John McCain: Republican Apostate?
Hillary Clinton speaks at a campaign stop in Davenport, Iowa January 2, 2008. REUTERS/Brian Snyder
The cherrypicked quote alone seems, on the surface, indicting. But what if we broaden the context in which the statement was made? From the transcript, February 25, 2005, Meet the Press interview with Senator Clinton and Senator McCain. In closing the show, Tim Russert:
MR. RUSSERT: Senator McCain, a serious question: Do you think the lady to your right would make a good president?Isn't it obvious, that this was just a lighthearted interchange, following a very serious interview? A moment of humor and civility? Why aren't Democrats up-in-arms over Senator Clinton essentially returning the compliment, agreeing that "absolutely" Senator McCain would also make a good president? What would have been a more appropriate response? In-your-face disrespect? Crude and rude discourse? How unpresidential. The full context matters. If you can't accept it, if you insist on seeing only what you have led yourself to believe, then you are suffering from McCain Derangement Syndrome.SEN. CLINTON: Oh, we can't hear you, Tim. We can't hear you.
SEN. McCAIN: Yeah, you're breaking up. I am sure that Senator Clinton would make a good president. I happen to be a Republican and would support, obviously, a Republican nominee, but I have no doubt that Senator Clinton would make a good president.
MR. RUSSERT: Equal time, Senator Clinton. The gentleman to your left?
SEN. CLINTON: Absolutely.
MR. RUSSERT: We may have a fusion ticket right here.
SEN. McCAIN: Thanks for doing that to us. Thanks for doing that to us, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: A fusion ticket.
SEN. McCAIN: We're both in trouble.
SEN. CLINTON: Yeah. We're in trouble now. Thanks a lot.
SEN. McCAIN: We're both in trouble.
MR. RUSSERT: Be safe, everybody.
SEN. CLINTON: Thanks, Tim.
SEN. McCAIN: Thank you.
Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain listens to a question during a campaign rally at Hope College in Holland, Michigan, January 14, 2008. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
The following isn't an attack against Russ Vaughn. I am just using his post as a springboard for my own. His is not a unique argument and is a sore point for many who have been led to believe that McCain has ever been anything other than loyal to the Republican Party.
From Robert Draper's book, Dead Certain, pg242,Go ahead and Google “McCain switching parties?” and look at the pages of hits which take you to articles from every sector of the media examining whether or not John McCain was preparing to switch parties as far back as 2001 and continuing into the 2004 campaign. The most chilling of all these reports is one from the Boston Herald in which McCain is quoted as responding to ABC’s Charles Gibson’s question as to whether he would even entertain the idea of running as John Kerry’s VP if Kerry extended such an offer,
“John Kerry is a very close friend of mine. We’ve been friends for years. Obviously I would entertain it." (click here for pdf)
That is a very telling quote. In his own words, to further his political ambitions, John McCain would have considered abandoning his party and his supposedly conservative principles to serve on the ticket with one of the most liberal candidates ever to run as a Democrat presidential candidate. Even worse, reading down, one reads that Kerry now claims it was McCain’s people who initiated such a proposal, not that we’d be inclined to lend too much credibility to that particular source.
when John Kerry pleaded with McCain, throughout the early summer of 2004, to be his running mate- asking more than once, sometimes late in the evening, begging his Republican colleague to at least think about it- McCain's refusal seemed, as with the Daschle gambit, almost a little too polite...as if McCain rather enjoyed the agony that this was putting Bush through.That reads like a rather honest account. McCain does seem to enjoy himself a little too much in these instances, and could easily have quelled the media buzz a lot more effectively than he did. But the fact remains, he has never left the Party and has campaigned not only for the man who defeated him in 2000, as well as delivered a 20 minute speech on President Bush's behalf at the RNC in 2004, but has also campaigned on behalf of such Senators as Rick Santorum.
Saying he would "entertain" the notion of a VP slot with Kerry was a stupid thing to say. One of those "gotcha macaca" moments, for which politicians suffer an excoriating woodshedding. Given that Senator McCain is friends with Senator Kerry, I believe that his response is only in being polite to his friend; maybe even flattered by the offer. But there is no proof that I have seen, that indicates Senator McCain ever actually, seriously, considered accepting a Kerry-McCain ticket.
And I think the real proof is in the following. It is an example of how a story takes on a life of its own, with people selectively remembering only what they wish to have heard, to reinforce their "McCain bigotry":
McCain on talk of run with Kerry: 'No, no and no'Michael Medved on McCain's loyalty to the Republican Party:
Arizona senator says Bush deserves re-election
Monday, April 12, 2004
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Trying to stamp out speculation that he might consider joining Democratic Sen. John Kerry's ticket, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona insisted Sunday that he would not do so under any circumstances.
He said he would campaign and vote for President Bush in the fall, despite their policy differences.
"No, no and no. I will not leave the Republican Party. I cherish the ideals and principles of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan," he said on NBC's "Meet The Press."
"I will not be vice president of the United States under any circumstances. I feel that I can be far more effective in helping shape policy in the future of this country as a United States senator."
McCain, who ran a hard-fought and frequently contentious campaign against Bush for the Republican nomination in 2000, is a close friend of Kerry's and like him is a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War, having endured more than five years as a prisoner.
He raised eyebrows last month in an interview with ABC when he said that if Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee, asked him to be his running mate, "Obviously, I would entertain it."
McCain went on to say that he thought such a scenario was impossible because the Democratic Party would never accept his conservative views on abortion, trade and national security.
He tried to quash the speculation raised by his comments by putting out a statement the same day saying he would not run.
Nevertheless, the chatter has persisted, fueled by media reports quoting Kerry advisers saying they think a Kerry-McCain ticket would be an unbeatable combination against Bush.
But McCain said Sunday that he believes Bush "deserves re-election."
"Have we agreed on every issue? Of course not. We didn't agree on every issue when we ran against each other in a primary," he said.
"I am not embarrassed to say that John Kerry is a friend of mine, but I want George Bush to be re-elected president of the United States."
McCain, 67, is running for re-election to his Senate seat.
He has never backed Democratic candidates for president or lesser posts – other than supporting his friend Joe Lieberman in his Independent campaign for US Senate in 2006. Over the years, he has campaigned tirelessly for Republican office-holders in every corner of the country – including vigorous campaigning that helped win elections for his former rival George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004.The truth, is nowhere near as exciting as the fantasy, that Senator McCain "almost jumped ships"; or that his relationship with the conservative base and the Republican Party is more nuanced and complex than simply believing: "McCain disloyal. McCain bad. McCain liberal. McCain traitor." To believe all that hyperbolic rhetoric requires a willful suspension of disbelief.
Cross-posted at Flopping Aces
Hat tip: The Michael Medved Show
Labels: Election, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John McCain, Tim Russert
posted by The WordSmith from Nantucket at 2/10/2008 07:44:00 PM
13 Comments:
Great de-bunking for some of the nonsense out there, Word! Some are so determined to show McCain as some kind of traitor to the party that they will use the cherry picked remarks against him, our own designated candidate. It's all insane. It simply creates more bad will.
I'm not worried about what McCain says during a moment of levity on some talking head show or being misquoted, it happens all the time. I'm more concerned with the things McCain says when he means the words he says.
Presidential ambition is a disease that can only be cured by embalming fluid. John McCain
I haven't heard the Clinton-as-president quote from anyone. Most of what I don't like about McCain is what he's DONE: Vote against tax cuts, Shamnesty immigration "reform." Plus, I can't stand his nasty temperament.
But then again, I've suffered through several presidents I couldn't stand and managed to survive. Surviving a McCain presidency will be better than trying to survive a Hillary or Obama presidency.
Huckabee is out of his league altogether.
karen,
It really is McCain Derangement Syndrome. Similar to how Bush is oft times misquoted and willfully misheard, to have his words spun in order to "self-fulfill" preconceived Bush-hatred.
jennifer,
You're one of the smart ones. Disagreement on policy issues and actual character traits, rather than perceived flaws, that are more a reflection of one's own biases against the man.
I haven't heard the Clinton-as-president quote from anyone.
That's odd. That and the "entertaining" the Kerry VP slot myth are oft mentioned by those who have already made up their minds about how bad McCain is. When you've got McCDS, you start making stuff up, to feel validation.
As far as voting against tax cuts, wasn't it because we weren't cutting spending at the same time? Certainly, I have not liked it when he resorts to class warfare language of rich and poor; but he is promising to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, and I don't see why we shouldn't take "the straight shooter" at his words. Immigration is a dismal problem, but his position is no different than President Bush's. Certainly, the status quo is not good and reform is necessary.
As for his temperament, I think it could be good as well as bad for him. It depends on how its directed.
Sometimes, you have to like firebrands when it's directed in the right direction.
John Fund:
Getting to 270
Can John McCain win in November?
February 11, 2008
The conventional wisdom is that Republicans start at a serious disadvantage in trying to hold the White House. A still-unpopular war and a softening economy certainly represent challenges. So far, most of the enthusiasm in the primaries has been on the Democratic side, with some 13 million voters casting Democratic ballots and fewer than 9 million picking a GOP one.
But despite these obstacles, John McCain will now begin to assemble his fall election team with surprisingly good poll results. The average of all the recent national polls summarized by RealClearPolitics.com show the Arizona senator leading Hillary Clinton by 47% to 45% and trailing Barack Obama by only 44% to 47%. Both results are within the statistical margin of error for national polls, so it's fair to say Mr. McCain starts out with an even chance of winning.
How could that be? The answer is that the same maverick streak and occasional departures from conservative orthodoxy that make conservatives queasy have the opposite effect on independents and even some Democrats. Mr. McCain's favorable numbers with independents exceed those of Barack Obama, who has emphasized his desire to work across party lines.
* * *
All of this plays out in the Electoral College map that is the key to victory in November. One candidate or the other must win at least 270 electoral votes. The assumption has been that Democrats have an advantage because they can supposedly win every state John Kerry took in 2004 plus Ohio, which has fallen on hard economic times and seen its state Republican Party discredited. That would give the Democratic nominee at least 272 electoral votes.
But Mr. McCain's rise to the GOP nomination throws that calculation out the window. He is the only potential GOP candidate who is clearly positioned to keep the basic red-blue template of how each state voted in 2004 intact and then be able to move into blue territory.
Let's assume that Ohio goes to either Mr. Obama or Ms. Clinton. It's at least as likely that Mr. McCain could carry New Hampshire. The Granite State went only narrowly to Mr. Kerry, a senator from a neighboring state, and Mr. McCain has unique advantages there. New Hampshire elections are determined by how that state's fiercely independent voters go, and Mr. McCain has won over many of them in both the 2000 and 2008 GOP primaries. He spent 47 days in New Hampshire before this year's primary and is well-known in the state. If Mr. McCain lost Ohio but carried New Hampshire and all the other states Mr. Bush took in 2004, he would win, 270-268.
It's true that Democrats will make a play for states other than Ohio that Mr. Bush won. Iowa is a perennially competitive state that could go either way this fall. Arkansas polls show that Hillary Clinton might well be able to carry the state where she served as First Lady for over a decade.
But Mr. McCain's roots in the Rocky Mountain West complicate Democratic efforts to take states in that region. His fierce individualism and support for property rights play well in Nevada and Colorado, which were close in 2004. New Mexico, next door to Mr. McCain's Arizona, gave Mr. Bush a very narrow 49.6% to 49% victory in 2004. But Mr. McCain's nuanced position on immigration marks him as the GOP candidate who is most likely to hold the Hispanic voters who are the key to carrying New Mexico.
Mr. McCain also puts several Midwest battleground states in play. Should he pick Minnesota's Gov. Tim Pawlenty as his vice presidential choice, he might have a leg up on carrying both Minnesota and Wisconsin, which went narrowly for Mr. Kerry in 2004.
"The media markets in western Wisconsin get Minneapolis television and are oriented to their news--Pawlenty would be a plus there," says Rep. Paul Ryan, a Republican. "McCain's independent stands would play well in that region--which is exactly where GOP presidential candidates have done poorly enough so that they lost statewide by 12,000 votes or so in both 2004 and 2000."
Mr. McCain can be competitive in other blue states. Michigan went Democratic in 2004 by only 3.4% of the total vote, and Oregon by just over 4%. The latest Field Poll in California puts Mr. McCain and Hillary Clinton in a statistical tie. If Democrats have to spend valuable time and resources holding down California, it will make it more difficult for them to take states they lost in 2000 and 2004.
Mr. McCain could even make a foray into the Northeast, where his support from Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Democratic Party's 2000 vice presidential candidate, could put Connecticut in contention. Ditto New Jersey, which Mr. Bush lost by only 53% to 46% in 2004.
Then there is Pennsylvania, which John Kerry carried by only 2.5% points in 2004. Michael Smerconish, the most popular talk-show host in Philadelphia, believes Mr. McCain has a real chance to carry the state. While Mr. Smerconish is a conservative who didn't support Mr. McCain, he thinks "the conservative blasting of McCain is good publicity around here." His independence and maverick status are exactly the qualities that could help him carry the tightly contested Philadelphia suburbs that voted to re-elect GOP senator Arlen Specter, a moderate, in 2004 but rejected conservative Rick Santorum in 2006.
* * *
In some ways Mr. McCain resembles Nicolas Sarkozy, the French conservative who won last year's presidential election even though the retiring president, Jacques Chirac, was unpopular and a member of his own party. "Like Sarko, who was of Chirac's party but not of Chirac, America's swing voters have intuited over the years that there is little love lost between McCain and George Bush," says the blog Race42008.
Mr. Sarkozy was able to convince a majority of French voters that he represented real change that would improve conditions, while his socialist rival, Segolene Royal, represented risky change that could make matters worse. That is precisely the challenge Mr. McCain faces this year against Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.
When you hear that the demise of the Republicans is a foregone conclusion, remember that when the campaign is joined this fall and voters will have to make real choices about the direction of the country, the result is likely to be close. Recall that pundits were ready to crown Michael Dukakis the winner of the 1988 election after he opened up a 17-point edge over George H.W. Bush. In 2000, they declared the race over around Labor Day after Al Gore opened up a clear lead over George W. Bush.
Given that polls show Mr. McCain is currently in a dead heat against either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton, it would be wise for the pundits to show a little humility this year. The Democratic strategists I talk to believe the race will be hard-fought and close, regardless of the direction the economy or the war in Iraq takes.
I'm enjoying my bout of MDS.
Why do you want to ruin my fun?
“I believe my party has gone astray. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy.”—John McCain
"John McCain is the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, so our friend works directly with McCain’s staff on a regular basis. I can’t really share any details, but his experience has been that McCain staffers are habitually heavy handed and abusive, using threats and intimidations to get what they want with complete and utter disregard and disrespect for people to the extent that it would make it very difficult to feel good about a McCain presidency. Maybe that’s how people get things done on Capital Hill, but that’s not the kind of leadership that I want to support."
“I think we can set up a program where amnesty is extended to a certain number of people, Amnesty has to be an important part...” - John McCain, 2003
Can't wait to see what words you'll use to smith these with.
Wordsmith: This is awesome work, deserving of a wide distribution.
Context is always missing in all of the "damning" indicators of McCain's apostasies and treason.
What's not in dispute, however, is that no matter how much evidence is marshalled in McCain's defense, none of it will get through to those suffering from MDS. Newsweek's cover story this week interviewed a couple of young men from Fallwell's Liberty University who attended CPAC, and they both flat out said nothing McCain could have said would have convinced them that he shares and would promote the conservative agenda.
This really is something beyond dislike. Things have gotten to a level of visceral hatred that's frankly pathological!
In any case, keep plugging away! You've hit the motherload with your analysis and insight.
I don't know, WordSmith. McCain just strikes me as a nasty guy. I'll vote for him, but I'm not going to enjoy it.
I'm enjoying my bout of MDS.
Why do you want to ruin my fun?
Go on with your fun, mike. God forbid that I should be in the way of that, by making some sense.
Can't wait to see what words you'll use to smith these with.
Thanks for weighing in, winghunter.
“I believe my party has gone astray. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy.”—John McCain
As with the "Hillary would make a fine president" quote, context is important:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A bit of context makes this statement a little less surprising, however. Senator McCain has long been regarded as something of a political maverick who travels the campaign trail in a bus called the "Straight Talk Express" and has expressed sharp disagreement with Republican principles and Bush administration policies on several occasions, and the quote reproduced above was something he said back in 2004 during a legislative seminar hosted by a Democratic congressman from Massachusetts at a time when rumors were circulating that McCain might actually be tabbed for the vice-presidential slot on a ticket with Democratic senator John Kerry (also from Massachusetts).
Here's how the Boston Herald reported his statement:
Sen. John McCain unleashed an attack on his own party, saying the GOP is "astray" on key issues and criticizing President Bush on the war in Iraq.
"I believe my party has gone astray," McCain said, criticizing GOP stands on environmental and minority issues.
"I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy," he said. "But I also feel the Republican Party can be brought back to the principles I articulated before."
The maverick senator made the remarks at a legislative seminar hosted by U.S. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Lowell) as he again ruled out running on a ticket with Democrat John F. Kerry.
The Arizona Republican took on President Bush for failing to prepare Americans for a long involvement in Iraq, saying, "You can't fly on an aircraft carrier and declare victory and have the deaths continue. You can't do that."
McCain said the U.S. should seek more U.N. involvement in Iraq. "Many people in this room question, legitimately, whether we should have gone in or not," he said, adding that that debate "will be part of this presidential campaign."
When questioned about his statement during an appearance with host Chris Matthews on MSNBC's Hardball a few days later, Senator McCain said he felt that the Herald had presented his words out of context:
Matthews: Senator McCain, here's what you said about the Republican Party in the Boston Herald: "I believe my party has gone astray. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy." Di the Herald get you right?
McCain: No.
Matthews: You didn't say that?
McCain: I said that, but let me put it in the proper context. I was speaking to some constituents of Congressman Marty Meehan. The question [was]: Why don't you run as Senator Kerry's running mate? I am a Teddy Roosevelt Republican and [an] Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt Republican. I will not leave my party.
Now I think that the Democratic Party is a fine party. I still think we need a two-party system in this country. I don't want to be a Democrat. I'm proud of my party and its heritage. That article in the Boston Herald was the most taken out of context, several quotes, some of which you'll probably give me....
Matthews: No, I think we've had enough here.
McCain: It was incredible. I mean, I said I don't want to leave my party. I love my party. I think it's gone astray. Sure I think it's gone astray on climate change, pork barrel spending. Tak a look at this highway bill that they just [ran] through the House. They're trying to attack the energy bill, the pork barrel energy bill, on this problem of taxation of corporation overseas. I mean, the deficit is now $7 trillion. I think that that is a party gone astray.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Since when has it been wrong to criticize one's own party? Is McCain wrong about spending? The size of government? The hardline conservative base has been highly critical of the Republican party for the past few years, and much of it on legitimate grounds.
"John McCain is the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, so our friend works directly with McCain’s staff on a regular basis. I can’t really share any details, but his experience has been that McCain staffers are habitually heavy handed and abusive, using threats and intimidations to get what they want with complete and utter disregard and disrespect for people to the extent that it would make it very difficult to feel good about a McCain presidency. Maybe that’s how people get things done on Capital Hill, but that’s not the kind of leadership that I want to support."
Source link? Or must I just chalk it up to hearsay and gossip? More media spin?
The quote is rather a "weak argument" anyway. I can find others speaking ill of other politician staffers and campaigners, as well. So what?
“I think we can set up a program where amnesty is extended to a certain number of people, Amnesty has to be an important part...” - John McCain, 2003
Source link please.
I'm not happy with immigration reform, as it was; but here's another perspective:
LIE #5: McCain is an advocate of “amnesty” and “open borders.”
TRUTH: As Senior Senator from Arizona, McCain has fought for years to tighten border security, stop illegal immigration, increase workplace enforcement and to resist “amnesty” for those who entered the country without authorization.
McCain’s rival for the nomination, Mitt Romney, unequivocally and rightly acknowledged that his opponent’s position in no way amounts to “amnesty” or “open borders.” In the Fox News debate in South Carolina on January 10, Governor Romney declared: “All of us on this stage agree… that we secure the border, we have the fence, and we have enough Border Patrol agents to secure the border; and that we have an employment verification system of some kind….We all agree that anybody who’s committed a crime should be sent home.”
As Romney pointed then out: “The place of difference between us is what we do with the 12 million people who are here illegally.” Romney’s answer? “Those who are here illegally today would be looked at person by person, given a specific time period by which they arrange their affairs, they stay here during that time period. When that time period is over, they go home…”
Alone among Presidential candidates, McCain has shown the courage to stand up against such simplistic sloganeering. No President will ever succeed in driving out all 12 million illegals – the greatest forced migration in all human history. Illegals represent more than 5% of America’s work force and the cost of firing and, ultimately, deporting for forcing out every one of those people would cripple the economy far worse than any recession. The immigration bills McCain supported (along with President Bush and the Senate Republican leadership of Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott and John Kyl) never granted “amnesty” or automatic citizenship for undocumented aliens. Instead, McCain’s idea of immigration reform always emphasized “earned legalization” and assimilation– not automatic privileges – in an effort to separate the immigrants who wanted to begin playing by the rules and to enter the American mainstream, from those who continued to defy those rules and have no long-term stake in the country. It’s not amnesty to charge $6,000 in fines and payment of back taxes, to require background checks and mastery of English, and to demand registry with the government and acknowledgment of wrong-doing before an immigrant received legal status. Before an illegal could become a citizen, the process required at least nine years (and in most cases fourteen) of cooperation, commitment and patience. Moreover, two crucial elements of last year’s immigration bill received almost no attention: under the bill any immigrant who attempted to enter America illegally after the passage of immigration reform would be apprehended, identified, finger-printed and biometrically recorded, and forever banned from receiving legal status to work or live in the United States. Second, the unfinished (and ultimately unsuccessful) compromise bill included a “trigger provision”: no illegal immigrant would receive legal status until after Congress certified that the border had been effectively secured. McCain emphasizes this provision in his current proposals: insisting we secure the border first, before we make arrangements for future guest workers and give a chance to some (but by no means all) current illegal residents to earn legal status in the U.S.
Now, if you want to say "the GOP has gone astray" on this, and not simply single out McCain, then by all means do so.
I don't know, WordSmith. McCain just strikes me as a nasty guy.
skyepuppy,
I don't have to like a president, to vote one into office if on policy issues, we are in agreement. Harry S Truman had a temper as well, but is regarded as a fine president. McCain is flawed, no question about it. But his hardheadedness can also work for us, as well. Trent Lott made the case, on how as an ally, you can't find anyone who fights harder, when he's on your side. Case in point, is the surge plan. McCain really stuck his political neck out there, on that one.
I liked that quote of McCain saying he's a "Teddy Roosevelt Republican" and won't be leaving the party. But Teddy Roosevelt left the Republicans to run for President under the Bull Moose Party banner...
I don't have to like a candidate to vote for him, when the alternative is total disaster. But I may have to buy a set of Michelle Malkin's "McCain Noseplugs" in order to do it.
You're a voice of reason in what seems to be a wilderness, Wordsmith. Thanks for this post!
I heard McCain being interviewed for an hour on Hannity last night, Wordsmith. You probably also watched the interview, and McCain was asked about this. He said that she would make a good president - for a Democrat! LOL!
The press is going to take everything he says from now on in out of context and run with it. They have no concience whatsoever and are working very hard at swaying the election. I hope Friday Night Live will help out McCain the way they did Hillary!
Post a Comment
<< Home