A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON MCCAIN

NOTE: ANOTHER COLUMN TODAY IS BELOW THIS ONE. COMMENTS WELCOME.

A Different Perspective
Victor Davis Hanson
From National Review Online

Three unexpected developments have given Republicans a shot this year at winning once thought impossible, given the normal desire of the electorate for a fresh party after eight years, and worries about Iraq and the economy. All can change, but for now they have a real shot.

The first, of course, is the radical turnabout in Iraq. Had we been seeing over 100 dead a month, the loss of Baghdad, and a failure of the surge, McCain would be finished and his Republican rivals would have carved out a third position between Bush and the Democrats that would have been still rejected by the voters.

Second, no one anticipated the surge of Obama, and the Clintons’ overt and clumsy efforts at personal destruction that turned off even liberals, a development that explains why a McCain in theory could be palatable to disaffected Democrats and Independents.

No one knows whether Thursday night’s [Obama-Clinton] reconciliation will last. But I doubt it, since Obama was figuring his nice guy image gained him ground, while Hillary worried that unleashing Bill and knee-capping her rival lost her percentages. But when it gets down to winning and the race narrows, each will readjust and it will get nasty again. Bill is ungovernable, and growls and gets toothy in periods of quiet and tranquility when he recedes from the news

And third, the unanticipated November implosion of Rudy Giuliani coalesced many moderate Republicans behind one candidate, the once moribund McCain, while base conservatives were never quite energized over either Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, or Fred Thompson, and either diluted their support or never embraced a candidate with real passion.

It is understandable to lament the absence of conservative purity, but ahistorical to suggest that any recent Republican president would have met any of the litmus tests now demanded, given the dependency of the middle class on entitlements and its touchy-feely worldview.

Reagan, and Bush I and II all adjusted to that unfortunate reality. A Democrat did not appoint Souter, O’Connor, or Kennedy, nor raise payroll and gas taxes in the 1980s, nor sign amnesty and de facto open-border legislation in 1986, nor, later, increase federal spending well past the rate of inflation, or offer amnesty again in 2007. Tax cuts were great, but without caps on spending they were unfairly slurred as revenue reducers once deficits soared. Recent Republican congressional scandals mirror-imaged some of the Clinton-era roguery.

Reagan’s pragmatism on taxes, amnesty, new federal programs and government expansion, was continued by both Bush I and II. In that regard, McCain seems a continuum, not an abject disconnect. His problem is mostly temperament, as when he strayed he was blunt about what he was doing and sometimes gratuitously offended his base in a way that neither Reagan nor the Bushes dared. That is a legitimate concern of tactical aptitude, but not one so much of ideology.

He also never was a conservative idealist that voiced conservative themes on the campaign trail which he could not enact once elected. But in terms of judicial appointments, foreign policy and the war, and federal spending, he is not much different from any of the prior three Republican presidents, and might well prove tougher, given his age and occasional contrarianism. We worry over his immigration stance, but his former mistaken position was Reaganite to the core and reflected the Bush consensus. His new stance of closing the borders first would be a radical departure, and a conservative remedy.

In short, anyone who saw the Democratic debate Thursday night can envision the new future on their horizon: identity politics and self-congratulation over race and gender; tax increases (back to estate tax hikes, income tax rates go up, payroll tax caps lifted, etc); internationalism for the sake of internationalism (defer to the U.N., E.U., apologies for past conduct, contextualizing terrorism), more government (teachers, the poor, the middle class, etc. all need new government programs to add to those we have), and legislating judges (more Ginsburgs and Breyers).

Given all of the above, I don’t think it’s in the interest of conservatives for much longer to worry about McCain’s class ranking at Annapolis or how many planes he was nearly killed in.


The following is from http://outsideofthebox.townhall.com

Hijacking the GOP
Saturday, February 02, 2008 1:27 AM


It is the new spin.

For months, the Republican In Name Only media...Ingraham, Rush, Hannity, Hewitt...has assured everyone that they spoke for the base.

So when they annointed Romney, the Reagan heir apparent...the previously unknown candidate that changed his mind on a half a dozen key issues...from when he was governor of Kennedy-Kerry liberal Massachusetts to now born again conservative for a national audience--should have swept through the Iowa primary.

But a no money ex-preacher won.

Ok, ok so maybe the base just didn't get the message.

For days, the RINO media told them all about Huckabee and explained ever so carefully that while the man is nice, he isn't a REAL conservative, certainly not one to step into the hallowed steps of the reinvented Reagan. Painstakenly, they pointed out the wonderful man that THEY had chosen and instructed REAL conservatives every where to vote accordingly.

Then McCain took New Hampshire...and South Carolina!

And once again, slowly, strongly, they explained why the choice of the people is not the right choice. In fact, since all the elections up to then had been opened, the Independents and the Liberals must be trying to hijack the party of Reagan!

Then came Michigan and even though Romney had to revert to the old liberal trick of promising that government would bail out the auto workers and turn out was extremely low...a win was a win...and surely now the base was getting the right idea.

Only, in CLOSED conservative Florida primary...conservatives voted for McCain, the guy they had CLEARLY told the base NOT to vote for.

WHAT IS GOING ON???

Today came the answer...

The Republican party has been hijacked...by Independents!

Thus, none of the Republican In Name Only media believe they have an obligation to vote for McCain if those registered as Republicans should choose him to represent them.

In fact, many have expressed taking their marbles and going third party--or as in the case Ann Coulter--to take their marbles and go to the Liberal camp.

One blogger told Steve at Campaign Victory 08 that he/she wouldn't vote for McCain if Billy Clinton himself was running against him.

In other words, it's THEIR way or no way. Gone are the principle of winning the WOT. Gone are the principle of loyalty. Gone is the idea that we can trust the people to make choices and to accept the will of the majority.

Once upon a time, conservatives watched as liberals tore apart Joe Lieberman for his stand on the WOT. I remember hearing all the talk about allowing those within your party to disagree and how intellectually bankrupt the Left was to be afraid of dissension.

Yet, here they are...months later, doing the SAME thing.

The RINO media was right...the Republican party HAS been hijacked. For many years, it was taken over by extremists, absolutists, sanctimonious bullies that called themselves Constitutionist, Libertarians, Reaganites, everything but Republicans.

In 2008...Republicans in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida...and with God's help, 20 plus states come Tuesday...is taking the REPUBLICAN party back.