The American Mind

Whatever else may be said of Ann Coulter, she is absolutely right here: John McCain has no honor whatsoever. A man of honor simply does not tell the lies he’s told.

Once upon a time he had honor, but make no mistake: the John McCain of today is no longer the same man who came home from Vietnam.

Anne has really fallen apart. Her support of Romney and calling him the most conservative is silly. None of the 3 left are what we would like as the nominee. However McCain when compared to Romney and Huckabee has overall the more conservative record. He may be a thorn in the side but he is a thorn we know. I don’t look to vote for him but if he wins the nomination and gets a solid conservative on the ticket with him like Thompson then I’d vote for him. If he moves left then we can all welcome a another Democrat Presidency.

McCain has the more conservative record?! How do you figure?

Coulter missed the only conservative… Thompson or maybe Hunter. Now she is stuck with Romney and his ship going down!Let her vote for Hillary… when the votes happen in November I won’t ask WWCoulterD or anyone else.YouTube Coulter and Romney and watch her fawn over him backstage…. is she trying to be his second wife???

Calvin - Figurings pretty easy. McCain’s voting record consistently places him in the 60-80 region with the American Conservative Union, at 10-20 with the ADA (a liberal voting tracker).

Romney’s gubernatorial record strongly stood for abortion, for tax increases, for socialized health care, and anti-immigration enforcement.

Don’t get me wrong, McCain’s not perfect. But at least he’s not trying to hide behind some sort of miraculous conversion to conservative belief. Elect Romney, you get a presidential version of David Souter.

Oh, yeah, and McCain has more honor in his pinky fingernail than that witch Coulter will ever have in her life. Sean’s right about CPAC - if they have any spine whatsoever, they toss Coulter out on her face if she shows. And they rescind the invitation right now.

If you’d like to explain how men of “honor” tell the types of lies McCain tells with impunity, you are welcome to try. If you want a succinct summary of how McCain’s record is FAR from “not perfect,” look no further than the links I’ve compiled here:
http://rightcal.blogspot.com/2008/01/conservatism-time-for-choosing.html
Feel free to disagree with everything beyond the first paragraph if you like, but the links are pretty devastating.

Meanwhile, Romney’s admittedly-flawed record is far from the disaster you’re portraying. First off, the Club for Growth, which says McCain’s “overall record is tainted by a marked antipathy towards the free market and individual freedom,” says Romney’s “record on trade, school choice, regulations, and tort reform all indicate a strong respect for the power of market solutions…given his outstanding private sector entrepreneurial experience; the strong pro-growth positions he has taken on the campaign trail; his overall record as governor; and the fact that the U.S. Congress will not be as liberal as the Massachusetts Legislature, we are reasonably optimistic that, as President, Mitt Romney would generally advocate a pro-growth agenda.”

Second, Romney has never been as liberal as his detractors have claimed. Look no further than the beginning of his political career—he ran on a solidly (with the exception of abortion) conservative platform against Ted Kennedy:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0207/Remember_Squishy_Mitt_From_94.html

Third, it’s strange that if his “gubernatorial record strongly stood for abortion,” that NARAL wasn’t happier with him: “(A)s governor he initially expressed pro-choice beliefs but had a generally anti-choice record.” (whoops; I’m citing data from an Ann Coulter column. It must be wrong!)

Lastly, Rick Santorum vouches for the work Romney did to fight for marriage behind the scenes.

Would I like to have a candidate without Mitt’s warts, or totally free of ambiguity? Sure. But there’s more than enough reason to be optimistic about conservative leadership from a President Romney. That’s good enough for me.

I think Sean secretly yearns for Ann.

C’mon, man! Admit it!

[…] Their basis for supporting McCain on judges is more sound once the general election comes around and the choice could between McCain and Clinton/Obama. If that’s the choice in November conservatives are better off ignoring Ann Coulter and picking McCain. […]

Calvin - I’ll be happy to disagree with any number of points in your blog. First off, and most important, the “illegimate black child” push poll is/was true, despite all efforts to hide it today. Not only was it cross-referenced by multiple sources (including one in Rock Hill, who I happened to work with), but Lee Atwater himself confirmed it after his fatal cancer diagnosis.

As for McCain’s vs. Romney’s gun record, you must be joking. Romney has already been caught in his underwear again after he made a statement in the recent Reynolds Instapundit interview that clearly conflicts with his record in Mass. and statements he made as little as two months ago. He supported existing Massachusetts gun restrictions, supported the assault gun ban, and supported the Brady Bill. McCain, admittedly, has been lukewarm on the assault gun ban - but has been anti-Brady and anti-mandatory registration for years.

I could care less what Romney campaigned on against Kennedy - frankly, it’s just more hot air, like his recent campaigning. His track record as Mass governor speaks for itself - tax and fee increases, pro-abortion, pro-gun control, and against immigration enforcement.

Ah, but his track record is exactly what my post addresses - and what you seem not to care about (much like McCain’s current lies about Romney).

Calvin - No, you’re basing your post on what he has said - not what he did. What he said against Kennedy is meaningless; he lost the election so we never were able to see if he’d do what he said.

Let’s review what he’s done:

Guns - As governor, signed assault weapon ban and requirement for firearm ID cards. Claimed this was pro-gun since it extended the length of time for firearm ID card renewal. Much as I can’t stand this guy, I do admire his capacity for spin. Ref: Boston Globe, Jan 14, 2007

Abortion - Romney fully supported pro-abortion laws in Massachusetts during his tenure, and he and his wife have directly contributed to Planned Parenthood. Despite photos of he and his wife at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser, he has always denied remembering being there. Quote from race against Edward Kennedy: “‘I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.”

Taxes - According to the Tax Foundation, Massachusetts tax burden for state and local taxes increased from 9.8% to 10.5% during Romney’s tenure. This does not include all the fee increases during his tenure, either.

Health care - Drove a bill that required all citizens to purchase health care insurance, whether they wanted to or not. It’s not quite Hillary-care, but if you didn’t participate, you were required to pay additional income taxes.

I could care less what he says. That’s what he did. Makes McCain look positively Goldwater-like by comparison.

Well, we’re at post #11, and the claim that McCain still has “honor,” despite his willingness to knowingly lie on the campaign trail, remains undefended.

Guns—I know Romney is lacking in this area. On multiple occasions, I’ve said that he’s wrong myself. But I don’t consider disagreement on an issue or two to be deal-breakers, except for the war and abortion. Speaking of which…

Abortion—Everybody knows Romney used to be pro-choice. And it figures that a pro-choice candidate would donate to PP. But you’re simply wrong about what he did as governor. Don’t take my word for it; take James Bopp’s. Granted, Bopp is a part of Team Mitt, but he’s been a strong, sincere defender of life since before Mitt Romney entered his life. The following piece reveals numerous elements of the abortion agenda Romney has always opposed, even while pro-choice:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWYwMzg3MzZkNDBmYzJhMGY5OTY5MjI3YTYxYzFkNDE=

Massachusetts Citizens for Life vouches for Mitt’s pro-life record, and as I’ve already noted, NARAL bemoans it. And for what it’s worth, consider the factors at play: years ago a relative of Romney’s died from an illegal abortion. Granted, he drew the wrong conclusion from the ordeal, but most pro-aborts have far weaker justifications for their position. And what changed his mind—modern embryonic science—is precisely the way the pro-life movement has been winning converts.

Taxes & Health Care—again, the Club for Growth took an extensive look at the candidates’ records on free-market related issues. Admittedly, they rip on both candidates in some areas, but Romney comes off FAR better than John McShame in their final analysis.

I have no need to defend McCain’s honor. When you’ve done seven days, much less seven years, in a ‘Nam POW camp, come back to me about honor. Romney doesn’t even have the same distinction of how he’s served our country, and as for lying, Romney’s done it so often I’ve lost track. Most recently, and well-documented from multiple sources, was his recent whopper concerning the assault gun law. Or was that just channeling another Massachusetts great, John Kerry, with a massive 2-month flip-flop?

And, no, I’m not wrong about his record on abortion. He did absolutely nothing in Massachusetts, even preach in the bully pulpit, about abortion - in fact, all his significant quotes while governor and while campaigning against Kennedy are all pro-abortion. Heck, he didn’t even bother with the HRC qualification about “safe, legal and rare”. With Mitt, it was more like “early, often, and I support Roe v Wade as I have for the last 20 years”.

And, no we don’t need the Club for Growth with their pro-Mitt agenda to define what Mitt did while governor. He encouraged and signed into law a universal health care bill that requires all to have health care or suffer large penalties on their income tax. I could actually excuse providing universal health care access, if those who do not want access are not required to buy in. But Mitt’s plan? Sorry, that’s out and out socialism. Enter our health care plan or vee vill tax you more!!

But back to the original part of the thread, I guess that fits. Ann’s supporting HRC, who supports socialistic health care, I guess it would make sense that she’d support the other creater of socialistic health care: Mitt Romney.

So, let’s recap: since McCain served (and suffered for) his country in Vietnam, he’s exempt from having to be an ethical person for the rest of his life. Funny how the Right didn’t have the same standard for Kerry and Murtha - and how NOBODY would use that standard for another American serviceman-turned-sour: Benedict Arnold.

Your empty bleating that gives McCain a free pass on basic decency, ignores Romney’s abortion record, and imagines that the Club for Growth is somehow a Mitt co-conspirator (what’s next: Pat Toomey’s really a Mormon?) proves what I suspected from the beginning: you’re no more than a shill for John McShame. It ain’t convincing anyone.

You lose, pal. Better luck next time.