McCain and Dixie Chicks to Launch Blockbuster World Tour
On Sunday, Sen. John McCain opened the conference (like a convention, only it happens every year) of Britain's resurgent Conservative Party. By all accounts, he bombed. But the speech was interesting for two knocks at George W. Bush unlike anything McCain has said on these shores.
Conservatives came to office to reduce the size of government and enlarge the sphere of free and private initiative. But lately we have increased government in order to stay in office.
And, soon, if we don't remember why we were elected we will have lost our office along with our principles, and leave a mountain of debt that our children's grandchildren will suffer from long after we have departed this earth. Because, my friends, hypocrisy is the most obvious of sins, and the people will punish it.
And he grumbled about the war in Iraq, too, warning Tories not to "attempt to placate public apprehension with false promises of swift victory and passing dangers."
They have seen enough of this war, in Iraq, Afghanistan and on our own streets to know better. We have an advantage over some countries. We serve a practical and stouthearted people. They can stand the truth better than they can stand deceit and hypocrisy.
So… why does McCain wait until he's escaped the 50 states to talk like this? He's bucked the White House on torture, in an almost cosmetic way, but when has he ever barred the door to more spending or more bluster about the Iraq War? The takeway story isn't that McCain is criticizing Bush in another country; it's the question of why he lacks the cojones to do it here.
In July, Macy Hanson approved this message about McCain's "campaign finance reform syndicate."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
... and what kind of trash was he talkin' at Jerry Falwell's college?
McCain is a victim of the Zelig effect.
Actually, I resent his speaking out like this in a foreign country, i.e., airing dirty laundry in public. These remarks should have been made in the US - where they are most desperately needed.
Did anybody see the doc "Why We Fight", not the 50's propaganda version? Anyway, its got this great scene where McCain is spilling the beans in an interview on why he thinks the Secretary of Defense should get fired, when out of nowhere his assistant informs him that Rumsfeld is on the phone for him. Stunned and nervous he removes his sleeve mike and stumbles to go take the phone call. The scene ends. You are then left to imagine the amount of ass kissing that was to ensue.
The original Why We Fight films were produced, as you might expect, in the 1940s, during the war. And they had less propaganda than the recent Why We Fight film.
"McCain is a victim of the Zelig effect."
I think Ruthless is onto something.
McCain is, no doubt, getting ready for his Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act II, which will make it illegal for citizens will not be able to criticize politicians on American soil within 60 days of an election. You know, to prevent corruption.
Most politicians are descended from Leonard Zelig. It's harder to do nowadays, what with all the press coverage and the Internet, but time was that politicians on campaign would say quite different things to different groups of people.
On the bright side, should McCain actually grab the 2008 nomination, there will be some demand for a third choice from libertarianish folks who usually vote Republican. Too bad nobody comes immediately to mind as a possible LP standout.
BTW, "going over a bomb" is a good thing in the UK. (Except when you are a PM at a party conference in Brighton.)
Kevin