While I love the Republican Party more than Hershey bars (and trust me, I am truly enamored by those delightful treats), I am more than disheartened at the relatively large proportion of the party that doesn’t accept John McCain’s viability as the most experienced and prepared candidate the GOP has to offer.
Sadly, America is no longer a nation united, thus the idea that a candidate whose views remain overwhelmingly conservative, but who has some liberal inclinations on the minority of major issues of concern, is a horrific thought for some Republicans. We need a candidate who can unite our ideologically-torn nation. Over the past decade, all we’ve seen is divisiveness. We hear the rhetoric everyday from George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton and the like – from individuals who choose (for one reason or another) to polarize, rather than to create a proactive and cohesive political climate. I am more than convinced that John McCain is the man for the job. Consider his response when asked how he would debate with the Democratic frontrunner should he secure the ticket:ÂÂ
 Aside from his clear and unambiguous diplomatic outlook, he is well versed on the issues that face our nation:ÂÂ
Republicans and Democrats need to move beyond the small ideological barriers that separate them from endorsing McCain. So many individuals are hanging him up to dry over his support of the Iraq war, while not looking wholeheartedly at the political spectrum. Aside from his unadulterated experience, John McCain is excessively intelligent and capable. He has more time in Washington than any of his contenders and would surely make a positive splash on the international relations scene. Plus – for the appeasement of GOP at least – he is far more conservative than his rivals:ÂÂ
So, get up, get educated and endorse him. He’s one of the only true patriots on the ballot.
There is a reason that even the mere perception of cooperating with someone on the other side of the aisle is viewed as party treason – the overwhelming influence that campaign contributions and special interests have on our political process.
The use of Congressional gerrymandering has been unjustly utilized to create “safe” districts for both sides, which has the effect of polarizing the nation while making primary elections more important than the general ones. This creates more extremists, who are always the best at fundraising for agenda-driven special interests.
Only a significant reduction in the corrupting influence of money can return us to an era of civility and bipartisan cooperation. McCain understands this better than anyone which is partially why he is so vilified by the base of the GOP (unfortunately, his signature bill has done nothing to reduce the windfall from K Street to Capitol Hill).
You aren’t a traitor if you share beliefs with the other side.
Agreed.
I’m a Snickers man, myself, and maybe that’s why I’m stunned by the adoration that McCain receives from independents and moderate Republicans. And even from some Democrats.
Johnny One-Note McCain is nothing more than Rudy Giuliani with a war record.
Like “America’s Mayor,� McCain is arrogant and condescending, trumpeting his military experience as a rationale for being commander-in-chief (“I’ve been there; I know how to lead.�) in the same way that Rudy wanted us to believe that because he happened to be in New York on 9/11, he was qualified to be president.
And the “Straight Talk Express� is a myth that just doesn’t stand up under scrutiny.
McCain has consistently distorted Romney’s words to create a false impression of his opponent’s position on Iraq and on immigration.
“Mr. War Hero� is a devious, conniving hack who thinks he’s better than his opponents.
Remember, too: He’d keep us in Iraq indefinitely.
Steve,
Obama and Hillary both stated that they would not remove U.S. troops from Iraq before 2013. And you have to admit that compared to Romney, McCain looks like the next coming of Thomas Jefferson.
Obama and Clinton would halt all combat operations now, and remove all troops by 2013. That’s a far cry from “being in Iraq for perhaps 100 years.”
McCain looks less like Jefferson and more like George Bush on steroids.
We do NOT need another “Macho Man!”
I take umbrage at being commanded to “get educated” by someone who writes like a college freshman.
I think Billy should lay off the chocolate bars and take up more brain-nourishing foods.
After I read these mysterious bits of saccharine prose “a proactive and cohesive political climate”, “looking wholeheartedly at the political spectrum”, “unadulterated experience”, “excessively intelligent” I went looking for a red pencil and checked my blood sugar.
Nothing was more mystifying, though, than where in the hell Billy gets the idea that he has the God-like discernment to tell us who the “true patriots” are.
I didn’t think anyone could surpass George W. Bush in unsupported arrogance, but I think Billy’s done it.
Ahhhhhhhhhhh…..now we get into the nitty gritty….
Steve,
I’m not so sure I trust Hillary to be as dovish as you suggest, especially considering her past voting record on military matters. Also remember that her husband supported combat action against Saddam four years before his successor.
I don’t mind a Macho Man in the White House if that attitude pertains solely to dealing with radical Islamic terrorists. No need to play the tough guy on other matters when diplomacy can be both necessary and a more effective negotiating tactic.
Vince: As for Billy’s prose, you’re being too generous.
I’ve taught college freshmen, and Billy is no college freshman. His stuff smacks more of middle school.
And as for “polarizing rhetoric,” it’s been The Decider who has deliberately polarized our country; IT WAS IN THE DAMN BUSH/ROVE PLAYBOOK!!!
It is unfortunate that days after 9/11, when the entire world was united against the threat of Al Qaeda, Bush decided to epitomize the use of aforementioned “polarizing rhetoric” when he declared before a joint session of Congress:
“Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.”
Ahh, lovely liberal lamentations. Since you have no valid points, Steve, you choose to diminish my intelligence. Ironically, I’m fine with that. It’s such a staple of the liberal establishment. You’d rather insult me by comparing my thoughts and ideals as juvenile. I’ve gotten preety used to that sort of treatment.
And not for anything, but were you guys around in 2000 or are you new here? Our nation was even more polarized, as we saw an election that was within thousands of votes in 2000 (our 2004 election, much to liberals’ dismay has a difference in the millions).
And…again, not for anything, but I belive, as well, that nations are either with America fighting radical extremism or against it. Swissification is absurd and spineless.
And I apologize for the spelling errors! I was rushing!
Why should we force the entire globe to become involved and actively take a stand in something that involves only a handful of nations? Conservatives used to admonish liberals for trying to police the world. Remember what Bush said when he ran in 2000? “I don’t think our troops ought to be used for what’s called nation building.”
Now look who is planning permanent military bases in the Middle East.
More from “The Straight Talk Express”…the candidate with “integrity”:
McCain characterized Senator Clinton’s position on Iraq (if elected, she would begin removing troops soon after taking office)as “the first time a candidate from a major party has advocated surrender.”
Got that? Surrender! That’s vintage Rove politics, and it’s despicable: Anyone who disagrees with our position is unpatriotic and wants the U.S. to lose in Iraq.
That’s your “honorable” John McCain — not only eager to commit US forces to war any time and any place, but dismissive of anyone who holds a different view…the same John McCain who was quoted above as saying “I am confident we’d have a respectable debate with any of the three [Edwards, Obama or Clinton]. Why not? I’ve worked with them all. They’re all patriots.â€?
So much for a “respectable debate!”
Not only is McCain’s characterization of Hillary’s positions unfair, but they are also completely inaccurate and misleading. She has been more hawkish on Iraq than even many Republicans (which is why, to no one’s surprise, Obama today picked up the endorsement of the very anti-war MoveOn.org).
Besides, didn’t both Nixon and McGovern devise strategies for ending the Vietnam War?
McCain has done the same thing to Romney, twisting and distorting his words about a timetable for exiting Iraq.
His “holier-than-thou” attitude (“I was a prisoner of war, and therefore I’m best qualified to lead this war”) and his self-anointed “hero” status, belies a sleazy campaign style.
Get ready for more of the same in the general election!
…and so did Lyndon Johnson!!!! His war of words buried the hawkish Goldwater, who told it like he saw it. The American voters, at the time, didn’t want what he was selling. They bought Johnson, who knew Goldwater was right, but was smart enough not to say so. He played it close to the vest, because he wanted the oval office, and being the smart, seasoned politician he was he knew better. Ultimately it cost the nation ten years of blood to finally retreat from where Johnson and Nixon ultimately took us, political affiliations not withstanding.
I don’t buy any political rhetoric, in an election year, that claims to have a simple solution to such a complex situation. If cirucmstances dictate, Obama, or any other successful candidate, will keep us there as long as necessary. Why? Because they will then be the leader of the strongest nation in the free world, and that will be his under his cloak of responsibility.
Steve,
In all fairness, Kerry used a similar strategy in 2004. Let’s hope McCain experiences the same result in November.
Speaking before a group in Hudson, New Hampshire last September, McCain took criticism of MoveOn’s Petraeus ad to a whole new level, saying that “it’s disgraceful, it’s got to be retracted and condemned by the Democrats, and MoveOn.org ought to be thrown out of this country.â€?
THERE’S your hero. THERE’S your patriot…quick to stomp on and “throw out of the country” an organization representing SEVERAL MILLION PEOPLE who happen to disagree with McCain!
If you thought Bush was playing fast and loose with our liberties, imagine what that arrogant phony McCain would do!
McCain is a political pragmatist who’s done his share of flip-flopping.
How many remember that speech McCain gave in 2000 after he lost the South Carolina primary to Bush?
He denounced Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson as “agents of intolerance” and “corrupting influences” in American politics.
And then he slammed them for “the evil influence that they exercise over the Republican Party.”
I applauded those statements at the time, but I almost vomited six years later when McCain licked Falwell’s boots at Liberty University.
It was truly sickening to see him grovel before one of the more loathsome anti-Christs of Christendom, all to make nice with the radical Christian fundamentalists who’d been insulted by his moment of candor.
I had already discounted McCain’s sincerity and integrity when in 2004 he literally embraced Bush after being so sleazily dealt with by the Rove slime factory in the 2000 campaign.
Right on, Vince.
That’s the McCain we know.
Hey, Billy…this one’s for you.
You complained that we liberals “have no valid points,� and instead “choose to diminish your intelligence.�
Okay, we may have taken a swipe at your writing skills, so let’s look at the McCain record:
1. You claim that you are “more than convinced that John McCain is the man for the jobâ€?…and that “aside from his clear and unambiguous diplomatic outlook, he is well versed on the issues that face our nation.â€?
As evidence, you quote McCain’s response to a question about the economy:
“Obviously, the economy is very, very important issue. There’s no doubt about that, O.K.? But the issue that’s going to be with us after the economy recovers is the challenge of radical Islamic extremism, of which Iraq is the central battleground.�
Did you note how McCain dodged the question and quickly turned the conversation to the subject he thinks he knows? Sorry, Billy, but that’s the kind of empty response I’d expect from a 19-year-old airhead in the Miss America contest…you know, “I want to work with people and make the world a better place.�
Still think McCain’s answer shows that he’s “well-versed on the issues that face our nation�?
2. I pointed out that McCain, the patriot, advocated throwing MoveOn.org out of the country for disagreeing with his view of the Iraq war.
How’s that for “radical extremism?�
We’re still waiting for your response to that.
3. Vince pointed out McCain’s denunciation of Falwell and Robertson, and then his unctuous embrace of Reverend Jerry when it suited his political purposes. Likewise, his embrace of Bush in 2004 after being savaged by W in 2000.
So much for McCain’s “integrity” and principles and straight talk.
We’re still waiting for your response to that as well.
Are you there, Billy?
Thus…it appears that we have made short work of all three front runners. Now, depending upon one’s political point of view, we will all be up shit’s creek regardless of who is elected.
Billy might get more respect here if his preaching matched his practice.
He leaps up on the soapbox and trumpets his message that Republicans and Democrats need to overcome the divisiveness of politics and unite behind his chosen candidate.
So he makes unity his theme, and commends McCain’s collegiality, but ends the sermon by condescending to his audience contradicting himself and his theme and insulting us all.
That seems to be the true point of this exercise in rhetorical deception Billy wants to tell us who the ‘true’ patriots are, because he knows better about that than John McCain.
To paraphrase Dr. Samuel Johnson:
Billy’s preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hind legs. It is not done well, but you are surprised to find it done at all.
You still there, Billy?
Here’s the latest on your “hero”…a real Stand-up guy who couldn’t manage to SHOW UP for a difficult vote.
Your “patriot” turned his back on veterans and seniors, and rather than take a stand on this issue, HE DUCKED OUT!!!
WASHINGTON (AP) – Republican presidential candidate John McCain skipped a difficult Senate vote Wednesday on whether to make 20 million seniors and 250,000 disabled veterans eligible for rebate checks as part of a proposed economic stimulus package.
The Arizona senator’s decision to miss the vote appeared to come at the last minute, after his plane had landed at Dulles International Airport outside Washington just before the proceedings opened on the Senate floor.
Asked Wednesday morning to comment on the pending vote, McCain talked about the need to pass a stimulus measure quickly. Later, on his plane, he said he was not sure he would make the vote.
“I haven’t had a chance to talk about it at all, have not had the opportunity to, even,” McCain said. “We’ve just been too busy, focused on other stuff. I don’t know if I’m doing that. We’ve got a couple of meetings scheduled.”
Whichever way McCain may have voted, it would have been a difficult choice given his status as the Republican presidential front-runner.
Senate Democrats cleverly bundled the rebates for seniors and veterans, key voting blocs, with expanded unemployment benefits and home heating subsidies for the jobless and poor.
President Bush and Republican leaders, as well as conservatives McCain was scheduled to woo on Thursday, vehemently oppose the expanded benefits and subsidies.
That put McCain in a bad political spot.
Voting “no” with Republican leaders would have offended millions of Social Security recipients and the disabled veterans not scheduled to receive rebates. Voting “yes,” on the other hand, risked alienating Bush, GOP leaders and conservatives already suspicious of McCain’s political leanings. McCain was speaking Thursday before a meeting of the Conservative Political Action Conference, a group that booed him last year in absentia.
For McCain, not voting meant not going on the record either way. He has missed all eight Senate roll call votes this year.
Republicans prevailed in blocking the Democratic proposal, saying they will try again later to include seniors and veterans. GOP leaders would not say how McCain would have voted. Asked whether there was any reason to believe he would have broken with the party and voted for the Democrats’ package, Republican Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona said: “I have no reason to believe that.”
McCain’s absence, he added, would not have changed the outcome of the vote.
There was confusion among McCain’s his staff about whether he would make the vote. Campaign spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said when he landed that she believed he was headed to the Capitol to vote, but a second spokeswoman, Brooke Buchanan, said later that he would not make it.
Democrats, including a spokesman for the presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, jumped on McCain’s absence. Clinton voted for the measure, which failed on a 58-41 vote. Supporters needed 60 votes to prevail. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid had voted in favor, but switched it at the last moment in a parliamentary move that allows him to bring up the measure for another vote at a later date.
“By failing to stand up as the deciding vote, John McCain let our families down,” said Clinton aide Phil Singer. “Tonight’s events prove once again that we need a president who will be ready from Day One to act in the interests of middle-class families and turn our ailing economy around.”
Face it, Billy…he’s a political hypocrite and a coward.
Unfortunately, he will be the GOP nominee now that Romney has dropped out of the campaign.
It says volumes about Republican voters that they would select such a phony.
But we should look forward to running against him. He presents a clear distinction from the Democrats’ position, and he’s out of touch with most of the country.
BRING HIM ON!!!
Steve,
Be careful of what you wish for. A McCain-Huckabee team could easily defeat Hillary and possibly Obama. The sad part is that compared to the other Republicans running, he is the least phony (especially compared to Romney). The fact that the Democrats are so divided right now could also spur independent challenges which is where it could really get interesting. 2008 may be a rare electoral realignment year not felt since 1968.
[...] To view the quotes and conversation mentioned in this article, go to http://www.washingtonhotlist.com/mccains-the-man-indeed/ [...]
In late 1972 and early 1973, he drilled with the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group of the Alabama Air National Guard, having moved to Montgomery, Alabama to work on the unsuccessful U.S. Senate campaign of Republican Winton M. Blount.