Opinion
McCain liberal? Give me a break
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Suchita Shah:
- Grad speakers sorely lacking (April 30, 2008)
- Onus for funds on UW students (April 23, 2008)
- Arts education gravely ignored (April 16, 2008)
- Multicultural groups enrich campus community (April 9, 2008)
- EPA not able to crack the whip (April 2, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
Last Friday, right-wing radical shockstress Ann Coulter shrieked that fellow Republican John McCain is “not only bad for Republicans, he is… very, very bad for the country.” I’m ashamed to admit it, but I actually agree with Ann Coulter here — well, actually, just the latter half of that statement. What boggled my mind, though, was why Coulter would decry her party’s probable nominee with such heated passion.
The election or even nomination of Sen. McCain could be a harbinger for the inevitable death of social conservatism. Granted, Mr. McCain is still not progressive by any means on many issues, but he does represent a distinct difference from the evolution-denying, fence-building, neocon nativists. Or what Sean Hannity calls “true conservatives.” However, those same people who lambaste Mr. McCain and espouse Mitt Romney as an alternative willingly ignore the Massachusetts governor’s mandated universal health care plan and 1994 promises to be more pro-gay rights than Ted Kennedy. And yet Ms. Coulter calls Mr. McCain a liberal? The Republican Party is confused, and, frankly, so am I.
Of course, the Arizona senator does earn maverick points by teaming with some of Congress’s most liberal members, including Sens. Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy and John Edwards. Nevertheless, he is most definitely conservative, even in today’s Bush-era definition of the term. NARAL Pro-Choice America gave him a zero percent approval rating in 2006 on reproductive rights. In 2007, 100 percent of the time, Mr. McCain supported the interests of Club for Growth, a conservative organization that seeks to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, cut social programs and deregulate the market — about as fiscally conservative as you can get. For 2005-06, the American Civil Liberties Union and the pro-LGBT Human Rights Campaign both rated him with a dismal 33 percent support. The environmentally-conscious League of Conservation Voters approved of McCain’s work only 29 percent of the time.
Okay, so he is anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-environment, anti-civil liberties and pro-tax cuts for the wealthy and pro-elimination of social programs. Let us get one thing straight: John McCain is definitely not a Democrat and by no means a liberal.
However, we cannot ignore that there is a rift in the Republican Party. Mr. Bush and his failed foreign (and domestic) policies have fractured the base and driven many to declare their independence. These frustrated moderates see in the Democrats hope for change in health care, the economy and Iraq. In a two-pronged attack, those on the farthest right are also leaving, disgruntled with “compassionate conservatism” and “big tent” Republicanism. Is the unified party with common principles a thing of the past?
If Mr. McCain is elected, it translates into four or even eight long years of introspection for the Republican Party. It would be perfectly normal for the GOP congressional delegation to throw a fit if, say, a President Obama or a President Hillary Clinton were to call for a path to citizenship for undocumented workers. But if a President McCain were to do the same, prudence and solidarity dictates silent acceptance, as he would then be the leader of the party. A McCain presidency would herald the marginalization of the so-called “moral majority.” It would redefine the Republican Party. Permanently.
What if McCain does become president? Will it be the nail in the coffin for the Republican Party because they perceive him to be less than ideally conservative? If a Democrat wins in November, the GOP at least has a reason to reinvigorate itself. But if Republicans elect Mr. McCain, then what?
The 2008 election will ultimately boil down to who can swing the independents and first-time or occasional voters. I don’t know who is running the Republican playbook now that Karl Rove is gone, but painting Mr. McCain as a liberal is shrewd strategy. It makes him more palatable to the moderates and independents, setting the stage for a strenuous showdown as we approach November.
Regardless of any purposeful intent, Limbaugh, Hannity and Coulter continue their condemnation. The same Republicans who profess their love for Ronald Reagan distance themselves from John McCain for his positions on issues like amnesty — which, lest we forget, Reagan supported.
If Mr. McCain is the Republican nominee, there is a significant possibility that the GOP base may not mobilize and rally around him simply because of the Coulter-created perception that he is a liberal. However, in the world of politics, perception is reality. Being seen as nothing short of truly conservative would be detrimental to Mr. McCain’s campaign not only in terms of the number of votes but also the dollars that effectively buy the votes. Will people like Ms. Coulter hold their noses and pull the lever for Sen. McCain because he is their Republican, or will they simply stay home come Election Day?
Suchita Shah (sshah@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in neurobiology.
11 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!
IP hash: 551bdc3e
why in the world do we keep getting “political commentary” from neurobiologists, communication majors, etc instead of POLITICAL SCIENCE MAJORS. The day I take my political position from a neurobiologist is the day I go to a fast food cook for a health physical. The biggest problem with college graduates and undergraduates is they make the mistake of believing that because they are an expert in one topic (neurobiology)it automatically makes them an “expert” on every topic.
IP hash: 86f89e0b
Even if he is liberal…so what? He may actually get votes if not perceived to be a complete conservatard like the other entrants. It will be a good day when “conservative” is as demonized as liberal.
IP hash: a3508080
It’s funny that being economically conservative isn’t a qualification that today’s republicans consider. It’s also funny that George W. Bush doubled the federal budget in only 8 short years.
IP hash: 60662e27
Liberal hackery is almost as entertaining as Coulter crazy.
Suchita, you should take on Ann Coulter. Debate her. Fight her. Sling mud. Or Jello.
IP hash: fa4f1bf7
Suchita Shah, not a hack? Give me a break.
IP hash: 1e607fdf
I do enjoy the liberals here on campus and throughout the media talk about a “fractured Republican Party.” Trust me when I say this, there will be nothing more uniting than a Hillary Rodham Clinton nomination. McCain already has the support of moderates and many independents in the early voting states. He remains the most electable republican on the ticket. The Republicans (including their conservative base) will do anything and everything to prevent another 4 (or dare i say) 8 years of Clinton leadership. So no, come November, the party will not have a difficult decision
IP hash: 34f51f46
As a Democrat, I’ll agree with 11:04. To avoid another dynasty presidency, I will consider voting for McCain or perhaps a 3rd party independent candidate, Bloomberg being a likely option.
IP hash: 74a2a5fa
“The biggest problem with college graduates and undergraduates is they make the mistake of believing that because they are an expert in one topic (neurobiology)it automatically makes them an “expert” on every topic.”
Suchita is the vice chair of College Dems, of course she’s qualified to write about this. Nobody claims to be an expert on anything, except for your apparently. Take your head out of your ass.
IP hash: 985e6e58
Why do liberals take Ann Coulter seriously? If people didn’t busy themselves condemning Coulter nobody would even pay attention to her. Rush Limbaugh is actually a relatively powerful figure in conservative politics—Coulter is not.
But in response 5:39, since when do poli sci majors know anything about politics? Poli sci is a shallow, easy major that mostly centers on making up definitions for already obvious ideas or things. At least a neurobiology major has had to do more over the last 4 years than define “institution” or “sovereign entity.”
IP hash: 332a58d9
don’t make fun of people’s majors… c’mon how childish are we here
IP hash: 66a25532
To: Those who anonymously leave stupid **ing petty insults.
Body: How people come here and anonymously post horribly unnecessary and unfounded personal attacks on others (and undoubtedly walk away with a smug sense of superiority and satisfaction) blows my mind. I honestly can’t think of anything more pathetic.
Seriously, if this applies to you, will you at LEAST just THINK about how big of a **ing idiot you are for belittling people who spend quality time putting together their articles and then proudly paste their names and pictures next to them, while you’re sure enough of yourself to thoughtlessly and pointlessly slam them, but not sure enough to include your name?
I mean, if you’re critiquing an argument made in the opinion and are actually doing so with some substance, then cool, don’t leave your name, but if you’re going to get personal or make a ridiculous claim without backing it up, have the guts to at least identify yourself.
Signed,
People who have dignity