McCain and the Bitter Conservatives

American Thinker ^ | June 15, 2008 | Andrew Sumereau

[neverdem]

John McCain is clearly the preferable option for conservative voters come November. Although liberal in his views toward immigration, government intrusion in free speech, environmental issues, campaign finance reform, health care, education mandates, and a host of other issues that run contrary to conservative orthodoxy, McCain is solid on two (alas, two) vital issues that make the difference; spending and judges. From the frustration of eight years of a Republican Administration that began with so much hope and promise it pains one to say it, but there it is.

Against the prospects of a President Obama, McCain wins.

A victim of circumstances and timing in many ways, Senator McCain carries the sins of Bush and the free-spending Republicans into the 2008 election minus any counter balancing virtues. The coming election has an eerie deja-vu feeling. The Democrat nominee is young, glib, dare one say it, slick; beloved by a media most happy to shield him from criticism. He is facing a cranky old Republican Senator with visible war wounds, famous for his temper, and viewed with apprehension by the religious right.

In addition, John McCain is detested, and deservedly so, by many Republicans of all types. Beyond issue and policy differences, and they are legion, his personality grates. His conceit of "straight-talk" and "maverick"-like independence so superficially applauded (up until now) by the mainstream media is almost Clintonesque in its narcissism. If only other politicians had his courage, he implies, things would be fixed straightaway. The big special interests have all the other elected officials in their pockets. Only Maverick-John tells it like it is! Yet the truth is that McCain could serve well as poster boy of the arrogant elitist beltway insider, friend of Hillary and Ted, foe of the unwashed. The party habit of selecting the next in line (e.g. Dole) has rarely produced such an unappealing candidate at such a critical time. In many ways he reminds one of Adlai Stevenson, who famously frustrated his supporters with his holier-than-thou ways during two failed contests against the popular broad-smiling Ike.

Despite what will surely be the focus of McCain's campaign, foreign policy and experience will not decide this election for conservative voters. One may point to the war in Iraq as the defining issue come November and see a big advantage for McCain. Not necessarily so. History will decide the wisdom of our foreign policy over the last seven years, whether the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions were a legitimate response to the threat of organized terror, or the overreaction of predisposed warriors intent on using the events of 9/11 to democratize the Middle East.

It is clear, in the short term that a McCain administration will cling to the ongoing military effort. He is a very sure bet on a continuation of aggressive and largely unilateral foreign policy. But unlike domestic issues, Presidents, as Truman said, "ride the Tiger" in foreign affairs.  They are controlled by events and often forced into moves at odds with their original intentions. Bush came into office as a critic of nation building and yet leaves committed to the rebuilding of Iraq. Johnson's Great Society fell victim to his own escalation of the Vietnam War. Clinton sent troops to Haiti. As Chief Executive of the federal branch they must protect our borders and command the military by constitutional decree. Democrats, even Carter, have found that once in office the requirements and prerogatives of military power seldom are resisted.

On domestic issues it is no better. He is with Kennedy on education and immigration, with Fiengold on campaign finance, with Gore on the environment. For the committed conservative, he speaks and acts as Bush-lite without the few rhetorical bones thrown in for appearance's sake. Each day, it seems, he appears to make a pronouncement, or suggest a policy, or chastise an enthusiastic supporter, in order to please the main-stream media and send conservatives off wailing and gnashing their teeth.   

So the question of the day is how can a candidate that turns off a large portion of his base, who will most certainly be put on the defensive by a biased media, who appears old and uncool to the great unlettered new generation of voters, succeed?

"Front Porch" campaigns put several Republicans in the White House starting with Abraham Lincoln. In the good old days Presidential candidates found it undignified and unbecoming to campaign for votes all over the country. They let their surrogates and followers go through the unending exercises so necessary yet so unseemly in the election process. Incessant bragging, boasting, and cajoling, voicing hypocritical platitudes, and bribing voters with empty promises and spending sprees in search of Utopia was not the stuff of our Founding Fathers. McCain would benefit from a restoration of this practice but in the age of 24/7 cable news and Internet blogs this is not practical.

McCain must recognize that he has some substantial advantages, chiefly his opponent's weaknesses. Also, conservatives, though unhappy, will do the right thing for the country if only through a sense of duty. Further, experience and genuine heroism are good to have on your resume.

But McCain also must recognize the depth of conservative despondency. He will not win by giving his base a reason to stay home. Unlike liberals, conservatives have lives and interests outside politics that serve as outlets for the impulse to do good and improve the world. And they are angry and demoralized, make no mistake.

For many voters and activists, thirty years of hard work in the conservative fields has produced a bitter harvest of uncontrolled spending, judicial legislation, preposterous congressional pork barrel earmarks, uncontrolled borders, and arrogance.

McCain is in a fight against the manufactured illusions of "hope" and history.  He needs every vote he can manage. Before he once again decides to berate conservatives, propose liberal policies, befriend the political opposition and (why?) laud the Clintons, he should perhaps better find a nice photogenic porch. Sit on the porch. Do this and conservatives on November 5^th will surely hold their noses and pull the lever for what is best for the country.

[Piquaboy]

I think he meant Ward Churchill.

[DieHard the Hunter]

> I guess that’s why they’ve just got doctors lining up to work there.... right?

Nope. They are in high demand in the US because Kiwi doctors and nurses are very well trained to a very high standard and thus demand a very high salary, in US dollars, relative to what they earn here.

And when they leave medical school (usually the University of Otago) they have high student loans.

So, they go either to the US or to the UK, work for a few years, earn lots of your US currency, come back to New Zealand, pay off their loans, buy a house, and live well in an amazing lifestyle that you in the US can only dream about.

In New Zealand it is called “The Big OE”, for “Overseas Experience”. Kids tend to take their OE either just before or just after University. It’s a tradition of ours: we like it that way.

> New Zealand is where all the richest people fly to for there cancer treatment, transplants, rehabilitative medicine, prosthetic technology, gene therapy....

We certainly get our share of overseas patients. Here, a US buck buys you alot more than it does over there.

And our Sports Medicine is certainly superior to what you get in the US. Guess why? It’s because New Zealanders on average play more sports than you do! Rougher sports where injuries are more common. That’s right: we spend less time on the couch watching TV, and more time running around on sports fields, than you lot do. Even our fat guys!

For example: you want a knee reconstruction? Used to be you went to Ireland for that: their surgeons specialized in knees due to knee-cappings. Now, you come here: we like Irish surgeons because they’ve come here to reconstruct our Rugby players’ knees. And we all play rugby. I’ve had my knee done here. Badly wrecked, but fixed good as new, walking normally same day as the surgery.

Hip replacements? My in-laws have each had two: one for each side.

Separated shoulder? I did mine last year, by accident (judo). ACC covered the lot, including therapy and accupuncture. Cost me not a cent.

Slashed open my right shin 1” deep earlier this year, again by accident. Again, not a cent out of my pocket, and 4 months later I can just barely see the scar. Not bad!

Like I said, you’d be really lucky to have a great Socialized medical system like what we have.

[mad_as_he$$]

Another version of he is a $astard but he is our $astard. Well he is not ours - never has been never will be.

HE LEFT MEN IN THE FIELD!! Unforgivable.

[patriot08]

.

[Grunthor]

John McCain is clearly the preferable option for conservative voters come November. Although liberal in his views toward immigration, government intrusion in free speech, environmental issues, campaign finance reform, health care, education mandates, and a host of other issues that run contrary to conservative orthodoxy

---

I bet the author has no idea how stupid he sounds in the first paragraph.

[Grunthor]

“McCain is in a fight against the manufactured illusions of “hope” and history. He needs every vote he can manage”

Wow. Perhaps he shouldn’t have spent the last decade kicking us in the ba!!z?

[Grunthor]

“McPain is ensuring that Americans will pay upwards of 10 bucks for a gallon of gas.”

Naw, we won’t pay that. The economy will melt down before that happens.

[RasterMaster]

If you think McLame is ANYTHING like Churchill, you’re smokin’ rope! The truth is, Juan McCain is more like Jean-Fraud Kerry....

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39892

[Grunthor]

“Well for all you Hispanic haters”

If the illegals were Swedish, I’d still have a problem with them.

“Abortion-puhleeze. that’s just a scam that the republicans mouth so that the Christians can hold their noses and vote.”

I agree with most of your post, including the above that I quoted. The Republicans will NEVER actually do anything to outlaw abortion. They need the issue to keep the pro-lifers voting for them.

[phillyfanatic]

Me too. I keep writing the RNC and other Pubs plus guys and gals who I will support sans Pub money calling orgs., to have another Pub Contract like Newt in ‘94. The Congressional Pubs should run as strong national conservs while giving mouth tributes to John but keeping their campaigns true to their own principles. Vote John but really help out the Congressional Pubs for it is there that the liberal traitors will wreck havoc on our foreign policy and economy.

[DieHard the Hunter]

> If you think McLame is ANYTHING like Churchill, you’re smokin’ rope! The truth is, Juan McCain is more like Jean-Fraud Kerry....

That is certainly an opinion that you are entitled to. I haven’t committed either way, except to point out that Churchill’s pre-WW-II political record was certainly no better than McCain’s — in fact, there are some remarkable similarities.

I have also pointed out that Churchill did not always sit firmly on the right: he began in the left, then moved to the right, and reached across the house during his time of Greatness, which was the Grand Coalition during WW-II.

If you disagree with that, I’d be interested in knowing how and why.

[ovrtaxt]

You just go right ahead and justify larger government. Let’s flush away our heritage of small government. After all, it’s so outdated in this brave new world.

Good luck having a nice future, you’ll need it.

[maine-iac7]

McCain will ALSO not abandon our military - get it?

[RasterMaster]

Churchill was a man of honor...something McLame knows nothing about. Churchill never sold out his own for the sake of “bi-partisanship”.

[DieHard the Hunter]

>> “and it is even better in the optional “private” system.”

> Bingo

Yup — bingo. But like I said, we have both. And the private system would truly suck if we didn’t have the public system, and vice versa.

Why? That’s easy: the private system focuses on treating the high-profit maladies: like hip replacements, most elective surgery, &tc. The expensive, hi-volume-lo-margin stuff? Fuggedaboutit!

Sure, they will cover it: but the premium differential makes it more worthwhile to get your cut finger or your broken leg treated in a public Casualty ward.

Acute injury? 100% of the time you will begin in the public system: that’s just how it is geared. You can get your private room on your private insurance once they’ve stopped the bleeding...

Chronic? Depends upon when you took out your private policy (ie before or after you became chronic) and whether you have an exclusions waiver. You could end up either private (if you are lucky) or public (if you are less lucky).

Elective? It’s usually nicer to go private if you can afford the policy. If you don’t mind perhaps having to wait, you will save lots of money and get just as good treatment by going public.

Like I said, we have both available, and it is really good that way. But it has taken years to build the infrastructure, and it would be really difficult to do in the US. But if you *could* have it, you’d be crazy not to.

[DieHard the Hunter]

Me, I am a big Churchill fan, so it pains me to point out that he was anything other than Perfect. But I must, and I think he would approve. Thoroughly:

> Churchill was a man of honor...

The Irish would perhaps have a different view on that. As would some Kiwis and some Ockers. And some Welsh. And many trade unionists. All with some justification.

> Churchill never sold out his own for the sake of “bi-partisanship”.

Go on! He changed *parties* for pete’s sake!

[Mamzelle]

re: His conceit of "straight-talk" and "maverick"-like independence so superficially applauded (up until now) by the mainstream media is almost Clintonesque in its narcissism.)))

bears repeating--can you find two bigger arrogant egos in DC than McCain/Obama?

[RasterMaster]

“He changed *parties* for pete’s sake!”

So did REAGAN...but I wouldn’t compare an a$$hat like McCain to Reagan. It’s funny the lengths some will go to prop up their golden RINO. Nobody’s perfect, but McCain is living proof of what is wrong with the GOP’s “big tent”.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Sorry, but I completely disagree with your entire premise

[dforest]

Hmmm? McCain/Obama, let them run together and then impeach both of them.

I can dream.