It's amazing that McCain is still in the race, given this New York Times' endorsement (which illustrates how far off the reservation he is):
January 25, 2008Because, frankly, anyone to the right of Stalin would be considered too individualistic and reactionary for the New York Times.
Primary Choices: John McCain
We have strong disagreements with all the Republicans running for president.
The leading candidates have no plan for getting American troops out of Iraq.Note to the New York Times - Just because you are not reporting the success in Iraq does not mean that they aren't happening (or that the GOP candidates and the electorate don't know about them).
They are too wedded to discredited economic theories...??? Discredited economic "theories". What the @#$ are they talking about? Free trade? Low taxes & decreased regulations result in an improved economy? If they want to talk about discredited economic theories, perhaps we could bring up the successes of the theories that are being implemented in Venezuela, Zimbabwe, etc, etc.
... and unwilling even now to break with the legacy of President Bush. We disagree with them strongly on what makes a good Supreme Court justice.Or, in other words, we disagree strongly with Supreme Court justices who restrict themselves to the words & meaning of the Constitution; instead, we want the justices to make decisions based on what any enlightened resident of the Hamptons would think is just.
Still, there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe.Ummmm, if there's been an angry fringe, I'd have to point to all of the Impeach Bush folks, the Markos "Screw 'em" Zunigas crowd, etc. Or is their form of political activity just rational debate in your eyes?
With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field.Yes, I can understand how you would "shudder" when a member of the Republican party occasionally takes an issue that isn't in lock step with the editorial board of the New York Times. That his defiance of your agenda is only occasional is of great concern to conservatives and party members across the land.
We have shuddered at Mr. McCain’s occasional, tactical pander to the right because he has demonstrated that he has the character to stand on principle.
Can you please give us a rundown of issues where he hasn't "pandered" to the right (ie, where he's in lockstep with your discredited worldview?
He was an early advocate for battling global warming and risked his presidential bid to uphold fundamental American values in the immigration debate.Strike 1 on global warming. Strike 2 on immigration (although I'm closer to McCain's newfound position of enforcement followed by a guest worker program than most of the GOP base).
Ok, that's two strikes... anything else?
A genuine war hero among Republicans who proclaim their zeal to be commander in chief, Mr. McCain argues passionately that a country’s treatment of prisoners in the worst of times says a great deal about its character.Strike three.... Not to mention his lack of support for tax cuts, erring on the side of protecting life on the question of federally funding stem cell research, etc, etc. I think he's run out of strikes - and at bats.
[...]Except for the national reconciliation bill which was reported in your pages in early January, right?
Mr. McCain was one of the first prominent Republicans to point out how badly the war in Iraq was being managed. We wish he could now see as clearly past the temporary victories produced by Mr. Bush’s unsustainable escalation, which have not led to any change in Iraq’s murderous political calculus.
At the least, he owes Americans a real idea of how he would win this war, which he says he can do.One area where I agree with McCain - the war can't be won when our fighting force is in Fort Carson.
We disagree on issues like reproductive rights and gay marriage.Ok, so McCain does have some redeeming qualities. (Although I suspect I'm more libertarian on the latter issue than McCain.... However, his exact position is difficult to determine given his flip-flops through the past 8 years.)
In 2006, however, Mr. McCain stood up for the humane treatment of prisoners and for a ban on torture.A ban on torture is useless if we don't torture. Who says we torture? Is loud rap music or tickling considered torture?
We said then that he was being conned by Mr. Bush, who had no intention of following the rules. But Mr. McCain took a stand, just as he did in recognizing the threat of global warming early. He has been a staunch advocate of campaign finance reform, working with Senator Russ Feingold, among the most liberal of Democrats, on groundbreaking legislation, just as he worked with Senator Edward Kennedy on immigration reform.Strike 6! Strike 7!
That doesn’t make him a moderate,to the Leftist-Moonbat standards of the New York Times
but it makes him the best choice for the party’s presidential nomination.According to the New York Times' editorial board who won't allow reality to penetrate the Manhattan bubble in which they exist. If I were Romney, Giuliani, or Huckabee, I would feature this endorsement in every ad in Florida and running up to Super-Tuesday.
Thanks to the Times, I'm revising my ranking of the candidates:
McCainHuckabee / Paul Huckabee
ARC: St Wendeler