I agree on the judges. Just yesterday, USA Today had a long article on the incredible impact of Reagan's judges. So I don't take that lightly.
However . . . although McCain has said he would appoint "conservative judges like Alito and Roberts," do we have any proof? The optimist in me says, he helped get all but three of Bush's judges confirmed through his little "Gang of 14." But the pessimist in me says, "he's screwing us on everything else. Why would this be different?" And moreover, NO judge who is conservative can possibly get by the Dem Senate McCain will face. If Reagan could not get a Bork confirmed, I find it unlikely McCain will get Jones or one of the other staunch conservatives confirmed. Instead, I suspect what we would get would be liberal RINO judges that McCain can get confirmed with a wink and a nod.
J.C. Watts says, "What's down in the well will come up in the bucket." We know what's in McCain's well. I'm afraid when the chips are down, it will come up in his bucket.
Yeah, but RINOs are better than Ginsbergs aren’t they?
And what about Iraq? With McCain we win, with Obama we lose. That’s HUGE. And I don’t see how we could later redeem the damage done. After 4 years of Carter, it was pretty easy to pick up the pieces. Just lower taxes, increase military spending, etc. These were internal matters that could be corrected through legislation. But how do we pick up the pieces when Iraq implodes and Iran rushes in, and the world sees that we don’t have the stomach to finish what we’ve started? We would never undo the damage. A failure in Iraq would dog us forever.
And healthcare? With Obama we get socialized care, which is a huge win for the Left. Frankly I worry less about the practical implications than the philosophical ones. Once people have accepted the premise that the government is responsible for ensuring their health, well, that’s just very bad for a nation founded on the notion of individual liberty and responsibility. Once we’ve ceded that premise, there’s probably no getting it back. And once healthcare is socialized, it’ll never be reversed. We may get a Republican back in office in 2012 or 2016 but we won’t get our healthcare system back.
McCain is a disappointment on global warming but global warming will ultimately be self-refuting, so the damage he does will not be permanent. The warming trends won’t pan out like the demagogues need them to and the whole thing will fizzle. As an issue it will be self-correcting, and resulting policy will be reversible. It’s not a one-way ratchet like these other things.
Immigration policy is also reversible. McCain might blow it but the next real conservative to come along can change course. Bad immigration policy can have very real bad effects but it’s not a ratchet.
Bottom line in my opinion is that lesser-of-two-evils type choices are the norm in politics. Providence gave us Reagan and Thatcher (and a great Pope) at just the right moment but that is not the norm. Most of the time you muddle through, and in 2008 it makes the most sense to muddle through with McCain. He has qualities that are irritating as hell, but he’s an honorable man who loves his country and has a basic conservative core.
That core orientation is critical because it guides a president when the sh*t really hits the fan. Consider Dubya Bush. He’s no pure conservative but he’s got the core, and as such he knew what to do when the terrorists attacked. We don’t know what might come up in the next 4 or 8 years, but we know that in a broad sense, McCain wouldn’t fumble it the way Obama inevitably would.
And remember this LS — unlike Obama who is basically a Christian-flavored agnostic, McCain is a Christian. He is also strongly and consistently pro life. In fact, this is reason to think that McCain might actually try to appoint conservatives to SCOTUS. If he is sincere about life, which he seems to be, it will be a real factor in his SCOTUS choices.