Saturday, January 12, 2008

Conservatives Remembering Why We Didn't Vote for McCain in 2000

John McCain, the proud, grizzled, go-it-alone maverick from Arizona, is basking gleefully in the afterglow of his narrow New Hampshire win. McCain is not the frontrunner. Nobody is. Yet if he somehow pulls out more victories in early primary states that might change. I, along with conservatives everywhere, are scared to death of that proposition, for it would destroy the conservative coalition as we know it. It would rip apart the Reagan coalation of social conservatives, fiscal conservaties, and defense conservatives.

There were lots of reasons conservatives didn't vote for McCain when he ran for president in 2000. Since that time he's given us many more reasons not to vote for him. Here they are (taken from Mark Levin's National Review article):

McCain-Feingold — the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.

McCain-Kennedy — the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.

McCain-Lieberman — the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry — through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases — in American history.

McCain-Kennedy-Edwards — the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients’ bill of rights.

McCain-Reimportantion of Drugs — a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).

And McCain’s stated opposition to the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was largely based on socialist, class-warfare rhetoric — tax cuts for the rich, not for the middle class. The public record is full of these statements. Today, he recalls only his insistence on accompanying spending cuts.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, McCain was consistently hostile to American enterprise, from media and pharmaceutical companies to technology and energy companies.

McCain also led 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.

And then there’s the McCain defense record.

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.

To read the full text of Levin's National Review article on McCain click here.


Anonymous said...

With the exception of Wyoming, truly RED states have not voted yet. When they do, they will take McCain down. They did not support him in 2000, and they will not support him now. McCain is NOT a conservative. He can NEVER capture the base of the party. Because of this he cannot and should not win the GOP nomination. If he somehow does grab the nomination, it will tear the GOP apart.

colecurtis said...

Who is anonymous you? that is wishful thinking on your part if you think
If you are stupid enough to support this idiot maybe you are living in the wrong country because there is nothing presidential about that idiot that you are supporting.
Are you in the photo stealing McCain signs?
All that I have to say "My Friend" is what have you done today to make you feel proud? john mccain has served his country all of his life and continues to serve can you say that? Didn't think so. So this next 2 articles & video are especially for you and all of the others like you:

Anonymous said...

Hey colecurtis!!!!! Here's one for you. The only semi-valid argument McCain has made in this whole process is his viability as a POSSIBLE secretary of defense. He is ONLY one dimensional and even on that note he didn't force Bush into the surge strategy. He's 72 yrs old for crying out loud. Since when does military service entirely qualify you for the president excluding all other necessary skills and competence. We don't question his patriotism but patriots aren't inherently excellent at everything they do. SORRY!!!