Why media conservatives hate John McCain

Gloria Romanorum Blog ^ | 1-30-08 | Florentius

[Antoninus]

One of the most frustrating aspects of this election season has been the willingness of our allies in the conservative media to outsmart themselves by supporting liberal Republicans. Some of them latched on to one of these "moderates" from day one. The most egregious example of this tendency is Sean Hannity, who must feel a bit foolish for his slavish promotion of Giuliani, given Rudy's inglorious performance at the polls.

Hugh Hewitt also gets raspberries for becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of Romney, Inc. One wonders if the FEC will be investigating Hewitt for all the free advertising he has given the Republican version of John Kerry. Personally, I'm more than a little insulted by Hewitt's shameless pumping of liberal Mitt under a micro-thin pretense of impartiality. I hope his audience share has suffered accordingly.

Other hosts, not nearly so audacious in their error (Rush Limbaugh most predominant among them), withheld their support from good conservative candidates until it was too late to do much good.

So now three weak sisters remain, with John McCain appearing as the most likely to limp to the nomination. Yet somehow, someway, the media conservatives have decided to rally around Mitt Romney who is perhaps the most liberal of the remaining three in terms of his record. With the sole exception of Michael Medved who, after a worrisome start, has been a level-headed, equal-access paragon of Republican impartiality throughout this extended campaign, the vast majority of media conservatives are now going after McCain hammer and tongs.

Which brings me to a quesiton that's been haunting me for the past month: What's so bad about John McCain that the supposed lights of the conservative movement would rather support a pandering, phony, northeastern liberal like Mitt Romney? I'm no fan of McCain, myself. Indeed, I've called him just about every name in the book over the past eight years. But at least with McCain, you know what you're getting and we can gear up for a serious fight after he gets elected.

With Romney, the GOP base is likely to be lulled into a false sense of security--until he goes Arlen Specter on us. Mitt had a strange propensity in Massachusetts to allow liberalism to advance on all fronts--and help it from behind the scenes--while putting on a dog-and-pony show of opposition. A crypto-liberal like Romney in the White House would be infinitely more dangerous to conservative causes than a mushy moderate like McCain. And given what has happened to the GOP in Massachusetts post-Romney, conservatives could be looking at another 40 years in the wilderness following a Romney term.

So why are these intelligent, plugged-in media conservatives willing to get on board the Romney bandwagon and reject McCain with extreme prejudice? It has to be more than mere political differences. Here's a theory that popped into my head to explain this phenomenon: the animus displayed by media conservatives toward McCain comes not from any true ideological difference, but mainly from fear that McCain would threaten their livelihood.

Last night, I got a bit of confirmation of this theory. A talkshow host who frequents a major forum posted the following:

McCain is a disaster...This should concern all conservatives, in and out of talk radio....At least the best in talk radio, and most of talk radio’s audience, have tried to stop this day from coming....But you go ahead and attack talk radio. I am sure McCain, with his great regard for the First Amendment and the Constitution, will be working with Kennedy, et al, to punish it.

I'm not saying this statement is wrong. McCain has shown himself to be on the wrong side of this issue with his ludicrous campaign finance "reform" act. But let's remember, McCain & Feingold may have been the catalysts for this piece of legislation--but President Bush signed it. I don't recall too many media conservatives holding a similar long-standing grudge against the President for his part in limiting their speech.

What I want to know from our friends in conservative media is this:

1. Is your extreme negative position on McCain based predominantly on worries about your ability to continue to make a (very) comfortable living in a McCain administration?

2. Has Mitt Romney made any soto voce promises to leave talk-radio alone?

I think we, your audience, have a right to know. If that's the case--fine. Come out and say it publicly and make it clear that you are not simply making a political case for "anyone but McCain" but are also lobbying to preserve your livelihood. Otherwise, all this vitriol about how awful and liberal McCain is and how conservatives need to rally around an even bigger liberal like Mitt Romney makes no sense...

...unless you guys really have become more media than conservative.

[Antoninus]

My theory on what's going on with the conservative media, for what it's worth.

[TexasCajun]

What MeCain said to Tx Senator John Cornyn!

I for one will not vote for a President should you and your kind vote MeCain the nomination.

[Red_Devil 232]

Probably because they can read and do not rely on the MSM for their news!

[Always Right]

My reasons I don't trust him. Still has Rudman as a key advisor who architect the Souter nomination and probably advised McCain to attack evangelical Christians in 2000. McCain-Feingold, worst attack on the first Amendment ever. Gang of 14, which helped filibuster consservative court nominees. Amnesty for illegals. Against Bush's tax cuts. And my #1 reason, McCain is gonna sell the US interests out in the name of global warming.

Forget the conspiracies, McCain's dislike by conservatives is well earned.

[oblomov]

>> I don’t recall too many media conservatives holding a similar long-standing grudge against the President for his part in limiting their speech.

Really? You must not have spent much time on FR over the past seven years.

McCain-Feingold, NCLB, and Medicare pt D were the three colossal errors of GWB’s first term.

[Red Steel]

Otherwise, all this vitriol about how awful and liberal McCain is and how conservatives need to rally around an even bigger liberal like Mitt Romney makes no sense...

The truth: the choices for presidential nominees are limited in 2008. Yes, Romney has flipped on issues, but he hasn't flopped back. His conversion could be sincere - so there's hope. He seems not to have a tin-ear and who can be persuaded to stay with conservatives agendas. At the very least, he probably will not actively support many of the liberal issues as president. McCain on the other hand has shown for decades his disdain toward conservatives. McCain has proven that he will consistently and actively support liberal issues on the national level. This explanation may clear up some of the confusion for this author.

[San Jacinto]

at least with McCain, you know what you're getting and we can gear up for a serious fight after he gets elected.

Yep. He is just like Obama and Hitlery, all right.

[GoLightly]

Remember Nixon?

[B4Ranch]

The War Secrets Sen. John McCain Hides

But there was one subject that was off-limits, a subject the Arizona senator almost never brings up and has never been open about -- his long-time opposition to releasing documents and information about American prisoners of war in Vietnam and the missing in action who have still not been accounted for. Since McCain himself, a downed Navy pilot, was a prisoner in Hanoi for 5 1/2 years, his staunch resistance to laying open the POW/MIA records has baffled colleagues and others who have followed his career. Critics say his anti-disclosure campaign, in close cooperation with the Pentagon and the intelligence community, has been successful. Literally thousands of documents that would otherwise have been declassified long ago have been legislated into secrecy.

Also see:

Vietnam Veterans Against John

[pissant]

Regardless of the motivations of the talking heads, I will support none of the above. My motivation is to promote conservatism. The lesser of two evils days passed me by long ago.

[jwalsh07]

“We must not only have a free flow of goods and services, but also start working for a free flow of people.”

[mgc1122]

There’s no conspiracy. McCain is nearly the spitting image of Hillary Clinton on issues. A conservative doesn’t vote to extend amnesty to illegals, suppress free speech and vote against tax cuts.

[Califreak]

>Come out and say it publicly and make it clear that you are not simply making a political case for “anyone but McCain” but are also lobbying to preserve your livelihood.<

So what if they’re trying to protect their livelihood?

By doing so, they are also fighting for free speech.

It won’t just stop at talk radio, you know.

Once they get rid of talk radio as an alternative to the mass brainwashing known as MSM they will come after people like us on sites like this.

The only information we get will be what we’re allowed to get, in carefully measured, thoroughly sanitized doses. It won’t be much different than what MSM gives us now, but we will have no other means of obtaining information.

Information is power. They are always holding back on us in order to render us powerless.

[bonehead4freedom]

McCain has an R after his name only to give cover to the Democrats,he caucuses more with Ted Kennedy and Russ Fingold the two biggest liberals in the senate then with any conservatives. He's the spitting image of jump’en Jim Jeffords.Romney is a typical northeastern Rino,and the Huckster is a big nanny stater who wants to decide how you should live your life,all of them want "immigration reform".The Republicans in congress are no better since they want to increase spending and and taxes.I'm tired of the "were your only choice Mr.Conservative take it or leave it where else are you gonna go?"I'm gonna vote for a real conservative and if you're not then I've got a feeling that the 3rd party movement it's going to be a whole lot stronger!

[Emmett McCarthy]

I do agree that Hannity looked like a stupid high school cheerleader in his support of Guiliani. The rest is some kind of effort to minimize and marginalize conservatives or try to force us to vote for the “Democrat Nominee for Republican Presidential Candidate”.

[Antoninus]

McCain-Feingold, NCLB, and Medicare pt D were the three colossal errors of GWB’s first term.

But people would still vote for Bush, and the conservative media still generally support him, whereas they are ferociously against McCain.

There's a certian amount of cognitive dissonance there that must have a source that we're not consdering. This article proposes a source.

[Antoninus]

So what if they’re trying to protect their livelihood?

They have every right to do so. But they should be up-front about it and not pretend to do so for other reasons. And that, in effect, would make them just another lobbying group.

By doing so, they are also fighting for free speech.

Not exactly. They conservative media is as much about shaping perceptions as the liberal media. I'm glad they're out there because I think this is needed. But in this election cycle, where so-called conservative hosts were in the tank early and often for liberal losers like Rudy and Romney, it made me wonder if we really have much of a media presence at all that is truly conservative.

The only information we get will be what we’re allowed to get, in carefully measured, thoroughly sanitized doses.

Exactly--like what we get when Hugh Hewitt talks about any candidate other than Mitt Romney.

As I said above, the conservative media has shown itself to be more media than conservative in this election cycle. Their latest attempt to stampede their audiences into Romney's camp is simply disgraceful--and an insult to our intelligence.

[Antoninus]

I've got a feeling that the 3rd party movement it's going to be a whole lot stronger!

The scary thing is, Ron Paul might actually have a shot if it's Paul vs. Romney/McCain vs. Hillary in the general. And I might actually cast my vote for him....

[Antoninus]

I do agree that Hannity looked like a stupid high school cheerleader in his support of Guiliani.

He and Hewitt have lost any cred they previously had with me. I find them both unlistenable anymore.

[Califreak]

>But in this election cycle, where so-called conservative hosts were in the tank early and often for liberal losers like Rudy and Romney, it made me wonder if we really have much of a media presence at all that is truly conservative.<

I still stand by my earlier statement, but am in total agreement with yours above. I was wondering the same thing.
How could they be conservative and push Rudy McRomneybee while Hunter and Thompson are in it?

Maybe they are pushing the “new conservatism” far more subtly than MSM. That would make them part of the problem.

But I am not relying on their statements when making decisions.

The only reason I am thinking of Mitt at this time is simply because I don’t want McCain to get the nomination. I don’t feel like I can go with Huckabee, because he may wind up with McCain. Ron Paul is right about a lot of things, but where he’s wrong, he’s really wrong!

So I feel kind of stuck with Mitt.

If it wasn’t so close, I would probably write in.