For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. ---Ephesians 6:12

"The age of casual Catholicism is over; the age of heroic Catholicism has begun. We can no longer be Catholics by accident, but instead must be Catholics by CONVICTION." ---Fr. Terrence Henry TOR, Franciscan University of Steubenville

Friday, February 8, 2008

McCain Mea Culpa?

Was McCain apologizing at the CPAC Convention yesterday for the Amnesty bill, and for all the other times he went dead set against conservative common sense? Was that really him saying he respected us for disagreeing with him on a host of issues???

Well, I'm not going to break down the entire speech he made yesterday with in-depth analysis. But I will at least admit it was a very good speech. McCain has a canny way of finding humor in things for which many of us wish to bawl him out. And in so doing he cleverly disarms us, at least temporarily, of our willingness to rip into him. He is a seasoned professional, no doubt.

He also gave us a long list of reasons why conservatives should join with him in barring the liberal leftist team of Hillary-Obama from the White House. Here is one list I ripped from Michelle Malkin's lovely blog:

[McCain voted to defund Planned Parenthood last year, Clinton didn’t and would likely expand Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer funding.

McCain voted to ban partial-birth abortion, Clinton didn’t and would likely reverse the partial-birth abortion ban.

McCain voted for Roberts and Alito and made the case for them in the media, Clinton didn’t.

McCain has never voted for a tax increase, Clinton will increase taxes.

McCain will continue the Bush tax cuts, Clinton will end them.

McCain will end pork-barrel spending, Clinton supports the endowment of projects like the Woodstock Museum with taxpayer funding.

McCain will not cut and run in Iraq, Clinton will work with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid to do just that.

McCain sponsored legislation to keep the Fairness Doctrine from rearing its head again, Clinton has not and has signaled moves to revive it.

McCain supports school choice, Clinton does not.

Clinton will mandate health insurance, McCain will not.

McCain voted to convict Bill Clinton on impeachment, Clinton was a witting accomplice in President Bill Clinton’s scandals.

McCain has an ACU (American Conservative Union) rating of 82.3; Clinton has a rating of 9.

McCain has 0-percent rating from NARAL; Clinton has 100 percent.]

Not all of these were mentioned by McCain yesterday, but they do give an indication as to why we might be better off with McCain rather then anyone the Dems plan to offer up. But in spite of the list, I am not convinced that John McCain really wants to do what it will take to win over conservatives. And I can't really back off of all those nasty things I said about him in past postings, either.

Truth is...he could end up being one of the worst presidents this country has ever had...or one of the greatest. It may all depend upon the level of his emotional maturity, the strength of his self-control, and whether or not he continues to stab conservatives in the backside.

And whether or not I actively campaign (on this blog) for him after he wins the nomination will largely depend upon whom he chooses for his running mate. It should be someone younger, very smart, economics minded, and fiscally conservative. Perhaps someone like Newt Gingrich, who harkens back to the freshness of the Contract With America, but without all that Newt-baggage. He should come from an important swing state like Florida...or Ohio. The public should be familiar with his name already and feel comfortable with him in a position requiring public trust. Hmmm...I can only think of one name so far: John Kasich.


Paul said...

Matt, I agree with the lovely Michelle Malkin, and will vote for McCain in November, even though he wasn't my first (or second) choice in the primaries. (I echoed your sentiments as the primaries began to unfold.) And I also agree with you that the intensity of my support will be influenced strongly by McCain's choice of a running mate.

In a WSJ op-ed yesterday, Pat Toomey (Club for Growth) argued that McCain has to name a strong economic conservative. Among those he suggested: Phil Gramm, Mike Pence, Steve Forbes. Right now, I'm most worried that "Mac" will choose the closet economic liberal, Huckabee, in a bid to pander to the evangelicals (who apparently just gave the Huckster a 3-1 victory over McCain in Kansas today.)

As a proud, orthodox, "old-school" Catholic, I share the social values of the rank-and-file evangelicals (e.g., pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, anti-embryonic stem cell research, etc.), but McCain--while not perfect on all these issues--is already far preferable to either Clinton or Obama. It would just be wrong to sneak an economic liberal (and foreign policy "Golden Ruler") into the tent at the last minute because he's "pure" on the social issues.

Meanwhile, I regretfully disagree with Ann Coulter and (perhaps) Rush Limbaugh, who suggest that there are worse things that could happen to this country than Clinton's or Obama's election to the presidency. McCain may....may....screw us on an issue or two, but the Dems will screw us on every single issue of importance to conservatives.