Three Cheers For John McCain
After reading this transcript from today’s Glenn Beck show, I now understand the wisdom of John McCain being the GOP presidential nominee.
STU: Why aren’t you happy? Big primary last night. We had to talk about Republican issues.
GLENN: John McCain won.
STU: Yeah, John McCain, Republican, frontrunner.
GLENN: We’re the Republican radio station.
STU: I know, I know. And John McCain’s Republican. Look at the odds right after his bid.
GLENN: What did you say?
STU: The Rs right after his name.
GLENN: But he is not really a Republican.
STU: No, I said John McCain, R.
GLENN: Have you seen his amnesty proposal?
STU: I know, it’s fantastic. I now love it.
GLENN: What do you mean you now love it?
STU: I now love it. It’s going to be great. The –
GLENN: We were on the air for months hating it.
STU: No, it was –
GLENN: This guy was in charge of the amnesty program. He partnered with Ted Kennedy.
STU: Yeah, I know. We love partnering with Ted Kennedy. I think this is the future of the party.
GLENN: You know who Juan Hernandez is, right?
STU: Oh, Juan, he is a great whopper. He is going to be fantastic.
GLENN: You hated Juan Hernandez. Juan Hernandez is the guy who says there should be one great state, Mex-Ameri-Canada. He says that Canada and Mexico and the United States should just all get together, once a Mexican, always a Mexican.
STU: This is ridiculous. You are talking about yesterday when I said that?
GLENN: What?
STU: You’re talking about yesterday when I said I didn’t like Juan Hernandez.
GLENN: Yes.
STU: This is today. John McCain won last night. Now I love him. I need you to get a little bit more pep in your voice when you are doing these breaks. These songs are way down key. They are low-key. People are excited today to vote for John McCain for President.
GLENN: Hang on. Hey, that’s the eagles and desperado on WGOP radio where, whoo, cowboy, John McCain won last night. And I mean, it’s — hey. Maybe Joe Lieberman could run with him because they’re good buddies, too. Joe Lieberman and John McCain and wouldn’t that be, you know, the whole global warming thing. They will be on top of that one with John McCain in the White House. And congratulations from all of us here at WGOP where the party goes on.
How can you argue against Stu’s logic? After all, isn’t it time that we just set aside our core beliefs for the good of the party? Just because our core beliefs have stood the test of time doesn’t mean that they’ll forever stand the test of time, right? Isn’t it better to agree with the latest opinion poll than agree with time-tested principles like federalism, limited government and sovereignty?
Seriously, though, Glenn’s and Stu’s mock conversation is being conducted all across the United States. People haven’t seen proof that Republicans still have a set of core values. People haven’t seen proof that Republicans stand for something other than being in the majority. The truth is that Reaganite conservatives stand for something quite different than Democrats.
Earlier tonight, I had the good furtune of talking with King. While the conversation started about the upcoming precince caucuses, it soon moved into talk about McCain, Romney and the future of the GOP. One quick point of agreement was that anyone who says that they’re a Reagan Republican should be disqualified from being the GOP presidential nominee. The only top tier candidate who didn’t claim to be created in Reagan’s image was Fred Thompson, the candidate who was most like Reagan philosophically.
According to CNN’s transcript of tonight’s debate, here’s the final exchange between Anderson Cooper and John McCain:
COOPER: Senator McCain, would Ronald Reagan endorse you?
MCCAIN: Ronald Reagan would not approve of someone who changes their positions depending on what the year is.
Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan came with an unshakable set of principles, and there were many times, like when he had to deploy the [Pershing] cruise missile to Europe and there were hundreds of thousands of demonstrators against it, he stood with it. Ronald Reagan had a deal in Reykjavik that everybody wanted him to take, but he stuck with his principles.
I think he knows that I stick with my principles. I put my political career on the line because I knew what would happen if we failed in Iraq. I hope that the experience I had serving as a foot soldier in his revolution would make him proud for me to continue that legacy of sticking to principle and doing what you believe in, no matter what.
It’s interesting that McCain started with a cheapshot at Mitt Romney, violating Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment. I can’t imagine him gaining points with that.
McCain then gave a telling answer, saying only that Reagan “came with an unshakable set of principles.” It’s interesting because Reagan’s “unshakable set of principles” were rooted in the Constitution, including the First Amendment. Not only is it true that McCain won’t back away from BCRA, he wants to ’strengthen it.’ I’d bet the ranch that Ronald Reagan would’ve swatted BCRA aside the second it hit his desk.
More importantly, Reagan was steadfast because Reagan’s principles were honed over several decades, rigorous debates and constant observation of the economy and the Soviet Union. People viewed Reagan as an “amiable dunce.” McCain doesn’t want to talk about what principles Ronald Reagan held because they frequently would be at odds with the principles that McCain holds dear.
I suppose it’s good news that Sen. McCain is a politician that sticks with his principles. The’res no doubt that the bad news is that Sen. McCain stubbornly defends principles that any federalist, including Reagan, would’ve run from.
The other thing I took from Wednesday’s debate is that McCain was his usual smug self. Bill Bennett correctly stated afterwards that McCain is still evasive:
BENNETT: But Anderson, you pressed McCain on this question of immigration, because he answered three times, my bill will not come up; that legislation would not come up. But you asked, or someone asked, would you support it again. And he finally did say, I think he said no. On the five or six big issues that people try to tag John McCain as being liberal, immigration, campaign finance down the line, he doesn’t respond to those. What he says is well, I’ve got a record. I’ve got a life.
MARTIN: Actually, he did respond, Bill. What he consistently said was, look, the American people let their voice be heard. That’s not going to come up. So that sounds like someone who said look, I have ideas.
BENNETT: Let me finish my point. On those five or six issues, he tends to throw up this cloud of, I am who I am. I have served my country. The point I want to make here is that people want real answers to those question. Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn’t. And he has to watch a kind of moral superiority. Look, I’m John McCain. Everybody admires the hero thing, but it doesn’t constitute an answer to some hard questions.
The truth is that McCain is too often evasive on the stickiest of subjects. He clearly doesn’t like talking about the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill. If you look at the video, he gets visibly defensive anytime he’s asked about it.
Technorati Tags: John McCain, BCRA, Immigration, Ronald Reagan, Reaganomics, Soviet Union, Mitt Romney, Bill Bennett, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
January 31st, 2008 at 5:33 am
I find it interesting and sad that “conservatives” follow radio pundits “Rush” “Ann” like robots. Though they might have a couple of good points they tend to go off the deep end quickly.
The reality is that the majority of Republicans and Independents are moderate and are the future. Moderates are tired of getting nothing done in congress because of partisanship.
January 31st, 2008 at 8:22 am
Its February of 2008. Do you know where your pocketbook and ID card are?
January 31st, 2008 at 9:48 am
People have been hoping for a long time for a “none of the above” choice.
Now that we need it, it’s here:
[ ] Ron Paul
That’s our “none of the above” choice.
When it gets to the general election, though, I’ll put on my hip boots and vote for whoever survives the reality show known as the Republican campaign. So far, three or so people have been voted off the island.
January 31st, 2008 at 9:53 am
Mike Huckabee is a nice guy, conservative on some issues, and a good Christian family values guy.
If you vote for him, it will be counted.
When the votes are counted, there are only two candidates that stand a chance of winning.
John McCain - One of the worst “Republicans” to ever sit in the senate. Stabs conservatives in the back every chance he gets. The list is long and you should already know about it.
Mitt Romney - Not the most conservative guy that ever took office, but getting more conservative every day. Willing to move forward as a conservative rather than attack it. Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Fiscal Conservative will appoint solid judges.
January 31st, 2008 at 1:12 pm
After reading about the Romney-Care I have a VERY hard time believing he has a conservative bone in his body.
Im not sure of the Author but it is a telling piece for the Romney folks that “Think” he’s conservative.
————————————–
As he campaigns across the country this week in anticipation of the Super Tuesday primaries, Mitt Romney probably won’t say much about the storied health-care plan he signed into law as governor of Massachusetts.
For one thing, it is hard to portray yourself as the ideological heir to Ronald Reagan when your health-care plan is virtually indistinguishable from the one proposed by Hillary Clinton. But another reason Romney may not want to talk about his plan is that it has been a dismal failure.
The Massachusetts plan was supposed to achieve universal health coverage while controlling costs. As Romney wrote in The Wall Street Journal, “Every uninsured citizen in Massachusetts will soon have affordable health insurance and the costs of health care will be reduced.” Or not.The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money.
Before RomneyCare was enacted, the number of uninsured Massachusetts residents was estimated at 618,000. Under the new program, about 300,000 previously uninsured residents have signed up for insurance. But of these, 169,000 are receiving subsidized coverage, proving once again that people are all too happy to accept something someone else is paying for. Another 70,000 people have also been enrolled in Medicaid, meaning a total of 239,000 people are receiving taxpayer-funded health insurance. Of those who have signed up for insurance since the plan was implemented, slightly more than half have received totally “free” coverage. Only 60,000 unsubsidized residents have bought insurance in order to comply with the mandate.
And though the subsidies have increased the number of Massachusetts citizens with insurance, as many as 300,000 Massachusetts residents have failed to buy the required insurance. Thus, half of those who were uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so.
The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money. It was originally projected to cost $1.8 billion in 2008, but it is now expected to exceed those estimates by $150 million to $400 million. Over the next decade, projections suggest that RomneyCare will cost $2-$4 billion more than was budgeted. Given that Massachusetts is already facing a projected budget deficit this year, the pressure to raise taxes, cut reimbursements to health-care providers, or cap insurance premiums will likely be intense.
The cost of the Massachusetts plan is also likely to continue rising, because it has failed to hold down the cost of health care. When Gov. Romney signed the bill, he claimed “a key objective is to lower the cost of health insurance for all our citizens and allow our citizens to buy the insurance plan that fits their needs.” In actuality, insurance premiums in the state are expected to rise 10-12 percent this year - twice the national average.
A major cause is that the new bureaucracy the legislation created - the “Connector” - is not allowing Massachusetts citizens to buy insurance that “fits their needs.” For example, the Connector’s governing board decrees that by January 2009, no one will be allowed to have insurance with a deductible higher than $2,000 or total out-of-pocket costs of more than $5,000.
In addition, every policy will be required to provide prescription drug coverage, a move that could add 5-15 percent to the cost of insurance plans. A proposal to require dental coverage failed narrowly, but the dentists - and several other provider groups - have not given up the effort to force its inclusion. This comes on top of the 40 mandated benefits the state had previously required, ranging from in vitro fertilization to chiropractic services.
Romney now says that he cannot be held responsible for the actions of the Connector board, because it’s “an independent body separate from the governor’s office.” But many critics of the Massachusetts plan warned him precisely against the dangers of giving regulatory authority to a bureaucracy that would last long beyond his adminis- tration.
Executives often blame others for the failures of their own policies, but that’s not a tendency one looks for in a candidate. Romney claims he is a “true conservative” with the business expertise to “get things done.” Judging by his experience with health-care reform, far from it.
January 31st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
As I noted long ago, when November comes I will hold mmy nose and vote for whoever the Republican candidate is because there isn’t a non-socialist running as a donkey.
As it turns out, it seems like there’s not a non-socialist running as an elephant, either!
Throw Huck, John-John and Mitts onto a pot and stir it up and you still can’t tell any difference between any of them on base principles.
It’s too bad, too. The Republicans had such a chance at making a difference with the future of our country. Now it’s only a matter of who’s going to flush the toilet fastest…
January 31st, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Romney care was actually Democrat-care, made as conservative as humanly possible in the bluest state. You’ve got to read this article about Romney and McCain’s ability to help the conservative cause:
http://christianprophecy.blogspot.com/
January 31st, 2008 at 9:51 pm
The only candidate left who truly espouses the ideas and ideals of our Constitution is Ron Paul. He is the only candidate who truly wants to make the federal government smaller and less intrusive. He is concerned about our right to private property, a crucial aspect of any free nation. While McCain, Romney and (even) Huckabee make some cogent points, they really aren’t free market conservatives. Ron Paul is, and he deserves your vote.
February 1st, 2008 at 10:37 am
Oh God…… Here we go….. Bible thumping and politics arent compatible… If YOU believe fine but STFU about it already. Seriously who cares but you?
February 1st, 2008 at 8:23 pm
I’m not going to stand around and snivel. Im going with Romney, and I hope he can tuin it around, because I think he can and he’s the best shot we have without Fred or Duncan. Id be OK with Mc Cain, because Id be OK with any Republican before Hillary (Poor Bill,can you imagine living with that voice yelling at you for 20 years?)
And of course its going to be Hillary, just wait til Carvil starts to go to work on Obama, poor guy.
February 1st, 2008 at 9:40 pm
If Paul wasn’t such a freakish isolationist, and had a modicum of understanding about the dangers we face with Islam, he would indeed be a worthy candidate.
Unfortunately, from what I understand, he really believes that if we pull out from everywhere around the world, the world will leave us alone. That’s not only ignorant, it is dangerous and pretty much a refutation of doctrine starting with Monroe and practiced by every president since. Including those counted as strict constructionists.
Hence, I’ll pass on him and vote for someone who at least gives lip service to protecting our nation from enemies foreign and domestic.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Paul’s idealism is only exceeded by Obama’s inexperience. If he gets elected, somebody, hopefully another Chief of State will have to get him behind closed doors and spell the world out for him. The free world cant afford to have a POTUS acting like a it’s just another day in Chicago with that Turkish son of a bitch in Iran.