Jan 27 2008

The McCain Effect – An Amnesty Hypochondriac Production

How is it John McCain is now best positioned to win the GOP nomination? If he wins FL (and recent endorsements by Gov Crist and Sen Martinez shows he has some gathering strength there) he will have supposedly turned the GOP on its head. Rush Limbaugh predicts the end of the party as we all know it if McCain is nominated. McCain is very liberal on a lot of issues, most notably the comprehensive immigration reform bill he worked with other ‘traitors’ like GOP Sen Kyl and the head RINO himself, El Presidente Jorge Bush – as the hyper-partisan amnesty hypochondriacs like to say to charm those who they disagree with. McCain is the one candidate who represents the antithesis of conservative AM radio talk shows, yet he continues to build momentum – how is that? Fred Thompson did the talk show circuit daily before SC, and came in a dismal 3rd. It was as if the more he talked to Hannity the lower his numbers went?

And the more Rushbo and Ingrahm and Levin rail against McCain the stronger he grows! I am beginning to understand that it is not McCain who turned the GOP on its head, he is the beneficiary of those who did turn the GOP on its head – The Amnesty Hypochondriacs. That is my affectionate, tongue-in-cheek label for those who would lose all to deport all long term, law abiding (excepting their lack of work permits, which is misdemeanor) illegals. And it seems they have succeeded – in losing all they had and hold dear. I cannot help but notice McCain’s support keeps growing as the hyper-partisan talking heads ramble on and on about how liberal he his. It’s as if the electorate is trying to find the most annoying candidate for all those who belittled those they disagreed with and now have destroyed conservative coalition.

Rush and others hint they may sit home this election, and that seems to spurn even more support for McCain. It seems America wants the Mary Poppins conservatives to sit home this election and measure themselves against their purity measuring tapes, self absorbed with their inherent purity and perfection in all things conservative. They seem to be pushing with all their might, through their support of McCain, to call the bluff or threat of the hyper-partisans.

I made a critical and basic error in my predictions of the 2006 race – I seriously underestimated the dislike of the GOP. I was not happy with them, but I had not realized I would be one of the last conservative independents to give up and try the Dems. I thought there was a little political collateral left to save the GOP for one more try. Part of that is due to the fact I don’t shift positions radically or with the wind. Thus why I never budged on Iraq, Harriet Miers, low taxes, Dubai Ports, the ban on Embryonic Stem Cell research, comprehensive immigration. I mix to be sure – but I have seen no reason to move on any of these issues. I don’t switch positions very dramatically. So I was not ready to dismiss the GOP too easily. Well, that is me – not America.

This year I am not going to be so blind. Dem turnout is just overwhelming GOP turnout in the primaries (see addendum below). And one of the most liberal GOP senators, one even I would not want to support because he is too left of me on too many issues, is leading the pack for the GOP nomination. The purity wars of the GOP clearly did more damage than I thought. McCain is strong on defense and spending, but he is also strong – in the supposedly wrong way – on immigration. That was supposed to be his Achille’s Heel, the one thing that would bring him down. It is not working out that way. The one issue I thought would stop McCain (and surprisingly the one we agree on!) is not doing what I expected. It is not slowing him down and may be propelling him forward.

Now I am wondering if there is a correlation between McCain’s growing support and the growing rants from the far right. Is this not the real reason why things are all upside down in the GOP? We know the GOP has been hurt by the stubborn purists, but maybe we have underestimated the damage they have done. The GOP is losing statewide elections in once red states like VA, and it lost 6 Senate seats in 2006, and is experiencing a wave of retirements from the 1994 wave when the GOP took over Congress. And I think those retirements are another sign that people who wanted to change America for the better are walking away from a party now over run by people who want a party in their own narrow images. They came to change Washington DC and found too many of their colleagues were changed by DC. Good decent people turned into heckling echoes of Begala and Carville instead of leaders of a new era. As Huckabee so aptly said in the FL debate: non-republicans.

I have no delusions, my views on policies are my own. I don’t believe they are “practically perfect in every way” – as the Mary Poppins conservatives crow – or, more importantly, perfect in every situation. I don’t try to impose my views, I share them and look for like minded people to follow a path of common ground, knowing there are areas all around us where we disagree and may end up opponents. I don’t hate people because one day we agree on one thing and the next we oppose each other. But the hyper-partisan hot-heads have no similar self confidence or self control. And the result is stunning.

I am pretty sure there is a backlash against the Mary Poppins Conservatives in the nation. The more they fight for their purity views the more greater America responds in the opposite direction. The more Fred Thompson haunted conservative talk radio the further down his numbers went. The more Rush and Hannity go after McCain the stronger McCain gets. The more the far right rails against the impure the larger the democrat crowds get.

When the purity wars erupted over Miers I could see the train wreck coming, and here is what I said back then:

The anti-Miers crowd won a pyrrhic victory today. The extreme right’s confidence and tolerance was tested, and found wanting. Instead of debating the merits of Miers, and allowing her to get to the confirmation hearings – too many in that crowd demeaned Miers and those, like me, who wanted to know who she was before rising in opposition. Their confidence was a charade as they panicked and lashed out in a way I thought republicans had outgrown and only liberals still did.

It is clear now that us impure conservatives cannot be allowed to participate in any meaningful or leading roles. We are not pure bloods with clear lineage to the far right cause.

The message from the Miers fiasco is clear. Only purebloods can be offered for positions of responsibility. If you are not a pureblood, then there is no depth the purebloods will go to knock you down as a mudblood.

And that is what is left of the conservative movement. We now have two factions who will never trust each other, and where name calling skirmishes will break out more and more often. It has already started. The genie is out of the bottle and cannot be put back in now.

I was sadly correct in where this would lead. When Dubai Ports erupted from the same panicky group I and many others saw the next phase in the unavoidable implosion of the GOP governing coalition. The final straw, all around, was immigration reform – which knocked the GOP out of control of Congress. Here is one of my many posts sampling the out of control anger of the amnesty hypochondriacs:

Post the list of traitors.
We’ll pull together the list of their corporate sponsors (because I can’t think of who else pushed them to vote for it) and start a boycott.
get the roll call.
Let’s crack some heads.
And with that, I leave the GOP.
Goodbye, guys.
This Is Fargin’ War!
Can you say United States of Mexico! Courtesy of our RINOS and RATS! I saw the soccer game between the USA and Mexico from Chicago and the stadium was filled with folk loyal to the RED, WHITE and GREEN…chants for Mexico drowned the USA chants…imagine that in our own land….USM!
Prez. Bush needs horse-whipping.

After all this is anyone is surprised there has been a backlash against conservatism? If not I can’t help them. Bush was respectful and a compassionate conservative who refused to get in the gutter. And for that decorum he was pilloried by those who seem to have trouble getting out of gutter politics. I heard Hannity ask a liberal caller from MD Friday what happened to her, did her parents beat or abuse her? It was a sick and disrespectful joke. It was another immature and insecure stab at someone who simply disagrees. It ranks right up there with Michelle and others going after the Baltimore family for speaking positively about S-CHIP.

I was wrong. I underestimated the damage the hyper-partisans have done to the GOP. It sounds like America is ready to destroy the party Rush holds dear and are inviting him to sit out 2008. McCain is a poke in the eye to the far right and America seems hell bent on poking that eye. Heck, he is the pick of the NY Times! I did not expect this. I feel good about McCain on national defense, pork spending and immigration. Some might expect me to be happy about his rise, but he is not really my top choice (or second or third). No, I am not happy to see how utterly destroyed the party is because of some hot-heads without self control and dignity and honor.

In the end I don’t think this matters much, because if Obama wins the dem nomination he will steam roll McCain. But it is interesting to see how much success the Amnesty hypochondriacs have had in 2008. Not only have their standard bearers all been forced out of the race, their nemesis is leading the pack to the nomination. Now that I did not expect, but then again I underestimated how much rejection the hypochondriacs where able to build up amongst their one time allies. I did not expect it or want it, but it is here.

Addendum: In case people missed all the news regarding the tsunami of democrat voter turnout I have posts on the matter from SC Dem and SC GOP (where the dems had enormous increases to record highs), New Hampshire and Iowa.

Given the early voting numbers in FL, where Dems are competing with the GOP numbers though their primary supposedly doesn’t count, I would say this trend is continuing. If the FL turnout numbers continue to show this kind of massive turnout differential favoring the dems all the GOP is doing is re-arranging deck chairs on their Titanic.

Update: National Review still thinks immigration works for them and against McCain. Boy, are they in for a shock.

66 responses so far

66 Responses to “The McCain Effect – An Amnesty Hypochondriac Production”

  1. Terrye says:


    What I mean is that I keep hearing how America is up in arms over immigration and they want this hard ass policy and yet the party that is most likely to win this year is not the party of Malkin and Tancredo. So thus far voters do not seem to agree with the hardliners about what it is that voters want.

    As for rich people buying elections, I am saying that in terms of a general election campaign finance reform has always been a winner because Americans are concerned about the effect on elections of money. They are concerned about how much it takes to run. Could a guy like Lincoln run today? Hell no, he was too poor.

    That is what I mean. I am talking about how most of the electorate perceives what they hear.

    And Rush is not accountable because of the money. Savage makes money and he is a neanderthal. Ron Paul has no trouble raising money and he has been associated with neo nazis. I am saying that Rush can make all sorts of statements about what Bush should do or McCain should do..as if he is some kind of expert, but he is not the one pursuing the policy. He is just a mouth.

    And no I am not a Democrat. I voted for Bush, he bought this party a majority in 2002 and 2004 and after the loss of one election cycle we hear that shill Noonan accusing him of destroying the party. We hear people calling him Jorge.

    So no, just because I say something you do not agree with does not make me a Democrat. I know you might think you get to decide what I am or am not, but you don’t. That is for me to decide.

    My larger point is that unlike a lot of those real Republicans out there who are threatening to stay home if their personal favorite does not get the nomination, this heretic will do her duty and vote for the Republican and against the Democrat.

  2. AJStrata says:


    Sorry – your first post needed to be moderated and I was at a B-day celebration. You should be able to post without being held up (unless you hit the spam filters, which happens to everyone!).

  3. Terrye says:

    And whippet I don’t want anything from someone else’s pie. That is exactly the sort of crap I am talking about. I say something you do not like and wham bam thank you ma’am I want something for nothing.


  4. AJStrata says:


    All I said is McCain is left of me – just barely.

  5. Terrye says:


    I am not so sure he is. We tend to be so general about these things. I read somewhere that McCain is a big fan of Teddy Roosevelt. That is why he cares about conservation. I think some people hear that and assume that makes him a liberal. Once upon a time conservation was literally a conservative policy. It meant saving what is there.

    McCain is pro life, consistently so. It is not a new position for him. He is a hawk and a fiscal conservative, so much so that he balks at tax cuts if they are not accompanied by spending cuts.

    I think the real problem some of the pundits have with McCain is that he obviously does not care what they say.

  6. AJStrata says:


    No, I don’t think Iraq was much of an anchor – mainly because the Dems have never been able to use it and win. The best example is Senator Leiberman vs Ned Lamont. If the Iraq war was so bad Lieberman would not be back in the Senate. CT is very liberal. If it was such an anchor it would have destroyed Joe. Same thing with McCain. He is a stalwart supporter and yet he gets enormous independent support.

    The fact is the only ones suffering defeat are the amnesty hypochondriacs, not the war supporters.

  7. wiley says:

    Well, you’re wrong about Lieberman and the effect Iraq had on the 2006 elections. Lamont was exposed as an incompetent junior varsity, who the far left propped up. While this was an important issue, it was just one, and Lieberman was shown to have principle and backbone. CT voters liked Lieberman on almost all other issues, and they liked his character, so he was easily elected.

  8. AJStrata says:

    Terrye, no one who supports factories of embryos for spare parts is ‘pro life’ – sorry. McCain is not pro-life, he is anti abortion – which is the choice of a mother and her pregnancy. But he is all for businesses killing thousands of human beings for spare part.

    That makes he very much left of me. Pro killing embryos and pro man-made global warming. That is why I call McCain liberal.

  9. Indy says:

    AJ, Sorry for the multiple post. This is my first posting. Terrye, if by what you say that McCain is constantly “pro-life” why did he create the “gang of 14” and stop the rule change in the Senate? Even Senator Lieberman used the “gang of 14” by McCain to state just how not conservative he really is.

  10. Whippet1 says:

    I didn’t say you WERE a Democrat I said you were sounding like one and it isn’t because I may disagree with you. I said I’m not crazy about Rush but the “market” decides if he AND Savage are successful. You think radio stations are going to keep them on if no one is listening? It’s a business and Rush and Savage still sells.

    You made a comment about Rush making millions and doing nothing but yammer. I suspect that if either of us tried to walk a day in his shoes we’d be exhausted so don’t discount someone you disagree with just because you disagree with them. Yes, he is just a mouth and he is accountable to his fans and the radio stations that carry his show.

    And campaign finance reform is a winner? Somehow McCain/Feingold is a winner (if that’s what you’re talking about) for keeping too much money from deciding an election? What about 527’s, what about the influence of a foreigner like George Soros dumping millions into 527’s that support Democratic candidates? What about those on the Republican side that do the same? If you’re talking about new campaign finance reform I’d like to see some of that too!

    And no, I don’t get to decide what you are and YOU don’t get to decide what They are. That’s why this country is so great!

    And just so you know…I voted for President Bush and would do so again. I just love the guy. He was my Governor here in Texas and I loved him then. I get very irritated when those on the right bash him but I don’t see it as an attempt to push for purity in the party. They want someone who believes more like they themselves do. How is that any different than all of us? I just don’t have much respect left for Peggy Noonan and others. But I will defend their right to say what they wish, I just won’t read it or listen.

    And my comment about wanting something from someone elses pie has nothing to do with disagreeing with you other than your post appeared, to me, to hold nothing but disgust for Rush making millions.(and your comment about rich people)
    If I have misinterpreted your comments, I stand corrected.

  11. Whippet1 says:

    “Pro killing embryos and pro man-made global warming. That is why I call McCain liberal.”

    Thank you…see we can agree!

  12. Terrye says:


    I am saying that campaign finance is a winner to the majority of Americans who are concerned about the impact of money on politics. I don’t think the bill did a good job of keeping money out of politics, I am not even sure it is possible. I am only saying that most Americans do not think it is a free speech issue, so much as a money issue.

    As for walking a day in Rush’s shoes spare me. I make a living taking care of sick and dying people. I have to see and smell and touch things that would probably make Rush lose his lunch and I do it for a lot less money that Rush makes. Fine, at least I know when it is all said and done I served a useful function. I am not so sure the same can be said for Rush.

  13. Whippet1 says:

    Then I guess you get to claim the moral highground?

  14. Terrye says:

    No, no moral highground. I just don’t appreciate it when people assume that the reason I have gotten fed up with people like Coulter and Rush and Malkin is that I am jealous of their money. It is not. I am tired of them trying to bully the rest of the party into supporting their positions for fear we will be deemed less than worthy if we stray.

  15. Whippet1 says:

    I never assumed that you were fed up with Rush, Malkin,etc. because you were jealous of their money. I understand why you are fed up with them, so am I. Bringing Rush’s millions into it gave the appearance of additional issues with them, that’s all.

    And I have never felt bullied by them or deemed to be less worthy if I don’t think like them. I don’t give them that much power.

  16. Dc says:

    Why would anyone care about what other people say, or how they say it…if it’s something you disagree with and don’t want to have anything to do with in the first place?? I could care less what Rush thinks of people like me, or the candidates we vote for (or not).

    It’s real easy….change the channel. I just turn it off or change the channel. I don’t know…it works for me.

  17. AJStrata says:

    Indy, no problem. I could have deleted them, but people sometimes add things each time they try to get through and it is easy to put them all up. Just a bunch of 1’s and 0’s!

  18. AJStrata says:

    Indy, no problem. I could have deleted them, but people sometimes add things each time they try to get through and it is easy to put them all up. Just a bunch of 1’s and 0’s!

  19. colin says:

    Of course we don’t have to do what Limbaugh, Hannity, or Coulter tell us to. But it would be crazy to talk about them like they don’t have enormous power to influence people in the Republican party. They gained that influence through the power of the marketplace, but that doesn’t mean that they can be irresponsible with that power and not get called on it. Essentially, the talk radio guys and the bloggers are public intellectuals. They may not usually be identified as such, but that’s what they are. In the past, public intellectuals took their positions very seriously, and refused to abuse them. Guys like Buckley (before he became old and bitter), Podhoretz, and Bill Bennett were the Rush Limbaughs of their day. They didn’t strike out on a crusade to destroy the potential nominee of the GOP.

    These guys are power political figures, and while they gained that position due to their own talents and abilities, they are acting in an irresponsible manner. If anyone has the power to destroy the GOP, it is these self-appointed movement leaders. They have been given an enormous honor due to a function of the marketplace. In my opinion, they are misusing it.

    Oh, and as a McCain supporter (I’ve actually already voted for him in Missouri early voting), and as a person who sees McCain as a (flawed) conservative, I have to say I very often get extremely aggravated at some of his behavior. Any of us who agreed with the President (and McCain) on immigration issues have demonstrated tolerance at divergent views within the GOP, and any of us who supported Rudy (as I did before his campaign tanked) knew how to deal with someone who disagreed with us personally on some important issues, but McCain seems to really dislike a lot of people on the right. Not just disagree with them, but dislike them. As Rich Lowry said at National Review earlier today, “McCain has always given the impression of reserving his true scorn for his enemies within his own party. I have a hard time imagining McCain making this kind of dishonest accusation [against Romeny for advocating a withdrawl timetable]against a Democrat—it would be uncivil and dishonorable. But making it against a fellow Republican running to his right? No problem.” McCaing better damn well address this issue, before even his supporters (like me, after all I did vote for him) start to really regret that choice.

  20. SallyVee says:

    Catching up here on the interesting conversation. Whippet, you’re kind of a passive aggressive bully but I gotta give you a couple points. One for sure is, I did give Rush and a few others way too much respect for way too long. And I admit to feeling a degree of scorn — so sue me! I also did turn Rush off. Trouble is, if you engage in politics even part time, you bump into Rush at least once a day. It’s sorta like pop culture… I don’t want to know a thing about Brittney Spears but against my will I end up knowing she runs around without underwear flashing paparazzi when she’s not busy being a devoted Mom. And do I have an opinion on that? Yes, she is disgusting, she is a terrible example, and I wish she would go away forever.

    Oh, and about the money. Yes indeed, Rush’s vast and much bragged on wealth gets my goat. Mainly because I’ve contributed thousands to his pot of gold, only to get a poke in the eye at a critical moment in American history, when he should be using his influence much more wisely and constructively.