Jonah Goldberg’s commentary is always accurate, succinct, and insightful. He had a good article this past week in USA Today: Should Conservatives Back Mac? Needless to say, I thought the article was interesting. He presents a strong case for why conservatives should back McCain, but I think it deserves some dissecting.
Goldberg’s overall point is that conservatives who continue to criticize and oppose McCain’s nomination are really just frustrated with the last eight years of Bush , and are taking out that frustration out on McCain. About this he’s right, but the fact of the matter is that Bush-fatigue is a good reason to oppose McCain, not a bad one.
Basically, you’ve got amnesty for illegals, uncertainty on judges, big government, and McCain-Feingold. Goldberg is largely right; McCain’s faults are almost identical to Bush’s faults.But this is precisely the whole point of opposing McCain! What conservative can truly say that they are 100% satisfied with Bush in all areas of his policy? I venture to say, none!
Taken on the whole, Bush has been excellent in certain areas, and just terrible in others. So why shouldn’t conservatives oppose a candidate with at least as many faults as Bush? Defend another semi-conservative for president because we’ve had to grit-and-bear through eight years of another semi-conservative? This doesn’t make sense.
How about conservatives start electing conservatives for once? Why do we keep electing semi-conservatives that inevitably put real conservatives into a position where we’re defending and apologizing for them constantly? Yes, conservatives are sick of defending Bush for being an incompetent liberal. So why would they elect another Bush, who is going to need the same tiresome defending?
The Republican Party keeps making the same mistake over and over again. The “moderate, experienced” George H.W. Bush defeated by Clinton in 1992. The “electable war-hero” Bob Dole defeated by Clinton in 1992. The “compassionate conservative” George W. Bush is somehow elected twice, but brings the above mentioned liberal policies with him.
And now we’ve done it again.The “electable-experienced-war-hero-compassionate-conservative” McCain. Even if he does win the presidency, it’s going to be more of the same. And conservatives don’t want more of the same, they want someone conservative. Conservatives believe that liberals, moderates, semi-conservatives, and the like simply don’t have the answers our country needs. They just don’t.
I don’t know what any of this means, I remain torn about the whole thing. All I know is that in a few years, regardless of who’s in the White House, conservatives and most Republicans are going to be regretting what happened this primary.
Jonah Goldberg on McCain and Bush
Jonah Goldberg’s commentary is always accurate, succinct, and insightful. He had a good article this past week in USA Today: Should Conservatives Back Mac? Needless to say, I thought the article was interesting. He presents a strong case for why conservatives should back McCain, but I think it deserves some dissecting.
Goldberg’s overall point is that conservatives who continue to criticize and oppose McCain’s nomination are really just frustrated with the last eight years of Bush , and are taking out that frustration out on McCain. About this he’s right, but the fact of the matter is that Bush-fatigue is a good reason to oppose McCain, not a bad one.
Basically, you’ve got amnesty for illegals, uncertainty on judges, big government, and McCain-Feingold. Goldberg is largely right; McCain’s faults are almost identical to Bush’s faults.But this is precisely the whole point of opposing McCain! What conservative can truly say that they are 100% satisfied with Bush in all areas of his policy? I venture to say, none!
Taken on the whole, Bush has been excellent in certain areas, and just terrible in others. So why shouldn’t conservatives oppose a candidate with at least as many faults as Bush? Defend another semi-conservative for president because we’ve had to grit-and-bear through eight years of another semi-conservative? This doesn’t make sense.
How about conservatives start electing conservatives for once? Why do we keep electing semi-conservatives that inevitably put real conservatives into a position where we’re defending and apologizing for them constantly? Yes, conservatives are sick of defending Bush for being an incompetent liberal. So why would they elect another Bush, who is going to need the same tiresome defending?
The Republican Party keeps making the same mistake over and over again. The “moderate, experienced” George H.W. Bush defeated by Clinton in 1992. The “electable war-hero” Bob Dole defeated by Clinton in 1992. The “compassionate conservative” George W. Bush is somehow elected twice, but brings the above mentioned liberal policies with him.
And now we’ve done it again.The “electable-experienced-war-hero-compassionate-conservative” McCain. Even if he does win the presidency, it’s going to be more of the same. And conservatives don’t want more of the same, they want someone conservative. Conservatives believe that liberals, moderates, semi-conservatives, and the like simply don’t have the answers our country needs. They just don’t.
I don’t know what any of this means, I remain torn about the whole thing. All I know is that in a few years, regardless of who’s in the White House, conservatives and most Republicans are going to be regretting what happened this primary.