Well, I’m not saying I buy the hype. I’m not sure I particularly like his political orientations and I don’t hold “principled” as a particularly lofty* or well defined goalpost.
I think that story, brianjedi, mainly shows McCain to be a nervous rooky. Maybe he should have caught a little more shit, but I don’t think he was truly criminal. But it does seem to remind me that “Senator Hothead” episodes were one of the tidbits that were under-reported during his 2000 Republican nomination campaign.
But to be clear: I don’t actually feel particularly strongly about McCain. These are just my vague impressions, perhaps as vague as Guin’s impression of her linked article.
The reason McCain gets respect, and deservedly so IMO, is that he is more willing than most to set aside partisan politics and work with the other side of the aisle. That’s what leaders are made of. But fundamentally he’s a rock-solid conservative-- i’ts just that even rock-solid conservatives and rock-solid liberals can find common ground if they make an effort.
I assume that was in response to my post. Santorum may have worked with HRC once in a blue moon, but he is still **much **more of a partisan hack than McCain is. Remember, McCain was the founding member of the gang of 14 who prevented the partisan Republicans from changing the Senate rules about filibustering judicial nominees, just for one example. That wasn’t about just one issue, but about preserving some measure of bipatrisanship in the Senate all 'round. The Senate is different from the House-- you really need 60 votes to get anything thru, not just a simple majority.
People with “I’s” after their names do not get elected in this country, the former governor of Minnesota being a notable exception.
The definition of “true conservative” is certainly open for debate, but I’d say that McCain’s flag burning position is colored by his years living as a POW. Most veterans groups, not surprisingly, are in favor of it.
Yes, John, that was in response to you. Thought it was obvious.
My point is that since even, in your own words, a complete “partisan hack” works with the opposing party it takes away a lot from the awesomeness of McCain doing it. Yes, he may be on the better end the spectrum, but hardly unique. And not an excuse for giving him the kid gloves. You say to remember he was part of the “gang of 14” when seven posts previous we are reminded he was part of the “Keating Five”. Not sure I’m sold, despite his noble battle to save filibustering.
Wanted to say that with the whole concept of “big tent” parties you are going to get guys who have their own agendas, like McCain. I just don’t think a lack of partisan hackery stands by itself as a reason to endorse a guy. It’s nice but not that nice.
Not really. The media gets all moist over ‘bipartisanship’ and ‘independence’ and all that. In recent years, Lieberman’s gotten more time on the Sunday morning talkies than just about any other Dem. He repeats GOP memes sliming Democrats, which is what it means for a Dem to be independent and bipartisan.
And McCain gets a lot of mileage out of his very occasional and mild criticisms of Bush, rarely backed by action. Since mid-2004, McCain’s been a big suckup to Bush, and during the past year, he’s been sucking up to Falwell and the religious right. But with respect to McCain, the press is still trapped back in 2000, when McCain actually was countering the GOP party line.
