McCain is NOT a Conservative
26 January 2008I was listening to an interview with Florida governor Charlie Crist following his endorsement of John McCain tonight. Among all the glowing compliments he had for McCain was that McCain is a great conservative. I continue to hear this same thing parroted from all manner of so called conservatives. It makes me wonder whether these people are attempting to redefine conservatism or if they have any idea what conservative even means.
The so called conservative pundits have been doing the same thing of course. And McCain characterizes himself as a conservative as well when he knows very well that he is not. And through all of this it appears that the electorate is buying the story. I suppose the old saw that voters have short memories is true.
The point of this post is to point out how contrary to conservatism John McCain’s record and rhetoric really is. In act after and and statement after statement John McCain has demonstrated himself to be anything but a conservative.
A great place to start in examining that record is a piece by Mark Levin at National Review Online entitled The Real McCain Record. In that article Levin chronicles McCain’s record and a plethora of issues. Beginning with McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform (which limited the only class of free speech the founders had in mind, political speech) Levin demonstrates how far from conservatism McCain is and has been. The list includes the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill, the McCain-Lieberman anti America global warming bill, the McCain-Kennedy-Edwards trial bar bill masquerading as a patient’s bill of rights and McCain’s attempts to decimate the America pharmaceutical industry by importing drugs from Canada.
Then there was McCain’s opposition to both Bush tax cuts. Today McCain claims his opposition was based on his desire to also cut federal spending. Even that reasoning is weak considering that penalizes tax payers for the government’s excesses but that was not his rhetoric at the time. Rather, McCain engaged in typical liberal class warfare rhetoric.
According to Levin, as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee “McCain was consistently hostile to American enterprise, from media and pharmaceutical companies to technology and energy companies.” Then there’s McCain’s role in the “Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees.”
Levin then goes on to McCain’s defense record. Of course, McCain supporters claim that he will vigorously prosecute the war against radical Islamic fascism. McCain’s record, however, suggests otherwise.
His supporters point to essentially one policy strength, McCain’s early support for a surge and counterinsurgency. It has now evolved into McCain taking credit for forcing the president to adopt General David Petreaus’s strategy. Where’s the evidence to support such a claim?
Moreover, Iraq is an important battle in our war against the Islamo-fascist threat. But the war is a global war, and it most certainly includes the continental United States, which, after all, was struck on 9/11. How does McCain fare in that regard?
McCain-ACLU — the unprecedented granting of due-process rights to unlawful enemy combatants (terrorists).
McCain has repeatedly called for the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and the introduction of al-Qaeda terrorists into our own prisons — despite the legal rights they would immediately gain and the burdens of managing such a dangerous population.
While McCain proudly and repeatedly points to his battles with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who had to rebuild the U.S. military and fight a complex war, where was McCain in the lead-up to the war — when the military was being dangerously downsized by the Clinton administration and McCain’s friend, former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen? Where was McCain when the CIA was in desperate need of attention? Also, McCain was apparently in the dark about al-Qaeda like most of Washington, despite a decade of warnings.
According to Gun Owners of America, McCain voted in 2004 to force gun owners to purchase trigger locks when they purchased a handgun. In 2004 he offered an amendment to a gun show bill that would have banned the private sale of handguns at gun shows unless a background check was run. The article includes numerous incidents of McCain treading on the second amendment. That should come as no surprise considering his view of the first amendment.
The Club for Growth said, “While Senator McCain’s economic record contains a number of pro-growth positions, such as his support for school choice and free trade, and his steadfast opposition to wasteful government spending, his overall record is tainted by a marked antipathy towards the free market and individual freedom.”
Let us not forget the Keating Five scandal of 1980s. This from Wizbangblue.com:
Few remember that John McCain only narrowly survived the Keating Five Scandal of the 1980′s involving the corrupt dealings of Charles H. Keating and the Lincoln Savings & Loan. Keating was responsible for the collapse of Lincoln, yet gave McCain and four other members of congress over $1.3 million in political contributions to help influence banking and other legislation. McCain later attempted to whitewash his role in this scandal by becoming the poster boy in the congress for campaign finance reform.
Slate.com has a pretty thorough explanation of what happened and it isn’t pretty for McCain. Charles Keating ended up going to prison for bilking depositors in his Lincoln Savings and Loan out of billions of dollars. It was the biggest of the savings and loan scandals and McCain was wrapped up in it. Keating contributed large sums of money to McCain’s campaign and sought McCain’s assistance with federal investigators. McCain claimed he was just making sure a constituent was being treated fairly but Keating was McCain’s long time friend as well as contributor.
John McCain’s record is one of corruption, consistent opposition to the Republican Party and conservative ideals. He has a reputation for fits of anger and anyone in Washington knows that you cross John McCain at your own peril because he will do everything in his power to get even. He is dishonest and will do and say pretty much anything to get elected.
Much has been said over the last few days about Rush Limbaugh’s assertion that he may not vote for the Republican nominee this year. I’ve had my disagreements with Rush during this campaign season but on this I’m in agreement. If John McCain wins the Republican nomination I will not vote for him. I’ve written about being careful about what you say regarding other Republicans because you may find yourself having to vote for them. In this case I’m not worried about it because there is no conceivable circumstance where I would vote for McCain. He is in the same category as Lindsey Graham. In McCain’s case I won’t vote for the Democrat nominee but I will either vote third party or not vote at all in the presidential race. There is simply no way I can, in good conscience, vote for this man. And I’m convinced that there are many like me.
That brings us to the widespread claim that John McCain is the only candidate who can beat Hillary Clinton (or Obama). I don’t believe McCain can beat either of them. Despite what the polls may say, McCain is the least electable of the Republican candidates. He does not inspire the rank and file of the Republican Party. There is so much bad blood that he would only serve to divide the party. And the claims that those in the middle, the so called moderates, would vote for him in large numbers is, I think, simply untrue. By and large those people will break for the Democrat candidate. McCain will get some of them, to be sure, but not enough to do the job. As for the Republican base, many will stay home. Others will vote third party. Some may even vote for the Democrat in protest. But at the end of the day, McCain will not have the support of the base. He will not have the support of conservatives.
And all those “conservatives” endorsing McCain today are, I believe, doing so because they believe the claim that he is the only one who can win. It is a lie perpetuated by the left with the help of the media. As Rush pointed out to a caller on Friday, what good is the endorsement of the New York Times? Does anyone believe they will endorse McCain over the Democrat nominee? Of course not.
UPDATE:
For even more details about McCain’s record of dishonesty and liberal policies, see Ann Coulter’s column, ‘Straight Talk’ Express Takes Scenic Route to Truth. The more you learn the more you realize McCain is a scoundrel!
Print This Post
Tags: Conservatives, Elections, John McCain, PrimariesRelated Posts
- McCain Wins South Carolina
- For the Good of the Party
- Huckabee Wins Kansas
- A Bleak Future for GOP
- Conservative John McCain?



February 1st, 2008 at 1:08 pm
[...] McCain is NOT a Conservative [...]