Two Peas in a Pod
Written by Sam on June 18th, 2006Okay, admittedly, I am exaggerating with the title. McCain isn’t as bad as Chafee. Nobody is as bad as Chafee, but the fact that McCain would stump for him shows how out of touch with the average Republican McCain continues to be.
Senator Lincoln Chafee gets some help from Arizona Senator John McCain in his bid for re-election. McCain spoke to about 500 Chafee supporters yesterday at Chafee’s home in Exeter.
18
PM
So if McCain stumping for Chafee shows how out of touch he is, does his stumping for Blackwell show how in touch he is?
He has also endorsed McSweeney but I don’t think he has stumped for him yet.
Sorry, I can’t help being a McCain fan.
18
PM
In a sense, yes, it still means he is out of touch. With all of his other “independent” excursions we have to deal with from McCain, stumping for Chafee just adds to it. He should be behind Blackwell and McSweeney. They are good, principled members of our party, but come one, we are talking about Lincoln Chafee. The guy is a true blue de facto Democrat. The GOP should write him off completely and do everything they can to get Laffey in his place.
18
PM
I agree Chafee should be replaced.
Alls I am saying is that McCain helps the good guys too.
18
PM
To be fair to McCain I am expecting a bush visit to RI to stump for chafee.
19
PM
Actually I don’t think Bush will stump for Chafee since a Bush stump in Rhode Island would hurt Chafee more then it would help.
I am sure Bush would be willing to stump for him though.
19
PM
Has George Allen headed up there yet? He pimped hardcore for Specter. Not sure if the Allen supporters around her remember that. Or maybe they do….
20
PM
I have to agree with the sentiment of most of the commenters that McCain isn’t fundamentally any worse than Allen, Romney, etc. As a GOP nominee I think he is a lot stronger than the usual suspects. I’m backing Mike Pence if he runs, but I could definitely vote for McCain in the general election.
For 6 years now we’ve gotten a distorted picture of McCain for two reasons:
McCain-Feingold: Yes, it’s as horrible as everyone says. However, I think the opinion making conservative groups we all know and love (ACU, Club for Growth, etc.) have been disproportionately vocal in attacking McCain because it has such a direct effect on their work. These same groups have not been nearly as loud in attacking, for instance, No Child Left Behind, which is equally bad and equally constitutionally questionable. I don’t blame them, I’m just saying I find it strange that it took four years and Harriet Miers for people to start saying, “Hey, Bush isn’t really one of us,” when it should have been obvious from the beginning.
The Media: Because McCain was discredited early on with the usual suspects and couldn’t raise money like Bush could for his 2000 campaign, he had to work with Democrats and utilize the liberal media to get his message across. That has contributed to his image as a party apostate. Emphasizing how horrible McCain-Feingold actually was, it bears reminding that Bush needed Democratic votes to pass Medicare Part D. He works with the Democrats? Heck, when he was in the senate Dan Quayle co-sponsored a major bill with Ted Kennedy.
Bottom line — I think more often than not McCain gets held to a higher standard than most other candidates. I also think he has a lot of strengths that are underemphasized (i.e. a commitment to restraining spending — see his Citizens Against Government Waste ratings), and his critics had better be able to do better than George Allen.
21
AM
Let me be honest, McCain-Feingold is probably the most undemocratic, unconstitutional, and worst piece of legislation to pass in the past 50 years.
21
AM
Anybody who justifies a bill by saying they’d rather have “clean” government (notice the quotation marks…) than stay true to the First Amendment has no place in the White House.