Posted on 02/13/2007 8:37:03 AM PST by meg88
McCain faces fight for the right David Reinhard Portland Oregonian February 12, 2007
When successful Republican presidential candidates talk about their base, they're usually talking about the GOP's social conservatives. When Arizona Sen. John McCain talks about his base, he's referring to the mainstream media.
Which helps explain two things. One, why McCain was not a successful Republican presidential candidate eight years ago. Two, why he's taken steps over the last few years to get right with the religious right.
Will it work? As Democrats cogitate over Barack Obama's challenge to front-runner Hillary Clinton, will the new McCain complicate matters for the old McCain and threaten his front-runner status among Republicans?
Advertisement
For most successful candidates, politics is about addition, not subtraction. This presidential campaign, however, McCain is involved in something of a zero-sum game. Securing a traditional GOP base could come at the expense of losing his old media base.
In 2000, his admirers in the mainstream media loved the tough-talking war hero of "Straight Talk Express." The Arizona maverick opposed George Bush and famously railed against "agents of intolerance" like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and other conservative religious leaders. Since then, he's been a conquering hero of Jon Stewart and "The Daily Show," a Republican worthy of puff-ball questioning. But McCain has committed two unpardonable sins in the eyes of the media clerisy. He has backed Bush's Iraq war to the hilt and gone out of his way to make up with Falwell and religious conservatives. Sacre bleu!
McCain's wooing of GOP social conservatives has not been pretty to watch. And, if recent developments are any guide, the effort might prove unproductive.
Recently, perhaps the most influential Christian conservative gave McCain a stiff-bristled brushoff. "Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances," said Focus on the Family's James Dobson in a radio interview. "He is not in favor of traditional marriage, and I pray that we will not get stuck with him."
McCain's alleged opposition to traditional marriage would probably astonish the most determined McCain watcher. Didn't he, after all, favor a traditional marriage measure that was on the Arizona ballot last November? Why, yes, he did. But right before Dobson let loose, his radio-show host had run a clip of McCain telling "Hardball" host Chris Matthews, "I think, uh ... I think that gay marriage should be allowed if there's a ceremony kind of thing, if you wanna call it that. ... I don't have any problem with that."
McCain had, indeed, uttered the same words before an Iowa State University crowd last fall, but – well, isn't there always a but? A quotation yanked out of context or something said in humor is treated seriously. In this case, "but" only highlights McCain's problem courting the GOP's traditional-values base.
In the same sentence that Dobson's radio interviewer found so damning, McCain had appended his own but: "But I do believe in preserving the sanctity of the union between man and woman." Yes, it made for an illogical sentence, and McCain and his handler realized they had a damage-control problem. After the next break, a student asked about a farm issue and McCain answered it. But before moving to the next question he said, "Could I just mention one other thing? On the issue of the gay marriage, I believe if people want to have private ceremonies, that's fine. I do not believe that gay marriages should be legal."
McCain is a moderate at best. He has forgotten where he has come from, like all the other career politicians.
Goldwater was pro-gay too. Had a gay grandson, if I remember correctly. And like McCain, Goldwater didn't support a federal ban on gay relationships.
I will not support McCain in primary or general.
If he's the nominee or the VP, I will write in Hunter/Tancredo/Gingrich/(even)Giuliani.
The man has done all he can to undermine Pres. Bush; he has been anti-free speech; he has been anti-evangelical; he lied about Bush's statement that the war would be long and hard; and he is anti-family.
The media likes him.
That tells me all I need to know.
you forgot that great head of hair.
As soon as McCain gives the Aye vote for amnesty it'll be time for the fork. The non-senate candidates are thankful they won't have to stick their necks out like he will have to.
That's because Hunter has a great head of hair too, so that wouldn't count.
The "Gang of 14" was the straw that broke the third camel's back with me.
SEN. JOHN McCAIN: THE ULTIMATE "RHINESTONE HERO"
SEN. JOHN McCAIN: THE ULTIMATE "RHINESTONE HERO" Part II
U.S. Sen. John McCain is no War Hero
John McCain: The Manchurian Candidate
McCain Is Booed by Labor Activists
McCain Rides to Kerry's Rescue: "John Kerry is Not Weak on Defense" (Today Show alert)
John McCain SCREAMS AT 9/11 FSA MEMBERS FOR OPPOSING HIS BILL TO GIVE AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS
A number of articles on McCain. (some the same as above)
McCain/Soros by Rabbi Areyh Spero
Soros' "Reform" (an article about Soros‘ instrumental hand in McCain/Feingold)
Not Child‘s Play [McCain/Schumer bill could effect FR?]
McCain's Letter (McCain aligns with Global Enviro activists)
The Turning Point on Global Warming (McCain and Lieberman Op-Ed Alert)
McCain Looked into Caucusing with Democrats
Climate bill sets stage for debate (Sens. McCain, Obama, and Lieberman join forces)
McCain Still Disliked by Fiscal Conservatives (Club For Growth)
John McCain Goes Left for Money
Sens. Snowe, Collins to head Maine exploratory committee for McCain
No they caved to polling, spending and liberals to MAKE themselves more appealing.....and got their asses handed to them this past fall! I don't see how Dobson is "bullying" anyone! He won't support McCain, because McCain can't be trusted with anything he says or does.
"I would hope that our country has moved on beyond the religious bigotry that plagued JFK's run."
Mitt, as a Mormon Bishop, believes he is on a path to becoming God of his own planet. If questioning whether scientologists, Moonies, Santerians, Wiccans etc. is valid, I see no reason not to question whether someone who believes they are a God-in-the-making shouldn't also be questioned.
What you call religious bigotry is really your simple minded way of saying no one's religion matters and that no one believes in what they say they believe in. That is so preposterous as to be laughable.
If religious bigotry is bad, then certainly you will vote for me because in my religion I believe I'm God Almighty and demand you annoint me President!
We will have to agree to disagree.
For all the "social conservatives longing for the good old days, I offer this bit of researh on our two foremost icons.
These two would fail to pass muster today, just like the frontrunners.
REAGAN:
Reagan publicly demonstrated this outlook when he opposed Proposition 6, a 1978 ballot measure that called for the dismissal of California teachers who "advocated" homosexuality, even outside of schools. Reagan used both a September 24, 1978, statement and a syndicated newspaper column to campaign against the initiative.
"Whatever else it is," Reagan wrote, "homosexuality is not a contagious disease like the measles. Prevailing scientific opinion is that an individual's sexuality is determined at a very early age and that a child's teachers do not really influence this." He also argued: "Since the measure does not restrict itself to the classroom, every aspect of a teacher's personal life could presumably come under suspicion. What constitutes 'advocacy' of homosexuality? Would public opposition to Proposition 6 by a teacher — should it pass — be considered advocacy?"
That November 7, Proposition 6 lost, 41.6 percent in favor to 58.4 percent against. Reagan's opposition is considered instrumental to its defeat.
"Despite the urging of some of his conservative supporters, he never made fighting homosexuality a cause," wrote Kenneth T. Walsh, former U.S. News and World Report White House correspondent, in his 1997 biography, Ronald Reagan. "In the final analysis, Reagan felt that what people do in private is their own business, not the government's."
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200312030913.asp
GOLDWATER:
Living in Arizona after retiring from the Senate, he continued to speak out on public issues and to preach his own brand of conservatism.
"A lot of so-called conservatives today don't know what the word means," he told the Los Angeles Times in a 1994 interview. "They think I've turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That's a decision that's up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the religious right. It's not a conservative issue at all."
During the 1990s, Mr. Goldwater spoke out in favor of allowing gays to serve in the military, and he worked in Phoenix to end job discrimination against gays. In 1994, he became honorary chairman of a drive to pass a federal law preventing job discrimination against gays.
"The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they're gay," he said. "You don't have to agree with it, but they have a constitutional right to be gay. And that's what brings me into it."
from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/goldwater30.htm
"If conservatives don't unite behind the most electable of those three--"
Okay. It is your assignment to herd all of the conservatives to share the same view.
Kinda like herding cats.
That's what irks me the most about social "conservatives". People like James Dobson act like they own the GOP, and that they're the true conservatives. That is a huge insult to true conservatives, especially those who fought so hard to fight liberalism in the GOP, only to now be losing to a different kind of liberalism.
He threatens to withhold votes for the GOP if they're not in lock-step with his insane, un-conservative agenda. In their attempts to accomidate him, the GOP moves both further away from conservatism and further away from the general electorate. The types of voters that Dobson corrals are the same ones who are continuing to infect the GOP with their big government, big spending ways. These are the types of people who think that Tom DeLay is somehow conservative. Many are former Democrats who don't like to pay taxes, but still want the government to take care of them.
On a side note, don't mistake me for a supporter of McCain - he's the co-author of the campaign finance boondoggle that bears his name, and record on guns is wishy-washy. I dislike him even more now that he's attempting to cozy up to the Christian Right.
You have hit the nail on the head. As an active member of the GOP in Texas, we are constantly being bullied, threatened by the social conservatives. They moan and bitch about Kay Bailey Hutchison and threaten to walk out if she is allowed to speak.
I loathe Dobson also ever since I heard him say, if the GOP does not pay attention to his agenday, "Then I am going to walk and take as many as I can with me." Disgusting and Armey was right when he called him a bulley.
You put together my thoughts exactly about the direction of the party. To me this was another mistake Reagan made--becoming to friendly with the Christian Right.
"People like James Dobson act like they own the GOP, and that they're the true conservatives."
Here is what fascinates me:
You would think that what I posted would get a flurry of responses. It doesn't.
I posted the same thing a couple of days ago on a busy thread. Zip. Nadda. Stunned silence.
Truth be told, the religious right were latecomers to conservatism. They used to be democrats, until Republicans became competitive in the South.
Conservatism was a product of people like Milton Friedman. And Goldwater and Reagan. Social libertarians, by today's standards.
With the quotes I posted, FR writers would decry them all as rinos and liberals, with their limited vocabularies. Actually just not Christian enough for them.
Then along comes Ted Haggard, prodigy of Dobson. Yet not even that renders him speechless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.