The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Gang of 140

1.28.08 @ 12:02AM

(Page 3 of 8)

Sure, some of Senator McCain's supporters grudgingly and dismissively acknowledge his more memorable positions that were contrary to the Republican Party and its constituents. Those are too numerous to list here.

The only principles the Senator embraces are those that promote his standing with the MSM and the independents (the buffet, Punxsutawney voters). So I am forced to read insults to my intelligence and one even came from Victor Hanson on January 20 when he wrote disgruntled Conservatives who are threatening to sit it out were engaging in "braggadocio." We'll see.
-- Diamon Sforza
Bartlett, Illinois

Mr. Wallison writes "The similarities between Reagan and McCain begin with their extraordinary attachment to principle." Mr. Wallison is presumably implying that "extraordinary attachment to principle" is inherently a positive characteristic. It is, in fact, a neutral one. All of the greatest tyrants of history were men of principles, those being horrifically malignant principles.

The other political party has a comparable siren song of "change." But "change" is also a neutral concept.

Therefore it is necessary to enumerate an individual's principles and then decide whether the individual is desirable or not. Senator McCain has declared his principles of:

(1) Voting against the Bush / Republican tax cuts at the time they were enacted, and also at the time making comments about tax cuts for "the rich" being unjustified. That the "progressive" tax structure inherently compels "the rich" to pay the vast majority of income taxes and thus naturally implies that an income tax cut would mostly affect "the rich" is apparently irrelevant to Senator McCain's principles.

(2) Supporting amnesty for illegal aliens and being a driving force behind the recently defeated amnesty bill. The staggering cost of importing poverty, its affect on hospitals, schools, crime and general employment, is apparently irrelevant to Senator McCain's principles.

(3) Blocking the appointment of conservative judges by virtue of his "gang of 14" that eliminated the "nuclear option" that would have allowed Presidential judicial nominees to have been approved or disapproved by a simple majority of the Senate and not a supermajority of sixty.

(4) Limiting freedom of political speech by virtue of his McCain Feingold Act banning certain political advertisements.

(5) Imposing a staggering burden on American industry and consumers by artificially increasing the cost of carbon based fuels. Senator McCain has swallowed the bogus science of man-made global warming hook, line, sinker, rod, reel and boat. And his principles require all of us to accept the same hook.

That said, there are many admirable qualities of John McCain. As the peerless Mark Levin has said, if John McCain did not have so many liberal political positions, he would be a terrific candidate for the Republican Party and President of the United States. But the reality of his positions requires a conservative to reject the Senator because of his principles.
-- Frank Natoli
Newton, New Jersey

Sorry, Mr. Wallison. John McCain is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a man of principle in the mold of Ronald Reagan. Mr. McCain is an opportunist of the first order, even as he pretends to being a straight talker. He doesn't talk straight about illegal immigration; he doesn't talk straight about taxes; he doesn't talk straight about his support for the surge; he didn't talk straight about the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth; he didn't talk straight about the tactics his campaign used in SC and MI in 2000. No, the good Senator McCain is not to be trusted, particularly since he is no different than Billie's wife at root. How long must we all pay for his Keating 5 transgression?
-- P.A. Melita
Charlottesville, VA

I am still in shock after reading Mr. Wallison's article comparing McCain to Reagan. I find such a comparison highly insulting to the Reagan legacy. I watched that little, weasel McCain try to arrogantly fool this country into swallowing his amnesty bill. When talk radio and Internet bloggers exposed his legislative tricks, he screamed bloody murder and accused those who opposed his bill of being racists (what party always seems to resort to that)?. This told me loud and clear that what the so-called, straight-shooting McCain most fears is an educated and informed electorate. His arrogance alone disqualifies him from any comparison to Reagan.

Is Mr. Wallison not aware of Senator McCain's assault on free speech in McCain/Feingold? Are we to believe that someone who argues for domestic trials for Gitmo terrorists and who opposes water boarding is the right person to lead the war on terror? Should we trust McCain to lead our economy when he opposed Bush's tax cuts? Is the straight shooter going to give us a logical reason why he voted against drilling in Anwar?

If Mr. Wallison wants to compare McCain to another politician then it seems pretty obvious to me who that should be. He might look better than her in pantsuits but what he's trying to hide is just about as bad.
-- Carner York
Pennsylvania

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Education, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi, Business, Earmarks, Social Security, Religion, Environment, Global Warming, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Military, Iraq, NATO, Socialism, Communism, Conservatism, Immigration, Energy