Video: President Bush says John McCain is a “true conservative”
posted at 4:55 pm on February 10, 2008 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Well, John McCain is every bit as conservative as President Bush is. Both have worked on major legislation with Ted Kennedy, for instance, and they see eye-to-eye on border security. Neither one has been very successful at pulling anyone on the other side of the aisle to the right.
Those aren’t the arguments that the president uses.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Like Bush knows what conservatism is.
Clark1 on February 10, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Heh considering hte bad blood between these two over the 2000 primaries is interesting to see Bush stand up for McCain.
I still remember the talk then of McCain being his VP. if he had done that this election would have been very different.
William Amos on February 10, 2008 at 4:58 PM
John McCain: The Only Man who can Save (Illegal) America!
/Pres. Bush
Jack M. on February 10, 2008 at 4:59 PM
I beg to differ with you Mr President. McCrankypants’s actions have spoken louder than his words. We will not rally ’round the Shamnesty flag.
CrimsonFisted on February 10, 2008 at 4:59 PM
BTW from Politico
William Amos on February 10, 2008 at 4:59 PM
Bush is the expert.
He says: “[McCain] has got some convincing to do to convince people that he is a solid conservative and I’ll be glad to help him if he is the nominee.”
Now there’s some help I’m sure the McCain campaign can do without.
Drum on February 10, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Ooooh….feel that blade sink in between your shoulders in your back.
Kokonut on February 10, 2008 at 5:03 PM
This might mean something if Bush were any sort of Conservative. He’s not — he’s a moderate only slightly to the right of McLame.
rmgraha on February 10, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Um, also, is Bush endorsing McCain?
Kokonut on February 10, 2008 at 5:04 PM
The one bit of advice Bush might give, but probably won’t, is: Don’t go to war with a country you know nothing about.
Drum on February 10, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Ditto.
At least Bush hasn’t made his name by trashing his own party and undermining it’s efforts.
edgehead on February 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM
This is what I was wondering about. Is what President Bush said equivalent to the “He’s a good man.” kiss of death?
It would be for me.
Let’s see what happens to Sen McCain in the next coming weeks.
Dark clouds be a’ brewin, says I.
Weebork on February 10, 2008 at 5:07 PM
It’s pretty ironic that most of us don’t consider Bush conservative while most dems think he’s far right. The first Bush set the pace towards the left and his son has continued it. McCain will most likely continue that momentum.
kongzilla on February 10, 2008 at 5:07 PM
Depends on what the meaning of “is” is. Just sayin’.
davidk on February 10, 2008 at 5:12 PM
I know what you mean by that, but Mr Bush’s stance on amnesty a.k.a “Guest Worker Program” could be argued to say the president, by sticking to his guns on this issue, under minded his party.
Weebork on February 10, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Not true, dat.
Always Right on February 10, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Yes, Bush’s comments have the “all-or-nothing Republicans” upset. But Bush & McCain are both, for the most part, true conservatives.
jgapinoy on February 10, 2008 at 5:14 PM
not just “far right” but “ultra right extremist” is their thought or rather “feeling” process.
its really amazing given how much he’s tried to work with the dems and has on certain issues. heck the Iraq War was bipartisian.
I liked bush’s quote in this interview that “frankly I don’t give a damn” when talking about critics.
jp on February 10, 2008 at 5:16 PM
John McCain abuses the educatoinal system! You heard it from Bush himself. “John McCain has principles that drive him.”
- The Cat
P.S. Sorry but I just can’t take anything that was said in the clip seriously
MirCat on February 10, 2008 at 5:17 PM
True that.
mattyj86 on February 10, 2008 at 5:19 PM
I’m still not convinced that McCain has as big a problem among the base as many suggest. Before super tuesday, a poll showed that McCain actually has a higher favorable rating among republicans then Mitt Romney, it was actually 23 pts higher. Also Karl Rove this morning on Face the Nation had a chart of a recent Fox Poll, McCain would garner the support of 86% of republicans, while Hillary and Obama would get 80% and 79% of democrats, respectively. McCain’s main problem would not be getting the support of the base, but rather closing the enthusiasm gap. Something that no other republican has been able to do, including Mitt Romney.
Complete7 on February 10, 2008 at 5:20 PM
omg….
If you simply look at John McCain’s record in the Senate, anyone could see that the man is a conservative. You simply can’t get over an 80% rating from the ACU unless you are a conservative.
I think most are angry that McCain isn’t a right-winger…and there’s a difference between that, and a conservative.
JetBoy on February 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM
the problem with McCain moving to the Right now, is that it turns off the indepedents that like him precisely because he thumbs his nose at the republicans on certain well publicized issues.
should be interesting to see how this plays out. Ultimately we need the mushy middle to not be in a ‘mood’ of wanting a democrat president next time.
jp on February 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM
How so? Bush named three conservative positions that McCain is strong on: national defense (arguable), pro-life (true) and fiscal (BS). What else?
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Yes, Bush’s comments have the “all-or-nothing Republicans” upset. But Bush & McCain are both, for the most part, true conservatives.
jgapinoy on February 10, 2008 at 5:14 PM
yea right and I’m a brain surgeon.
jerrytbg on February 10, 2008 at 5:26 PM
oh wait…I am! no, that was another life… I’m still just confusted.
jerrytbg on February 10, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Well this proves that McCain is NOT a true conservative. No offense to GWB, but I am not sure he knows what that is.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:30 PM
I’m deeply disappointed by McCain being the nominee because he wants to close Gitmo and he supports amnesty. On the other hand, McCain would be far better on cutting government spending than President Compassionate Conservatism has been.
I have noticed that I have a tendency to post the positive side of things and I wonder if I’m going too far to be nice to McCain? Especially since I’m voting for the Democrat nominee.
thuja on February 10, 2008 at 5:30 PM
I think the libs will paint McCain as a third term for Bush, and they will probably be successful which will end in defeat for McCain.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:31 PM
the real question is would mccain actually do this or was thta just another calculated political position? who knows, but I trust him more than the dems.
jp on February 10, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Not really. The origin of the terms left-wing and right-wing, dating from the aftermath of the French Revolution, was that liberals generally sat to the left of the President’s chair and conservatives sat to the right of it.
This point sounds silly, as everyone knows that this original definition is outdated. In which what case are your reference points? What position does one have to hold to be right-wing and how does this differ from conservatism?
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 5:34 PM
In which case I meant to say.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 5:36 PM
I trust the Dems to be Dems, I don’t trust McCain on anything, you never know where he is going to come down on an issue. In my mind this makes him worse. In the case of libs, you just know going in you need to oppose just about everything they come up with. McCain will make noise about being a “conservative” with the media playing along and then he will turn on us. I don’t see how he could back off from closing GITMO now, he has gone on record numerous opposing it.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Conservatives have already found something to like about John McCain: They think he can win in November.
According to interviews with a dozen leading conservatives at the recently concluded Conservative Political Action Conference, movement leaders believe McCain brings significant advantages to the top of the ticket.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8421.html
bnelson44 on February 10, 2008 at 5:38 PM
How is McCain not a fiscal conservative? He did oppose the Bush tax cuts at first but at that time he also had his own tax cuts. And in the 1980s he supported all of Reagan’s tax cuts. The last two times the senate has voted to make the tax cuts permanent, Sen. McCain has voted for them. McCain voted against No Child left Behind, and the prescription drug bill, based on fiscal responsibility. In his 24 years in congress he has never voted for a tax increase. McCain may not be perfect on fiscal conservatism but he is a lot more conservative then most in congress and maybe even President Bush. Please refer back to this post.
Complete7 on February 10, 2008 at 5:38 PM
The general isn’t going to be determined by who votes or doesn’t vote for McCain. It will be determined by who the donks put up as their candidate. McCain’s chances against Hillary are lookin’ better, unless she can overcome the backlash from any Michigan/Florida delegate decision plus the superdelegate controversey. Obama is going to run the table if nominated. He brings way too much emotionally charged generality to overcome. His symbolism creates more enthusiasm to the public than does that of McCain.
a capella on February 10, 2008 at 5:39 PM
President Bush says John McCain is a “true conservative”
And a shiver ran down McCain’s spine..
Yakko77 on February 10, 2008 at 5:39 PM
McCain’s amnesty bill would have cost the US taxpayers 3 trillion dollars according to the Heritage Foundation. He has also been there through all of the years of free spending, I honestly don’t remember him leading a charge against them other than the occasional rhetoric or some of his votes.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM
I suspect that McCain will have no trouble closing Gitmo and bringing the terrorists into the country for circus trials that will damage our intelligence agencies.
thuja on February 10, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Except that Bush is more conservative on GITMO, enhanced interrogations, tax cuts, CFR…
Buy Danish on February 10, 2008 at 5:41 PM
I guess we’ll forget that whole rating of 65, less than some of the Democrats I’ll add, in 2006 from the ACU for McCain. Oh well, we’ll talk about lifetime average right not specifics.
To help you out there JetBoy, I’m going to list the Democrats who got a higher conservative rating than McCain in 2006
Cramer, Barrow, Melancon, Peterson Colin, Taylor Gene, Boren, Davis Lincoln, Edwards, and Cuellar.
There were another dozen or so who were within five points of tying Senator McCain, so by your standard, each of these Democrats is actually more conservative than John McCain. Now, I don’t know how that makes you feel, but I’m not real warm and fuzzy about supporting John McCain’s conservative skills.
Now, to consider this in a new light. Today’s conservative movement is opposed to Abortion, but not in favor of an Anti-Abortion amendment. It’s also dedicated to a woman’s right to choice. Is opposed to Gay Marriage, and at the same time is opposed to a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Is in favor of leaving American’s helpless and defenseless by failing to close the boarders, and in favor of the ability to ban firearms from the citizens at will.
What about this is supposed to make me feel like there some Conservative movement going on? I’ve seen these issues, and most of the positions from our “conservative” leaders are closer to the arguments put forth by the Progressive elements of our society.
McCain is many things, Conservative isn’t one of those things. Sorry Jet, but perhaps you should try telling your friends at work, or wherever, how conservative McCain is. Many of US actually know the truth about McCain.
Snake307 on February 10, 2008 at 5:43 PM
It is one thing to say you are a conservative and voting like one when there is no political risk. A TRUE conservative however does not pander to the Dems and the media and rail against his own party when the big issues are being decided when everyone is watching. The Maverick turns to jelly at times like that and stabs his own party in the back.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:44 PM
Bush’s judgment should be questioned in his apparent support of McCain, after all be also backed Arlen Specter, the Senates contrarian.
pocomoco on February 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Takes one to know one…and Bush isn’t one.
Has that been mentioned already?
Vigilante on February 10, 2008 at 5:48 PM
You simply can’t get over an 80% rating from the ACU unless you are a conservative.
JetBoy on February 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Is it possible that the ACU is trying to redefine what a conservative is? Much like the acLu is oxymoron in nature, maybe the ACU should add the L and be called American Conservative Liberal Union. They could cut back on staff… that would be conservative…
Where’s Mitt… someone ask Mitt….
jerrytbg on February 10, 2008 at 5:50 PM
There is a difference however between the two. Conservatives were able to reign in GWB on occasion. Good luck tethering Mac. If it does seem like he’s following your side, check the silverware, check your back pocket, check your back, because he is up to something.
Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 5:51 PM
I would like to know what it is McCain intends to conserve.
Drum on February 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM
His technical objection to Bush’s tax cuts seem narrow to me. I accept your other points but his “patriotism not profit” routine strikes me as politically perverse in that it contributes to the liberal mental atmosphere that corporations are evil. It’s a poke in the eye to the WSJ who shilled for him on amnesty. Voting conservative while at the same time appearing tonally liberal is not an ideal state of affairs.
The original question at the end of my comment was other than the three issues Bush mentioned what makes him a solid conservative?
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM
I could actually make the case that Bush is more conservative than McCain. At least Bush has stuck to his guns against the ACLU. How many times has McCain caved in or even reached out to them on issues? I’ve lost count.
Jay on February 10, 2008 at 5:53 PM
I find it really funny for the right to ‘rebel’ against Bush in his last year in office. If true conservatives are against huge deficits, it would have been nice to have heard their voices years ago.
mycowardice on February 10, 2008 at 5:54 PM
You can label me and others like me “all or nothing Republicans” all you want. But we really are
conservatives that are staying true to and honoring our principles. A trait you obviously lack.
If you want to compromise yourself and what little you seem to believe in, that is up to you. But your attitude towards those that don’t agree with you hardens my resolve to continue the good fight and leave the capitulating to people like you.
leanright on February 10, 2008 at 5:54 PM
The amnesty issue alone is enough for me to never support McCain for the rest of my life. The bill itself and the way they tried to ram it through was borderline treason in my mind.
McCain insults our intelligence after the fact by claiming it wasn’t amnesty because there was a small fine. Of course we know the government would have never collected those fines and nobody would have been forced to learn English. They can’t manage the situation now so how would they manage an even more complex scheme? He knew damn well he would drop all of those requirements later and he thought he could bullshit us. He also had no intention of enforcing the border.
Then he gets behind this idiotic Global Warming crap. He justifies it by saying it will be good for the country whether climate change is “real” or not. Energy independence and C02 reduction do not necessarily go hand in hand yet again he thinks he can bullshit us or maybe he is just stupid himself.
For all of this I hate his guts and will never vote for him and will fight him all of the way.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:55 PM
mycowardice on February 10, 2008 at 5:54 PM
I’m a newbie to this site and believe me, you would have heard me loud and clear long ago.
jerrytbg on February 10, 2008 at 5:59 PM
borderline treason in my mind.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 5:55 PM
Even in a north wind you could have p_____ to the other side.
jerrytbg on February 10, 2008 at 6:01 PM
Glad to know that, because at the end of the day, Republicans, Democrats or Independents, we are all stuck with the same national debt, the same war in Iraq, the same social entitlements, etc.
mycowardice on February 10, 2008 at 6:01 PM
Good point. He liberalised the Republican Party (or tried to). He also accused the 70% of the American people opposing amnesty of being racist. Good thing he isn’t British or he’d really be in trouble. /sarc
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 6:03 PM
Boehner: McCain is a solid conservative
“When you look at his record on fiscal responsibility, when you look at his record on getting rid of wasteful Washington spending, look at his record on a strong national defense, and leading forward in the fight on terrorism, he’s a solid conservative,” Boehner told Wolf Blitzer earlier today
“Look at the Republican candidates that are running for President, as compared with all of the Democrat candidates, and you see a very distinct picture,” said Boehner.
bnelson44 on February 10, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Of course Boehner and the rest of the Washington crowd are going to support McCain no matter what. He is the nominee and politicians will always be for party unity. They also want to be on his good side in case he wins which he won’t. Especially in McCain’s case as he has been known to hold a grudge.
These same people will and the pundits that are supporting McCain will be glad to list his screw-ups too after he fails to win the general election. Nothing new here.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 6:08 PM
I’ll get back to you, and everyone else who thinks I’m a little nuts…more later (the power keeps going off here…windy and snowy, and my laptop battery has a fully-charged life of about 15 minutes *sigh*) but it’s nice of ya to single out one year for McCain’s ACU rating.
A thought: Would conservatives support a candidate who would raise payroll & income taxes? Would conservatives support a candidate who would create an even larger government, instead of a smaller one? How about a candidate who granted “blanket amnesty” to millions of illegal immigrants, or appointed Supreme Court Justices who weren’t, shall we say, “strict constitutionalists”? A candidate who would sell arms to an extremist Islamic state like Iran?
Because that candidate would be…Ronald Reagan. And I don’t think anyone here doubts that Reagan was anything but a conservative. Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely idolize Ronald Reagan…but he did far less “conservative” things in his time than John McCain would ever dare to.
JetBoy on February 10, 2008 at 6:13 PM
You see a very blurry picture like looking at a Monet painting close up. The point I made two days ago and affirmed by Newt Gingrich yesterday is that if you want to win elections and conserve your historic society stand firmly to right and stay there like an immovable object. Tracking to the left is like chasing the dragon – you never catch the dragon.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 6:14 PM
I don’t think Bush’s definition of a true conservative is the same as mine.
katieanne on February 10, 2008 at 6:17 PM
The few mistakes of Reagan do not magically absolve McCain. If anything should know better because of those mistakes, especially on amnesty. We know what will happen because it happened before. He knows what will happen too but thought it would be a good idea to lie to us.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 6:19 PM
JetBoy on February 10, 2008 at 6:13 PM
McCain and his people want it both ways. I’m conservative because I’m a Reagan foot soldier. If you say I’m not conservative, because of xyz, well then, Reagan did xyz too. That’s what I like about McCain. Lie, back stab, exhume Ronald Reagan, and then encourage independents and liberals in open primaries to stuff your ballots. These are all hallmarks of a true conservative. What’s funny is we know these things about McCain going into this mess…. how should anyone expect different once he gets the keys?
Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 6:21 PM
bnelson44 on February 10, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Yes sir, I sure do. And that picture is tilting more to the left every day.
McRINO is a liberal shrill, and I don’t want to hear that “I get it” again. What I want to know is just exactly what he is going to do.
McRINO won’t commit himself to anything right of Kennedy’s views. And he is not going to tell you what he is going to do because you wouldn’t vote for him if he did. He is a liar and a sneak, and getting worse every day.
leanright on February 10, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Good points regarding Reagan. McCain has been resolute on Iraq, opposed to abortion and has been vocal on restraining Washington spending. There are valid arguments against him, but he has important differences from the Dems on each of the 3 legs of the stool.
dedalus on February 10, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Conservatism deserves to win all elections, but I don’t think the RINO Republican nominee deserves to win an election because he claims to be a conservative. If he wins, he will destroy the Republican brand for the foreseeable future.
If he loses, then we re-energize the base around conservative principles and fight the Dems for 4 years looking to nominate a true conservative in 2012. I will take the latter, we survived 8 years of the Clintons we can live through 4 more of them or Obama for long term gain.
Compromising our principles for political expediency has proven to be a disaster. The party couldn’t be in worse shape right now and McCain is not the cure we need, in fact quite the opposite.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 6:26 PM
President Bush, you rock!. He was correct when he said, “you can’t please everyone all the time”. And the fact that he “does’nt give a damn about the polls” and “does not chase popularity” reminds me of why I have always respected him. Conservative/Liberal is like Hot/Cold, there’s hot, damn hot and scalding hot. It’s more important to have a president that sticks to his own principles than one that has to consult a focus group everytime he has to make a decision. I’m just glad that Huckabee is not the front runner, talk about combative, as he is clearly the liberal republican.
As for closing Gitmo, fine with me. Try the bastards, execute the proven guilty and send the rest back to the desert with a new tracking device implanted. I’m not really interested in giving them 3 squares a day for the rest of their lives.
myamphibian on February 10, 2008 at 6:26 PM
JetBoy,
I’m going to take your points one by one.
They shouldn’t. However, and its a big however, Reagan at least created a balance by rehabilitating the economy so that if was affordable.
Doing this in 1986 is not the same as doing it in 2007. It is now clear to almost everyone that amnesty and illegal immigration threaten national existence. Also, apropos 9/11, jihad doesn’t stop at the Rio Grande.
Good point. He shouldn’t have caved on picking an incompetent female nominee just for the sake of it. Seems to be a kid of Republican voodoo curse unfortunately.
To be used against Iraq. All through his term Reagan had the Persian Shias and Iraqi Sunnis at each others throat. A brilliant strategy that neither McCain or Bush would have the smarts to develop.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 6:27 PM
Are you sure you don’t want to rethink that little argument? John Edwards and his ambulance chasing fraternity would have a field day representing these combatants.
Are we also going to rewrite how we conduct wars in the future?
Do we take prisoners and then ship them back stateside for trial?
I mean the pen is mightier than the sword…. but this is Ron Paul territory.
Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 6:31 PM
dedalus on February 10, 2008 at 6:24 PM
The only thing a three legged stool was ever good for was milking cows. It ain’t worth a hoot as a foundation for conservatism.
leanright on February 10, 2008 at 6:32 PM
Yes of course it is but if that president sticks to principles that are irreconcilable to your own values then you have to take a principled stand to oppose him.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 6:33 PM
This is exactly the narrow-minded, self-righteous attitude that characterizes the all-or-nothing mindset. The attitude that says “to hell with what is best for the country- I want everyone to suffer if they disagree with me, because I am better and more pure than all of them, and I have principles. Hell, the troops may be putting their lives on the line for those same principles, but if they support McCain, F*** ‘em, they deserve Hillary /Obama for Commander in-Chief”
Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Excellent point. Machiavelli and Sun Tzu each had mission statements. I’d much rather stick to a conservative/constructionist view of the constitution, thank you very much. McCain utilizes schoolyard/jock popularity principles.
Side note:
If McCain didn’t care about polls, why did he just hire a conservative PR firm to re-shape his un-conservative image?
Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 6:38 PM
It’s an analogy Rush and Levin have been using.
dedalus on February 10, 2008 at 6:39 PM
Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Don’t disparage if you can’t prove your point. I understand this is right out of McCain’s play book. He can’t argue the economy so he jumps into a foxhole and hides behind the troops. The man lied Priscilla. Try and spin that.
If you cannot give valid arguments supporting McCain’s conservatism, don’t marginalize. Yours and others arguments of the like, further alienate. They also prove the point many have repeatedly made. It is un-conservative to vote out of fear. Conservatism sells itself. It does not need the boogey man to sell it.
Cold Steel on February 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM
doing a heckuva job brownie…
Harriet Miers is a pitbull is size 6 shoes…
rumsfeld is not going anywhere…
john mccain is a conservative…
see a pattern?
JustTruth101 on February 10, 2008 at 6:47 PM
Principles are important. They’re things that don’t grow on trees. They’re what liberals like McCain don’t have.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 6:48 PM
George wouldn’t know a conservative from a consomme.
(What’s with all this “no ties with suits” falafel salesman in Istambul look?
Wear a different shirt if you don’t like ties.
These politicians who think they look “relaxed” in this get-up are just starting to look like creepy fake Rolex salesmen at ally entranceways.)
profitsbeard on February 10, 2008 at 6:48 PM
I agree, but at some point you have to at least concede that your values may not exactly coincide with the majority of americans. I’m all in favor of you expressing your opposition to McCain, as another commenter so eloquently noted, this is not communist Russia.
I meant that somewhat tongue in cheek, but what is the endgame as far as the terrorist detainees go? I don’t think anyone is advocating giving them Johnny Cochran trials (as Dennis Miller would say)
myamphibian on February 10, 2008 at 6:48 PM
McCain was hammering Rumsfeld at a time when a lot of conservatives were afraid to say anything critical of Bush’s handling of the war.
Waiting to fire Rumsfeld until the day after the 2006 elections cost congressional seats and extended the war.
dedalus on February 10, 2008 at 6:51 PM
But yet conseratism is so fragile that it cannot withstand McCain? (who many find conservative enough) What do those that oppose McCain fear?
myamphibian on February 10, 2008 at 6:56 PM
First, sorry about your weather related problems, with McCain’s position on the environment, they’ll only get worse.
Now, Reagan and his various less than conservative actions. Yes, what you write is true. However, Reagan also cut taxes, which McCain voted against. Reagan pulled Democrats and Independent’s to the more conservative, instead of joining them for the most part. Reagan won the cold war in Iceland, none of us saw that at the time, we figured it was a huge mistake, we were wrong. Reagan was right.
Reagan’s tax cuts. Let’s remember how that came about. The press, public opinion, and congress were against it. Reagan went out and educated the public about his ideals, and his beliefs, and the public got behind his ideas. They wrote congress, and demanded that we try this, because the situation we were in was awful.
The numbers don’t lie, the result was simple and predictable. In 1980, the IRS took in some $500 billion dollars. In each successive year, more and more money was brought in with the tax cuts. Reagan had to accept the tax increase congress gave him, and told us it was the best he could manage. Clinton for that matter ran on tax cuts, and then gave us the largest tax increase in history. Including taxing social security and unemployment. Apparently the Clinton/Democratic party approach was that the poor weren’t paying their fair share.
In 1990, Reaganomics, or Voodoo economics brought in to the IRS more than $1 Trillion. Reagan doubled the income of the federal Government in ten years, a single decade.
Reagan gave us some good conservative judges on the court, Justice Thomas for one, and some fair Judges, Sandra Day O’Connor for example.
Others are addressing other parts of your post. However, say what you will about Reagan, he was for individual freedoms. It’s interesting isn’t it that James Brady wasn’t able to get his law through until after both Reagan and Bush41 were out of office? You would think with the fact that Reagan was himself shot, that some action would have been warranted, and it was. The guilty party was arrested, tried, found to be nutty as a fruit cake, and locked up for a very long time in a padded room.
Reagan unlike McCain saw exceptionalism in the American People, and that’s McCain’s biggest problem. McCain looks out over the American People and sees not the potential for greatness, the opportunity to do something really great, or really hard, because it’s a hard thing, ala Kennedy. McCain looks out over the land, and sees an opportunity to stand on those who make it great.
Reagan saw the great potentials of American Business. McCain sees the untapped potential of Washington. Reagan saw life as something to be cherished. McCain has previously said he would never interfere with a womans right to do with her body as she saw fit. Reagan saw individual liberty as something inspiring. McCain sees individual liberty as something to be regulated, and controlled.
McCain is many things, he’s not a Reagan, and he’s not going to get my support, or my vote. You could literally run Lenin on the Democratic Ticket, and with Obama, you’re pretty close, and I’d not vote for McCain. People on the left claim that Bush sees himself as a King. McCain really does see himself as a King, and we’re all going to do what he says, because he said so.
Calling us Racist was in many of our experience, literally the last straw. The last few years of McCain’s record at the ACU is the most telling. Those are his signature items. McCain Feingold. McCain Kennedy, McCain Lieberman, and McCain the would be maverick king. History has it’s Napoleon, we don’t need another one.
Snake307 on February 10, 2008 at 6:57 PM
The problem with the “McCain is better than nothing” argument is that it means we are willing to validate and reward his asinine views at the expense of our own principals. I for can’t bring myself to do that. It isn’t like he is close enough, he isn’t close at all. I suppose if he was against the war these same McCain supporters would be telling us to vote for him anyway.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 6:58 PM
My god, have you ever read McCain’s biography? I’m beginning to think that you folks who blather on about your “principles”, don’t actually have a clue of what real core principles and decency are.
I’ll give you a hint – people with core conservative principles do not try and elect socialists.
Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 6:59 PM
Pres Bush:
Supported Amnesty for illegal aliens
Is now supporting the Islamist terrorists Hamas and Fatah in their attacks on Jews in Israel, as well as sucking up to the Islamists in Saudi and Qatar and DuBai and Kuwait
Has not been conservative on fiscal policy
Supported selling our ports to the Islamist in Dubai
Wanted to appoint Harriet Myers to SCOTUS
Placed unreasonable handcuffs on our military as they have been fighting the scumsucking terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan.
georgealbert on February 10, 2008 at 7:00 PM
Again, Chris Wallace doesn’t mention a word not even a hint about the illegal flood that is the most damaging issue of our times.
Wallace might nearly as well have been talking to John McCain, again.
George spent his interview time patronizing and treating us like the issues that concern us are childish he portrayed the same McCain he destroyed in 2K as a wonderful Conservative specimen and we should be eternally grateful for his presence in our airspace.
Well sweetie, McCain isn’t a super model, he’s not better than in 2K and I damn sure don’t need to be excoriated as a bigot again.
Speakup on February 10, 2008 at 7:01 PM
I don’t think McCain stands a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning whether I vote for him or not, Michigan will go for a Democrat as usual, no matter how much harm they have done to this state. If he is going to lose, I would rather have him lose big so it doesn’t encourage other RINO’s to run in the future.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 7:04 PM
I doubt that using extortion as a debate tool will yield much in the way of results, but we’re getting sort of used to it. Give me something with some sunshime and hope, instead of a veiled warning I’m responsible for bad things I can’t control if I don’t do what you want. Can you absolutely predict victory in the WOT if we do it your way? Economic positives from jumping on the global warming bandwagon and granting citizenship to criminals because it is the right thing to do? I didn’t think so.
a capella on February 10, 2008 at 7:04 PM
O’Connor was Reagan. Thomas was Bush 41. The moderate Bush 41 did give the U.S. a victory in the Gulf War and a SCOTUS pick that is still paying dividends for conservatives. Sitting out the ‘88 election because Bush 41 wasn’t Reagan would have given the U.S. President Dukakis and a liberal SCOTUS pick instead of Thomas.
dedalus on February 10, 2008 at 7:04 PM
Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 6:59 PM
His biography is about the man that is no longer there.
Update your facts about where he stands today.
McRINO isn’t better than the alternative, he is the alternative.
leanright on February 10, 2008 at 7:06 PM
You make my point for me. The majority of Americans are for preserving American sovereignty, seventy per cent approximately, explicitly opposed to amnesty. It’s hardly a fringe issue. McCain should be opposed by voters not only on principle but because his core policy is destructive and opposed by an unprecedented overwhelming majority of Americans.
It is true that the Democrats would do the same but that is even more reason not to vote for McCain. Immigration is a bipartisan issue in two dimensions. It is bipartisan to the Washington elite in that both parties agree that it must be continued, expanded and legitimated. It bipartisan to the electorate that it must be halted and the threat it poses to national existence extinguished. If McCain prevails then the imperatives of the political class will be cemented meaning at least bye bye Republican Party and at worst bye bye America.
I’m all in favor of you expressing your opposition to McCain, as another commenter so eloquently noted, this is not communist Russia.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 7:07 PM
dedalus on February 10, 2008 at 7:04 PM
Your absolutly right, but the RNC sh!t on their conservative base this year dispite that knowledge.
leanright on February 10, 2008 at 7:13 PM
Of course, not. I can’t absolutely predict anything, nor can you. But I can hear, and I hear the Democrat candidates saying “immediate troop withdrawal, negotiations with Iran.” In my book, this does not bode well for victory, so I go with the guy who says we’ll stand tough against terror.
But, who knows, anything can happen – maybe appeasement and surrender will work this time.
And if it’s sunshine and hope you’re wanting, well then, I guess Obama’s your guy. He says he can fix it all, and tie it up with a pretty bow. Everyone will be happy. He’s not a conservative either, but he’s telling you what you want to hear.
Priscilla on February 10, 2008 at 7:19 PM
Yes I’m familiar with his biography. I applaud McCain’s honourable sacrifice (although I don’t agree that standing up to torture is in itself heroic).
As for decency, his behind-the-scenes crude jokes are notorious. He was even uninhibited enough to tell one in public at a Republican Fundraiser: “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her real father’s Janet Reno.” Classy, as Allahpundit would say.
Your last point, that people who oppose McCain are actively trying to get socialists elected is disingenuous. Principles cannot be applied on a negative basis, only a positive one.
The Spanish civil war is a case point. We’re told by Hitchens (et al.) that the socialists deserved support because they were fighting fascists. If anyone had bought that line in 1936 Spain would have a focal point of the Cold War. It’s an extreme example but illustrates my point.
aengus on February 10, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Now, now. The only times that I can recall McCain sliding ever further left than Bush are in calling his tax cut proposal “a tax cut for the rich”. Otherwise, he supports the war(s), is eye-to-eye with W on illegal immigration and amnesty, is an actual conservative on congressional spending — unlike Bush — and wrote the constitutional affront that bears his name, and which W signed into law.
Knife? Back? If he’s stabbing you, it’s in the gut. But I think his support of McCain is right on.
Jaibones on February 10, 2008 at 7:37 PM
Point by point as well:
And what indication do you have that McCain won’t also be successful at that same “balance”?
What’s the difference between now and then? Illegal immigrants do not “threaten national existence”. Rosarita the cleaning lady is no more a threat today than she was 20 years ago. But as you point out, jihadist very well CAN easily come through a porous border. I agree that national sovereignty cannot exist without a secure border…and McCain ha already pledged to do just that. Like he says, it makes no sense to deport anyone unless the border is secure first.
And I see we agree on Reagan’s O’Conner pick…
But wait…didn’t we sell arms to Saddam for the same reason? Yes…I realize the goal was to create a sort of “stalemate” between the two countries. We didn’t want either of them to “win”. But it wasn’t Reagan who had them fighting each other…they were doing that anyway. And why did Reagan have to be so underhanded in the whole Iran/Contra affair? Again, I believe Reagan (and Ollie North) all did the wrong things for the right reasons…but if we’re going to speculate on McCain’s actions as being “unconservative”, let’s hold him to the brightest conservative light we had in recent times as a comparison.
JetBoy on February 10, 2008 at 7:37 PM
It is not her personally who is a threat. It is 20 million mostly uneducated people who consume more public services than they pay for. The threat is 3 trillion dollars in cost for this problem. The threat is overburdening public services that are already going broke. The threat is not being able to assimilate this many people this fast who also have a historical grievance with this country which will result in a balkanized society.
echosyst on February 10, 2008 at 7:41 PM
He hasn’t? That’s news to me.
It’d be better for the Republican candidate if Bush endorsed Hillary.
MrScribbler on February 10, 2008 at 7:52 PM
So you’re saying, if I have this right, that it’s not so much the individual illegal that’s the problem, it’s the number of illegals that’s the problem.
Yes…I totally agree that it costs us taxpayers far too much. But the thing is, the problem of illegals has been ignored by both parties for so long. And all of a sudden, we simply want to expel them all? How do you expel 20 million people all over the country? And what purpose would it serve if the border isn’t secure?
And as for anyone having that “historical grievance” …re Aztlan…Most immigrants here illegally don’t subscribe to that notion. They’re here, working hard, raising families, and yes…even paying taxes. I’m not making excuses for being here illegally, but right now there’s laws on the books on how to deal with illegals. They’re simply not enforced. So, we need some “new laws” now?
All I’m saying is, the illegal problem is no easy fix. Not by a long shot. The main thing is to first secure the border. Build the wall. Guard it.
Only then can we move forward with anything else.
JetBoy on February 10, 2008 at 7:54 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »