About the Author
Opinion Archives
E-mail Scott
Scott's Links

Nominating McCain will seriously wound the Republican Party

By Scott Tibbs, February 4, 2008

I watched the tail end of a rebroadcast of the debate at the Reagan Library on Saturday night and discovered that John McCain has the uncanny ability to offend me virtually every time he opens his mouth. That is an "honor" not even disgraced ex-President Clinton was able to attain.

In the final question of the debate, the candidates were asked if Ronald Reagan would endorse them and why. Mitt Romney said Reagan would endorse him, and listed several issues (drilling in Alaska, winning in Iraq, opposing campaign finance reform, tax cuts and so forth) where Reagan would agree with him.

Ron Paul said he didn't know if Reagan would endorse him but mentioned Reagan's support for him in the 1970's and that he was one of a tiny number of Republican Congressmen who supported Reagan in 1976. Paul also said Reagan understood the importance of the gold standard. Meanwhile, Mike Huckabee said that while he can't presume Reagan would endorse him, he endorses Reagan's positive vision for America.

When it was John McCain's turn, he again attacked Romney for changing his position on some issues. McCain said that Reagan would endorse him because he stands by his principles. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Ted Kennedy stand by their principles as well, many of which (amnesty for illegal aliens, gutting the First Amendment with "campaign finance reform", membership in the so-called "Gang of 14," opposition to the critically important Bush tax cuts and opposing a ban on homosexual marriage) are shared by McCain. Do you think Ronald Reagan would endorse Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Ted Kennedy, Mr. McCain?

And has John McCain always stood by his principles? Here is what McCain said to the San Francisco Chronicle in 1999:

Id love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.
Later, McCain flip-flopped. On November 19, 2006, McCain said:

I do believe that its very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support.
And what of McCain's position on homosexual marriage? From a July 14, 2004 article on CNN's web site:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona broke forcefully with President Bush and the Senate GOP leadership Tuesday evening over the issue of same-sex marriage, taking to the Senate floor to call a constitutional amendment that would effectively ban the practice unnecessary -- and un-Republican.
Later, McCain flip-flopped. From a March 28, 2006 article on the ABC News web site:

According to Falwell, McCain is not pushing for a federal marriage amendment at this time. But McCain "reconfirmed" to Falwell that he would support a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman if a federal court were to strike down state constitutional bans on gay marriage.

I don't respect John McCain personally, much less as a potential leader of our country. McCain can brag about his service in Vietnam all he wants, but that does not automatically qualify him to be President. McCain is going to do severe damage to the Republican Party if he wins. He's going to hurt everyone all the way down the ticket (including Mike Sodrel and Mitch Daniels) because a lot of disgusted conservatives are going to stay home. McCain's campaign for President is about nothing more than vindicating himself for losing in 2000. He has no chance of beating Barack Hussein Obama and I give him 40% odds of beating Hillary Clinton.

But as Rush Limbaugh said on his radio program, we had to suffer through 4 years of Jimmy Carter after Gerald Ford won the primaries in 1976, and conservatives came back and won in 1980. Maybe we need to have a President Hillary Clinton or a President Barack Hussein Obama to wake the Republican Party up. Like a friend told me after Republicans lost the House and Senate in 2006, sometimes the baby has to feel the hot stove to learn his lesson. Apparently, getting burned once is not enough for Republicans. Hopefully having Hillary Clinton or Barack Hussein Obama in the White House will be enough.