The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Barry and John

6.2.08 @ 12:01AM

(Page 2 of 4)

I can live with McCain as POTUS. I certainly prefer him to Barack. And I despise Hillary. But I wonder what his honor obsession is covering up. What is it McCain found honorable in leaving a wife who waited for him all the time he was a POW. And whether McCain's contemptuous behavior toward conservatives is a way of overcoming the powerlessness of his captivity. So I'll be damned if I vote for him. Or any RINO.
-- Wolf Terner
Fair Lawn, New Jersey

All that Quin Hillyer writes about good Senator McCain is true. Yet I can't help but harbor a nagging suspicion. At the Senator's advanced age, and very possibly liberated from another election campaign, that he'll give full play to his inner apostate -- and it's not liberal principle or policy that will suffer as a result.
-- Jeff Schmidt
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

If Quin Hillyer can't tell the difference between an influence peddling crook (Keating 7 and Airbus contract) and a true conservative, I wonder what he is doing on your website.
-- Tom DeLand

Quin Hillyer responds:
On the air tanker contract, it is because of McCain that the crooks are in jail. That is one more point in McCain's favor, not against him.

HOLY MIKE
Re: W. James Antle III's Huck and Spend:

What you fail to understand in your article, is Mike Huckabee is expressing his Christian worldview. He exonerates what staunch conservatism leaves out of the equation. Although most evangelicals are conservative, what has been missing, in the philosophy of those they have had to embrace in the past, is the explicit commands in both the Old and New Testament to take care of the orphans, widows, all who are poor plus the social injustices often heaped upon the underprivileged in any society Although encouraging free enterprise will eliminate a great deal of poverty, leaving it only to chance will not! Jesus said, "the poor will always be with us." There is segment in any society that must be helped.

Mike Huckabee did not make a mistake, nor will he quit or change, to satisfy far right advocates. Although he is far right of John McCain, he knows there is something terribly amiss in our country right now that must be fixed. Liberalism and socialism is not the answer. It's track record is one of failure. However Huckabee knows that conservatism must add to it's social conscience an ingredient that has been missing for all to long. Besides he sees the grass roots rebellion that is already brewing. If Republicans don't wake up there will be a landslide in November that will put the far left in charge putting us on a tragic course towards catastrophic failure.

I doubt if they will, but staunch conservatives would do well to listen to him. Huckabee's voice could go far in bringing about a needed Republican victory in the fall.
-- Earl Hill

W. James Antle, III writes: "Republicans in Washington were not ruthlessly cutting spending -- they were increasing spending across the board, on education, prescription drugs, pork barrel projects, and defense without setting any priorities." A few comments:

(1) After the last almost eight years, it should be abundantly clear to everyone that Republican and Democratic office holders differ from one another on spending only in which constituencies they serve at the behest of well paid lobbies who bundle campaign funds. Some would argue that there are exceptions. Senator Tom Coburn comes to mind, but if you look on his website under "constituent services" you will notice that the second item is "grants" (pork by any other name). The exception is a matter of degree, not behavior.

(2) If you believe that in the future Republicans will reduce the size of the federal government, thereby reducing taxes, you fit Albert Einstein's definition of insane: Doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. As I've said in previous letters, Congressmen are merely responding to the demands of their organized constituents and they really cannot be expected to commit political suicide. That's simply an unreasonable demand.

(3) Unfettered spending coupled to tax cuts is unethical because of its consequences for our children and our grandchildren. It is not in the long-term interest of our nation's economic well-being and security. If you believe that tax cuts generate enough economic growth (and tax
receipts) to pay for tax cuts, please read Ben Stein's article advising Senator McCain on tax policy should he be elected president. To quote Mr. Stein: "The next thing (you need to know) is that the Republican Party (my party and yours) has for the last 30 years or so been operating under a demonstrably false and misleading premise: that tax cuts pay for themselves by generating so much economic growth that they replace the sums lost by tax cutting."

(4) For the reasons outlined above, I think it is futile to discuss budget cutting at this time. Regardless of what Ben Stein writes, I have no doubt that promises of cutting taxes will be a successful campaign tactic in spite of the probable negative consequences for our children, grandchildren and the nation's well being.

(5) So, I cannot understand why TAS and conservatives aren't focusing more on the FairTax instead of budget reduction and tax cutting.

(6) If you don't already know how the federal tax code sits at the juncture among constituents seeking federal pork, their lobbyists and our Congressmen in both parties, I beg you to do a little research. While it's true that FairTax doesn't address spending, a serious argument can be made that enacting the FairTax would set the stage for a more fruitful discussion of federal spending.
-- Mike Roush
North Carolina

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Transportation, Education, John McCain, Constitution, Law, NATO, Socialism, Conservatism