Posted on 02/19/2008 4:55:34 PM PST by K-oneTexas
Why I Will Vote for McCain Conservative resolve (mine, not his).
By Daniel Oliver
John McCain is not a conservative, but I will vote for him anyway.
After all, in 1952, conservatives, grumbling that Ohio senator Robert “Mr. Republican” Taft had not been nominated, voted for Eisenhower because he was clearly the better alternative to Adlai Stevenson. And they voted for Ike again over Stevenson in 1956.
In 1971, a Who’s Who of conservatives, including the senior editors of National Review, suspended their support of President Nixon because of both his domestic-policy failures and his tendencies in foreign policy.
In 1972, however, National Review endorsed the reelection of Nixon, describing the Democratic candidate, George McGovern, as “not something with which a grown-up superpower can play.”
Was Eisenhower a conservative? No. Nixon? No. Bush (either one)? No. McCain? No. Republicans, yes — it’s a famously big tent — and with some conservative positions. But having conservative positions is not the same as being a conservative.
What is a conservative? Essentially, someone who is temperamentally suspicious of government. That’s why conservatives argue for limited government, economic freedom, low taxes, and fewer regulations. The bumper-sticker version might be: “If in doubt, keep government out.” That demonstrates a healthy skepticism of both government’s competence (think Katrina clean-up) and its fuzzy benevolence, which generally involves toying with any activity that begins with the letters A through Z, scolding people for their behavior (and, er, persuading them to change it), or redistributing their wealth.
The skeptical view of the redistributionist function of government can be described, with apologies to William Graham Sumner, as A and B deciding how much C should give to D.
The behavior-modification efforts of government can be seen in innumerable campaigns and diktats like anti-smoking and anti-obesity crusades and campaign-financing laws.
A useful rule of thumb is: No one who voted for, or signed, the McCain-Feingold Act can be considered a conservative. Unless he recants and repents.
John McCain also opposed Bush’s tax cuts (though his vote may have been less an anti-tax-cut vote than an intemperate anti-Bush vote — but that is not good either) and he favors global-warming programs that most conservatives think are foolish and harmful (if in doubt, keep government out). And — sigh! — he favors importing prescription drugs from Canada, which is not just economic nonsense of the first order but suggests college-level economic illiteracy.
Nevertheless, McCain is clearly a Republican, with some conservative positions. He has promised to appoint judges who will interpret the law, not make it. He has promised to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. And he has promised to fight government spending, to veto any bill with earmarks, and to roll back entitlement programs—positions that, these days, it is an act of nostalgia to describe as “Republican.”
Meanwhile, Senator Barack Obama has been named the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate by National Journal. Senator Clinton can’t be far behind. Against them, Senator McCain would seem the obvious choice for conservatives. But some of them think a term or two in the political wilderness would be beneficial.
Conservatives have been here before. As National Review said in 1972, “There are those, including some of our colleagues, who believe that four years of McGovern would catalyze a recrudescent conservatism. We disagree that the chance is worth taking. McGovern is the erector set of big-think intellectuals, otherworldly dreamers, and children. Belloc warned that dangerous toys should not be given to little boys.”
Senator McCain might help his cause with conservatives if he stopped calling himself a conservative. He is damaging their brand name. And conservatives should stop, now, demanding that he be a conservative: that is not a condition precedent for being the better choice for president. Conservatives should remember that the fault McCain is not a conservative is partly their own: They have not succeeded in making conservatism the iPod in the marketplace of political philosophies.
To conservatives, John McCain sounds like the Devil. That is his fault, not theirs. He has dissed them and enjoyed it. That is not presidential, and if he does not stop he will not be president. He should make—and is making—amends, and not for his own sake, or for the conservatives’, but for the country’s.
It is time for conservatives to accept reality (accepting reality is another conservative trait); and the reality is (1) John McCain will be the Republican nominee for president and (2) he will make a far better president than the Democratic alternative.
Dangerous toys should not be given to little boys.
Or to little girls.
— Daniel Oliver was chairman of the Federal Trade Commission under President Reagan. He is now a senior director at White House Writers Group and chairman of the board of National Review.
;-)
Thank you for demeaning my opinion. I can see that if I don’t agree with you I must be wrong.
(And your words scan best when read out loud in the voice of a sarcastic liberal whiner, with a lilting accent.)
Is it still called “straight talk” if they are gay? ;-)
Thanks for the links. I knew McCain was a gun grabber.
It’s beyond me how rational people make a case for McCain as though he is a pale shade better than Obama or Clinton... All three are cut from the same cloth. Any one of them is more than capable of destroying this Republic, but only McCain has committed ACTIONS in DIRECT assault against the Bill of Rights, and on the “top dog” of the lot to boot... and he’s proud of it!
Short answer: The Tides Foundation (mostly)
The author reminds me of an abused wife. Constantly black and blue, but still unwilling to get the heck out.
Bwah!
No, I think that's called "stray talk." When you brag about the alley cats you've brought home.
Oh, yeah. Put their respective records up for comparison and McCain has a REAL list of accomplishments...in promoting the destruction of the Republic. Are they more committed to the Marxist ideology? Sure, no doubt about. Gee, that sure makes me feel good. McCain is wrecking the Constitution randomly with no core philosophy. That’s such a comfort.
That is just lovely. One thing is sure, I will be buying lots of ammo this coming year.
“For some reason, the Republican party thinks eliminating conservatives, paleos, and small l libertarians is a winning strategy.”
Has nothing to do with the “Party”...their financial backers , however, want NOTHING to do with small government conservatism...nothing in it for them at the K St trough.
Stray Cats? I went to one of their shows once!
Danced all night—it was a blast!
No comparison to a McKeating Rally. ;-)
MCCAIN, LIEBERMAN TAKE NEXT STEP IN EFFORT TO REQUIRE MEDIA VIOLENCE LABELING
May 2, 2000
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) today introduced a bill to create a uniform labeling system on all movies, video games, video programs and music products. The "Media Violence Labeling Act" amends the Cigarette labeling and Advertising Act to apply warning label requirements to violent media products. The bill does not include TV programs. "There is a consensus in the scientific community that exposure to violent images through the media is harmful to kids. This is common sense to the rest of us," McCain said. "The producers of these products have a moral obligation to inform consumers of violent content. What this legislation does is impose a legal requirement to do so."
LOL Never saw them. Never have been to a Ted Nugent concert either but I could rock to Cat Scratch Fever. No McLames allowed there either. ; )
What a hypocrite. McCain has frequently talked about the action movies he likes to watch. “Good for me but not for thee.”
Okay - then, how about you can pick up part of my big tax increase when one of the Dems get in since that’s what will happen to ME and many others. I think we should find out who all you traitors are and make you pony up.
If the GOP could not or would not enact real border security when they held all three branches of Government, what do u think McCain can do?
an excellent point!
I do believe that he will sign an amnesty bill just as fast as he can.
In the last year or so it's become painfully obvious to me that I'm not a Republican, I'm a conservative, and there is a lot of differences between the two.
When Republicans run conservatives, I'll be happy to vote for them.
“We define “progressive” as creating a positive impact on people’s lives in ways that honor and promote human rights, justice, and a healthy, sustainable environment”
Right out of the U.N. handbook:
‘Human Rights’ is code for Abortion on demand and homosexual marriage.
‘Justice’ is code for socialism.
‘Sustainable environment’ is code for Death culture politics: Euthanasia, Abortion, Infanticide... the elimination of two-thirds of the world population.
Do a Nexus or web search on the ‘Man in the Biosphere’ program of the United Nations. and especially research the ‘Seville’ plan. I have hard copies that were retrieved in 1998. The Seville plan is so controversial that they may have removed it fro the web. It was buried deep in the bureaucratic layers of U.N. documentation regarding Sustainable Development.
I call BS!
Can anyone cite McCain making amends of any sort to conservatives, I sure can't think of one.
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.