A pro-choice running mate for McCain?

posted at 10:40 am on August 14, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Hopefully, members of Team McCain have rushed to remind John McCain that he needs to energize the Republican base to support him, not to oppose him.  In an interview with Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard yesterday, John McCain suggested that Republicans might not mind a pro-choice VP, as long as he suppported other portions of the social-conservative agenda.  He intended to draw a contrast between Tom Ridge and Michael Bloomberg, but the comment threatens to draw lines within the GOP instead:

John McCain said that he is open to choosing a pro-choice running mate and named former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge as someone who merits serious consideration despite his support for abortion rights. McCain also criticized Barack Obama’s presidential campaign for attempts to “politicize” the debate over Georgia and criticized President Bush for failing to recognize the true nature of Vladimir Putin.

“I think that the pro-life position is one of the important aspects or fundamentals of the Republican Party,” McCain said. “And I also feel that–and I’m not trying to equivocate here–that Americans want us to work together. You know, Tom Ridge is one of the great leaders and he happens to be pro-choice. And I don’t think that that would necessarily rule Tom Ridge out.”

McCain’s comments came in response to a question about comments he made to several reporters during the Republican primary season. During that exchange, McCain was asked whether New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg would make a good running mate. McCain offered strong words of praise for Bloomberg but said that Bloomberg’s position on abortion–he is also pro-choice–would make it difficult to choose him as a vice presidential candidate. …

“I think it’s a fundamental tenet of our party to be pro-life but that does not mean we exclude people from our party that are pro-choice. We just have a–albeit strong–but just it’s a disagreement. And I think Ridge is a great example of that. Far moreso than Bloomberg, because Bloomberg is pro-gay rights, pro, you know, a number of other issues.”

McCain has this exactly backwards.  Abortion is the sine qua non of the social conservative agenda, not gay rights, for a simple reason: abortion kills human life.  In comparison, gay-rights issues stirs passions, but not the kind of line in the sand abortion represents.  Being tough on gays hardly represents a consolation prize to pro-life Republicans, many of whom think the gay issue is already overblown as it is.

Michelle notes the essential problem McCain creates with this odd formula:

Pro-open borders. Pro-global warming hysteria. Might as well go for the trifecta.

Either one believes human life begins at conception or not, and if so, then abortion is an abomination.  McCain has a good track record on this issue as it is, so he obviously believes that human life should not get terminated out of inconvenience.  Why, then, would he propose asking someone who doesn’t believe that to take a position which could put that person in charge of appointing judges to the bench if something tragic happened to McCain while in office?

It looks like a trial balloon to me, a way to show that McCain can get along with everyone in Washington and work across the aisle.  If so, let’s pop that balloon tout suite and quit alienating the base.


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

Comment pages: 1 2

He will be destroyed. No one who runs for president once can ever go back. Kerry wanted to run, and couldn’t. Edwards tried, and didn’t get the votes. After this, McCain wont be a force to threaten you with his democrat ways at all.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 3:21 PM

I don’t know. McCain ran and lost in 2000 to Bush. He almost ran in 04 as John F Kerry’s VP choice. Probably couldn’t get a promise of enough face time on Meet the Press to satisfy himself. McCain is a lunatic who dreams of having that power, that job.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Anyone who doesn’t win is free to run again. Once a candidate runs for president in the general, then that’s it.

And McCain “almost ran in 04 with Kerry” … according to the democrats. I tend not to trust their version of events. But what do I know. I haven’t contributed $200 to Omama like you. So there you go. I’ll take his word over it than the democrat’s version.

“McCain is a lunatic who dreams of having that power, that job.”

While I don’t think he’s insane, I see a difference between disagreeing with political opinions and crazy. You are, however, correct in your comment that he dreams of power. To wit-

“Presidential ambition is a disease that can only be cured by embalming fluid.”

He has dreams of power and wants to be president. So does Obama. So did Kerry, So did Bush, so did Al Gore, and Clinton, and Dole, and Perot, and Dukakis, and Bush’s father, and Mondale, And Reagan, And Anderson, And Carter …

The list goes on.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 3:33 PM

Looks to me like McCain can’t beat Obama.

Looks to me like they both are in a race to the bottom of the polls. No matter who wins in November, I predict that nobody is going to be happy with the outcome and whomever the “winner” he will be a one-term wonder with absolutely no mandate.

highhopes on August 14, 2008 at 4:14 PM

I predict that nobody is going to be happy with the outcome

Except all the democrats and about half the republicans will be happy that Obama won.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 4:17 PM

I am very critical of McCain.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM

Wow. Just…WOW.

misterpeasea on August 14, 2008 at 4:32 PM

I explained this already on page one, if you are interested in reading it.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Oh, I’m critical of a lot of things. Am I required to tell you them all? Will you get upset and stomp your feet if I don’t tell you?

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Is this your “explanation”?

Reminds me of the geek in The Breakfast Club: “Uh, she lives in Niagara Falls.”

misterpeasea on August 14, 2008 at 4:43 PM

I am very critical of McCain … and I am also one of the few conservatives here who seem to have been paying attention to current events. And that little bit of news is that the election is now down to two people. One of which are guaranteed to win. And while some here are acting like the republican primaries are still going on, I can see the bigger picture of candidate A or B, and am not making crap up about candidate B to soften the blow when candidate A wins, as to think that this is somehow better.

And I am probably one of the few here who remembers President Reagan’s 11th commandment. And the consequences of ignoring this.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 4:45 PM

misterpeasea on August 14, 2008 at 4:43 PM

“Again, your version of events. Not anywhere near the truth. I am in progress in doing what I can to make McCain understand what issues are important to me. And since McCain does not read blogs, I am not attempting to convince him by making impassioned speeches to him here.”

Not that I need to justify my actions to the likes of you.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 4:48 PM

I am also one of the few conservatives here who seem to have been paying attention to current events

I’ve never heard “selling out” described more poetically.

highhopes on August 14, 2008 at 4:51 PM

“A pro-infanticide Veep” – Political suicide for McCain. When is his campaign going to grow a brain?

kirkill on August 14, 2008 at 4:53 PM

If so, let’s pop that balloon tout suite and quit alienating the base.

McCain doesn’t care about his base. He’s shown that time and time again. The only reason I am voting for him is that Obama terrifies me…not from anything Republicans have said, but due to what Obama himself has said. He did it all by himself.

katieanne on August 14, 2008 at 4:55 PM

I am very critical of McCain … and I am also one of the few conservatives here who seem to have been paying attention to current events. And that little bit of news is that the election is now down to two people. One of which are guaranteed to win. And while some here are acting like the republican primaries are still going on, I can see the bigger picture of candidate A or B, and am not making crap up about candidate B to soften the blow when candidate A wins, as to think that this is somehow better.

And I am probably one of the few here who remembers President Reagan’s 11th commandment. And the consequences of ignoring this.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 4:45 PM

Sure, I know the consequences of an Obama win, but let’s look at McCain’s record, then we’ll consider party politics, as practiced by McCain.

McCain violated the first amendment. No doubt about it, his signature legislation which was a huge issue in the 2000 election was McCain Feingold, which says among other things that you can’t run a negative ad about a candidate for sixty days before the election. That is a violation of the first Amendment. I don’t care which party puts it forward, it’s not a conservative principal to abolish free speech.

There are three ways to look at this really. First, my party right or wrong, which is asinine. My party is always right, which is juvenile. Principal over party. The third choice is mine.

I swore an oath to support and defend the constitution, and I did it for nine years in the Army. Part of that Constitution says that Congress Shall Pass no Law. It doesn’t say that the Supreme Court shall overturn any law which Congress Passes. It doesn’t say that Congress shall pass only those laws that they think they can get away with. It says Congress Shall pass NO LAW. How many Republicans voted for that abomination of a law after clearly stating that they thought the law violated the first Amendment. Even the President signed it, after stating that he thought it violated the First Amendment and was unconstitutional. Everyone hoped the Supreme Court would do the right thing, because they themselves lacked the courage to do the right thing. McCain led this charge, McCain pushed this, and McCain is the one who is most directly responsible.

If his sins against Conservative Principal ended there, I could stomach him as a Candidate. They don’t. McCain then was asked while the Republicans had the majority if he would support amendments to the Constitution, thus taking the courts out of the game, to prohibit Abortion and Gay Marriage. McCain said no to both. Then he campaigns saying he’s opposed to both. Obviously, he only wants them as campaign issues. Only via an amendment can you take the court out of the issue, instead McCain has two issues to campaign on, the court, and Abortion. Gay Marriage is defacto in now thanks to him and the other wimpy Republicans.

McCain is on the Television constantly as a Senator, always bad mouthing the Republicans. Now I’m supposed to show loyalty to a man who has always attacked Conservatives, and Republicans? Sorry, my back is hurting right now, too many knife blades have been buried there John, perhaps I’ll raise my hand to help you later. Probably not, but perhaps.

John is for lower taxes, but voted against lower taxes, at the time claiming that it was too generous to the rich. When did Conservative Values and the Republican Party become the group that participated in Class Warfare?

John is for Amnesty, and those who opposed him? They were racists. When did we become the party of name calling and racially charged attacks?

Reagan started as a Democrat, and when asked why he left the Democratic Party, he said they didn’t. The Party left him.

That’s how many of us feel as we watch the Republicans line up behind McCain. We didn’t leave the party, they left us. My opposition to McCain isn’t based upon some wild made up charges. Each of those and many many more, are true, and factual. McCain said and did all of that. I can’t support the party, right or wrong, when I know they’re wrong. The right and the truth are obvious, and when you have a liar like McCain as the nominee, I can’t support you or the party.

Reagan’s commandment was never to bad mouth a Republican. However when a Republican is wrong, what am I supposed to do? Swallow my principals? Violate my oath to support and defend the constitution before God? What price to support my party is too high? Does it end with my soul? How much of my personal honor should I sell to support party first?

McCain was instrumental in the PATRIOT ACT as well. Including those wonderful National Security Letters. If McCain hasn’t bothered to read the first amendment, why am I surprised that he doesn’t understand the plain language of the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment either.

No, I won’t support McCain. Under no circumstances, well earlier I said I would if he nominated Lieberman, but that’s only because I know he’ll lose then. Other than that, I will not vote for him. I would rather vote for Satan himself, because at least with him, I know what I’m getting.

I’d rather have an honest enemy, than a dishonest ally.

I’m not making any of these up, McCain did all of those, and more. I know John McCain, and I won’t ever support him.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 5:05 PM

McCain can count on losing the election if he alienates the pro-life vote. If he is that wishy washy on such an important issue to the conservative vote it would be better if he picked a pro-abortion VP candidate thus showing his true colors and losing the election as a RINO.

Tobias2012 on August 14, 2008 at 5:07 PM

McCain doesn’t care about his base. He’s shown that time and time again.

I wouldn’t call the conservatives “his base.” Conservatives haven’t always been friendly with him and vice-versa. Yet, Republicans still voted for him. Oh well.

terryannonline on August 14, 2008 at 5:09 PM

Can you say: “Presi, Presssi, Pr-Pr-Pr, Prezzeedent Obama?

stenwin77 on August 14, 2008 at 5:11 PM

Oh look at the cute little trackback by Red Pill.

RushBaby on August 14, 2008 at 5:33 PM

With all of the world turmoil going down right now, what idiot would throw abortion into the GOP VP cauldron? Only the same mentality that set-up and cleared the Russian invasion of Georgia during the Olympics, as if no one is noticing they’ve gone awry.

When there’s oomph amount of discontent, don’t add to it thinking the tipping point is no longer relevant.

Lieberman or a pro-abortion VP pick by McCain will only chill what support he actually has in hopes of flirting with Obama lovers. Very stupid idea.

maverick muse on August 14, 2008 at 5:58 PM

I sometimes wonder if McCain is saying these things just to get Michelle’s (Malkin) knickers in a twist. She reacts so predictably to everything he says that doesn’t fit her rigid worldview.

The same can be said for many here.

After all, McCain did not say he will pick a pro-choice candidate like Ridge, did he?

I’m totally against abortion, but that belief is sometimes at odds with my desire to see government staying out of people’s personal lives. The notion of anti-abortion police watching over women who might choose that option is troubling, and should be so even for others who believe it is wrong.

In a more sane world, a candidate might float an idea and see what response comes back. That’s a no-no these days, both for the lefty loons and the conservatives.

Sad.

MrScribbler on August 14, 2008 at 6:00 PM

Rudy G would be a great VP nominee. Strong executive experience, strong debator, funny.

Anybody who hasn’t read this graduation address he made at the Citadel in 2007 really should.

http://externalaffairs.citadel.edu/giuliani_commencementaddress07

Rudy is pro-choice. If McCain picked him for VP, none of you would vote for the ticket?

funky chicken on August 14, 2008 at 6:02 PM

In a more sane world, a candidate might float an idea and see what response comes back. That’s a no-no these days, both for the lefty loons and the conservatives. Sad.
MrScribbler on August 14, 2008 at 6:00 PM

It’s really upsetting to me to watch as these lines are blurred as they are.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 6:03 PM

Rudy is pro-choice. If McCain picked him for VP, none of you would vote for the ticket?
funky chicken on August 14, 2008 at 6:02 PM

… some of them even voted for him when he was running for president …

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 6:04 PM

Romney was pro-choice when he was governor of Massachusetts. Pro-life in his personal life, pro-choice as a governing philosophy.

So, you all agree with Huckster that Romney is a no go as well?

So, Rudy and Romney are just off the list based upon abortion. sad

funky chicken on August 14, 2008 at 6:07 PM

Possible off-the-radar pro-choice pick: Jodi Rell.

Big S on August 14, 2008 at 6:10 PM

Not that I need to justify my actions to the likes of you.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 4:48 PM

The likes of me? You mean “trash who should just go on over to Kos or HuffPo?” “Secret Obama supporters”?

“LYING LIARS WHO LIE ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN”?

misterpeasea on August 14, 2008 at 6:33 PM

McCain may not be out there reading blogs but he has people doing that and they need to know that the base isn’t buying into his message of socialism (compared to Obama’s marxist agenda).

highhopes on August 14, 2008 at 2:28 PM

I’m with you!

Branch Rickey on August 14, 2008 at 6:34 PM

Possible off-the-radar pro-choice pick: Jodi Rell.

Big S on August 14, 2008 at 6:10 PM

A big NO THANK YOU on that one. If he is gonna pick a woman, there are lots who are better than that one. She’s boring, and not at all telegenic, and doesn’t inspire me with her seeming brilliance or anything.

Kay Bailey Hutchison would be a better choice, and I’m not head over heels for Kay Bailey. Condi would be a much better choice, and I’m far from enthusiastic about her. Hell, Sarah Michelle Gellar would be a better choice than Jodi Rell.

If you’re gonna possibly piss people off with a pro-choice VP, it had better be an otherwise brilliant person like Rudy or Condi (who says she is “agnostic” about abortion as a political issue).

funky chicken on August 14, 2008 at 6:46 PM

She reacts so predictably to everything he says that doesn’t fit her rigid worldview.

The same can be said for many here.

McNumnuts is a liberal. He’s not as radical as Hussein, and thats the best thing I can say about him.

neither of these libtards will ever get my vote.

dogsoldier on August 14, 2008 at 7:10 PM

Depressing.

If he does I am getting to the point of not voting for McCain – and vote Bob Barr instead.

Having the RINOS in charge of our party for 4 years screwing up the country and taking over the Republican party and turning it into country club republicans may be worse than having Obama in charge.

McCain – its not political abortion is a MORAL issue – and clearly he doesnt get it. I question his judgement.

The delagates can still nominate someone else for President.

winged on August 14, 2008 at 7:32 PM

neither of these libtards will ever get my vote.

dogsoldier on August 14, 2008 at 7:10 PM

They will get votes, however, and the one who gets the most will probably be the one you will like least.

I think it’s unfortunate that McCain doesn’t agree with my positions on all the issues. compared to Osama Obama, however, he’s the safer choice.

MrScribbler on August 14, 2008 at 7:32 PM

The likes of me? You mean “trash who should just go on over to Kos or HuffPo?” “Secret Obama supporters”?
“LYING LIARS WHO LIE ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN”?
misterpeasea on August 14, 2008 at 6:33 PM

Do you realize that you have done this to me many many more times than I have ever (and I haven’t even done this to your idiotic trolling levels as you constantly, repeatedly have done to me) at all. Stop trolling. And give it a rest, because you are only embarrassing yourself by doing this childish stunt over and over, and try to stay on topic. If you can.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 7:36 PM

It looks like a trial balloon to me, a way to show that McCain can get along with everyone in Washington and work across the aisle.

Yes, it’s intended to show McCain’s bipartisanship. He’ll choose a social con veep.

jgapinoy on August 14, 2008 at 9:13 PM

I’ve noticed that something seems to happen every single time I post a long litany about the reasons I dislike and won’t support McCain, usually after someone like Wise decides that we’re all just making it up, no one has the courage to respond. Instead, they ignore the truth and much like the liberals, pray that their world view prevails in real life.

Real life the truth is usually the first thing to go, and I’m saddened to see the Republican Party throw the truth overboard in the pursuit of Political Power.

Conservative people, myself included, have always had truth on our side. We can truthfully point to the logic and the historical proof of our positions. More people working, means more tax revenue for the Government. The way to get more people working is to lower taxes. Corporations have money to hire people, people have jobs and buy things, which means more corporations have to hire even more people.

That is a truth, which John McCain doesn’t believe in. He thinks Rich People should pay more, which is why he opposed the Bush Tax cuts. Well, that and McCain was a poor loser in 2000. Wise man’s assurance that this is the last time McCain can run, I don’t think so. Nixon lost to Kennedy and won eight years later. There are no hard and fast rules as to who can and can’t run. Only the public who is too often fooled by political rhetoric over the truth.

The truth is that McCain is easily the most dangerous candidate we have running for President. Clinton ran as a Liberal, and during his first two years in office, he managed to get two things accomplished. He raised taxes, no big surprise when you consider that there was a Democratic Congress, and he got Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell installed.

That’s it. After his first two years, the Conservatives came back with a huge win, and from then on, Clinton governed as a Moderate battling the Conservatives who were always one more policy away from having people in the streets, and bankrupting the nation.

The problem is we forgot all of that when we got our own Moderate Republican in office as President. We had the majority, and the balanced budget ideals went out the window. We had the majority and our principals on individual liberty? We forgot what we’d promised, fought for, and cared about. We lost because we became more of the Country Club Blue Blood Republican Party, and less of the Conservative Party.

I didn’t leave the Republicans, they left me.

Now to this election. There are three ways to view this election. It’s important because of X. But that’s the line that’s taken in every election, and so far X has never been solved. So we’re left with the idea that the elected need X to get elected, as an issue so they don’t want to solve it.

Option number two. The election is the last chance to save the nation from Liberalism. Yet, our candidate is a liberal. He has been in favor of limiting freedom of speech, and don’t tell me he won’t sign the fairness doctrine if Nancy pushes it through. He will in a second in the interest of Bi-partisanship. He’s a big government is the solution guy, which is the Liberal, not the Conservative answer.

Option Three. This is a battle we’ve lost, and the intelligent move is to accept the loss, salvage what we can from it, much like the British did at Dunkirk, and gather our strength to fight the war to total victory.

I choose Option Three. This battle was lost, lost before we got to the two people fight. Lost years ago when we started down the path of country club blue blood Republicans, following John McCain. The smart move now is the rebuild our forces, and come back stronger than ever, and win on the Conservative Principals that are time tested, proven time and time again, and have clearly been shown to be what the Majority of the public want.

If we follow option two, that this fight is the last chance, and we actually win the battle, the war for our nation is lost. McCain will govern as a Liberal, bigger Government, more programs, less individual liberty. The Republican Party won’t be able to rebuild to fight that, because it will be fighting for it, and the Conservative Movement will take twenty to thirty years to rebuild.

It’s Dunkirk friends, and we have a choice, pull out as much as we can and fight another day, or pull a Philippines and pray we can hold on until aid arrives, only it never does. We stand and die with that plan. It is untold suffering for the population that way too. Instead of soldiers, we’re sacrificing principals, or saving them to fight another day.

You decide, how much of your principals are you willing to sacrifice for a victory that guarantees death for what you believe in? I am willing to compromise on a few issues, but so many sour pills would need to be swallowed to support McCain that I would have a terminally sour stomach.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 9:23 PM

We’re really going to miss you from the republican party. Don’t forget to write every so often.

*kisses*

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 9:29 PM

We’re really going to miss you from the republican party. Don’t forget to write every so often.

*kisses*

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 9:29 PM

So I can assume that you don’t have any principals, or they aren’t significantly important to you that you’re willing to sacrifice to support McCain. Great. Good to know, that you’re one of those Juvenile fools who thinks your party is always right. Awesome. Glad to know you’ve become as bad as the Liberals on Democratic Underground or Daily Kos.

Perhaps you should start a website, Republican Revenge. Then you can have in your user agreement that you are here to push Republican Candidates, and only posts in support of the Republicans will be permitted.

I’ll take the free speech path, although between the liberals, and you McCainiacs, I don’t think I’ll have that right much longer.

Good buy boys, and have a good time storming the castle.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 9:49 PM

this is not war, Snake; this is politics–there are several Big Differences. But in both, you sometimes work hard for an ugly messy victory to avoid a disasterous defeat

I wanted Rudy, and God only knows Rudy is less than perfect. What I got was McCain. I’ve made the analogy before, but McCain is Ike in 1952: not a geniur, not a conservative, not really a Republican

but as in ’52, the alternative is a liberal scatter-brained liberal Dem senator from Illinois.

It’s not the coast of France in 1940, man, or the Philippines in 41-42.

It’s time to avoid something much, much worse than MsCain

Janos Hunyadi on August 14, 2008 at 9:56 PM

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 5:05 PM

and

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 9:23 PM

Very well said. A few of those things I’ve said myself over the last couple months but not as eloquently as you have with these two posts. Thank you.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 9:29 PM

That’s it? That’s all you can say? You strut around here insulting people that won’t support McCain; accusing them of lying about his record and wanting to support Obama…Snake just wrote 2 f***ing essays that pretty much sum up in a very eloquent way how many of us who won’t support McCain are feeling, and address your gripes..and all you can come up with is your pathetic little kiss off message? You know, I was half prepared to give you some benefit of the doubt of being a thoughtful guy but you just proved yourself to be an irretrievable jackoff. And don’t worry about writing often. If your lamea** candidate somehow manages to win this election (and only then through the sheer incompetence of his opponent) I’ll be eager to remind you every day of how much he sucks…especially when the betrayals start.

austinnelly on August 14, 2008 at 10:03 PM

So I can assume that you don’t have any principals, or they aren’t significantly important to you that you’re willing to sacrifice to support McCain.
Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 9:49 PM

You’d be wrong in that assumption. I don’t fit into your definition of how things are, so you feel better about yourself by making stuff up about me that’s not true. But I wouldn’t want to harsh your mellow as it were to your manifesto that the republican party left you. You want out. I’m just being cordial, Not insulting, as is some people’s opinion. Which is also wrong.

Best of luck backing a third party candidate that is going to loose, with zero electoral votes and about half a million votes, or .40% of the total votes. Approximately.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 10:17 PM

this is not war, Snake; this is politics–there are several Big Differences. But in both, you sometimes work hard for an ugly messy victory to avoid a disasterous defeat

I wanted Rudy, and God only knows Rudy is less than perfect. What I got was McCain. I’ve made the analogy before, but McCain is Ike in 1952: not a geniur, not a conservative, not really a Republican

but as in ‘52, the alternative is a liberal scatter-brained liberal Dem senator from Illinois.

It’s not the coast of France in 1940, man, or the Philippines in 41-42.

It’s time to avoid something much, much worse than MsCain

Janos Hunyadi on August 14, 2008 at

OK, so what do we gain from this victory? Do we win a solid Republican gain? No we don’t. It’s far more likely that McCain will have a majority Democratic congress. If we had a rock ribbed hard core by the principals candidate, I could live with that.

We have a candidate who’s reputation and in fact his moniker of Maverick is earned by working not against Democrats, but with them. So when the Democrats push for a tax increase, and McCain initially resists, let’s pretend he does. Then they offer him something he wants, like his carbon cap and trade, which in reality is another tax anyway, does he agree? You bet he does, he’s said it many times, he’ll negotiate anything.

I won’t. Some things are not negotiable, yet no McCainiac can name something that McCain won’t negotiate, because his history clearly shows he’s negotiated everything over the last twenty two years in the Senate.

McCain will be blamed by the Democrats for all these things. Increased taxes, more unemployment, more economic disruptions. The answer in 2012? Massive Democratic win. Instead of unseating Jimmy Carter, we get Jimmy McCain unseated, and we lose even more in the house and Senate.

Today’s victory, even if it’s bloody, is liable to lead to an even more disasterous defeat. We’re liable to be wishing for Obama to run in 2012, instead of what we get. Simply put, there are worse things out there then Obama now. He’s new, has no chits built up, and can’t get his agenda off the ground so long as the Republicans left fight against him. McCain will get his agenda, and drilling won’t be in that agenda. McCain has years of opposing Drilling to fall back on. Years and tons of history with the people he’s supposed to be fighting.

We might win in November, but if we do, it will be Pyrrhic to be certain. We’ll end up giving away the farm before we recover from that victory.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 10:23 PM

but as in ‘52, the alternative is a liberal scatter-brained liberal Dem senator from Illinois.
It’s not the coast of France in 1940, man, or the Philippines in 41-42.
It’s time to avoid something much, much worse than MsCain
Janos Hunyadi on August 14, 2008 at 9:56 PM

Watch out. Lest you incur the wrath of teh snake and nely from austin. They don’t even recognize the real threat of Obama, so they have to build up this object of their irrational hate of McCain to epic proportions. You see, normal people who read their opinions are also similarly bewildered by their behavior. I’ve observed this behavior before, over the last 7 years. “Not my president!” is one of those people’s battle cries. Did you catch the poll that said a third of them believe that Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks beforehand?

Crazy is a very ugly thing. Especially when mixed with politics. And while McCain is a flawed candidate, he’s no where near the level of demented anti-christ that some paint him out to be. *shrugs*

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 10:26 PM

You’d be wrong in that assumption. I don’t fit into your definition of how things are, so you feel better about yourself by making stuff up about me that’s not true. But I wouldn’t want to harsh your mellow as it were to your manifesto that the republican party left you. You want out. I’m just being cordial, Not insulting, as is some people’s opinion. Which is also wrong.

Best of luck backing a third party candidate that is going to loose, with zero electoral votes and about half a million votes, or .40% of the total votes. Approximately.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Actually, as I said earlier. I’m voting for Obama. Give me the weak and ineffectual liberal over the dangerously competent liberal any day. I’ll take the one least likely to get his agenda through and gives us the best chance at another Republican Revolution. With McCain, I’m going to have to join a Union just to survive.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 10:29 PM

Yup. With McCain, our nation will be nothing left but a charred cinder before he’s done. That dangerously competent liberal McCain. Not to mention old.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 10:33 PM

Besides, isn’t “another Republican Revolution.” what you want? Why, you could even vote for McCain .. in a totally reverse psychology sort of way. Now that would really be devious!

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 10:35 PM

Besides, isn’t “another Republican Revolution.” what you want? Why, you could even vote for McCain .. in a totally reverse psychology sort of way. Now that would really be devious!

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 10:35 PM

The Difference between us is I want the Conservatives to win in the near future, while you want them defeated for the next decade or more. Which is why I don’t support McCain, and you do.

Obviously, if McCain gets elected, the carbon cap and trade tax will go in, the Democrats love it, and the Republicans will have their arms twisted to go along. They will, in party unity. So it will pass, and we’ll have a huge economy destroying tax in effect. Good job John McCain.

If it’s Obama who tries the same thing. The Republicans fight him, and we manage to convince enough of the blue dog Democrats to keep it from passing. We win, the economy is saved.

Which scenario is more likely? Will John McCain just decide he didn’t really mean it when he said he wanted to do that? Will the Republicans fight him? When they did over Immigration, he screamed at them and called the other Republicans Racists, that by the way was his own party. Now he violated the sacred Reagan 11th Commandment, but hey, he’s the Maverick.

Only when we had sent tens of thousands of bricks to Congress did the Amnesty move stop, for now. McCain said he learned, and then said if that same bill ended up on his desk, he’d sign it.

Do you think he didn’t mean that? Do you think he wouldn’t sign an all out Nancy Pelosi authored Amnesty Bill? He would in a minute and you know it Wise, or else you’re inaptly named.

What wouldn’t McCain do, and without the Republicans to fight him, what couldn’t he accomplish?

There is no limit to what he can do, which is why I said he’s the more dangerous Liberal candidate. He wants the same things as Obama, only no one will be fighting against him for four years. He will accomplish more of the Liberal agenda, because he’ll control the Republican Party for the next eight years.

Sure, try and get me to vote for him by telling me he’ll die soon, he’s old. Sorry, I won’t bet on that. Only the good die young, and he’s no good. He’s the biggest threat to our economy, or security, and our freedom that you’ve ever seen, and you refuse to admit it.

So answer these questions Wise. Did McCain push McCain Feingold including the free speech abridging section mentioned above? Answer Yes.

Was McCain instrumental in violating the forth fifth and sixth amendment regarding the National Security Letters part of the Patriot Act? Answer yes.

Did McCain vote against the Bush Tax Cuts because they were too generous to the Rich thus making him a class warfare politician? Answer yes.

Did McCain push for his Amnesty Plan, and didn’t he state on the Senate Floor that by opposing this you were telling them to get to the back of the bus? Honest answer has to be yes.

Didn’t McCain propose the Carbon Cap and Trade system? Answer Yes.

So which of these are manufactured or lies? Which of them is not true.

Which of them is the Conservative Republican approach to a problem? None of them.

Which of them represents the Republican party that won huge in 1994? None.

Which of them is the Republican party that won in 2000, 2002, 2004? None.

McCain helped draft the Bankruptcy reform system, which took rights from individuals, but maintained them for his business cronies. Again, fact.

So why is it I am making things up? He’s dangerous enough in the Senate, giving him a more important job isn’t smart is it?

Obama has accomplished nothing. Would accomplish less if elected. So we’d lose what by letting him win? Nothing.

We lose the whole war by winning this fight. Go Obama, I’d rather live to fight another day.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 11:15 PM

I still have my Fred 08 bumper sticker on my car.

Novote for Nobama here; I’ll vote McCain with a clothespin on my nose.

electric-rascal on August 14, 2008 at 11:16 PM

I wonder if McCain picked Fred, how many additional votes hewould get. Or how many votes he might get, but wouldn’t.

wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 11:18 PM

Scribbler, Mr Amnesty will win big, mostly due to husseins unelectability. Frankly I won’t be happy with him in the White house either.

dogsoldier on August 14, 2008 at 11:49 PM

We lose the whole war by winning this fight. Go Obama, I’d rather live to fight another day.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 11:15 PM

A whole thread of “I’m a conservative and I hate McCain to find out the snake loves Obama. Poisonous and pathetic indeed.

Rovin on August 15, 2008 at 12:50 AM

I’ll be eager to remind you every day of how much he sucks…especially when the betrayals start.

austinnelly on August 14, 2008 at 10:03 PM

No question about it. But the down-ticket candidates matter too much. As a result of pathetic leadership this cycle, I got involved locally. One thing I found out is that local elections are messed up because people show up to vote for the top of the ticket and leave the rest blank.

RushBaby on August 15, 2008 at 2:04 AM

A whole thread of “I’m a conservative and I hate McCain to find out the snake loves Obama. Poisonous and pathetic indeed.

Rovin on August 15, 2008 at 12:50 AM

I said more than once that Obama was essentially no different in his Liberal Big Government policies. It was the achievement of those policies that I debated. I believe and you would have a hard time arguing that McCain will achieve more of his Liberal Policies than Obama will. In fact, I’ll challenge you to this. Do you think that McCain will be able to pass his proposed Carbon Cap and trade tax if elected President?

I await your answer. I already know what it would be. The answer would be yes. He would be able to get it through Congress. The Democrats would love it, as it plays to their base, the Man Made Global Warming crowd is undeniably Liberal. Now, who would stand in opposition to this plan? Would the Republicans rise in opposition to their own parties President? Some few would most would go along, and the measure would pass both houses of Congress. We would watch our economy be destroyed. McCain’s success equals our disaster.

Are you able to argue this? I know you’re not, and you know you’re not. You could try and debate the effects on the economy, but since many economists and business leaders have come out and predicted exactly what I said, disaster for our economy, your argument would be baseless.

Same situation, President Obama this time. He proposes it, and into Congress it goes. We manage to strong arm most of the Republicans with the exception of the RINO’s like St. John of McCain. We’re able to strong arm a few Democrats, the Blue Dog’s mostly. We keep it from passing, and Obama doesn’t get to destroy our economy.

Again, realistic scenarios, and ones we’ve seen played out in Washington time and time again. The theory of the Minority Opposition party is that they fight to keep extreme legislation from going forward. In this case, McCain’s the extremist with the best chance of getting those to go forward.

Tell me where I’m wrong in this presentation. Please, I would like to know how the Republicans would oppose a Republican President who is putting forward this particular piece of legislation? Do you think the Democrats would oppose it?

Snake307 on August 15, 2008 at 2:42 AM

Let’s try different legislation, how about the McCain Amnesty Plan?

President McCain proposes it. Congress debates it. We’re able to safely say that a vast majority of Democrats will vote for it won’t they? Then we’re able to say that at least a third of the Republicans will vote for it. Then we’re able to say that it passes and becomes law. Of course, we can’t say the same thing about the same legislation proposed by President Obama. The Republicans with few exceptions, like John McCain vote for it. A few Democrats vote against it, and what do you know, we’re able to block the legislation.

Same legislation, essentially the same congress, completely different outcomes based upon who is pulling the strings and twisting the arms.

In two years, the Republicans campaign as Conservatives, with a two year record of fighting hard for Conservative ideals, and pick up a few seats, perhaps enough to take back control of the house, it’s possible with Obama as President.

With McCain as President, the Republicans have only one thing to campaign on. If you elect us, we’ll push unemployment well into double digits by supporting the President’s new tax plan on the rich.

Yeah, we win big with that plan don’t we?

In 2012, with four years of a lame Obama who has seen his best efforts thwarted, we push again, and this time we put up a Conservative. I don’t know if it will be Jindal, or who. The point is we push hard for Conservative ideals and principals. He reads right from the winning playbook of Newt, Reagan, and even Clinton, who all campaigned on tax cuts and smaller Government. Sure Clinton lied and jacked taxes up, retroactively as a first, but hey, were talking campaign not governance here.

Both of these scenarios have been played out in recent history. In one, Republicans gained power, and pushed their conservative agenda. In another, they frittered away their Conservative message and the nation suffered. Which do you want to see my friend?

I prefer to see a stymied Liberal Agenda, one which is blocked at every possible path. I want to see Conservative Ideals once again the talk of Washington Town. There is absolutely no way that any Conservative Ideals will be pushed in Washington except the make believe Conservative ideals of John McCain. Great old time Conservative ideals like higher taxes, bigger Government, and less personal liberty and control over our own lives.

You know, the Country Club Republicans version of Conservative.

Snake307 on August 15, 2008 at 2:58 AM

I am willing to compromise on a few issues, but so many sour pills would need to be swallowed to support McCain that I would have a terminally sour stomach.

Snake307 on August 14, 2008 at 9:23 PM

McCain wants so desperately to be indigestable he can’t resist an extra weekly kick in the butt to keep the base from liking him. Whether this is due to base-envy or RINO stupidity matters not for it lets the base know how they will be treated after the election when they are no longer needed

A whole thread of “I’m a conservative and I hate McCain to find out the snake loves Obama. Poisonous and pathetic indeed.

Rovin on August 15, 2008 at 12:50 AM

I’m conservative. I despise McCain and I detest Obama. I do not obey the GOP and I am not a conscript. I find it mildly interesting that so many are outraged at conservatives who have not jumped on the band wagon to pledge support for a candidate who has promised to not represent them if elected.

The convention agenda is still mystery. McCain is still trying to build a coalition to exclude the base so there are no guarantees on any promises made today.

Obama may be a changeling but McCain will be a conservative only if he is trapped by the polls

It is a loser’s game to spend anger on people who will not vote your way. The better strategy is to find a way to make them like your candidate.

A politician is unlikable if people fear he will shaft them

entagor on August 15, 2008 at 4:32 AM

Sorry, I don’t vote to pop this balloon. Abortion is wrong. But not enough people see it as wrong to make it a Federal law. It is also not discussed in the Constitution. Thus, properly, it is left to the states to decide.
 
I believe it is wrong. I will tell any young woman who asks this ancient granny aged critter it’s wrong, it’s against God’s teachings, it’ll come back to haunt you, and even in the hands of the most skilled surgeon there is a risk that you will never be able to bear a child of your own. But I will not restrain her. My mother always told me that if I played around, “went all the way”, and got “caught”, “I will still love you; but, do not name it after me.” Translated that’s, “Go ahead and make a damn fool of yourself. There are some things I cannot kiss and make it better for you.”
 
If a young woman makes this unfortunate choice what it does to ber in this life and when she meets St. Peter are her responsibility.
 
So I temper urges to keep the unborn babies alive at all costs to anyone involved with the realization that God has specifically declared I am not here to judge and force proper behavior. Judgment is God’s to mete out.
 
Perhaps this is tempered by growing up in Michigan in the era when abortions were still illegal back alley or kitchen table affairs. They still happened in numbers you young whippersnappers might not appreciate. A mere law against it will have the same effect as the anti-drug laws. It will make society’s problems worse as the criminal element moves in to supply this, unfortunately, high demand “service” to customers.
 
I believe this is an issue that must be regarded as states rights, simply to bounce the hot potato to people closer to the electorate. No Federal law of any kind should address abortion.
 
{^_^}

herself on August 15, 2008 at 5:25 AM

Didn’t Palin support the 75% windfall profits tax on Alaskan oil?

Actually, no. That story from the Seattle paper was false, but unfortunately some people believed it.

http://bulletproofdiction.wordpress.com/2008/08/11/the-windfall-profits-tax-and-gov-palin-non-issue/

McCain’s best chance to win:

*A conservative, pro-life Governor.

*A charismatic, fresh face who can excite the GOP with a preview of the next generation while good ol’ Maverick steers the ship for 4 yrs.

*Someone with the ability to appeal to swing voters who don’t care for the stereotypical “Republican”.

*A Veep who balances the ticket with a “big issue” other than McCain’s National Security issue. (Hmmmm. Domestic Energy would be perfect.)

McCain/Palin ’08

Mr. Wednesday Night on August 15, 2008 at 6:49 AM

Yet, Republicans still voted for him. Oh well.

terryannonline on August 14, 2008 at 5:09 PM

Not that many, really. He can’t even seem to break 70% in primaries against phantom candidates, months after he clinched the nomination. He was consistently in the 30-40% range prior to that.

Not really a popular candidate, party-wide.

Maybe that shows how smart conservative voters are about his smarmy MSM- and lib- buttkissing.

TexasJew on August 15, 2008 at 7:18 AM

I’m a conservative and I don’t like McCain, but Obama is, to me, not worth a single solitary rat’s ass. The worst candidate to run for a major party in my lifetime, by a parsec.

You simply have to be a raving drooling shitmeister to vote for that POS, if you claim (sic) to be a conservative.
Or maybe you’re just a lying scumbag…

TexasJew on August 15, 2008 at 7:28 AM

Fine, Maverick, you just go ahead and select Ridge or Nanny Bloomberg or Lieberman.
You’ll be congratulating President Elect Obama in your concession speech.

abcurtis on August 15, 2008 at 10:01 AM

I am very critical of McCain.
wise_man on August 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM

Wow. Just…WOW.
misterpeasea on August 14, 2008 at 4:32 PM

And to further reiterate the point, not all of my life is online. Just because I don’t parrot the same ‘OMFG, Capt’n Amnesty SUCKS!! he’s going to destroy the republican party! Time for a revolution!’ BS comments here doesn’t mean I like McCain. What I am doing in real life I think might have a better impact on attempting to get the word out to McCain how displeased I am than ranting like a dog frothing at the mouth on a page that he doesn’t read. For some people, they allow their limited view of the world to define their reality. I just would hope that some people would try to see the bigger picture here. Sadly, I don’t see this happening much, by some of the comments that I read. Especially the ones that claim McCain will be worse than Obama.

The bad thing of McCain not picking a very strong conservative/far right politician is obviously the people who can’t see past their own arms will see this as a betrayal. The positive results would be that the people who often decide elections – Moderates, Independents, might see this as a more balanced ticket than an ultra left liberal Obama and whoever he picks. Obama IS left, far left and has attempted to display himself as being middle. McCain is moderate right, but still right. And he made this no secret when he was running for the nomination. If you step back and look at both of these people, more people would realize that while McCain is a flawed candidate, he won’t be able to do everything he wants, and will be moderated by the legislative branch. With Obama, you’ll have the democrats doing whatever they want to. And no one to stop them.

If you look at this election using a microscope, and only at certain issues that you pick and choose, and not everything in it’s totality, then you will be very shortsighted as to all of the events that will effect us all. And the world. I wish more people would think larger than themselves here.

wise_man on August 15, 2008 at 11:13 AM

Amazing, not one single person challenged my assertions that McCain would be able to implement his Liberal agenda, while Obama would not.

Instead, the march of “We have to support McCain over Obama posts” continued.

Therefor I see that there is only one reasonable answer. You don’t care what policies the Republican Candidate puts forward, so long as he’s a Republican. If that means he destroys the economy with a carbon cap and trade plan, so be it. If that means he destroys the Republican Party in the process, better yet.

Thus my contention that those who support McCain can’t possibly be Conservatives is essentially demonstrated.

Game. Set. Match. Snake.

Snake307 on August 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM

wise_man on August 15, 2008 at 11:13 AM

you just wasted a lot of bandwidth to say your voting for mccain no matter what he says or does between now and the election. your a lemming, try to deny it but you are here defending mccain on his every utterance. you have never criticized him. but you have some kinda psyop going in real life to pull mccain over to the conservative side? but any of that is too top secret to mention?? what a tool

chasdal on August 15, 2008 at 1:33 PM

you have never criticized him.

Yes I have.

wise_man on August 15, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2