McCain vs. Hayworth: No Contest for Conservatives
In his PJ Media piece “Please, No More ‘Half-as-Much’ Republicans,” J. Robert Smith states that swapping out John McCain for J.D. Hayworth in the upcoming GOP senatorial primary in Arizona is a “nice bargain from a conservative’s viewpoint.”
It would certainly be that, and an analysis of the voting records of these two men from the Grand Canyon State via vote ratings from the American Conservative Union (ACU), National Journal, and the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) highlights just how good a bargain it would be.
Looking first at the ACU numbers, we see that Hayworth’s ACU lifetime rating of 98 is significantly higher than John McCain’s lifetime ACU average of 81. In fact, in John McCain’s 22 years in the Senate prior to last year, he was only able to equal or surpass Hayworth’s low-water mark of 88 (in ’03) three times (’94, ’95, and ‘96). What’s more, with the exception of 2003, Hayworth voted with the ACU position at least 96 percent of the time every year he was in Congress — a feat that John McCain has only achieved once.
With respect to National Journal’s ratings, Hayworth’s average score for the 12 years he served in the House was 22 points higher than John McCain’s average rating over this same period (National Journal ratings are only available for McCain for this 12 year period, as he did not vote enough in ’07 or ’08 to receive a rating and scores are not available prior to ’95). To put this in perspective, this gap is greater than the 21-point margin in 2008 between Senators Sam Brownback and Arlen Specter. Additionally, just as it was with the ACU data, Hayworth’s least conservative year fairs very well against McCain’s average year. In fact, Hayworth’s least conservative score (78) is higher than any score John McCain has received from National Journal since 1995.
As for the ADA ratings, they too show that Hayworth is clearly the most conservative choice to represent Arizonans alongside Jon Kyl in the U.S. Senate. According to ADA statistics, McCain and Hayworth have voted against the liberal ADA position 85 and 96 percent of the time, respectively, over the course of their congressional careers.
I am not from Arizona, nor do I know anything about Hayworth. But, in addition to the scores you mention, I would also want to consider McCain’s weight in military and foreign affairs. Support for the surge was probably the single biggest issue of the last decade. Could Hayworth have done what McCain did?
If I lived in Arizona I’d vote for Hayworth over McCain and consider it a no-brainer. I voted for McCain in 08 because he was what the R’s were offering, and his opponent was Obama – another no-brainer.
While I have not done a statistical analysis, I’d bet the only time that McCain “appears” to look conservative is when he’s up for re-election, otherwise he acts like a “progressive conservative” – talk about an oxymoron!
I agree that J.D. is a more reliable conservative. But Arizona is not a Republican state anymore. The fact is that incumbents have a huge advantage over challengers. If Republicans are serious about taking over Congress, they won’t throw their 2008 nominee under the bus even if there is someone a little better but probably unelectable based on his past performance. After all, if it weren’t for McCain, would conservatives even know the name Sarah Palin?
Thank you Andy Wickersham for an excellent companion piece to Smith’s prior post. Most of the negitive posts condeming Hayworth in Smiths piece did so claiming ‘facts’ which, as you have noted, were nothing more than opinions cross dressing as directions to the Rodeo.
4. Bob: “But Arizona is not a Republican state anymore.” Oh yeah? Despite all the hoopla about independents rising – has the recent Napolitano era really ushered in Democrat party transformation here in AZ? I guess that is why Terry Goddard has lit the state on fire running away with things this cycle huh?
I certainly don’t agree. Just one off the beaten path example.
Let us recall one of the Big SIS Janet’s stunts fairly early in her career as Gov. It kicked off the I (independent registrants ‘revolution’) way back in ’04. It was CONCEIEVED in her office as a ruse to overstate her gains (the success of clean elections serving as inspiration) – and to help sell/promote her ‘BRAND’ to national Democrats as a national figure thus WORTHY OF MORE MONEY and boosting.
This governor and her people allowed TENS OF THOUSANDS OF REGISTERED REPUBLICANS to get their status changed from R (Republican) to I (Independent) due to the ILLEGAL recognition of a third party – a third party that specifically applied and briefly was accepted with an R also – thus gaming the registration system to bounce off said thousands of voters – many of whom never found out until they went to vote in the ’04 cycle. (And it was Jan Brewer – as then Secretary of State – who fixed this mess – recommending – unsuccessfully that investigations and indictments were in order – to no avail with a democrat as attorney general)
And many voters did re-register eventually – but plenty didn’t. They didnt’ because it was the beginning of the downturn in the Bush years – and since this state has been staunchly libertarian conservative for so long – many here caught a whiff of what Bush was doing and rejected it a lot sooner. And a little credit is probably due to Lou Dobbs active register Independent campaign on CNN about the same time as well – as an offshoot to his immigration campaigning.
It also helps when you don’t have anything remotely resembling a compliant fox news/conservative pubilcation – a notable difference from the Goldwater fifties & sixties – since the only game in the WHOLE STATE is the Arizona Republic – a newsie that was the preverbial ‘sixth man’ off the bench for Janet durning her reign of terror. A rag thats barely right of the friggin FREE TIMES~!
Regurgitaiton (non-facts as well as facts) unfortuately has become the new standard of journalism in our current 24 hr news cycle – unlike reporting such as Mr Wickersham.
While it sounds like a minor issue – it’s precisely the kind of minucia that the average voter hardly notices – And more importantly is just the kind of inside baseball that voters are rebelling against today.
And it’s just one hallmark example of what Napolitano did as the titualr Democratic head here during her run; rule by buearacratic deception – incremetially grow state government (specifically through creating appointee’s – unelected – who stay ‘forever’). It worked for HER – upp-wardly mobile failure while avoiding the concequences of her profilgacy. She gets a cabinet position & we get a state in tatters.
I guess in one way this state has become certainly more liberal in the past ten years – mainly with the in-migration of so many former Californians. In fact when you talk to them(whether it’s down in Chandler or over in Paradise Valley or SELECT neborhoods in Scottsdale & Tempe), or more specifically endure their whinny patronizing cant, what you discover is this.
John McCain IS THEIR SENATOR. These folks are HIS BASE – which dovetails nicely again with Mr Wickershams observations.
But as far as Bob’s assertaion that we are a shade less blue than New Mexico? No way. We are still in Red box canyon territory.
Which is part of what this rumble is all about – asserting that Phoenix voters are determined to roll back the Napolitano largess rather than cave into a smaller version of Sacramento. That this ‘new West’ progressivism is a bunch of bunk.
This primary is the primer to the real big one’s in Arizona – finding out whether Harry Mitchell, Kirkpatrick & Gabby Giffords can survive (hope not) – and who will take over for Shadegg.
And finally if we keep a conservative gov to go with a reliably conservative state house – or elect a dolt like Goddard.
To paraphrase Patton
“I would rather have a democrat in front of me, than have McCain at my back.”
When push comes to shove, McCain has always bought into the Democrats’ definition of bipartisanship:
Move people over to the right-hand side while the ship is still steering hard left.
#1,
He could and he DID.
Could McCain get bamboozled by Economics 101 – yes, he did, whereas JD is very well versed in economics and was a member of the Republican Libertarian Caucus.
McCain was an illegal aliens best friend; JD sacrificed his career in trying to stop the flood in the face of significant Republican opposition.
JD is a strong advocate of free markets, McCain is utterly clueless in that regard.
On Defense and Security, they’re equal.
SUMMARY: JD by a wide margin.
Sharpshooter
San Tan Valley, AZ
McCain is a snake in the grass. His head-popping up all over the TV screens is due to his desperate desire to WIN! The minute he achieves that goal he will be back to creating new bills like Campaign Finance Reform and supporting amnesty for illegals, and more . He is a wrench that the Libs throw into the motor of the Republican/ Conservative party and he does it with glee “‘kuzsh heezsh McCain, hee, hee, and heezsh on TV!”
Sorry Andy, but I live in AZ and we ran Hayworth-less off one time and we’ll do it again. I am very conservative and on my top 5 issues, McCain has done a fine job. He believes in lower taxes, less pork a strong military, less abortion,no national healthcare.
Hayworth is a crook. End of story. He is a self-serving loud mouth that won’t be able to lead…yet alone follow. He’s in the only role he could find; talk-show host. Leave him there.
Those that think politics are “all or nothing” are the same people that stayed hom and got Obama elected.
We need McCains EXPERIENCE in Washington.
Charater matters and McCain has it.
Go beat up the lying, spending Democrats and leave an honorable (yet not perfect) Republican alone….
Vote conservative in the primary and Republican in the general. Honestly though it would be hard to vote against McCain.
Yeah.. some “character”..
Founding Member of the Keating 5 Back in the old days, defendants in famous trials got numbers — the Chicago Eight, the Gang of Four, the Dave Clark Five, the Daytona 500. McCain was one of the “Keating Five,” congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips.
Charles Keating was convicted of racketeering and fraud in both state and federal court after his Lincoln Savings & Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $3.4 billion. His convictions were overturned on technicalities; for example, the federal conviction was overturned because jurors had heard about his state conviction, and his state charges because Judge Lance Ito (yes, that judge) screwed up jury instructions. Neither court cleared him, and he faces new trials in both courts.)
McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating’s airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating’s luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain’s wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a “sweetheart deal.”
McCain was not convicted of any crimes, though the Senate concluded that he exercised “poor judgment.” (Furthermore, he got off on some charges by a technicality — that he was still in the House when he took those vacation trips, and so the Senate couldn’t prosecute him. The House concluded that THEY couldn’t prosecute him because he had moved to the Senate.)
With respect to National Journal’s ratings, Hayworth’s average score for the 12 years he served in the House was 22 points higher than John McCain’s average rating over this same period…
Hayworth is no longer in the House because the voters in his district threw him out in 2006.
Those who say McCain is a tax cutter are dead wrong. McCain voted against Bush tax cuts nearly all the time.
McCain voted against a 1,35 Trillion tax cut on incomes and capital gains President Bush proposed in 2001.
McCain voted against a similarly large tax cut in 2003, saying the tax cuts disproportionately benefited the wealthy. Kennedy and Kerry said the same thing and voted the same.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/108374
McCain also voted against President Bush tax cuts on Income, dividends and Capital gains in 2008 along with John and Ted.
McCain favored TARP bailouts, but seems to always oppose tax cuts.
Bill Heuisler
McCain is an honorable man, but he belongs in the high command (but not President) rather than the legislature.
Why continue as career politician? McCain’s married to a millionairess, has 7 houses, he’s past the age of retirement. Talk
about love of power. It’s really sickening. McCain has never held a private sector job. YOUR taxes have paid for town car lunches for nearly 30 years.
McCain supports Amnesty, voted bailouts, fundraises for Kirk & Crist, luv’s Cap’n Tax Lyndsay Graham. McCain is a viral cancer to conservative causes.
Mark Levin is leading the charge against McCain. Go here and Download the Jan 26 archive… at the 50:00 mark http://is.gd/8wWJg
McCain is no conservative. Those on here claiming otherwise are absolutely ill informed or members of McCain staff.
McCain MUST GO!
Stop following everyone else! Think for your self! You people must have vote for obom-us. Nice job, now he’s living the highlife on our tax paying money. Don’t try to tell me I’m wrong. He has taken his “wife” out a few times at our expens. JD HAS BEEN VOTED OUT OF THE HOUSE 2006. HE’S BEEN DOING TALK SHOWS AND JUST RUNNING HIS MOUTH. Really, no brainer? You have to really do your research and stop following. When people said “we want change in the white house.” What type of change do you really think that was?
I voted for McCain in 08, but only because his was the only rational choice on the ballot. I’d like to send a small donation along Hayworth’s way, but I’m hesitant for one reason: I think it’s better to have a some-of-the-time good R in the senate than all-the-time bad D. Does anyone have any info about how Hayworth polls against likely dems?
I have another concern. It might be necessary for Hayworth to win a three-way race. McCain is so addicted to power that he might be tempted to emulate Lieberman and run as an independent if he loses in the primary.
A “hope against hope” that Arizona gets it right this November will be a hope that McCain gets re-elected. There’s a reason why Hayworth is no longer in the house and that kind of unelectability is what will doom the Republican Party and ANY hope for a conservative legislative rebirth. The Buckley axiom should rule here: elect the most conservative person you can get. McCain is surely conservative, if not perfect; Hayworth is a chance simply not worth taking if your serious about a conservative national agenda.
This is the year to go incumbent hunting. I’m in the mood to vote out anyone who has been in DC most of his or her adult life regardless of ideology. An old swishy-washy Rino who did not even try to articulate conservative principles during the 2008 debates? Goodbye!
I firmly believe the platform of any conservative who wants a Tea Party endorsement should include support for a Constitutional Amendment limiting terms for members of Congress. These leeches seem to increase their ability to damage the Republic the longer they are there.
Thanks for the analysis PJ Media! The Conservative movement here in Arizona is growing by leaps and bounds. McCain has a reputation of having a stranglehold on the Republican party here…. however, the little people are involved and awake now and we are going to Unseat John McCain. He thinks he can trick us by bringing in Sarah Palin to campaign for him. Think again Senator McCain…… you see we know you here in your home state. You can pretend to be a conservative during election cycle, but we know you !
I voted for Palin in 2008. McCain was just the head of the ticket. After McCain-Feingold, I have a hard time getting behind a man who would trash the first amendment so blatantly.
#15 Myth Buster: Ditto – McCain is an honorable man who has served his country well, but he’s not reliably conservative. Plus, he’s often wrong (e.g. McCain-Feingold) but a nice man and honorable nonetheless. Hayworth, despite having been thrown out in 2006, as #13 gs above points out, will be consistently conservative, and thus better for the country. Neither McCain, nor his family, will starve or want for a place to live after he leaves office.
The 2008 Presidential election should serve to remind us that conservatives should not listen to the opposition as to who Republicans should nominate. Democrats kept saying, “Oh, McCain’s a maverick, and he’ll work with the other side, find common ground . . yada, yada, yada.” Well, personally, I don’t want someone who’ll work with the other side; I want someone who will consistently & relentlessly pursue & vote a conservative ideology. Our country has had enough deficit spending, tax hikes & government growth to last for many generations to come.
McCain has had his turn; I say AZ voters should support Hayworth cautiously, keep his feet to the fire & make sure he stays true to his conservatism. If he doesn’t, kick him out, too.
McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy Amnesty, Supported Tarp (stuffed with earmarks, auto bailout, mortgage bailout and the AIG bailout. Somebody please tell me what’s conservative about McCain. His past military experience has nothing to do with his service in the Senate, so please spare me the war hero thing although I do respect his service.
Ha Ha… Hayworth is hardly an unknown. He has a lifetime ACU of 97%; was caught up in redistricting and a bad year for all republicans in reelection. He was the Dem’s number 1 target. What does that tell you? With JD, you will know what you get: a consistent conservative vote.
McCain is a stab-conservatives-in-the-back Republican. He’s done an excellent job of stabbing conservatives in the back and thumbing his nose in our faces, in spite of which he’s actually managed to be re-elected before.
John ‘I was misled on bailout’ McCain also must have been misled on amnesty for illegal aliens, abortion, cap and tax, Bush’s tax cuts that he opposed, and he misled himself on the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 he recently sponsored that will ban consumer access to supplements . He’s definitely a victim.
No, let me begin by detailing where I think John McCain has gone wrong. For starters, John:
•Voted against the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 echoing liberal Democratic arguments that they were tax cuts for the rich;
•Voted for an $850 billion bailout for banks and car companies, which was loaded with special interest earmarks totaling $150 billion;
•Proposed spending $300 billion to buy up every bad mortgage in America, which National Review called a “full bailout for lenders” (McCain said he got the idea from Hillary Clinton!);
•Supports a cap and trade scheme that the Wall Street Journal called “an expensive, invasive government bureaucracy” – indeed, McCain once proclaimed, “I don’t know how any conservative cannot support cap and trade;”
•Wrote the campaign finance law just struck down by the Supreme Court that denied free speech rights to groups like the National Rifle Association while carving out an exception for media corporations like the New York Times;
•McCain refuses to support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. And, McCain’s wife is openly campaigning for the gays in California and supposedly for Grant Woods the Democrat candidate for Senator;
•McCain opposes drilling in ANWR;
•McCain supported Napolitano in AZ, ensuring her election and defeating on two occasions a conservative Republican;
•McCain opposes the use of the enhanced interrogation techniques (waterboarding) that we know prevented at least 4 major terrorist attacks;
•He wants GITMO closed;
•McCain helped write an amnesty plan that would let illegal aliens qualify for Social Security and Medicare, and which the Heritage Foundation estimates would cost taxpayers “at least $2.6 trillion.” This is not the record of a true conservative, much less a fiscal conservative;
•And, let’s not forget that he was one of the senators involved in the ‘Keating Five’ savings-and-loan corruption scandal.
•The ‘Gang of 14′ which aborted Republican attempts to force an up-or-down vote on conservative Supreme Court nominees;
•The normalization of relations with the Red Vietnamese government before they came clean on the POW question;
•Publicly considering a party change to run as VP for John Kerry;
•McCain has also endorsed in the primaries – Mark Kirk, Fiorna, Crist and Brown. His PAC is actively trying to get these type RINO candidates elected. Let’s not to forget that Politico article a few months ago about how McCain is on a countrywide mission to move the party to the center, center left.
McCain has tried to reverse course and rejected nearly everything he stood for and advocated 5 years ago. Was he wrong then or wrong now? Let me help and summarize for the blind and dumb:
Talking Points for Dummies:
Here are the top 10 reasons some conservatives dislike the Arizona senator:
1. Campaign finance reform. McCain tried to limit the role of money in politics with measures that, critics say, stomp on the constitutional right to free speech.
2. Immigration. McCain has been a vocal supporter of a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, although he now says he understands the border between the U.S. and Mexico must be sealed first.
3. Tax cuts. McCain twice voted against President Bush’s tax cuts, saying in 2001 they helped the wealthy at the expense of the middle class and in 2003 that there should be no tax relief until the cost of the Iraq war was known. But he now wants to extend the tax cuts.
4. Gay Marriage. McCain refuses to support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
5. Stem cell research. McCain would relax restrictions on federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research, which critics consider tantamount to abortion.
6. Global warming. Among the loudest voices in Congress for aggressive action against global warming and a frequent critic of the Bush administration on the issue.
7. “Gang of 14″ member. One of seven Republicans and seven Democrats who averted a Senate showdown over whether filibusters could be used against Bush judicial nominees.
8. Kerry veep. McCain was approached by the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, about being his running mate. McCain talked with Kerry but rejected the offer.
9. Works with Democrats. See all of the above.
10. Belligerence.
But JD is a birther. That puts him in the wacko camp right there. I would agree, McCain likes to see himself as a deal maker, but he is not a wacko.
I do like to see JD pull John to the right though!
To Phoenix48: I have both McCain and Giffords in my crosshairs and intend to term limit them at the ballot box — and am working mightily in the meantime to spread the word.
We will replace them with JD Hayworth and Jesse Kelley, respectively. Cheers, from AZ8.
Notice that McCains most conservative voting record coincides with the years the Republicans took over Congress with the “Contract”. Seems he is a good “me too” kind of Senator.
Let’s kick him to the curb and move on. He’s a nice guy, but needs to take up gardening. Lord knows there is plenty of manure stacked up near him anyway.
I do live and vote in Arizona and previously lived in Alexandria, Virginia for many years. i would never vote for Hayworth> I may not always agree with mccain and didn”t like his presential campaigning but hayworth is a loudmouthed windbag> when he served in congress longstanding republicans who lived in his district could not bring themselves to vote for him> just because he votes the way you would like on conservative issues doesn”t mean a thing> sorry about the typos> something is wrong with my keyboard>
McCain is fiscally pretty good but had some major bonehead policy positions – Cap and trade, campaign finance, torture nonsense, etc. Hayworth takes the right policy positions for the most part but is a big time pork abuser and part of why we have huge deficits.
I think AZ could do well looking for a third option.
Do I really want to bring this up?
Instead of fighting for conservatives (since he billed himself as one to get elected), he has chosen to fight alongside progressives to achieve “bipartisanship” legislation. There is something vaguely “Stockholm” syndrome-ish about this; he sides with the enemy in order to survive. Hmm.
The truth is, we’re in a war, and we need Churchills not Chamberlains.
“All of us, Republicans and Democrats, have to work together to get our economy back on track. I hope my vote today is a strong step toward restoring bipartisanship in Washington.” So says Scott Brown today in defending his vote for cloture on the $15 Billion jobs bill.
“Three other Republicans — Sens. Susan Collins (Me.), Olympia Snowe (Me.), and George Voinovich (Ohio) also voted for cloture.”
Is it not true that among Republican senators, only Collins, Snowe, Voinovich, and Murkowski have more liberal-leaning records than does J. McCain during this session? And isn’t it remarkable that with J. McCain’s courting of Scott Brown, his campaign contribution and open endorsement, we now have in Senator Brown a Massachusettes senator beholden to J. McCain? a MA senator who can cast his lot with liberals so J. McCain doesn’t have to — during this election year when it is so crucial that McCain maintain a conservative posture?
I am so cynical, it makes even me sick to my stomach.
There is no way on earth my husband or myself would vote for the immoral JD Hayworth. Even throughout this short campaign, I have heard nothing from his mouth that is even worth listening to. Call McCain old, call him too far left, call him whatever you want. When it all comes down to it, we are at war, we are a mess in Govt we are in need of strong voices, which is what McCain is. McCain has fought against the big spending, against earmarks, against the ridiculous health care bill, he fought and continues to fight for our Nation’s Security, McCain is needed in office. JD needs to find a job in the underground where he cannot get into trouble!
I am sorry, but I developing a lack of patience for articles such as this one by Andy Wickersham and for the kind of posts seen here that depict McCain as being on a bipartisan crusade when in fact, he has a very conservative voting record and is a leader the opposition to Obama, denouncing Obama for pursuing a “left wing crusade.”
J.D. lost his last race to Congress in an overwhelmingly Republican congressional district. There were questions about ties to Abramoff, and his conservative record is not so clear as portrayed by Mr. Wickersham. Sarah Palin and all the Arizona officials elected to national office do very much know what they are doing in supporting John McCain.
Worried about the deficit spending we are doing and the national debt we are racking up? You should be. John McCain, throughout his career, has been a fiscal conservative who has gotten into heated argument with his opposition to earmarked and out of control federal spending. McCain voted against Obama’s trillion dollar deficit spending budgets, denouncing them as “generational theft,” a phrase picked up by Sean Hannity. J.D. doesn’t and can’t compare on this critical subject.
Worried about ObamaCare and socialized medicine? You should be. John McCain had the most free market approach to health care in 2008 of all the candidates and had always been adamantly opposed to national health care. The GOP National Platform in 2008 was excellent on health care because it adopted the McCain platform on the subject. McCain has strenuously opposed ObamaCare and has been accused by the New York Times of throwing bombs on the subject. J.D. can’t compare on this critical subject.
Worried about bailouts? You should be. McCain voted AGAINST every Obama bailout bill and even voted against the second release of TARP monies when Bush was still President in late 2008. J.D. was on the sidelines on these issues because he lost his last race for Congress.
Worried about the kind of people in the Obama Administration and nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court? You should be. McCain voted AGAINST the confirmations of tax cheat Geithner, radical pro-abortion advocate Sibellius, leftist attorney Kagan and transnational advocate Koh to their respective positions in the Obama Administration. McCain voted AGAINST the confirmation of Sotomayer to the U.S. Supreme Court. Again, J.D. was on the sidelines on these issues because he lost his last race for Congress.
Worried about foreign policy, military matters and national security because of Obama’s appeasement mentality, lack of experience and naivete? You should be. Few people have the experience and knowledge concerning foreign policy, military matters and national security that John McCain has. He was right about the Iraq War when even many Republicans went wobbly and fought off Democrat led efforts to cut off funding our troops in the field in Iraq. McCain was right to attack Obama for dithering about committing to General McChrystal’s plan for Afghanistan and for not supporting the Iranian dissidents. McCain could be right because he knows his stuff when it comes to Commander in Chief decisions; he is the one capable of being a Churchill. J.D. can’t remotely compare on this critical subject.
Worried about the lack of real patriotism and the kind of example being set by people in the Obama Administration? You should be. John McCain is a patriot. He was a combat naval aviator during the Vietnam War who braved one of the toughest air defenses in history over North Vietnam. He is the grandson of the Admiral McCain who was Bull Halsey’s right hand man during World War II and the son of the Admiral McCain who was CincPac during the Vietnam War when John McCain, the combat aviator, was a P.O.W. in North Vietnam. John McCain’s campaign theme of “Country First” reflected a family tradition of military service that has continued with one son who is a Marine who has served several tours of duty in Iraq and another son who is a Naval Academy graduate and serves in the Navy. John McCain’s discussion of serving with a servant’s heart was and is genuine. J.D. can’t remotely compare on this critical subject. No one can.
Hayworth is a big-mouthed moron. So what if he can check off a few more boxes on the “conservative issue” list? He couldn’t hold his own House seat!
It’s only a matter of time before he says something else stupid – more birther nonsense, for example, which he has mentioned on the radio far too often to disown.
I’m as disdainful of McCain’s apostasies as anyone, but losing his seat is no solution.
Mr. Byler, I’ve read your posts in the past, and I can’t say that I’ve ever agreed with you.
You go right on ahead and vote for amnestyJohn if you want; for the man who proposed a $300 Billion mortgage rescue plan; for the man who was against the Bush tax cuts because they weren’t “targeted”(code for redistribution of wealth); for the man who hopped aboard the gang of 14 train, thereby permitting dozens of conservative judicial candidates to fall by the wayside — there’s bipartisanship for you; the man who with Lieberman was gung-ho for cap-n-trade — the legislation that would have strangled us all; the man who brought us Campaign Finance Reform (with Sen Feingold), reform — as in it’s OK for huge media corporations (you know, the lefty-led MSNBC, ABC, CBS, etc.), to spend gazillions to prop up their candidate within 60 days of an election, but woe to the likes of IBM, Walmart, Raytheon, or the National Right to Life folks. Oh yeah, I almost forgot about that wife and daughter of his who have jumped on the bandwagon of our latest cultural degradation: gay marriage. Oh, yeah. He’s a real winner.
You just go right ahead and vote for this paragon of Constitutionalism if you like; you can comfort yourself with his military record and national posture, which, oh, by the way, doesn’t include enhanced interrogation, but does make the Euro-types happy with his closing Gitmo stance.
But I’m going to work against him. And that’s a fact. And I vote here. Do you?
Mark Levin is endorsing JD Hayworth. I respect John McCain’s service to his country, but we need warriors right now. I don’t really know if people understand the danger this country is in. John McCain did not challenge Barack Obama, when he needed to, that was during the election. I can’t support him for that reason. I still remember the woman in the audience at the town hall, who told John McCain she thought Obama was an “Arab,” and she said she was afraid of him being President. John McCain’s response, was, “I admire Barack Obama.” That sticks with me to this day. How does one admire someone who is friends with Bill Ayers, Rashid Kalidi, Bernadine Dohrn, Jerimiah Wright, Malik Shabazz(who along with William Ayers have since visited the White House, as has Angela Davis former Black Panther.) How does a person admire a serial liar?
John McCain had his time, it is time for someone younger, and tougher.
Mr Byler,
You and I agree on nearly everything with one huge exception. I have lived in Arizona for 40 years and know far more about John McCain than people like you who live in the Northeast.
All of us who have served in the military honor John for his courage and service, but his nasty anti-Hayworth ads coupled with his ads about his fighting the “Titans” are hypocritical.
Back in the eighties and nineties McCain’s own personal Titans like Burton Barr, Jim Henseley, Kemper Marley, Charles Keating and Duke Tully aided and abetted him with millions of money and reams of newspaper propoganda and enabled his political career.
McCain never fought the “titans” here in Arizona.
Bill Heuisler
I’m a combat Vet with an honorable discharge. I must deserve 40 years in the Senate.
We need men like McCain in command, but not in a place where they make deals. Put simply, McCain is a sucker, because he projects his own sense of honor onto his opponents. Make him Secretary of the Navy or Secretary of Defense, and you’ll have a good man in place, but leave him in the Senate, and he’ll be fooled time and again.
Hello Darcy, I have posted on a number of different subjects, so I find your observation that you never have agreed with me interesting. In any event, you reel off a list of subjects as to which you have disagreement with John McCain. Let me pick two and suggest that your disagreement is misconceived.
First, “Gang of 14.” In 2005, at a time there was a Republican majority in the Senate, Senator Schumer was threatening a fillibuster of Bush judicial nominees. There was a thought of Republicans voting to abolish the fillibuster as to judicial nominations. But there was no guarantee that would have gone through, and if it didn’t that would have jeopardized all nominees; and there were long run problems if it did. What the “Gang of 14″ compromise did was to preserve the filibuster as to judicial confirmations, but that enabled overcoming the Schumer-led Democrat filibuster so as to allow Roberts and Alito to be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court and many conservatives to be confirmed to U.S. Courts of Appeals and that caused Schumer to complain about Democrats being snookered. McCain’s preservation of the filibuster was done with the thought that while in 2005, the GOP controlled the White House and the Senate, in future years (like now), the Democrats may control the White House and the Senate and the filibuster was a needed check. Will you say that the preservation of the filibuster was a mistake if Obama nominates to the U.S. Supreme Court former Yale Law School Dean, current State Department Advisor Koh and you realize that Koh believes in transnationalism — a legal “philosophy” that makes international law superior to the U.S. Constitution?
Second, Bush tax cuts. The only time that McCain voted against the Bush tax cut was the first time, and that is because the tax cut bill was amended to delete spending restrictions. After that, McCain voted for the continuation of the Bush tax cuts and campaigned in 2008 on their continuation as well as a cut in the corporate tax rate. The Wall Street Journal did an analysis of the original Bush tax cut legislative history and confirmed what McCain has said — that with the spending restrictions, he would have voted for the tax cut the first time. McCain voted for the original bill for the tax cut, but switched his vote once the spending restrictions were removed. McCain would have preferred a diffeent rate reduction structure, but that was not the deal breaker. What was, was the removal of spending restrictions. Given the overspending by Republicans during the Bush years, are you going to say that McCain was wrong to fight for spending restrictions?
Hello Bill Heuisler, I keep hearing about what are described as “nasty” McCain ads against Hayworth, but their substance is not reported. Hayworth has some liabilities. What are the ads doing that are making them “nasty”? Saying what is true, such as that Hayworth lost his last race in a predominately Republican congressional district, can’t be considered nasty. Is it the reference to the Abramoff matter and Hayworth? If Hayworth does have some liabilities, it does not help the GOP if he were the candidate and those liabilities cause a repeat of his last electoral failure.
Mr. Byler,
Writing e-mails at 4:48 a.m. is obviously a labor of love.
Those ads? The female whispering about Hayworth with both relish and disgust mentions Abramoff and alludes to other reasons Hayworth lost his Congressional seat – leaving a distinct impression of corruption and starting a dirty fight.
This is both unworthy of McCain and foolish, because imputing dishonesty in others only draws attention to his own past. For many years no one in the Republican Party has done anti McCain ads that feature his relationship with Charles Keating and the other disreputable people I mentioned earlier.The reason? Most don’t want to smear Republicans and help Democrats.
But that has never bothered McCain. He has made a career taking tainted money and smearing others. It’s time he was exposed.
Bill Heuisler
39. myth buster:
I’ve have the same thought – he thinks he is dealing with honorable people, not politicans. Most of us would have learned.
Hello, Mr. Byler:
“It is pure post hoc ergo propter hoc for the Whites to contend that the Gang of 14 deal had anything to do with the confirmations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito. Supreme Court appointments are of a different dimension than nominations to the lower federal courts, even the Circuit Courts of Appeal. The public is far more engaged in them, and the political price of obstructionism is certain to be markedly higher.”
Here is the link for you, the entire article, written by A. McCarthy and Mark Levin in Jan. 2008:
http://article.nationalreview.com/344301/mccain-and-the-gang-of-14/andrew-c-mccarthy–mark-r-levin?page=1
While it was good of you to reply to my post, let me assure you that my opinion of J. McCain is fixed; in even the second point you cite on the tax cuts, here’s this:
“SUMMARY: The Associated Press reported that Sen. John McCain favors an “extension of expiring tax cuts from Bush’s first term,” but the article did not point out that McCain changed his position on the Bush tax cuts, opposing the reductions in 2001 and 2003, then voting to extend them in 2006. . . . in a May 26, 2001, floor statement that he opposed the bill because “so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle class Americans who most need tax relief.” http://mediamatters.org/research/200801180003
So, there you go, Mr. Byler. Thank you for the opportunity your reply afforded me to back my assertions with the record of the facts.
Solid article Mr. Wickersham!
McCain is the greatest political disappointment in recent memory. As Glenn Beck has aptly stated, McCain is a Progressive, like his hero Theodore Roosevelt. He follows the Marxian ideal that the achievers should be ‘punished’ and favors wealth re-distribution, much like Obama. Just last November in Kingman, Arizona he accused banks of being ‘greedy’ just because they’ve tightened up their lending standards due to more restrictive rules from FDIC. Darcy, you are right on and your references are dead on, versus McCain’s candidacy which will be DOA!
Mr Byler, you must be one of McCain’s benefactors who care little about liberties. I’ve followed his career since the Keating 5 when he barely escaped prosecution. Get tired ALL you want, you must be quite sleepy to miss the contradictions in your statements versus McCain’s voting record. Sleep tight for when you wake up on August 25th, McCain will be effectively retired!
The single biggest cannon shot into the ranks of the liberal establishment in DC would be a McCain loss. The MSM nominated McCain in case Obama stumbled…as he did several times…with the media always there to tell the public to look away.
Seventy-two hours after McCain recieved the Republican nomination his pals at the NEW YORK TIMES had a front paged unsourced article about an affair between the Senator and a lobbyist. That’s the way liberals work. For McCain until he got the nomination…then…back to promoting Obama by attacking McCain.
A Hayworth win would show the left that the people of Arizona want their border protected and sanity restored in Washington. No more McCain-Feingold…no more gang of 14…filibusters are just fine when the left does them…and McCain humms to their tune…remember when reconciliation was the “nuclear option”? Now, according to the media and the left (but I repeat myself) it’s a justified majority vote, just democracy in action.
please no more of johns stupidpity now he pimps palin and brown on us enough its time to put him out to pasture