Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

27
Letters
Friday, May 12, 2006 12:00 AM

Maverick -- or panderer?

Will John McCain abandon his principled opposition to a federal ban on gay marriage to suck up to the religious right?

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Thursday, May 11, 2006 06:44 PM

OF COURSE McCain will cave in

OF COURSE he will embrace this absurd amendment. All you need to do is consider all the previous times recently when he's abandoned his declared principles to "do what needs to be done" to get the Republican nomination.

Here in Ohio, McCain has French-kissed Ken Blackwell, by endorsing him for governor. Blackwell, of course, has cast his lot with the right wing Christian conservative segment of the Republican base -- and unfortunately, has just been nominated as the GOP candidate for governor.

My disappointment with McCain is total. I actually registered as a Republican so I could vote for him in 2000 during his campaign against Bush for the presidential nomination. Stupid me -- I thought he was DIFFERENT -- a politician with principles, who would tell the truth at least PART of the time.

Oh, he IS a politician. But he's nothing more than that -- a politician, in the worst sense of the word.

Thursday, May 11, 2006 07:01 PM

check out this video on ifilm re: john mccain's true colors

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2716221

Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:15 PM

We are way too hard on politicians...

I was a dedicated Kerry supporter in 2004, but I have to say that for '08 I am more excited about a Mcain candidacy than many of the Democratic hopefuls.

I know as a feminist I am supposed to join the marching band for Hill in 2008, but I can't help but point out the elephant in the room - Hillary can't win the presidency. Furthermore, Hilary hardly passes muster as a Democrat.

Barak Obama is promising but he has had very little experience governing. And again (am I being too cynical?) I think the electorate is unready to vote in a person of colour.

Mcain has shown time and time again that he has a great deal of integrity. He stood up to defend POWs against torture and has never played down-and-dirty politics even when he was subjected to Rove's unseemly tactics. Most importantly, Mcain actually has good policies. He is promoting fiscal conservatism, which is exactly what America needs right now.

Despite Mcain's qualifications, he has never been a contender for the presidency because of the lack of endorsement from the religious right. Making an (unholy) alliance with Falwell might actually mean that the 2008 presidency results in *gasp* good government (this is something that we are more familiar with in Canada).

What's even more unbelievable, is that if Kerry or Gore are able to win the Democratic primary then we might actually see a 2008 presidential election that is ethical and substantive rather than the insulting fluff that we have been subjected to in the last several elections.

Friday, May 12, 2006 02:59 AM

There's still a question mark?

"Maverick -- or panderer?"

Come on, we've been through this: 'panderer'.

What's next, a story titled "George W. Bush: Compassionate Conservative?"

McCain, IMO, is the biggest threat to the democrats in 2008 because he's cultivated this 'maverick' image.

Salon should spend more time answering the question titling this article than implying the answer is unknown.

Friday, May 12, 2006 04:15 AM

Drink the Koolaid, John

Unlike certain other pressure groups whose endorsement presidential candidates seek, the religious right doesn't merely want a candidate to be right on the issues. They want to be certain that they own you, body and soul. To further their agenda, they cannot trust any politician who endorses their positions on discrete issues but otherwise remains a free agent. And why should they, when there are plenty of politicians who will give themselves over whole hog to their anti-democratic (and basically anti-Christian) theocratic program?

The religious right is an organization that uses moral issues as emblems to conceal its disturbing desire to wield direct power over this nation. Falwell probably wants to get McCain on record as saying things that will compromise him with his moderate and secular base in order to fatally cripple him in 2008. He will then discard McCain in favor of Frist or another fervent supporter. Experience shows that the cynicism of these politically connected holy men is boundless.

Friday, May 12, 2006 06:14 AM

Loser

McCain is a POW brain addled, cowardly puke. He'll kiss anyones ass for a pat on the head.

Friday, May 12, 2006 06:17 AM

disgusting

Apparently Howard Dean did some pandering of his own on Pat Robertson's network. I've always felt John McCain was an oppertunistic phoney, but for the life of me I can't fathom why the Democrats pander to a group who will NEVER support them and insult their own dase in the process.

The Republicans will retain the House and Senate in November and the Whitehouse in 08. Why? Because the Democrats will slap their own in the face to curry favor with the Christian right.

Friday, May 12, 2006 06:24 AM

Is it too early to start begging people to vote?

The most sickening thing about this is watching how a minority viewpoint gets to dominate the agenda. And yes, the religious right IS a minority, which is why they make so much noise all the time, to give the impression that their voices are in the majority. I believe most Americans primarily believe in the concept of fairness and staying out of other people's lives so long as those people are not causing harm. I believe they believe this because 100 percent of the people I know don't want anyone to tell them how to live.

To watch McCain on the Republican side and Hillary on the Dem side keep selling themselves out to the minority is simply appalling, but really, what are they to do if they want to get elected? The minority might be wrong, and even bad for the country, but they show up at the polls down to the last man and woman. If only a fraction of the majority shows up, the minority gets to call the shots, and that's the way of it.

Look at the last election, the most important election I can remember or even imagine; how many people still couldn't bother showing up. Look at the resulting rhetorical nightmare where the right proclaims that 51 percent of the "country" professed their faith in Bush when the truth is that most of the country expressed no opinion at all.

I would so dearly love to live in a country where the majority made their views known thunderously loud and clear, so that when the Falwells of the world start their tired old braying about the Fa-a-ammi-ly! The McCains of the world could feel perfectly safe and secure in looking them straight in the eye and saying in true maverick fashion, "You know what? Fuck you! I represent America and we love our families, too, asshole. Yes, and we even love the gay members of our family, so fuck you."

At least that's what I'd say if everyone made the commitment to vote for me. Hell, I already said it.

Most Active Letters Threads

683

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
478

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
294

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon