John McCain and the myth of the 'true conservative'
Brad DeFlumeri, Collegian columnist
Issue date: 4/7/08 Section: Editorial / Opinion
John McCain is an American hero. And he is also, albeit disputably, a conservative. The notion that he is something else - usually emanating from an anti-minority and rather regrettable wing of the conservative movement - is politically unsound and devoid of any realistic basis.
Conservatives of all types clamor for the "good old days" of Reagan at a time when the current GOP president is running up record debt and spending money on housing programs in a way that would have given Adam Smith and David Ricardo ulcers.
On the search for one mind-altering conservative leader, a subject on which so many of my colleagues seem to be wasting their time, Jeff Jacoby of the Globe said in February: "My point is simply that the immaculate conservative leader for whom so many on the right yearn to vote is a fantasy. Conservatives who say that McCain is no Ronald Reagan are right, but Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan either. Neither is Mike Huckabee. And neither was the real - as opposed to the mythic - Ronald Reagan."
This, however, is not to say that I blindly agree with many of McCain's policy prescriptions - I don't. On matters from illegal immigration to campaign finance to the Bush tax cuts to global warming, McCain has historically been too much to the left of what I would want in a Republican president. For these reasons, I supported Romney in the primary, until he conceded defeat to McCain.
What many anti-McCain conservatives like Coulter and Michelle Malkin don't see - or perhaps ignore in an effort to squeeze one more sound bite out of their otherwise irrelevant careers - is that McCain's behavior as president need not be identical to the way he voted as the senior Senator from Arizona, a state riddled by crime, uneven access to education and immigration concerns.
To be sure, the presidency and defense of the country bring with them more important and sobering challenges than the constituent-driven agendas of many Senators. And this is where and why Senator McCain bothers me a bit less, and President McCain excites me a lot more.
Conservatives of all types clamor for the "good old days" of Reagan at a time when the current GOP president is running up record debt and spending money on housing programs in a way that would have given Adam Smith and David Ricardo ulcers.
On the search for one mind-altering conservative leader, a subject on which so many of my colleagues seem to be wasting their time, Jeff Jacoby of the Globe said in February: "My point is simply that the immaculate conservative leader for whom so many on the right yearn to vote is a fantasy. Conservatives who say that McCain is no Ronald Reagan are right, but Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan either. Neither is Mike Huckabee. And neither was the real - as opposed to the mythic - Ronald Reagan."
This, however, is not to say that I blindly agree with many of McCain's policy prescriptions - I don't. On matters from illegal immigration to campaign finance to the Bush tax cuts to global warming, McCain has historically been too much to the left of what I would want in a Republican president. For these reasons, I supported Romney in the primary, until he conceded defeat to McCain.
What many anti-McCain conservatives like Coulter and Michelle Malkin don't see - or perhaps ignore in an effort to squeeze one more sound bite out of their otherwise irrelevant careers - is that McCain's behavior as president need not be identical to the way he voted as the senior Senator from Arizona, a state riddled by crime, uneven access to education and immigration concerns.
To be sure, the presidency and defense of the country bring with them more important and sobering challenges than the constituent-driven agendas of many Senators. And this is where and why Senator McCain bothers me a bit less, and President McCain excites me a lot more.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 29
Scott Harris
posted 4/07/08 @ 2:39 AM EST
Another ill-informed, intellectually mediocre editorial by DeFlumeri. Although, I suppose his writings qualify for comedic relief.
richard montgomery
posted 4/07/08 @ 11:10 AM EST
I have to agree with Mr. Harris, DeFlumeri's article is really off the mark.
While it can be said that John McCain was a POW, he certainly was NOT held captive for "almost a decade. (Continued…)
Joyeb Kurbanhussain
posted 4/07/08 @ 12:20 PM EST
Stop the massacres in Iraq. Problems in Iraq cannot be solved without active participation of Iran. The longer US takes to bring Iran in,it will become increasingly impossible to bring peace. (Continued…)
Steven James Gray
posted 4/07/08 @ 4:54 PM EST
Dear Brad,
Thanks for providing me with another reason to be disturbed by the content of this paper. Your blatant obfuscations and tall tales about Mccain's time and treatment in North Vietnam are enough to render your article meaningless and unreadable. (Continued…)
Mr. Arrogant
posted 4/07/08 @ 10:29 PM EST
It's funny liberals tend to end up fighting with each other over the slightest inconsistency.
In short:
1. Anyone who calls McCain a "coward" is clearly delusional. (Continued…)
L33to
posted 4/08/08 @ 12:16 AM EST
Ah constant ad hominems, the classic trademark of the high school debater
ed cutting
posted 4/08/08 @ 11:26 AM EST
Condi Rice. I have long said that she is campaigning for the VEEP slot (and all of her responses to the "are you running for President" have been consistent with this). (Continued…)
Andrew F
posted 4/08/08 @ 12:21 PM EST
Ed,
I agree with you that many countries have terrible human rights records, far worse than the United States. But I find it sad that we are even up for comparison with them. (Continued…)
richard montgomery
posted 4/08/08 @ 2:22 PM EST
Mr. Gray seems to have attracted another critic. Mr. Cutting is more eloquent than I am. Surely, most readers have identified Mr. Gray for what he is. (Continued…)
L33to
posted 4/08/08 @ 5:29 PM EST
LOL Ed has a newfound successor of long winded rhetoric
Post a Comment