It appears that Johm McCain ? Ariz. will be the Republican nominee for President (Written 4, Feb 08) this year unless something happens as happened to the New Engbland Patriots (it didn't).

is this good or bad?

In his favor are the 83% lifetime rating by the American Conservative Union, which looks at the voting record. This last, curtesy of Bill O'Reilly aka America's Demagogue. But I'll take if for fact, O'Reilly did expose the main publication of the Swift Boat Vets as not good at best and while not saying so, most likely fraudulent. Also is the 90% American Security Council score; but that is narrow-issue and several Democrats like "Scoop" Jackson and another senator named Bird did very well, and it really only shows that one supports strong actions. McCain supported the Clinton Serbian War of the late 1990's so it may be that he's just trigger-happy and never met a war he didn't like. I used to be a member of the American Security Council

On the other hand what about the public McCain?

  1. McCain-Feingold; viewed by conservatives and anti-free speech
  2. McCain-Kennedy: The Shamnesty bill: surrender to Mexico
  3. McCain-Liebermann: Globaloney Warming. alnog with the display of bright green he put on in California and the emerald speech in Michigan. Does "Wacko Environmentalist" do much for you? What principled person wants to get behind Al Gore Lite?
  4. Having Juan Hernandez of Progresso Latino, a Mexico-first group as his "outreach" point man puts McCain in bed with anti-US forces and brings into question his loyalty and asks questions about sedition.
  5. The Keating Five: A group of Senators that was found by the Ethics Committee to have peddled their influence in Congress on behalf of one of the principles in the Savings & Loan debacle of the late 1980's McCain was the only Republican of the five which included leftist Alan Cranston.
  6. Votes against drilling at ANWR and the Bush Tax Cuts
  7. Was referred to by a spokesman for Human Events, the oldest leading Conservative publication as "devisive" or as we say in sports "a cancer in the clubhouse"
  8. Was discussing with Tom Dashell et al quiting the Republicans and Joining the Democratic Party. I'd heard about this a couple of times but this was confirmed within a fortnight by Limbaugh quoting a story attributing this to Dashell
  9. ADDED 30 AUG: According to Dick Morris on 29 Aug, discussing how Mc can set himself apart from Bush: McCain was part of the overwhemingly Democratic lynch mob in the Senate that went after the tobacco companies ("tobacco nazis").
  10. ADDED 5 SEPT. from WRNI 1290 AM Rhode Ilsnad NPR station "All Things Considered" "...He [McCain went against his party on campaing finance reform..." (which was not reform, just more big governemnt) and ran with the Democrats which it seems he does a lot of. Don't look at me, it's his record, not mine.
  11. ADDED 28 Oct. In early October McCaihn said he would like to "work with Al Gore [on global warming]" and have Warren Buffett as his Treasury Secretary. Gore is a known lunatic and as for Buffett he's the one who said that "Americans don't pay enough taxes". and the list of betrayal goes on. At least Obama talks out of only one side of his face. On 27 Oct. Rush joined the lemmings
Now you have two things, the ACU and ASC ratings that support his claim to be on the right and eight, very publically done and discussed things that speak against it. Which do you think are the anomolies? All this to cozy up to the leftist media? Shrewd dishonesty is one thing but what can you say about dumb?

What will a McCain nomination bring? I see a very Deomcratic public image to the point of corruption. Well, Harry Truman said "Given a choice between a fake Repbulican and a real Republican, the American people will choose the real thing" in response to claims that his Deomcrat policies were too hard-line. Well McCain is quite open to the charges of being a RINO which means Republican in Name Only. which means a fake Republican, therefore more like a Democrat and a fake Democrat.

He will be a minority president if he wins at all and he displays too much of a penchant for supporting Democratic ideas of the worst sort. This and his desire to keep in the good graces of the liberal media; dance with the one who brung you, will ensure his signature on every piece of bad legislation that comes down the pike: Hello Kyoto: Hello universal health care and Goodbye Southwestern US. However, He does hang tough on Iraq, which, if you like to see US troops being killed for no good reaons and with no end in sight is just your thing.

Given this outlook, I plan to vote for whoever the Democrats put up.


First; it is my nature to respond sharply to betrayal, especially to betrayal that makes me wonder if the betrayer is a few planes short of a carrier or is not playing with a full deck. Second; I agree with Truman. Real is better than fake. Metaphysically what is true is true, what is fake is false. Epistemologically the true expands our range of awareness, accepting the false contracts it. As to the superiority of which, Ayn Rand made an eloquent statement; "when an organism is attacked from beyond its range of awareness, it dies": End of Story. Ethically: In any choice between true and fake, which is good and which is evil? As a psychohistorian. I observe that the substitution of false for true is a key component of mental illness except that in the case of the mentally ill, it is not voluntary because it is not controllable. Historically, this substitution is the key element of superstition and superstition marks the beginning of decline. Practically, as Glen Beck and Michelle Malkin put it Can you trust McCain?

My answer is 'No". Now I can trust Hilary to be Hilary and Obama to be Obama and they have the scarlet L for "Liberal" on their forehead so they will be under scrutiny.

Also, we must purge the Republican party of the phoney conservatives. This election will finish off the Evangelicals as a force in politics, consigning them to the three "b"'s: Backward, Bigoted and Beaten, hopefully for good and all until they can advance to the post-Wright Brothers world. So if McCain goes down that will restore the principled approach to the Republican party. It is said that McCain can "reach across to the other side". Two things. They are the "other side" as in the Nazis, Communists and Al Qeada were and are the "other side". Did Reagan "reach out to the other side"? or did he attract people from the other side to him? When you "reach out to the other side" (the opposite side from yours) you validate their mindset, ideals and beilefs at the expense of your own side's. That is, you say that the enemy's system is true and those whose name you claim have the false ones. At least Obama and Hilary can't stab me in the back. McCain-Feingold has already empowered George Soros as well as the Swift Boat Vets, which is fast becoming the term for lying (as it, in fact, is) So no good has come to the conservatives of McCain right out of the box. An interesting sidelight here is that the Democrats will probably pay the Republicans back for the (not too) Swifties by finding former soldiers who have an axe to grind with McCain. Speaking of "reaching out to the other side" it is now said that McCain will or should "consciously reach out to the conservatives", one of whom he claims to be. Now, if he were in fact on the right, he would not have to "reach out" as in "reach out to the otuer side", so the conservatives must be, to him, the real "other side" as in Nazis, Communists and Al Qaeda.....Hmmmm; you don't suppose?....Nah, can't be...erm...can it?

As far as Huckabee, Do you really wnat someon who takes literally and believes the six-day creation story to have his finger withinin 1,000 miles of the nuclear trigger? What if he gets the notion that the End Time is at hand and wants to make a mushroom for Michael? Not me!

Now you ask me "What is to be gained by defeating McCain?" Look at the list again. Any two of those positions and by itself going Green automatically disqualifies one from being conservative or libertarian. Now if the person holding those positions becomes President under the Republican banner, he infects the Party with them. How can Republicans defend freedom of speech having McCain (As in McCain-Feingold) at the top? How can the Republicans oppose the Greens if their President is himself, by his public demeanor, one of them? How can the Republicans stand in opposition to illegal immigration with McCain-Kennedy (note the lead name) probably on a fast trac? Who knows what other Democratic ideas will get play from this clown?

But you say to me "You are supporting the Democratic campaign? How are they any better?" Let me answer:

  1. There is no meaningful difference between what the Democrats and Republicans are offereing up given the actions to-date: class warfare (look at the sneering way McCain attacked Romney for being able to "buy and sell businesses"), Pro-illegal immigrant amniesty, opposition to drilling for oil in ANWR, Gore's whacko stuff and taxes. In fact Mc was ready to leave the Republicans to join the Democrats. Any differences are minor and of no concern to anyone with an IQ larger than that of a size 10 sandal.
  2. The Dems at least state their ideas and beliefs openly and clearly which gives them metaphysical clarity moral superiority. The rightness or wrongness of these ideas is irrelevent sonce both parties are supporting them: One open and one somewhat secretly. The honest one gets the edge. When this state of affaires occurred back in the 1960's amd '70's, it was called "me too'ism".
  3. There are things that I support that are not conservative: Roe v Wade, Removal of "under God" from the pledge of allegeience: Freedom of religion necessitates a stricty and purely secuar polity, and an end to the Iraq war post haste (It's already lost and was when no significant threat from Saddam Hussein was shown to be factual since which it's been the mission of the week, goal of the day and sruge of the hour, much like the child caught with his hand in the cookie jar coming up with one lame excuse after the other as each gets shattered to flinders by the adult who did the catching).
  4. The Republicans have presided over the largest expansion of government since the Great Society in the last 8 years.
  5. A McCain victory would infect the Republican Party with the same toxic ideas that are mainstays of the Democratic Party. By implicitly accepting these postions, the Conservative/liberal fight is taken off the table by the Republican Party: They've compromised their principles, which is a total surrender because it is the surrender of the basic identiy of the Republican Party. For one thing, as a minority president, and knowing to whom he is beholden, McCain will sign whatever the Dems send his way. Also, having come to power under these liberal ideas, The Republicans can never again advocate the ideas that are incompatible with these archtypical ideas of libralism, hence this is the ultimate and final repudiation of Reagan and what brought Republicans to victory in the first place as well as a reversion to the "me-too'ism" that marked it as the minority party for the quarter century prior to Ronald Reagan's 1980 campaign.
  6. McCAin is a Trojan Horse; a RINO and therefore a fake and therefore a lie! A lie is a willful denial of reality and by extension of the whole of the universe. It is also a deliberate contraction of one's range of awareness. Recall my earlier Ayn Rand quote and add this Rebecca Howe (Cheers) quote "It means I'm too stupid to live".
A landslide defeat is the least that the Republicans deserve for this election cycle. Perhaps later they can come back with something more appropriate to the party of principle. Right now, the only party that is standing up for its principles is the Democratic Party. Another Ayn Rand quote "A man with ptinciples; even the wrong principles, is better than a man with none".

And there's one more thing McCain's old harridan of a mother said that, according to Michelle Malkin and other reports "Conservatives will have to hold their noses and vote for John". Anyone who accepts and yields to that sort of castration is fit only to kneel and be defecated upon: Just in case Howie Carr, Rush Limbaugh, Hanity et al are listening (or not listening as the case may be in which case they won't know what the [bleep] hit them). Aside from all of that, These guys did the kind of attack job on McCain that:

In fact. Romney's speech wasn't even dry and Carr had his lips firmly clamped around McCain's nose, followed by the oft heard "giant sucking sound" of Ross Perot fame, and he didn't even ask for any bread. One would think that such a hard guy would at least have waited a microsecond before rolling over with his paws in the air.

Now you may say "But McCain is the lesser of two evils". That might, at best be true, but this self abnegation of its core principles, in the face of a Democrat Party that is holding true to it's own core beliefs makes the Republican Party the greatest of all evils.

One also must consider this. What are Mccain's chances of winning the final?

Of course the Demsocrats are politicians, too and these predictions presume at leat a moiety of competence. But if I had to bet... But there is one immutable truth about politics