The Right Is Wrong on McCain

The Wall Street Journal ^ | February 9, 2008 | Robert McFarlane

[TenYearLurker]

There's an old Groucho Marx riff in which he launches a new career as a stick-up artist -- while worrying that his native cowardice may not induce the requisite fear among his victims. Sure enough, after a little time in a dark alley he springs out to confront his first victim, points his gun to his own head and says, "Take one step closer and I'll kill myself."

Such is the posture today among pundits on the far right of the Republican Party as Sen. John McCain moves closer to receiving his party's nomination. Consider the destructive implications of their pledge to work against Mr. McCain's nomination and even -- in the event he is nominated -- not to vote in the general election. Start with where it would leave our country -- presumably under the leadership of either Democrat candidate -- in the two domains where we will face critical challenges in the years ahead: our national security and the threat of an economic meltdown.

>snip

[RavenATB]

“50 million Mexicans added to our population in the next 10 years will turn the US into a third world country. “

Yes, and isn’t that ugly... However, you must remember that about 30-40 percent of those illegals will be women, and they’ll have babies.

Illegal females are currently dropping an average of 3.1 children each. If you figure 40 percent of those 50 million illegals will drop 3.1 kids each, thats another 62 million spawned from illegals, bringing the population of US “citizens” who gained their status as the result of a crime to about 112 million in the next generation, making them the largest single voting block in the US.

So don’t worry about us becoming a 3rd world country in 10 years...it won’t last for long. In two generations we won’t be the US at all.

[jan in Colorado]

Not that you will take any advice from me, after insulting me last night,(after one of my rants), but one suggestion for you McCain supporters would be to back off and let us vent. With McCain getting WAY less than 50 per cent support, and most of it coming from liberals and independents, many conservatives are very angry, frustrated and mad as h***. We need some time to vent, and figure out what we are going to do.

Being lectured to or criticized and called names, certainly doesn't help the situation one bit.

Reading that you have family fighting this war, I can certainly see how the decision for you was an easy one. But for many of us, we feel betrayed by our Party and you don't just get over that in a day or week or even a month.

If you want to help McCain, maybe it would be a good idea to stop throwing flame on the fire.

Thanks.

[lmr]

You basically just told this person that no matter what anyone shows you regarding McCain or his potential opponent, that you weren't going to be convinced that McCain is the lesser of 2 evils.

It's occurred to me that the level of defeatism is just getting worse with some people. You want the country to embrace Conservatism and your Conservative principles overnight?

Well, the fact is, we Conservatives don't even form a plurality in this country and we are even less effective when we are divided.

I don't like McCain-Kennedy, it's a stinker, for sure. I have said time and again that most Conservatives would find McCain acceptable if not for this.

I think I am right.

Republican moderates and conservatives who have been supporting McCain are being treated like crap, especially here on FR. Some of them haven't even been given as much politeness or levity as we do some DU trolls.

These people, many of them Conservative are already starting to feel like reaching out is impossible with some of their counterparts because of stubbornness and unreasonableness. They also feel like they are being pushed aside by people they thought were friends.

I don't care if you vote for McCain, but you shouldn't be so close-minded as to say that 'I am not going to listen to what you have to say, no matter what it is YOU CAN'T CONVINCE ME, and it's ok for Conservatives to treat you like a red-headed step-kid.'

Don't think for a second that these people, I among them, will forget how our 'Fellow Conservatives' have treated us. You are doing more damage than you realize. Your impatience and insistence on the perfect Conservative giving you the perfect country right after the election and stepping on all of those that you believe oppose that idea, which is now unattainable is suicide for the cause of Conservatism.

At least you kept your principles. Among these principles includes the fact that you and many Conservatives like you, refuse to work through this imperfect system because it doesn't acheive the perfect result you think it should.

[RavenATB]

“I thought he pretty much already did that with his “I got the message / secure the borders first.””

You’ve got to be kidding?

Secure the borders first...before what? Amnesty?

McCain was dancing around the issue trying to evade the true message. It wasn’t the border fence people were truly angry and calling Congress about. It was AMNESTY.

A small fine followed by the opportunity to gain US citizenship is sill amnesty. The value of US citizenship will always be far greater than any financial penalty the government could exact from an illegal. In other words, citizenship, even if it follows a fine, will represent a net gain, not a penalty. Such a government program is still amnesty.

I’n not interested in McCain promising to close the border after we’ve already allowed the invasion. I want the illegals out...forever!

[ApplegateRanch]

So, we can just ignore the ideological positions and policies of the presidential candidates and vote for the one that we like the most?

Did you really mean to ask that question the way you wrote it?

If so, then the answer is, "yes."

In the end, you always do that. Or, you don't vote.

Guess that's the difference between a Lib and a Conservative. I've voted many times for people I did NOT like, because I DID agree with their positions.

Feelings be damned. Conservatives think; Libs "feel". Thanks for finally fully outing yourself.

[LibLieSlayer]

It was a reference to ahnolds phrase from the 2004 Republican Convention and a word used by Rush to describe men who have been castrated by “inside the beltway, pc dominated attitudes”... usually members of the DC press and government.

LLS

[Racehorse]

Yawn.

[Nuc1]

Now that IS funny!

[mylife]

There has been precious little to smile about in this election. :0)

[Radix]

"My first post.'

It is a doozie. You were better appreciated while you were lurking.

[TenYearLurker]

Well! Thanks for the welcomes!
I posted the article because:
(a) It was interesting
(b) It hadn’t been posted.
No, I’m not a shill for McCain. My first and second presidential choices dropped out. Very disappointing. I will vote for the candidate that I think will best protect the country from (unnamed) foreign religious fanaticism, whoever I decide that is in November. I went through many years of Political Purity voting Libertarian, and it didn’t do a bit of good.

And I was away from my computer in order to get some things done. Can’t be glued to FR the whole day!

Yes, I really have been out here since the days of Monica.

Regards to all,

[LadyNavyVet]

“I stand by my original assertion: John McCain as POTUS would be an imminent threat to the U.S.A. as we know it.
Somewhere in what I’ve written above I hope comes the rejoinder that what you assert is impossible. It presumes unchecked powers he simply wouldn’t have.
And if he circumvented the will of the Party, say by executive order or administrative powers (i.e., allocation of resouces) or an unwillingness to use his veto against Democratic legislation, I doubt the party would be there to support and finance a second term.”

McCain would wield power that few Presidents have, by virtue of being a nominal member of one party while ideologically aligned with the other. Republicans wouldn’t fight the POTUS of their own party, not if they wanted to keep their political careers. Democrats wouldn’t fight McCain, at least not much, because they ideologically support most of what he wants to do anyway.

Because he is philosophically a Democrat while wearing the label of a Republican, McCain would be a uniquely powerful and therefore uniquely dangerous. He would be able to do far more lasting and significant damage than either Hillary or Obama, because one party would fight them, while no party would fight him. Add to that the fact that McCain is old and sick and probably doesn’t have eight years in him, and there is virtually no check on him. He can do almost anything he likes because he literally has nothing to lose.

If McCain wins, we will have effectively lost the two party system. With so many RINOS in power already, we are dangerously close to losing it now. With four years of McCain, the transformation of the parties into “totally socialist” and “slightly less than totally socialist” will be complete, and there will be no party left that even gives lip service to the Constitutional foundations upon which this country was based.

I, for one, will not be a part of that, and I think it is childish and shortsighted for any conservative to do so just to get a win in the “R” column in November.

[Nuc1]

So true.

[Racehorse]

I, for one, will not be a part of that, and I think it is childish and shortsighted for any conservative to do so just to get a win in the “R” column in November.

Do you believe we will fare just well or better with an Obama or Clinton Presidency than we would with a McCain Presidency, with regard to national security, military operations in Iraq and the War on Terror in general?

For me, it is not just about the "R" in the win column.

[billmor]

"... With McCain getting WAY less than 50 per cent support, and most of it coming from liberals and independents, many conservatives are very angry, frustrated and mad as h***. We need some time to vent, and figure out what we are going to do...." Jan

Took the words right outta my head...Righto ! we do need time to figure things out...I wasted my vote here in Fla because of the chaos, voted for a person who is against every ideal i believe in as a blocking vote..We want a candidate we can vote FOR and not AGAINST...

[jan in Colorado]

We want a candidate we can vote FOR and not AGAINST...

Exactly. I guess a brokered convention is our best chance!

Republicans that still get to vote, need to protest McCain and vote for Ron Paul, unless they are Huckabee supporters. Dr. Paul is the conservative, of the three that are remaining, so the best protest vote would be for Ron Paul!

[jan in Colorado]

.

Welcome TenYearLurker...it's about time!

If you've been lurking that long then the reaction to your post didn't surprise you one bit.

You have made a very big mistake though...

And I was away from my computer in order to get some things done. Can’t be glued to FR the whole day!

That is against the rules. You can't get anything else done...
you must FReep all day,all the time!

[LadyNavyVet]

First off, McCain has very little chance of winning, and that includes if every last Freeper votes for him. In a two party system, the other party is going to win once in awhile, and the Republicans are fighting Bush fatigue, an unpopular war and a worsening economy. Prepare yourself for Hillary or Obama and do what you can to get good conservatives elected downticket. We’re going to need every last one we can get.

I had a Democrat Commander-in-Chief. I didn’t like a lot of what he did, but I didn’t like a lot of what one of my Republican Commanders-in-Chief did, either. For that matter, I even had a few philosophical differences with the Gipper, who was, all in all, a fabulous CINC.

McCain wants to close Gitmo and bring the terrorists to our soil, stop waterboarding, bring our military tribunals in line with international law, and allow the International Criminal Court to try military members and CIA officers for war crimes. He is for open borders. Hillary and Obama agree with him on all these things. The difference is that the Republicans will fight Hillobama tooth and nail on these issues; they will not fight McCain.

McCain said we might stay in Iraq 100 years, but in the next breath said that that was only if none of the troops were injured or killed. That is, on several levels nonsensical. I have serious questions about his mental stability and temperament. I believe he might be in the early stages of senility. I do not think he is healthy enough and vigorous enough to be President.

Being a crummy pilot forty years ago does not mean McCain knows how to run a war today, but he will try to micromanage instead of leaving it to the experts. He’s that type. He already tried to do that with Rumsfeld, which is the basis of their mutual loathing. There is nothing worse that having a know it all dilettante dictating to the generals because he’s convinced he knows more than they do, and they have to do what he says.

All in all, I’d call it a wash.

[ChildOfThe60s]

As horrible as that sounds, it is a realistic assessment of what the amnesty bill version 2 is going to do to this country.

[calcowgirl]

EXCELLENT post, LVN--the whole thing. You nailed it!

I particularly liked this part which has been exemplified by Schwarzenegger over the past 5 years in California:

McCain would wield power that few Presidents have, by virtue of being a nominal member of one party while ideologically aligned with the other. Republicans wouldn’t fight the POTUS of their own party, not if they wanted to keep their political careers. Democrats wouldn’t fight McCain, at least not much, because they ideologically support most of what he wants to do anyway.