Et tu, Brute?
Posted on 02/02/2008 7:29:44 AM PST by Bubba_Leroy
I’ve given quite a bit of thought to that question this week because I happen to be one of those freaking out over the prospect of a McCain nomination.
Some cite McCain’s positions and past votes and say he is on the wrong side of too many issues, but the same can be said of George Bush. Why does McCain seem to ignite such emotion and strong opposition in so many? There are a lot of positions McCain has taken that have angered conservatives, to be sure. Opposition to the Bush tax cuts, McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform, Gang of 14, the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, global warming and drilling in ANWR are just a few.
The strong negative reaction from conservatives is not solely because of his positions on issues, though. The reason so many conservatives are concerned about the prospect of a McCain nomination and a McCain presidency has almost as much to do with the way McCain has taken the positions he has, as the positions themselves.
As I often tell my children when they get in trouble for talking back or giving me attitude, sometimes it is not what you say, but rather how you say it.
I was not happy about McCain’s opposition to the Bush tax cuts. As disappointed as I was with his vote, though, what really angered me was the "tax cuts for the rich" rhetoric he used to explain his opposition. I think it is horrible when Democrats play that class warfare game, but realize that many of them actually believe it and even those who don’t believe it know they need to say it because that is what their base wants to hear. It was hard for me to imagine any reason a true conservative would want to say such things. I still can't.
For many years McCain has displayed what appears to be a need for the love and acceptance of the media and Democrats. He often seemed to go out of his way to find fault with those in his own party in order to further cultivate his maverick persona. Instead of being a representative of the Republican party, or even of conservatism, he often emphasized his differences with others in the party and the movement, or allowed those in the media to do so for him.
I suspect many of those “freaking out” about McCain being the standard bearer for the Republican party have gone through the same progression I have over the past year.
McCain has been working hard for a year or so now to assure conservatives that he is one of them. His strong support for the war effort and the surge went a long way in making that case. He also softened his rhetoric against those in his own party. Over the summer I forgot many of the reasons I had opposed McCain as a presidential candidate. When he was down in the polls and did not appear likely to have a shot at the nomination, it was easy to forgive and forget.
When McCain started winning primaries and took the lead in the national polls, though, some of those reasons for my original opposition starting seeping back into my memory.
One of my earliest recollections of a negative reaction to McCain was in 2000 over what appeared to me to be a meltdown in South Carolina over “dirty tricks.” In 2000, going into the South Carolina primary, McCain ran a television ad accusing George Bush of “twisting the truth like Clinton,” while at the same time complaining about negative campaign tactics. I couldn't help but wonder how he would react to criticism and dirty campaign tactics from Democrats in a general election.
Comparing a fellow Republican to Bill Clinton back in 2000, knowing there was a good possibility that candidate would end up being the nominee and Democrats could use those words to discredit him, did not sit well with me at all. It led me to believe I could not trust McCain to do what was in the best interest of the party.
In 2001, speculation that McCain might change his party affiliation to switch the balance of power in the Senate only fueled that mistrust.
In 2004, McCain made his "dishonest and dishonorable" comment regarding the Swift Boat Vets. He sided with John Kerry, rather than with 250 plus Vietnam vets, including some fellow POWs. He didn't just say that he would have to look into the claims of the Swifties, or that he didn't know the specifics. No. He called the actions of those men "dishonest and dishonorable." Not only did he not apologize for that comment, but he reportedly entertained the idea of running with John Kerry.
I had put much of that out of my mind though. It is now 2008 and my desire to see Republicans retain control of the White House, and particularly to see a Republican commander in chief, seemed most important and polls repeatedly showed McCain the candidate most likely to beat a Democrat in November. The performance of McCain in the most recent debate, characterized by some as angry and sneering, along with what appear to be unfair attacks on Mitt Romney over the issue of a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, brought it all back – the temper I saw in 2000, the repeated high profile breaks with Republicans on big issues and the flirtations with Democrats about switching parties. Unlike some conservatives I am hearing from, I will vote for McCain in November if he is the nominee. Even for all his faults, McCain has many strengths and is vastly superior to Hillary or Obama. He has impressed me on the conference calls he has held frequently with bloggers where he has patiently and candidly answered any question put to him. Foreign policy/defense is one of my top issues, and I think McCain will be strong there.
It will take a lot to convince me that he can be trusted on issues important to conservatives, though, or even that he can be trusted to positively represent the party. He has built his entire political persona on showing how much he differs from Republicans and conservatives. That does not bode well for those wanting a White House that is more conservative than the current one.
Best line of the entire thread!
Wow,, I must have missed that! I've been following the news pretty closely for the past 20 years or more and I just completely missed McCain trying to assure conservatives he was one of us!
Was that before or after his attempt at removing our southern border and providing amnesty for illegals??
Maybe he was doing that just before he got the duct tape out with McCain/Feingold??
Could he have been acting sort of conservative that time he was sticking his middle finger in our eyes?? Remember?? That time he sort of blindsided us all and blocked the Senate with some other RINO's from overturning the rules that allowed Dems to keep blocking conservative judges to the courts???
Gosh,,, where did I miss this??!! Oh, I know,, I DIDN'T MISS IT!! CAUSE HE HASN'T DONE IT!!
McCain is unelectable for one reason everybody forgets.......the Keating Five.
Because, like an alcoholic that can’y admit his problem, he’s really a democrat.
He’s a dishonorable man who’s only concerned about himself. He, as president, will only be concerned with what the press thinks of him and his ultimate “legacy”. America’s interests will always be secondary. Just like his favorite historical figure, Napoleon, all decisions he will make will be for the advancement of John McCain and not America.
If he were to win the nomination, with those planks on hos own maverick platform, would set back conservatism by ten years. That's all.
Don't forget the part about cheating on his wife, then divorcing her. The wife that kept her disabling car accident a secret from him while he was a POW, because she didn't want him upset. The wife that he divorced for the woman he cheated on her with. How long do you think the media's going to keep quiet about THAT, if he gets the nomination?
Anyone who thinks McCain "deserves" to be President because of the 6 years suffering as a POW is not thinking it through. Sure, let's say he deserves a "reward" for being in danger's way. That's what being elected Senator was. Why does he now insist on a double reward? He's already been amply repaid. There are 300,000,000 Americans who can only dream of being a US Senator and a household name.
I have no intention of voting for someone with such deep-rooted narcissistic personality disorder.
This is the key point to remember. SOMEONE is going to be elected President in November. Half the country didn't want Bush in the first place and that number has grown significantly since 2004. Anyone who things a candidate that's even further to the Right can get elected in this climate is dreaming. McCain isn't a conservatives ideal, but would you REALLY rather see Hillary or Obama in the White House for 4, or most likely 8 years? C'mon!!!
I not sure of that. This country might be stronger than that as long as the Sheeple realize their big mistake. We have been down before.
Simple. McCain was a junior Senator who was caught in a huge scandal. He was toast unless he could build a new image. If he were a strong conservative, the press would butcher him. He realized he could coddle the media by becoming the "Republican who was Anti-Republican and Pro-Democrat."
He became a national treasure to the media, and they rebuilt his name under a new mantle--independent, strong, principled, blah, blah.
Of couse, once it's him agaist the dim, it will be a new story. His friends in the media will dredge it all up and the ignorant dummies who ar now voting for McCain won't be able to recognize him in this new and very negative light.
Finally, when the inevitable spit and sputter melt down of McCain occurs, that will be an enduring image for Republicns who made him their nominee.
1. Waterboarding - Empirically, this has been an extremely valuable way of extracting information on pending attacks and has probably saved countless American lives.
2. Closure of Gitmo - This would lead to premature release of terrorists whose religion compells them to pick up where they left off and kill us.
I would rather see the dems get in and stir up republicans in congress for four years before I would vote for this dangerous nutcase.
John Kerry, Russ Feingold and Hillary Clinton to name just three. There are many others. Don’t forget he was the only Republican member of the Keating 5.
Because I hate his freakin guts and will sit at home rather than vote for him or hillary.
Et tu, Brute?
I can nearly forgive the man for all of his foolish transgressions, but I simply cannot convince myself to elect a man that is such an arrogant ass. Every single time I hear him open his mouth in debates I think of him as a five letter word that ends with RICK.
Keating five.
There's always SOMEONE to vote for. In 1960, my then-Baptist mother voted for the Prohibition candidate (whose name she doesn't even remember) rather than vote for either a Republican or a Catholic. Dad voted for the Republican because the only thing worse WAS a Catholic.
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.