Is John McCain a Conservative?

[Bluemoon_Rising]

February 01, 2008
Is John McCain a Conservative?
Real Clear Politics
By Robert Robb

One of the larger questions overhanging the race for the Republican presidential nomination is this: Is John McCain a conservative? That question is best answered by borrowing a distinction Bill Buckley has made about both President Bushs. According to Buckley, they are "conservative," but not "a conservative."

By that, Buckley meant that they would usually list toward the conservative position, but weren't anchored by the philosophical tenets of modern American conservatism he did so much to expound and popularize. To answer the question of how much McCain can be expected to list conservative requires, regrettably, also borrowing from Bill Clinton: It depends on what the definition of "conservatism" is.



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/is_john_mccain_a_conservative.html

[Timberwolf]

No.

'nuf sed....

[Taylor1]

I think fox explained it well.

[Timberwolf]

I'm no fox...grrrrr....:biggrin:

[BuckeyeMike]

Not only no.........but HELL NO!

[ThomasMore]

No.

[DoctorDoom]

No, but he IS more conservative than Osama Obama or the Bitch Queen. Allowing the RATs to win on November 4th to "show" the GOP is political suicide.

IMO, it's equivalent to eating a dogshit sandwich rather than a Big Mac because there is no filet mignon on the menu.

[ThomasMore]

I have been looking for a link for this, but I just saw McCain quoted on Fox News as making an "appeal" to conservatives thus: "Who will they trust more to appoint conservative justices? Hillary or me?"

This from the architect of McCain-Feingold, which means that the First Amendment is fine, except when it comes to political speech.

He has already indicated that Alito is not his kind of justice (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?p=636885), then he tried to weasel out of his own statements.

Judicial Trust meter:

Hillary = 0
McCain = 0

It's a tie.

His statement also shows he arrogantly assumes that we owe him our support -- that we have nowhere to go but him. That is true, but we also have nowhere to go WITH him. He has done nothing to support the conservative movement or his own party, and he thinks we will follow him wherever HE wants to go out of our concern over the alternative. He is not taking us where we want to go, either.

I will vote for any conservative Republican candidate I can -- for Congress and in the local elections. (The problem is Illinois is full of McCain-type politicians and very few conservatives. That is why the Republicans are in a now-permanent minority here.)

I won't vote for Obama. I won't vote for Hillary. And I won't vote for McCain.

[ThomasMore]

IMO, it's equivalent to eating a dogshit sandwich rather than a Big Mac because there is no filet mignon on the menu.

Doc, the problem in a McCain v. (Hillary/Obama) election is that there is no filet mignon, and there is no Big Mac.

The choice is whether we want our excrement on the bun runny or hard.

[DoctorDoom]

One thing is certain: we WILL have either McCain or the RAT as the Potus on 5 Nov 2008. If McCain has one conservative position, that's one more than the RATs have.

If you can live with four years of that neocommmunist Blowjob Billy's third term as POTUS, that is of course your right. I for one refuse to accept that.

BTW, the question could be asked, "Is George W. Bush a Conservative?" The answer would be no. Does that mean that we would have been no worse off with 4 years of John F'ing "I served in Vietnam" Kerry or AlBore?

| Sidebar On |

The POTUS office has for the last 20 years been held by two families. Shall we allow 24/28 years of that domination? In 2016, we can elect Jeb Bush for the first 4 of his 8 years. And in 2024 Chelsea should be ready for her 8 years, her qualification for office being that both of her parents were presidents. Then we have Jenna and Barbara Bush for 8 years each. 60 years of Bush and Clinton would be history-making.

| Sidebar Off |

[ThomasMore]

Doc, I know that if the Clintons get back into the White House, that's the end of our country. And I think that is the most likely scenario regardless of how I vote.

Of course, if Hill gets the office, Jeb will never get the chance...

The press will turn on McCain once the primaries are done, and he will never be trusted or loved by the grassroots -- a disfavor he has sown for many years.

It makes me ill that the alternative is McCain -- and he is only just barely an alternative. My dislike, disrespect and distrust of the man is 99 44/100% pure.

[ThomasMore]

As for GWB, the man is not a conservative on a number of issues, but he always put this country first (even though I think he sometimes missed the mark, e.g., border control).

He did a lot of things right, and in some areas, e.g., national defense, tax policy, life issues and judicial appointments, he was a very effective conservative.

Even though I disagree with GWB on some issues, I have a lot of respect for him.

I have no such trust of McCain on any level.

[DoctorDoom]

Doc, I know that if the Clintons get back into the White House, that's the end of our country. And I think that is the most likely scenario regardless of how I vote.That, sad to say, is what I expect. However, I couldn't live with the thought that I played a part, however small, in the destruction.

[TheIrishman]

You have to vote Republican, hoping the man will choose constructionist Supreme Justices.
We definitely wont survive liberal judges.

[Elgalad]

Hope just isn't enough sometimes.

Stephen Breyer or David Souter?

Not sure I see much difference.


-Elgalad

[MrSanity]

He has already indicated that Alito is not his kind of justice (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?p=636885), then he tried to weasel out of his own statements. So you would be getting another John Roberts, instead of another Samuel Alito.

Tell me, what's wrong with John Roberts?

[MrSanity]

Doc, the problem in a McCain v. (Hillary/Obama) election is that there is no filet mignon, and there is no Big Mac.

The choice is whether we want our excrement on the bun runny or hard.The Big Mac analogy works for me. Eating a Big Mac for eight years won't kill you, but after twenty-five years, it's a health risk.

[Elgalad]

McCain would never appoint a judge like Roberts that would overturn unconstitutional legislation like McCain-Feingold.

Hope is one thing, common sense is another.


-Elgalad

[MrSanity]

McCain would never appoint a judge like Roberts that would overturn unconstitutional legislation like McCain-Feingold.

Hope is one thing, common sense is another.


-ElgaladI'd rather let Harriet Miers types on the bench than a pack of Ruth Baders who intend to light our constitution completely on fire in exchange for world communism.

[Naturalized-Texan]

http://www.investors.com/editorial/cartoons/IMAGES/CARTOONS/toon01021108.gif

[Maggie_T]

No.


There. Short and sweet. Thanks, Tom.

[Maggie_T]

Allowing the RATs to win on November 4th to "show" the GOP is political suicide.

Exactly. That's why I won't vote for McCain.

IMO, it's equivalent to eating a dogshit sandwich rather than a Big Mac because there is no filet mignon on the menu.

Well, for once I disagree with you, Doc, darling. IMO, voting for McCain is the equivalent of eating a rat turd sandwich rather than a dogshit sandwich because there is no real meat on the menu.

You say "tomato," I say "tomahto," and all that, I guess.

[maxparrish]

So you would be getting another John Roberts, instead of another Samuel Alito.

Tell me, what's wrong with John Roberts?

There is not another John Roberts. Roberts was selected because of all the major choices he was the only stealth nomination. He was mainly an attorney, not a long-time judge with a conservative set of opinions. He did not publish in academic journals. Everyone assumed he was conservative because of his work for Reagan and by word of mouth, but even his membership in the Federalist society was uncertain.

However, all the other choices that we like are clearly conservative, as was Alito (called a more tempered version of Scalia). What McCain did not like was that he was OBVIOUSLY a conservative in his written opinon. His wife participated in pro-life activities. He was a member of the federalist society.

McCain, the liberal, did not like that. His view of Republicans is like the view by them by democrats...they are to be seen not heard. They are "acceptable" if they don't act religious or tout conservative principles.

So who would McCain appoint? Most likely a choice that would make his "band of brothers" Kennedy (et. al.) happy.

How many times must it be said, McCain is a liberal. Here, let me help:

McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.

In other words: McCain is a Liberal!

[ThomasMore]

So you would be getting another John Roberts, instead of another Samuel Alito.

Tell me, what's wrong with John Roberts?

Nothing is wrong with John Roberts -- he is an outstanding jurist; a once-in-a-lifetime pick. Don't expect McCain to find another Roberts even if he wanted to.

And just because he says he would choose someone like Roberts doesn't mean he will. McCain said that in a promise to conservatives; but he couldn't even bring himself to support Alito, because, well, (shhh...Alito is a conservative. We can't have that now, can we?).

McCain isn't really interested in conservatives, except as vehicles to get him elected. He is much more interested in showing off his "independence" to the press by cozying up to Feingold, Kennedy, Daschle and other Democrats.

This is the "conservative" who considered being Jon Carry's running mate, who said that Hillary Clinton would make a good President, and who stuck his finger in the eyes of conservatives, in the eyes of his colleagues in the Republican party, and in the eyes of the Bush administration -- over and over.

McCain's assumption that conservatives will fall into line because of the alternative bespeaks both an arrogance and a contempt for his supposed constituency.

The man is neither conservative nor trustworthy.

[maxparrish]

Doc:IMO, it's equivalent to eating a dogshit sandwich rather than a Big Mac because there is no filet mignon on the menu.

Well, for once I disagree with you, Doc, darling. IMO, voting for McCain is the equivalent of eating a rat turd sandwich rather than a dogshit sandwich because there is no real meat on the menu.

You say "tomato," I say "tomahto," and all that, I guess.

ROFLO...am I the only one that is constantly laughing at some of our posts - this exchange is priceless (okay, second time I used the word today).

Would you rather die by the hand of the enemy in a firefight or be fragged by a so called friend? Either way your gonna die but I'll be damned if I am gonna hand the grenade to this "ally" and invite him to back me up.

By the way Maggie, perhaps you'd feel better if the rat turd were a served by GOP waiters and on a croissant, with little sprigs of parsley?

[TeenageRepublican]

How many times must it be said, McCain is a liberal. Here, let me help:

McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.
McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal. McCain is a liberal.

In other words: McCain is a Liberal!

*Yelling, even though TR is three feet away* I'm sorry, I can't hear you, all I heard was McCain is a bisexual! Tell me something I don't know!
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/X/e/1/mccain_bush_brokeback.jpg

[Wyatt_Junker]

So who would McCain appoint? Most likely a choice that would make his "band of brothers" Kennedy (et. al.) happy.


Let's back up a bit. Forget McCain. All we need to do is regard history.

Before we rip an imaginary hole into McCain's colostomy bag, WHO DID Ronald Reagan appoint?

I shouldn't have to remind anyone. And if we're going to preemptively bash McCain on this point, then we should likewise renounce Reagan for his actual and proven incompetence.

Reagan was a near derelict as two thirds of his appointments managed to rob the Constitution of its meaning at every decision. Kennedy who appalled legal scholars by his fetish of referring to European law as illumination into our own bewildered even liberals. And we needn't be reminded of the other screwy geezer with the bleach-white afro, good old Sandra Day, whose only contribution to liberty was proportional to the amount of glucosamine that was crammed into her daily pillbox.

Seriously, if we're going to insist on being as serially fantasist to judge someone on their supposed future picks as being somehow left of Bader Ginsburg, then we might also want to point out our own hypocrisy for either voting for Reagan or applauding the dead coot.

I'm with Doc. This isn't a zero sum game.

Its a zero plus one game.

Give me one issue that is better, a millimeter more conservative, than Hill-O-Bama and while I may not be down with that candidate, I'll still vote for them for the same reason that Reagan wasn't a conservative but now he's made the all-star lineup(for some reason). But to be honest, he was just another chump like all politicians are. The best thing I will remember about Reagan was his cutting tax rates from a business-choking 70% down to 29%. Awesome stuff. But he sucked as a con in so many other ways. I'm glad he beat Jimbo though.

You can apply lesser evils in any context. Its still lesser evils no matter who, what or where.

When it comes to politics nothing is sacred.

[Riverboat]

Its a zero plus one game. . . The best thing I will remember about Reagan was his cutting tax rates from a business-choking 70% down to 29%. Awesome stuff. But he sucked as a con in so many other ways. . . When it comes to politics nothing is sacred.But at least Reagan recognized an enemy when he saw it, and wasn't afraid to call a spade a spade. Evil Empire? Indeed. Matched only by the satanic methods employed by the gee-whiz-bang-hadists. On that score, I have to give Bush and McCain credit. I'm still sore about Reagan not pulling the plug on the Department of Education, leaving it for W to fill that sandbox with more sand than a beach berm.

Politics is a contact sport. If your head is sensitive, put on a helmet and don't be a crybaby.

[Wyatt_Junker]

What made Reagan great was he was a simpleton. That's what makes a con a con. That's what makes them great.

K.I.S.S.

Now, a lefty is into 'the complex' 'issues' and 'problems' that 'we face' and therefore a lefty wants 'change' in order to 'overcome' 'the struggle' that 'all Americans' face.

Complicated stuff there.

For a lefty, politics is like rocket science. You have to have your fingers resting on all the chrome plated switches and dials ALL THE TIME. Its tricky. Complex for sure. You have to control everything. To be a lefty you have to be one of those people who can pat themselves on the head WHILE ALSO rubbing their hand around in a circle over their belly with the OTHER HAND!

Complicated.

For Bush and for Reagan it was enough to get a couple things done. Cut taxes and bomb bad people.

For a con you don't need to change the world. In fact, 'change' is gay. At least for a con. No. Just shoot bad people, make sure they're dead and give people back their money. Short, sweet and righteous.

But a lefty weeps for bums and hobos and wants to change the world to make all the pain go away. They want to rewire human nature. They want to take Mr. Johnson's money away from him after making him complete 105 pages of IRS forms and then punish him a little for being so selfish, then electronically deposit his cash into a reserve account where people who know better can tap into it and do GREAT THINGS with it, complicated things, like re-route it to ponzi schemes like SSI or, better, use it to show other people how kind you are by giving it away to people who drool into dixie cups.

I mean, you want complicated? Take Hillary for example. She's going to rework the entire healthcare industry in one short year. She's going to take a couple trillion more of your money in a single year and cut it into little paper people holding hands and wrap it around her Christmas tree and make all the pain go away. She's going to make people so that they never have to cry again, EVER. She is going to talk to dictators and make them like us. That's complicated. Very difficult. But she and Obama are going to do it. Oprah thinks so too.

The GOP. What can they do? They're old men. They don't have the ability to be so dynamic. They're simpletons. They just give Americans back their money so that they can keep it and kill murderers. Cons are evil.

[Riverboat]

Take Hillary for example. She's going to rework the entire healthcare industry in one short year. She's going to take a couple trillion more of your money in a single year and cut it into little paper people holding hands and wrap it around her Christmas tree and make all the pain go away. I'm mostly worried about the kind of people she's going to put in that village that she wants to raise our child.

[DoctorDoom]

In view of the alternative, I've concluded that no matter how bad McCain is, he has my vote. He can't hold a candle to the evil of the left.

The voters in the primaries made their choice. We are thus given the option of McCain or four more years of co-president Clinton—"America is getting two for the price of one." We can survive McCain. The Clintons will destroy this country.

Coupled with increased RAT domination of Congress, we will die as a nation. I for one refuse to be forced to tell my kids, "Sorry, but I sat on my ass and did nothing. You are well and truly f**ked, and I share the blame."

I'd much rather say, "You are well and truly f**ked, but I opposed it."

[TheIrishman]

“Looking forward to the next presidency, we see that Justice Stevens is 87, Justice Ginsburg 74, Justices Kennedy and Scalia 71, Justice Breyer 69 and Justice Souter 68. Perhaps all will be sitting in January 2013. Perhaps all will be retired. Voters who care about the Supreme Court ought to assume that the next president will have an impact on the future course of the Supreme Court greater than any president in modern times. The Court of course affects every aspect of American life, from the conduct of the war to the protection of the unborn, the right to worship and speak freely, the right to bear arms and the right to be free from intrusive governmental oversight. The Court can chose to protect private property or, as has been the case for decades, almost completely ignore this foundational right. The Court is the country’s future in many respects, and the president is the keeper of the court.” —Hugh Hewitt

[Naturalized-Texan]

“Looking forward to the next presidency, we see that Justice Stevens is 87, Justice Ginsburg 74, Justices Kennedy and Scalia 71, Justice Breyer 69 and Justice Souter 68. Perhaps all will be sitting in January 2013. Perhaps all will be retired. Voters who care about the Supreme Court ought to assume that the next president will have an impact on the future course of the Supreme Court greater than any president in modern times. The Court of course affects every aspect of American life, from the conduct of the war to the protection of the unborn, the right to worship and speak freely, the right to bear arms and the right to be free from intrusive governmental oversight. The Court can chose to protect private property or, as has been the case for decades, almost completely ignore this foundational right. The Court is the country’s future in many respects, and the president is the keeper of the court.” —Hugh Hewitt
Thanks for providing a resounding case for voting for McCain over either Hillary or Obama.

[DesertFox]

They ain't no "resounding case." McCain is a rotten choice for prez. Horrible. Dangerous for America.

He is better than Hillary. He might be better than Obama. None of which makes him any good. He isn't.

[Maggie_T]

Thank you, Fox.

[UnkHiram]

February 01, 2008
Is John McCain a Conservative?
John McCain is as much a conservative as the 2008 Miami Dolphins are World Champions