Go, Pat, Go. I am with you Charles. I have GREAT respect for McCain. I respect his willingness to stick to his guns and unwillingness to pander. Respect and support are not the same thing. Besides, whatever the polls say… I cannot help but think about Dole ’96.
Not being fooled by rhetoric would require taking Buchanan’s words with a grain of salt.
The “Gang of 14” kept the GOP Senate from killing debate on justices. That McCain voted for Ginsberg is to his credit (yes, Democrats started politicizing the selection process with Bork, but heaven forbid McCain should vote on principle while the rest are bickering partisanly). And after all, Bush got both his nominees confirmed (though putting his personal lawyer up for the job first makes one wonder in what way McCain could possibly be worse than Bush).
And yes, McCain goes against conservatives on another hair-brained idea: a Berlin Wall on the Mexican border. Does the border need to be fixed? Yes. Will a wall fix it? Probably not. But it will be a sad day if I have to explain to my child one day what terrors lurk on the other side of that concrete fence that scared the country into building it.
Now, I suggested McCain (why not McCain?) as an alternative to Paul whose newsletter has made him unpalatable even to many of his single-digit supporters. McCain or Romney will win the Republican nomination. Romney is a sudden conservative, liable to become a sudden liberal on the other side of his election (aside from the fact that he just gives one the creeps). So, McCain is it. And, if conservatives get behind him, he can win.
Then again, if we, like Buchanan, are looking back fondly on the “glory days” of the 19th century and its protectionism, then the 21st century will simply pass us by. Pulling out of the free-trade empire that we’ve constructed (around ourselves) would be about as responsible as pulling out of Iraq prematurely: economies would collapse, chaos would ensue, and the international finger would point squarely in our direction. Curse McCain for wanting to be responsible with the historical situation we’ve inherited.
I don’t know what “protectionism” is. It sounds like an ideology, and I am no ideologue. However, I do know what “protecting” means, and I think that it is a very good thing. Protectors/guardians/conservators have existed since the beginning of time. We protect our families and our cultures, if we want them to survive.
Look, I respect McCain. He has probably made more sacrifices for our country than have the rest of the candidates combined. In a general election against either Obama or Clinton, I would probably vote for McCain. But I’m not sure that he would be much of an improvement over Obama or Clinton, and (as Buchanan argues) he could very well be worse than Bush.
I happen to think that our current policies on immigration and on war are destroying us. With McCain, I see more of the same. I wish that we could help every needy soul in the world, but we can’t. Since we must choose, I would much prefer to help my kith and kin rather than a Mexican or an Iraqi whom I’ve never met.
I agree with you that we have bit off quite a bit more than we can chew in many respects. The Iraq war is probably the greatest misadventure by a single American president (Vietnam was bad too, but it took more than one leader to make that mess). There was never any justification for it, but there’s an argument to be made that pulling out before Iraq can govern itself would put the U.S. at greater risk.
I’m not sure I understand in what way our current policies on immigration are “destroying us.” What is being destroyed? The housing market? The economy? The culture? A change needs to be made in immigration policy, but coolly defining the problem is the first step to solving anything.
Jeff, good question. I’m not blaming immigration policy for all our ills, but it’s a big factor. If you have a chance, take a look at Buchanan’s book, State of Emergency. I think he “coolly” and extensively defines the problem.