In 2000, Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) portrayed himself as a moderate straight talker, and gave us the impression that if elected, he’d work to achieve consensus. Senator McCain’s presidential bid was derailed by the current president, George W. Bush, who ran one of the more cutthroat campaigns in history, notably savaging McCain in the South Carolina Republican primary by spreading an eleventh-hour rumor that McCain had fathered a black child out of wedlock. (The truth, if you’re interested, is that McCain and his wife did adopt a Bengali child.)
But now McCain is interested in jumping on the Bush partisan bandwagon. He’s been touring with Bush, shilling for Bush’s Social Security changes. As McCain enthused in Albuquerque recently, “Please urge our Democrat friends to come to the table and sit with us and do this for the greater good of the United States of America. … This issue isn’t shouldn’t have anything to do with partisan politics.”
What is this shit? In the same breath he calls out “our Democrat [sic] friends” and declares this “shouldn’t have anything to do with partisan politics.” What’s happened to you, John? You used to be respectable. Now you’re Bush’s patsy, doing the vicious public speaking part for him. Sure, there’s no way you’ll ever become president; we all know that. But why are you taking your failure out on us?
A registered Democrat since 1992, I actually considered voting for McCain. Had he gotten the nomination, I might very well have done so. But now there’s no way I’ll ever consider it. I can’t even conjure a little respect for this sell-out Republican partisan. Step down, McCain; it makes me sick to watch you dance for your far right boss. You’re no consensus-builder. You’re a fraud.
I’m honestly not sure what you’re pissed about. What was so “vicious” about what McCain said about Democrats? Why are you so surprised that he’s backing the president on this? He’s been foursquare behind Bush since he lost the nomination to him back in 2000. I’m another Democrat with a lot of respect for McCain, but I certainly never expected him to jump parties just to make me happy. He’s a proud Republican who places party loyalty above party politics, and always has been. What’s different about his behavior now, versus five years ago when you would have considered voting for him?
Could it be that he thinks SS reform is necessary? Could it be that he’s just trying to get an honest debate going? You don’t know, but you’re labeling him a “partisan shill”? Physician, heal thyself! Just because he holds the opinion opposite yours, just because on this matter it looks as though he is in agreement with someone you hate, that does not make him a “partisan shill”. McCain is an honorable man, honorable enough that I’m willing to bet that when he speaks of “Democrat friends” he’s talking about actual friends that he has on the other side of the issue.
McCain has always been a conservative Republican. He just supported campaign finance reform, which was more of a Democratic issue. But in terms of economic and social issues, he’s on the right. He’s also always been really loyal to the party.
Gotta agree. McCain has remained principled and honest, and that combined with the examples of so many others on his side of the aisle has led the more optimistic among us to think of him as not a true Republican and maybe not even a conservative. But he is.
True enough. The appeal to people like Chance (if I may be so bold) and me is that he speaks honestly and bluntly, and addresses issues head-on. No smirking, no smarmy tactics, just an (apparent) honest view of his politics. Any ethical person is comfortable with someone he feels presents an honest case for public debate. Loyalty is fine. Pandering and dishonesty are not. McCain is a throwback to the days of Truman.
Where did I say anything about how McCain should have switched parties? Where did that come from? I never said anything of the sort. And placing party loyalty above party politics is a glaring contradiction. Loyalty to a party is the very essence of party politics.
McCain’s picking up the far-right habit of referring to the Democratic Party as the “Democrat” Party. It’s a bad sign that he’s picking up on this derogatory term. McCain may well feel that Social Security change is necessary; I’ve never felt he was even vaguely liberal. But his closeness to Bush is sickening. This is a man who is often cited as one who’s able to bring factions together, but he’s jumping on board with the man who savaged him in 2000. What the hell?
This is not the only issue that McCain has disappointed me on. He’s been on board with the irresponsible tax cuts and gutting Medicaid, to name a couple. I guess I’m just sick of people referring to him as some sort of great uniter. He’s not.
The thing that ruins McCain for me is the Campaign Finance Reform act. I know Bush signed it. I was the first to say fuck Bush for doing that. I know the SCOTUS upheld it. I was the first to say fuck them for doing that. But, I really hold the grudge against McCain on that because it was his bill. McCain Feingold. Every time you read about it you are reminded who brought us the worst blow to our first ammendment rights in the last 100 years. I don’t know if I could vote for him for anything simply based on this one huge mistake of his.
Superficially, maybe. The difference is that Truman actually had principles. McCain’s gift is knowing what issues to harp on so that his face is kept in the news, see steroids. I’ve got several friends that have worked for McCain and people in that office work very hard at maintaining that “maverick” image that McCain has very carefully built up.
He’s blunt on issues that he knows will resonate with the public, and that’s it. You’ll never see him use that “straight forwardness” on an issue that his staff hasn’t carefully figured out will play well with the people.
In other words, McCain is an incredibly shrewd politician. Good for him, they’re always better than the inept ones.
I wouldn’t vote for McCain if he somehow got past the GOP establishment and was nominated for president. I also wouldn’t vote for him for the Senate if I lived in Arizona. However, unlike the vast majority of Republicans, I do have at least of modicum of respect for the guy. For example, I did like the fact he was still willing to go after the tobacco lobby even after the rest of his party was all-too-eager to jump in bed with them for campaign money. Moreover, I think that if he had been nominated and been elected president in 2000, we would’ve not gone to war in Iraq (at least not until we caught Osama and sufficiently rebuilt Afghanistan) nor would our budget deficit be as huge as it is now.
As for his partisan shilling on social security and other issues, I’m not surprised. McCain was–and still is–a conservative Republican. He only seems like a maverick because the rigid doctrinaires who control the GOP (and the conservative establishment) and who have skewed the party far to the right require lock-step agreement on every issue. Thus, when McCain broke with the GOP on issues like tobacco legislation and campaign finance reform, he was suddenly viewed as a traitor who was slightly to the left of the Socialist Workers Party. And Republicans–like their elephant mascot–apparently never forget. Case in point:Speaker of the House Dennis Hestart’s cement-headed comments about McCain not knowing anything about war and sacrifice after the latter, last year, had the audacity to suggest that cutting taxes during a time of war may not the best thing to do either militarily or fiscally.
If the term is derogatory, it’s because it’s associated with unsavory folk like most Democrats these days.
Really, I think you guys make too much of this. This formulation, “Democrat Party”, was regularly used by my grandfather, who remained until his death a proud labor FDR/HST/JFK Democrat. I doubt he meant it insultingly.
I don’t see that he’s doing that with the term “Our Democrat friends…” by which he means “Our friends who are Democrats”. Yeah, he probably should have said “Our Democratic friends”, but I don’t think he was neccesarily being derogatory there.
McCain used to say what was on his mind, and let the chips fall where they may. But ever since he endorsed Bush last June, he’s been Mr. Party Line, and hasn’t really said anything to suggest that he still has a mind. For the past nine months, a Random Republican PC Phrase Generator could have written his speeches. Where have you gone, Mr. Straight Talk?
Here’s a description of some of his stances from the May 2002 Washington Monthly:
IOW, he’s espoused numerous positions in recent years that distinguished him from the GOP mainstream. In a leftward direction. And we’re not talking about trivial issues here.
But that McCain seems to have vanished since last summer.
As the Democrat-pushed Keating Five investigation in 1989 by Congress showed. (It is largely believed that McCain was targeted only because he was the nearest Republican - the Democrats wanted to avoid the impression that the S&L scandal was purely a Democratic failing; the other four members of the Keating Five were Democrats.) McCain has been a staunch advocate of campaign finance reform ever since; this stance is nothing new for him.
So, you were one of those who was gullible enough to believe in 2000 that McCain would be a candidate that Democrats could/should vote for; and now the wool has been lifted from your eyes, and you blame John McCain for you having once been one of his supporters?
Wow. Talk about finding any excuse not to admit that you were fooled by a politician.
Well, in fairness, we had no idea that accusing anyone who disagreed with us of being a terrorist would be so much more effective. Hindsight is 20/20, I guess.
