The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

This report from the reliable David Freddoso is the second time I have seen this same information (I take it more seriously now that Freddoso is reporting it), and it chafes me no end. Basically, it says that McCain won't consider Mark Sanford for Veep because of hard feelings about Sanford not endorsing McCain in the primaries this time after having done so in 2000. If this is true, it shows incredibly pettiness, arrogance, and stupidity on the part of the McCainiacs, very much in line with the overblown code of loyalty that led both Bushes to value loyalty and even sycophancy above merit.

Just because Sanford endorsed McCain in 2000, as a congressman, doesn't mean he is obligated to do so again as a governor in 2008 -- at least not in any sane world. People don't OWE loyalty for so long; if anything, McCain owes Sanford for going out on a limb for him in 2000, rather than having a right to expect the same limb-walking again eight years later.

Furthermore, it is not as if Sanford HARMED McCain: the governor did not endorse anybody else this time around, either; and McCain won the South Carolina primary, perhaps his most important and nerve-wracking victory of the whole primary season, anyway.

Look: If Sanford would make a good vice president and a good vice presidential candidate, it shouldn't matter one bleeping bit who he endorsed. He could have endorsed Duncan Hunter and he still should be strongly considered by McCain. On the other hand, if Sanford would not make a good Veep and a good Veep candidate (two separate questions, by the way), then McCain should not consider him even if Sanford had literally carried McCain's bags on every political trip McCain had taken in the past eight years.

Again, all of this is based on the assumption that Freddoso's report is accurate. But if it is, it gives me yet another reason, just as I am searching for reasons to support McCain, to think, again, that he has some serious deficiencies of character and judgment.

Leave a comment

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer

http://spectator.org/blog/2008/04/15/are-the-mccainiacs-so-so-bushl

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT