The "Maverick" John McCain

There's a very real danger that folks consider "Maverick" John McCain to be, at heart, a liberal. He isn't.

Do you think [McCain]'s a conservative?
Absolutely. Liberals attracted to him would like to believe that he's not, but that's a mistake, and that's why so many in the national media love him. But this idea that once he's president he'll become more liberal, it's wishful thinking. If you look at his record, he's a conservative. But that gets skewed by this obsession with character. In 2000 we were assured that Al Gore was the dishonest one, that George Bush might not be bright, but he's honest. Clearly, Bush has told some pretty heinous lies. So often the press gets it wrong.

I fact, McCain's not even very honest. His statement:

I’m the only one the special interests don’t give any money to.

Actually, McCain has received about $400,000 from special interests.
As to his judgment and his hanging around with Vicki Iseman? I hate to paraphrase conservatives from the late 90s, but it's not the sex, it's the inability to learn from past mistakes. The blogs don't see much evidence that McCain actually slept with Iseman, but McCain very clearly did many, many favors for lobbyists and that's a problem that the Bill Clinton & Monica Lewinsky affair didn't have. Their affair was just that, a strictly sexual encounter. With McCain and Iseman, there was lots of lobbying and cash and Senatorial favors for corporate clients involved.

Howard Dean's statement is perfect and should be the template for all Democratic comments on McCain/Iseman.


Anonymous said...

If you think the New York Times is attacking Joh McCain, that’s nothing compared to what Iran is doing! Check out this great blog post about the Iranian government claiming McCain is involved in a Jewish conspiracy!


Rich Gardner said...

The blog post is completely unobjectionable for quite a ways. The
characterization of George Soros as an "extreme left-wing political
activist" may be a tad overstated, but the assertion that Soros and
McCain are unlikely to be conspiring together as they're on opposite
sides of the political spectrum is absolutely right-on.

As to anti-semitism, Juan Cole
that: "If Ahmadinejad is a genocidal maniac who just
wants to kill Jews, then
why are there 20,000 Jews in Iran with a member of parliament in
Tehran? Couldn't he start at home if that was what he is really about?"
and makes a few other arguments in the same post.

Hard to say from here of course, but I very recently saw a
good C-Span segment featuring two women who have worked in policy
towards Iran and they both very strongly recommended against the US
getting involved with Iranian groups that are hostile to the
government. They said that to be identified as taking money from the US
is the "kiss of death" over there. The government will peg one's group
as traitorious, but more importantly, there is little to no
desire to overthrow the government by force. The governmen certainly
has problems. It's far from a Jeffersonian democracy, but neither is it the totalitarian dictatorship that right-wingers like to paint it as.
Major problem is that the US record in Iraq has shown the Mideast that
US-sponsored "regime change" is not the way.

Rich Gardner said...

From Daily Kos:

Saudi Arabia's morality police are at it again, this time arresting and investigating 57 men for flirting. They have been accused of playing loud music and dancing in a manner meant to attract girls. The horror.