March 29, 2007

John McCain Announces Support Of Hot Democrats
— Ace

Almost jumped with -- or even before -- Jeffords in 2001.

Old-ish news, but it's largely from Tom Daschle's book, which no one read, including Tom Daschle. And we've known for a long time that John McCain flirted with the idea of joining John Kerry's ticket in 2004.

This guy is going to win the Republican nomination? I don't think so.

He almost bolted because of his anger with elements of the Republican Party which fought (dirty) against his candidacy in 2000. He quite clearly despises most of the party. He barely can manage to pretend otherwise. How can we imagine he'd govern as a Republican if elected President?


Posted by: Ace at 06:23 AM | Comments (56)
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

1

To be honest, after his treatment at the hands of Bush in 2000 I'd be pissed off at the party, too. 


Posted by: Jason at March 29, 2007 06:29 AM (B9+zH)

2 Another reason to not like McCain.  Sorry RWS, too many dings on this beater to warrant a test drive.

Posted by: SOC at March 29, 2007 06:30 AM (1/F/d)

3 But is he circumcised?

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at March 29, 2007 06:34 AM (JefgB)

4 I don't see how any one can blame Bush for any alleged dirty play against McCain. And, I don't see how the allegations, which were silly to begin with, actually hurt him. Much easier to blame the gossip for his losing than to admit that he lost fair and square.

Posted by: Red at March 29, 2007 06:37 AM (ffvtp)

5 Much easier to blame the gossip for his losing than to admit that he lost fair and square.

Exactly.  McCain's whining in 2000 and afterward was just pathetic.  He's played hardball before and didn't exactly have clean hands himself in 2000.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 06:41 AM (R8+nJ)

6

I'll repeat this here. Did you guys catch this part???


Absolutely not so, according to McCain. In a statement released by his campaign, McCain said, “As I said in 2001, I never considered leaving the Republican Party, period.”


So, yeah. If you want to believe Tom Daschle over Lindsey Graham and McCain himself....fine go ahead. They don't want McCain being the nominee because they know he can beat Hillary. 


Just keep in mind that although you may be mad at McCain for some of the things he believes in, he has never been known to be a liar. But Tom Daschle? Yeah...liar extraordinare.


 


 


 


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 06:42 AM (ZLSG3)

7 Like I said last night, I don't care if it's true or not. The fact that it's plausible is enough. Why is it plausible?

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at March 29, 2007 06:45 AM (JefgB)

8

They don't want McCain being the nominee because they know he can beat Hillary. 


It's all a plot by space aliens. McCain saw the real Kennedy assassin while he was healing lepers on the grassy knoll.


Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at March 29, 2007 06:46 AM (4fqRM)

9

Why would Dems care that he can allegedly beat Hillary?


They know she's not going to be their nominee.


 


You know what else?  I lived in SC at the beginning of Lindsey Graham's tenure - have some direct experience with the guy.  Having him as a character reference is...how shall I say this...not necessarily helpful.


Posted by: Rocketeer at March 29, 2007 06:49 AM (GFaLW)

10 Cuffy's got it right - the plausability is what kills McCain here.

Simply, we know he's capable of doing something like this, because he loves slipping the shiv to Republicans.  It's all part of his carefully cultivated "Maverick" image, and we're getting sick of it.

And again, he's not the only person that can beat Hillary, as poll after poll after poll has shown time and time and frickin' time again.  So that tired meme is getting to be a bit tattered.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 06:51 AM (R8+nJ)

11 Cuffy>>>>Like I said last night, I don't care if it's true or not. The fact that it's plausible is enough. Why is it plausible?


Bingo.


RWS, you said

>>>>Just keep in mind that although you may be mad at McCain for some of the things he believes in, he has never been known to be a liar. But Tom Daschle? Yeah...liar extraordinare.



I dunno, but one could consider his eagerness to backstab conservatives at every fucking turn a form of lying.

Posted by: Sinistar at March 29, 2007 06:54 AM (bSYRF)

12 Look, RWS, I know you like the guy, but can you at least understand why we're were so hostile about him?

Posted by: Sinistar at March 29, 2007 06:56 AM (bSYRF)

13 It's all part of his carefully cultivated "Maverick" image, and we're getting sick of it.

Getting???? No, we've been sick of it for years.

Posted by: Red at March 29, 2007 06:56 AM (ffvtp)

14

I dunno, but one could consider his eagerness to backstab conservatives at every fucking turn a form of lying.


Or also, oh - I dunno - BEING ONE OF THE FREAKIN' KEATING FIVE.


Posted by: Rocketeer at March 29, 2007 06:57 AM (GFaLW)

15 And I'm cursing out that shitheel McCain, not you, RWS.

Posted by: Sinistar at March 29, 2007 06:57 AM (bSYRF)

16

I don't believe it. I'm by no means a McCain supporter(sorry RWS) but this sounds about as plausible as Ted "The Swimmer" Kennedy's description of a car crash. Hell not just Teddy but ANY Kennedy. Bunch of uncoordinated pricks. Joe Jr: crashed his plane in WWII, JFK: Crashed his PT boat in WWII,Ted:Killed Mary Jo Kopechne in crash off Chappaquidick Bridge,Bob Jr: crashed his car in a drugged out haze in D.C. JFK Jr: crashed his plane in a drugged out haze into the Atlantic, killing his wife and her BFF. The bet one ouyt of that family is the one that got lobotomized


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOEE6cWpLPc


Posted by: Don Carne at March 29, 2007 07:00 AM (RJDcF)

17 Getting???? No, we've been sick of it for years.

Well, okay...yeah, I'm pretty sick of it.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 07:01 AM (R8+nJ)

18

Yeah, count me as sick of him too.  And frustrated.  In fact, angry.  If you can't tell.


Sorry, RWS.  No disrespect to you intended.


Posted by: Rocketeer at March 29, 2007 07:03 AM (GFaLW)

19

The bet one ouyt


And my lobotomy went just fine thankyouverymuch.


Posted by: Don Carne at March 29, 2007 07:04 AM (RJDcF)

20

Being disingenuous to me is the same as being a lier. I don't like him or the way he handles himself. Will I vote for him if he becomes the republican candidate? Yes.


Will I be happy about it.


No.


Posted by: Bosk at March 29, 2007 07:07 AM (+aNmG)

21

Oh....and ....good morning everyone.


 


Posted by: Bosk at March 29, 2007 07:08 AM (+aNmG)

22

Look, RWS, I know you like the guy, but can you at least understand why we're were so hostile about him?


I totally understand. I do. But no matter what anyone says, you guys won't give the guy a break. I may be repeating myself here from HotAir so forgive me.


Senator John] McCain [R-AZ] gets the following ratings from conservative groups in their most recent rating periods: National Right to Life Committee: 82%; National Taxpayers Union: 78%; Americans for Tax Reform: 90%; John Birch Society: 90%; Republican Liberty Caucus: 82%; American Conservative Union: 80%. . .


McCain is clearly a conservative, a leader, and a war hero. Has he screwed up? Yes. Is he wrong on some issues? Yes. But at least he isn't our version of Bill Clinton, like Rudy is.


The bottom line is this. If I am right and he is the nominee then all of you will have to bite the bullet and vote for him.


If Rudy is the nominee then I will bite the bullet and vote for him. But it will  make me just as sick to vote for Rudy as it will you to vote for McCain.


But the GOAL here is to beat Hillary. Period. So, I would just like a bit of a "fair and balanced" look at these nominess on these blogs. That's all.  


 


  


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 07:26 AM (ZLSG3)

23

When the dirt starts flying about Rudy, for example, I can't wait to see Ace and Allah automatically believe the person throwing the dirt. Because that is just what they are doing here.


Every little thing that is damaging or makes McCain look bad, they jump on. I'm getting a bit tired of it.


 


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 07:29 AM (ZLSG3)

24 Every little thing that is damaging or makes McCain look bad, they jump on. I'm getting a bit tired of it.

Well, yeah.  But considering that McCain jumps on every opportunity to declare his independence from the Republican party over the years, it's understandable that Republicans are going to be a bit less inclined to defend the guy.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 07:34 AM (R8+nJ)

25 Frankly, RWS, I don't believe them. However, that still leaves more than enough reasons not to vote for McCain. I'm not enthralled with Guiliani, either. I don't think the rest of the country is going to put a New Yorker in the Whitehouse. Unfortunately, Ace convinced me the other day that Fred Thompson lacks the necessary qualifications, too.

Posted by: Red at March 29, 2007 07:35 AM (ffvtp)

26

McCain a secret Democrat? Giuliani is Bill Clinton? Thompson lacks the qualifications to be president? All according to my plan . . the pieces are falling into place.


Bwahahahahahahaha!!


Posted by: Mitt Romney at March 29, 2007 07:40 AM (4fqRM)

27 Again, plausible.

Here's what McCain said after Jeffords switched.
San-Antonio Express-News, May 25, 2001

"I think Sen. Jeffords' decision sends a very loud,
clear message that while the Republicans talk bipartisanship, they fail
to do things in a bipartisan way," said House Democratic Leader Richard
Gephardt of Missouri.  


Gephardt said
that when Jeffords "didn't support the president's budget, the White
House punished him. It's a chilling message for bipartisanship."  


Those charges were underscored by Sen. John McCain,
R-Ariz., a maverick in the GOP who embarrassed Bush in the New
Hampshire presidential primary and often has been at odds with the
administration on policy.  


McCain said Jeffords was "unfairly targeted for abuse" by Republican lawmakers, staffers and lobbyists.  


"Perhaps those self-appointed enforcers of party loyalty will learn to
respect honorable differences among us," McCain said in a terse
statement that concluded with a scolding charge that "it is well past
time for the Republican Party to grow up." 

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 07:42 AM (R8+nJ)

28 McCains decision making capabilities scares me as much as any Democrat out there.  His track record is not very good regardless of what his political philosophy is.

Posted by: 40 year old virgin at March 29, 2007 07:42 AM (m2CN7)

29 Bwahahahaha . . ha . . (cough) . . . Hahahaha!

Posted by: Mitt Romney at March 29, 2007 07:47 AM (4fqRM)

30

Boy, thanks for the Hobson's choice, RWS - do I believe the loathsome, lying Democrats, or do I believe the self-aggrandizing, thin-skinned collaborationist McCain?


It's difficult to know whether to believe this story, since I'd expect that if McVain really wanted to jump ship, Daschle would have offered him anything short of 24-hour anal access to Eleanor Mondale in order to get the "maverick" on their side, control Congress and, happily, stick a knife in W's back.  However - it wouldn't surprise me if McVain made noises along the lines of, "I can't stand that dimwit Pretzeldent Chimpy and his godbothering Jeebusfreaks running the party!  I wonder if I'd be happier on the other side?" If a sentiment like that got to Daschle's ears, perhaps there'd be some below the radar reaching out to see if old Keating Five John was really serious.


And bosk made the point above - is McVain a blatant liar?  Sure, I think so, but I'll give him and you the benefit of the doubt.  But disingenuous?  Abso-f'ng-lutely.  Remember the little "dream team" scenario when his name was floated as Kerry's VP?  Oh, how McVain danced and giggled and postured like a runway model when he could have simply come right out and said "I am a loyal Republican.  John Kerry can take his offer and blow it out his treasonous magic Cambodian hat ass."  But he didn't.


You can vote for him if he's the nominee, RWS.  I won't.  But let's presume he's not the nominee.  Let's say it goes to Rudy or Mitt or Fred - or, hell, Ron Paul.  Are you ready to guarantee Maverick John won't try a third-party run?  Or at least tease out the idea so long that it cuts the GOP nominee off at the knees?


Posted by: Christopher at March 29, 2007 07:49 AM (SjUPQ)

31

The bottom line is this. If I am right and he is the nominee then all of you will have to bite the bullet and vote for him.


Sorry there sweetcheeks, but I don't have to vote for anybody.  He gets the nomination, I either stay home or vote third party for the first time since being old enough to vote in 1988. 


Also note- he didn't deny considering joining the Kerry ticket; he denied leaving the Republican party.  It's entirely possible for a President of one party to have a Vice President of the other party.


Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 29, 2007 07:50 AM (plsiE)

32

Hollowpoint,


Well, dumplecakes, I didn't mean that literally. Did you think I would bring a 48 to your house and force you into the voting booth?


I'm talking to the reasonable here....;-)


 


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 07:55 AM (ZLSG3)

33

RWS,


You sure spend a lot of time defending someone that has branded you and yours as "agents of intolerance".


I'm just saying that we all know you have McCain's back.


Are you quite sure that he has yours?


Posted by: Log Cabin at March 29, 2007 07:59 AM (U+rNI)

34 Rightwingsparkle,

I know you get frustrated with the McCain doubters and the numbers you post should boost your case but they just don't resonate with most conservatives. 

McCain is undoubtedly more conservative than Rudy on a number of issues (not all...immigration comes to mind) but it goes back to that feel thing. McCain has all the wrong friends (The NY Times, tons of Democrats, Lincoln Chaffey, etc) while Rudy has all the right enemies (The NY Times, the NY establishment, Al Sharpton, etc). 

Rudy is also racking up some impressive conservative endorsements (David Vitter and Steve Forbes off the top of my head) and isn't running around bashing groups like the Club for Growth and CPAC (well, McCain didn't bash them but he did diss them).

A lot of a candidate's attractiveness is about persona, McCain is a conservative on many issues but he hasn't built a conservative persona. 

Posted by: Drew at March 29, 2007 08:09 AM (gNyUT)

35

You can destroy a lot of conservative credentials with a few well-placed stabs.  Overall, sure he's got a conservative record.  But when it's time to be "All John, All Maverick, All the Time" and stick it to conservative Republicans...


 


You don't have to do it often.  And he's done it way too many times for my support.


Posted by: Dave in Texas at March 29, 2007 08:11 AM (W5xJB)

36 Look at the news story I posed above. Those were pretty dire times for the GOP. McCain could have rallied the troops, helped encourage the president and members of his own party.

What did he choose?

The Way of the Maverick™

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 08:16 AM (R8+nJ)

37 Er..."posted" above.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 08:17 AM (R8+nJ)

38 Bosk,

Sorry I didn't stick around to answer your question last night, but I'll do so now.  I was born in San Francisco, raised in the SF Bay Area, and in the 80s, I migrated north to where I now live, Eugene, Oregon, home of the Frischinator™!


Posted by: OregonMuse at March 29, 2007 08:41 AM (CkYzD)

39

logcabin,


I don't think he was talking to people like me. I just don't.


If I was looking for a religious conservative I suppose I would have to go with Mitt. But, believe it or not, religion is not my top priority for President. McCain is certainly no religious conservative. But he is a leader. He understands the enemy we face more than any of the candidates because he has LITERALLY faced and fought such an enemy and they did not break him. They made him stronger. Strong enough to fight this horrible infected monster that threatens us today.


I have known politicans all my life. We all know how they are. They are, for the most part, egotistical power hungry men and McCain is that too, but he is more. He went through the fire and he survived and lived a life dedicated to public service. He raised his children to love this country enough to join the service in time of war.  That says more to me about his love for this country than any campaign finance reform bill and any immigration stance.


He said recently that he'd rather lose this election than lose this war. He wasn't changing his mind about the war just to get elected. The war is not popular even among Republicans. McCain could have made a different stance and been the "maverick" once again. But he understands the fight and he understands how important it is.


McCain may love the limelight, but he loves this country more.


Of that, I am sure.


 


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 09:00 AM (ZLSG3)

40

RWS-


This is all a pointless discussion, since the party base who nominates candidates isn't going to nominate someone like McCain who has made pissing off the Republican base a point of pride. 


Voter turnout wins elections, and if your parties nominee is one who's repeatedly shown loyalty to no one but himself, one might just decide to stay home and watch re-runs of "Scrubs" instead of voting for someone like McCain who doesn't exactly inspire strong support amonst people who arent... well, you.


Just as the Democrats found that their "anybody but Bush" tactic in 2004 wasn't enough, Republicans might just find that "anybody but Hillary" won't work either.


John McCain is to the Republican party what Andrew Sullivan is to conservativism.


Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 29, 2007 09:08 AM (plsiE)

41

No prob o.m. Have cousins in Eugene, brother in Tigard.


I left Oregon in 85. Been back a couple times. If I ever leave here I'll probably end up back in Oregon.


Posted by: Bosk at March 29, 2007 09:11 AM (+aNmG)

42 >>>>>McCain may love the limelight, but he loves this country more. Of that, I am sure.

Posted by: Sinistar at March 29, 2007 09:13 AM (bSYRF)

43 "Are you ready to guarantee Maverick John won't try a third-party run? Or at least tease out the idea so long that it cuts the GOP nominee off at the knees?"

Christopher, I'll take a stab at answering your question.

In 2004, McCain had a perfect opportunity to screw Bush. And I don't mean by being John F'n Kerry's VP. No, all he had to do was sit on his hands.

But he did nothing of the sort. Did you hear his address at the 2004 RNC? He delivered it in his patented monotone, but it was a helluva speech. And he campaigned for Dubya as well - and, from what I read, campaigned effectively.

If he passed up that opportunity to do the party dirt in 2004, what makes you think that he change his mind in 2008?

The fact is, McCain is solid on the big issues; and when things get tough, he's loyal and strong. That matters a lot to me.

I realize that it's galling to have the MSM praising the "independent" McCain. But the thing we conservatives have to remember is that the MSM is full of shit. Period. Whether they attack someone, whether they praise someone, the MSM is full of shit. And we should give their opinions all the weight that we give to people whom we know are full of shit: that is, none.

Is McCain the perfect candidate? Far from it. I support Rudy or Mitt over him, principally because they have executive experience:. Rudy's run one of the biggest cities in the world, Mitt one of the biggest states; but McCain, as best I can tell, has never run so much as a hot-dog stand. Also, there's his health. He'd be a year older than Reagan was when he became president, but Reagan was in excellent health, while McCain's is marginal at best - no small thanks to the Vietnamese Communists.

But if it comes down to McCain or Hillary, then McCain gets my support. Period.

Posted by: Brown Line at March 29, 2007 09:13 AM (VrNoa)

44 I have no doubt whatsoever that McCain loves his country, but that isn't the issue.

And honestly, neither is his Vietnam service.  As honorable as his actions in Vietnam were, I simply am tapped out on that one.  His non-political actions of the 1970s do not excuse the political errors he's made for years.

I think if McCain tries too hard to play up his Vietnam experience, it will work for him about as well as it worked for John Kerry.

Who he supported during the campaign, by the way.  You know, when standing up for conservatives would have been helpful to the president's campaign.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 09:13 AM (R8+nJ)

45

Hollowpoint,


I just think you are completely wrong. I could name many areas where Rudy and Mitt have shown no loyalty to the Republican party as well. None of those running are conservative in the way Reagan was or even the way Bush was. You cannot just dismiss the obvious support for McCain just because YOU don't like him. 


 I guess we shall see who is right when the nominee is elected.


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 09:14 AM (ZLSG3)

46
But if it comes down to McCain or Hillary, then McCain gets my support. Period.


If that sad scenario comes to pass, then yes - I would vote for McCain.

But until then, I'm going to do anything I can to help his campaign go down in flames.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 09:18 AM (R8+nJ)

47

Slublog,


Well, it is the issue to me. And I don't think for one second McCain will bring up his miltary service as Kerry did. I bring it up because I think it says much about him.


Look, I am beyond the point where I think I can change your mind. But I will continue to defend McCain on blogs that I feel are unfairly bashing him.   


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at March 29, 2007 09:18 AM (ZLSG3)

48

RWS. I won't be staying home and not voting. I'm one of those "power voter" kinda guys.


No matter what I WILL VOTE. And every one else should too.


 


Posted by: Bosk at March 29, 2007 09:19 AM (+aNmG)

49

He understands the enemy we face more than any of the candidates because he has LITERALLY faced and fought such an enemy and they did not break him. They made him stronger. Strong enough to fight this horrible infected monster that threatens us today.


Except he's been actively working with Ted Kennedy instead of fighting him.


Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 29, 2007 09:20 AM (plsiE)

50 Look, I am beyond the point where I think I can change your mind. But I
will continue to defend McCain on blogs that I feel are unfairly
bashing him.  


No, you're not going to change my mind at all.  I dislike McCain for a number of reasons, not the least among which is my personal experience with him and his supporters.

Let's just say that I don't have the same opinion of his character as you, based on those encounters.

Posted by: Slublog at March 29, 2007 09:22 AM (R8+nJ)

51

Just think of the things he has done since this 2002 article.


 http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020429&s=chait042902


Posted by: roc ingersol at March 29, 2007 09:37 AM (m2CN7)

52

Brownline, you make a good rebuttal.  In fact, it's nearly identical to what a friend of mine - who supports McCain, but is a Rudy man now - said: "when the chips are down, McCain was behind Bush."


But I said it before - I have no use for someone who is "behind Bush" at election time who's spent the past year felching Pinch Sulzberger and tonguing Chappaquiddick Ted.  It would be like me screwing around on my wife with a hot redheaded MILF every weekend, insisting proclaiming I'm a good husband because I remembered our anniversary. 


Posted by: Christopher at March 29, 2007 09:37 AM (SjUPQ)

53

If McCain gets the nomination I'd consider voting for Hillary. Why? Because I don't think Hillary is a Democrat. I think she is a ruthless political powermonger who thinks the Dems are a convenient tool.


Given the right motivation, I can see Hillary being a Machiavellian cutthroat willing to use every dark power at the White House's disposal and beyond to destroy an enemy (as we know she has done in the past)...


Hillary is hungry for power and willing to do anything to get it and keep it. McCain is hungry for popularity. Given the choice and the state of world affairs, I'd go with Powermonger over Attention Whore.


Imagine if we could just convince the Clintons that America's enemy is their enemy as well? I think it my be easier than it sounds...


Posted by: DoDoGuRu at March 29, 2007 09:44 AM (BXpVN)

54

Sorry the link comes up for paid prescription only. You can pull the article up on google, McCain TNR what's in a name.  This is from a democratic viewpoint in 2002.  If this doesn't give RWS pause, nothing will.


Posted by: roc ingersol at March 29, 2007 09:46 AM (m2CN7)

55

Frankly, RWS, I don't believe them. However, that still leaves more than enough reasons not to vote for McCain. I'm not enthralled with Guiliani, either. I don't think the rest of the country is going to put a New Yorker in the Whitehouse. Unfortunately, Ace convinced me the other day that Fred Thompson lacks the necessary qualifications, too.


This party sucks.


Fuck this. I'm a Libertarian. Let's have some fun losing.


 FREE POT FOR EVERYONE! Woooooohoo!


Posted by: Entropy at March 29, 2007 10:17 AM (m6c4H)

56 "he isn't our version of Bill Clinton, like Rudy is."

Not cool, RWS. Not cool.

Posted by: Knemon at March 29, 2007 11:07 AM (8MdFH)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
106kb generated in CPU 0.31, elapsed 2.4797 seconds.
62 queries taking 2.3178 seconds, 292 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.