believes in big government, isolationism, and ignorance. The other side believes in the Constitution, democracy and personal responsibility, with all the messy hard work and complex thought that goes along with it. The reason we’re in this mess is because we Conservatives have been working hard taking care of ourselves and our families and have let the libs educate our neighbor’s children and take over the media, maintaining an ignorant public. We have failed to put out our case for democracy and convince the voting public that it is worth the effort and thought.

Liberalism is easy, that is what makes it popular.

ncpatriot on February 4, 2008 at 7:55 AM

Just in case any of you need more reasons not to vote for John McCain – The List of Infamy.

Buy Danish on February 4, 2008 at 8:01 AM

Romney 2012!

davecatbone on February 4, 2008 at 8:43 AM

Here’s what I don’t get: McCain takes great pride in being the “Great Compromiser.” This gives him full latitude to change his position, once elected, on any of these promises, stands or commitments. Why would ANYONE vote for him based on ANY position, knowing he’s already said he’s willing to CHANGE that position if he deems necessary???

ncpatriot on February 4, 2008 at 7:42 AM

This was essentially what Bill Clinton did (govern as a populist) and he still remains, any rational Republican should be willing to admit (perhaps begrudgingly), one of the more popular presidents of the last few decades.

You’re dealing with the party base vs. mainstream (and by that I mean independent or moderate) voters. The party base (be they D or R) only wants someone who’ll tow the party line. Moderate voters want someone who it appears will be willing to change their position from the party line if it’s necessary.

Vyce on February 4, 2008 at 10:10 AM

Monday morning awakens to the sweet victory of the underdog Giants.

Since they beat the “inevitable” team Patriots, the Romney camp has the public acceptance of the possibility for his come-from-behind to take the lead by 4 points before the whistle.

Will Romney seize the day, or will McCain blow him to bits in the line of friendly fire? “My friend” preceding every address exposes McCain as the Caesar wanna-be that he is. Caesar suffered death by the alliance of senators including his trusted Brutus. Bloggers can’t take down McCain. But bloggers can barrage their senators to WITHDRAW any support for McCain.

To date, Mitt has failed to create a reason for senatorial unity toward his campaign for presidency. Senators probably have many established reasons to NOT ally with Mitt. But the barrage of phone calls and e-mails AGAINST MCCAIN with the ultimate constituent vote against their legislator would make an impact on current “good” behavior from senators towards McCain’s POTUS campaign.

Grassroots successful influence on Capitol Hill depends on unity, and at present there is none. Mitt’s camp should get beyond amnesty for illegal aliens as it alone does not make Americans unite AGAINST McCain’s campaign for POTUS. It is amnesty for McCain’s crimes against America that would bind the grassroots movement to prevent him from taking hold of the presidency.

It is McCain’s corruption and his wife’s corruption destroying the public trust at the expense of the most vulnerable people on earth that remains McCain’s bane. He and his wife never were prosecuted though federal investigations proved their guilt. McCain sold himself and his wife to the powers that be in order to survive without prosecution, all guilt swept under the rug. They are thieving criminals, and thieving not as private citizens, but as professional stewards of public trust, money, and medical supplies to destroy lives and cause victims the worst physical and financial ruin, pain and suffering. Amnesty for McCain the POW stops as he is no longer a POW returned home. McCain as a senator becoming a president has proved his affinity for crime and ability to evade prosecution and deny American justice, granting amnesty where none is deserved and none is called for except to create a larger population of submissive participants in crime. Having returned to the USA following Nixon’s “honorable” withdrawal from Viet Nam, ex-POW McCain has since broken sworn alliegance to all but himself and his thieving second wife. Surely, Nixon was no crook as McCain is.

maverick muse on February 4, 2008 at 10:14 AM

AP, are you trying to get me to like McCain? It’s working. If you keep this up, I could even end voting for him–no matter how much I threaten to vote for Obama. When will these so called social cons get into their head that they have already lost the gay issue? Gay marriage is simply a matter of time. Every time I meet a right-wing young person who opposes gay marriage, it turns out that they support “domestic partnerships” or gay marriage by another name. Of course, I really welcome the social cons continuing to fight this issue as it discredits them some on the abortion issue.

thuja on February 3, 2008 at 3:41 PM

The answer is that they won’t.

This is why I supported Rudy before he left the primaries. It’s why I detest some of the vitriolic furvor over the presumptive McCain nomination – lots of people here arguing about how you need Mitt to “save the future of the GOP”. Those people are not pragmatic, or being realistic about the situation.

Which is, to a large extent, they’ve already LOST this aspect of the culture war. The party has shifted to a more moderate position, which is what is has had to do to survive. Social conservativism is rapidly failing. Gay marriage is not going to go away. Abortion is not going to be made illegal. This does not mean that one cannot oppose either, because if those are your principles than so be it. But the rest of America has shifted away from you and I do not forsee that changing. This isn’t a pendulum where momentum is going to shift back your way.

Vyce on February 4, 2008 at 10:20 AM