Posted on 05/09/2008 2:58:08 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
I consider it a banner day when I can render my friend Ann Coulter speechless.
The wonderful conservative warrior was a guest on my radio show this week (Ann is one of the best guests in the business) and I hit her with something so wild, so preposterous, and so outrageous, that she just, well, stayed silent for a few seconds.
After a long pause, she laughed and said, “You know, he’s just stupid enough that he might do it!”
The “he” in question is Sen. John McCain. Ms. Coulter has made no secret of her total and utter disdain for the GOP presidential candidate. To many diehard conservatives, Sen. McCain is that horror of horrors, a Republican with enough moderate tendencies as to attract people to him who might not ordinarily vote for a Republican.
So I thought I’d have some fun by sharing with her a prediction that one of my radio callers made earlier that day.
When the caller, Tim from Atlanta, first suggested it to me, I had virtually the same reaction as Ann. I was stunned.
“Mike”, he started. “Something came to me last night while I was watching the TV coverage of the primaries in Indiana and North Carolina. I was wondering just who John McCain might pick as a running mate and it hit me like a ton of bricks: I predict that after Hillary is finally forced out of the race, McCain will shock the world and pick Hillary Clinton as his vice-presidential candidate!”
Think about that for a minute. “McCain/Clinton 2008.”
After I pulled myself off the floor and sat back down in my chair, I asked Tim from Atlanta how that idea could possibly have any merit.
“It’s simple”, he replied. “The media keeps beating the drum about bi-partisan cooperation in Washington in order to get things done. People continue to harp about being tired of all this bickering and politicking and fighting. McCain is well known for wanting to reach across the aisle and work with Democrats – who could forget McCain/Feingold – and it’s pretty much understood that Madame Hillary would do just about anything to get back to the White House,” he said. “A McCain/Clinton ticket would be virtually unstoppable!”
The only thing stopping right now is the beating of my heart at the prospect of such a nightmare.
But his prediction demonstrates just how loopy this entire campaign cycle has become. It also reinforces the heartburn and headaches that many of us Republicans are experiencing as we get nearer and nearer to the general election.
Writer David Frum believes that John McCain is possibly the perfect GOP candidate in an ever-changing country. Frum, a daily contributor to National Review Online and best-selling author, thinks it’s a huge mistake for us to pine for the days of Ronald Reagan-era conservatism. He argues that a successful Republican presidential candidate will be the sort of person who demonstrates unshakable integrity, a willingness to shake off some of the previous conservative orthodoxies, and can challenge and even disagree with some of the cultural philosophies that helped define the Reagan Revolution. Frum makes the case that a successful GOP candidate will be the one who returns to fiscal conservatism, reigning in out-of-control spending, even if he or she wanders off the reservation over an issue like illegal immigration.
That view, of course, is heresy to a rock-ribbed conservative like Ann Coulter. In fact, when I asked her about Frum’s arguments, she chortled and admonished me to stop asking her about people like David Frum “who aren’t real conservatives.”
I greatly admire the torchbearers of conservatism like Ann and Rush Limbaugh and others who believe that the real peril is in Republicans even considering moving one inch to the center.
But David Frum is a smart guy, too. He makes a compelling case that if the GOP has any chance of retaining power in D.C., the party should realize that this isn’t our father’s Republican Party anymore. Instead of hearing all the supposed stories of Republican voters willing to support Barack Obama (a bizarre concept that I still can’t understand), why not produce a GOP candidate that Independents and even Democrats can support?
He seems to think McCain might be that guy.
Whichever point of view you endorse, it seems pretty evident that as Sen. McCain prepares to gear up for a full scale battle during the next six months, the Republican Party is at a crossroads.
Let’s hope Sen. McCain doesn’t choose to cross the road hand-in-hand with Sen. Clinton.
That’s a funny picture.
I imagine McCain looks like just about anybody that has had the misfortune of having to sit next to kerry for any more than 5 minutes.
And kerry just completely oblivious to it.
SOMEBODY is going to walk into the White House on January 20, and run this country for four years. The options may suck, but let’s at least make the lesser of two evils less evil.
Not fing likely.
BUT...
What’s scary is that so many of us, while doubting the possibility, do not dismiss the concept immediately.
i am more of a scorched earth type of guy
I certainly understand & sympathize with the idea.
Unfortunately, I have to live on that earth.
Dude...not gonna happen. Ann and Mike have lost it.
If McCain thought he really could do this without any conservatives voting for him, he wouldn’t have made the CPAC speech, among other things. Looks like his strategy is to make up for the general anti-GOP feelings in the elctorate by giving every group something to like or even just tolerate about him that they won’t accept in his opponent. So, somebody like me votes for him because of the war, the judges and the health care plan, and a union worker in Ohio votes for him because he’s a moderate and a known quantity and Obama is an unknown quantity who likes to do stuff like tell Planned Parenthood reps that we should start sex ed in kindergarten.
That’s my theory, anyway. We’ll see how it plays out.
Ouch! That’s a direct hit!
Won’t happen. But it doesn’t make a difference if it does. McCain is still at the top of the ticket. He doesn’t believe in smaller, less intrusive government, so no sale.
Ever wonder why McCain helped seal files from Viet Nam era MIA’s?
If his daddy hadn’t been an admiral he would not have graduated from flight school.
We have three unacceptable candidates; voting for one because he is the least rancid POS is still unacceptable.
He has already shown contempt for conservative values and conservative politics. And you want to vote for him?
Odd how people are finding excuses to vote for McCain when there were several better candidates that people found excuses not to vote for.
The lesser of two evils will likely get more evil.
The greater of evils really can’t get much worse.
Voting for the lesser of two evils can only get you evil.
You vote for evil and you deserve what you get.
At first I thought Ann Coulter had finally gone over the top (even for me), but then, upon further thought, I realized this is MacCain she’s talking about and from his previous history, it’s clear he’s whacky enough to pull some 5h!+ like this.
“After all, your stupid enough to campaign for her.”
Hell, McBackstabber ENDORSED her.
I've read McCain's books and I doubt that you are speaking from a wealth of knowledge on this subject, so go to your local library and stock up. McCain never toots his own horn about the Hanoi Hilton, you can see an extensive interview with Col. Bud Day about that on FNC. Just incredible! Please watch, if for nothing more than to enrich your life.
I read “Faith of My Fathers” when it first came out, way before presidential politics took hold. You will swallow all of your bile against McCain once you read the raw account of what happened to him during his time in capture.
If you don't want to believe McCain, then believe Col. Bud Day and his account of their time at the NNA prison camp. He video recorded his account to FNC’s Carl Cameron. He's telling the truth when he talks about the character of the man. A true hero, someone who went beyond “extraordinary means”, someone with the strength and grit to outlast the most deviant of oppressors, the man who could have gotten out but didn't....how much more do you need to know?????
, um yeah, tons of that...
I would be more interested in McCain’s books if he had actually written them. So, he’s a war hero. NOT enough qualification for president since that’s all he’s got.
Mark Salter wrote his books. http://nymag.com/news/politics/encyclopedia/trustedadvisor/
Here’s some McCain military logic....he wanted ground troops in Kosovo.
‘’Many Republicans have criticized the Democrat president for a failure of resolve over the Kosovo crisis and in other earlier foreign policy crises like Bosnia and Iraq.Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who spent more than five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, insists the United States should be preparing its troops for a ground war in case that option became necessary.McCain was one of a number of members of Congress travelling to Brussels and Aviano, Italy with Defense Secretary William Cohen in the next three days to meet top NATO leaders and visit U.S. forces involved in the operations.
http://www.alb-net.com/kcc/index24-1.htm
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who spent more than five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, insists the United States should be preparing its troops for a ground war in case that option became necessary.McCain was one of a number of members of Congress travelling to Brussels and Aviano, Italy with Defense Secretary William Cohen in the next three days to meet top NATO leaders and visit U.S. forces involved in the operations.
http://www.alb-net.com/kcc/index24-1.htm
March 25, 1999
‘’These bombs are not going to do the job,’’ said Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Republican who was a naval pilot in the Vietnam War. ‘’It’s almost pathetic. You’re just going to solidify the determination of the Serbs to resist a peace agreement.
‘’You’d have to drop the bridges and turn off the lights in Belgrade to have even a remote chance of changing Milosevic’s mind,’’ he said. ‘’What you’ll get is all the old Vietnam stuff, bombing pauses, escalation, negotiations, trouble.’’
Mr. McCain, who is expected to announce his candidacy for President next month, said the Administration was caught with unpalatable alternatives — bombing, which he said ‘’has never worked without ground forces,’’ and the use of ground forces, which he said had little support on Capitol Hill or in the nation as a whole.
“In our current structure conservatives have no voice. Think about it. “
This is no accident.
When John Draper wrote a book on President Bush last year, he focused on a number of areas involving Daschle. Most relevant today is the assessment of the political connection between Daschle and McCain and the mention of a Daschle visit to McCain’s Arizona ranch.
Daschle’s objective, wrote Draper: “To see if perhaps he could make an honest Democrat out of him (McCain). Depending on which staff you believed, Daschle either came very close to succeeding or never had a chance to begin with. Nonetheless, the flirtation did not go unnoticed by the White House.”
When reviewing the book, I asked Daschle about Draper’s comments.
“It is true that we were once close to bringing John McCain into the caucus. There are many who can verify that,” Daschle said.
http://argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080208/COLUMNISTS0102/802080318/1157/VOICES08
“We are not Europe or Israel.
We have only two parties. There are other trivial wannabe’s but they are not really of any real significance. In the Presidential race there are three choices.... Republican, Democrat or trash your vote.”
And that was NEVER the way it was meant to be, was it, bert?
Well? Is that what our Constitution and founding fathers had in mind...2 party (really one) rule? Not hardly.
There is no evidence there was anything against a two party system. To say otherwise is balderdash.
They did not have anything much in mind except balancing the rights of the small colonies to the large ones.
The two party system evolved because it provides what the Constitution requires. It meets the Constitutional requirements because it allows the States to set the rules.
“There is no evidence there was anything against a two party system. To say otherwise is balderdash.”
____________________
Give it up, bert. The two party system (any ‘party’ system) we have is ugly and dangerous. The founders used the ‘factions’ to describe them, which is more correct.
First read this: The Debate on the Constitution, Library of America, 1993.
Page 404, James Madison (no, I’m not going to transcribe it all for you!)
“.....the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties”
A quote from George Washington’s final presidential address in 1796:
“To the efficacy and permanency of your union a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliances, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute.......I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged.....”
Source: J.D. Richardson, ed., Compilation of Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol.1 (1907), 213.
Yes, thank you.
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.