Skip to content

This is interesting

May 11, 2010

Lots of outrage over the new McCain ad about the border fence in Arizona

It’s kind of a crappy ad, not very well made and McCain and the Sheriff are both so stiff they look like someone has their hand up them like a ventriloquists dummy. That isn’t the interesting part though. It’s the idea that once a politician has ever held a position, he is forever immutably locked into that position. Any reconsideration on his part is either fake or flip flopping, any attempt to reconcile voter wishes with political positions is pandering. It’s retarded. What’s really stupid is that in 2006, after the GOP destroying immigration fight, McCain said, “We got the message”.

Here is the factcheck page on McCain and immigration reform. As it shows support for the border fence isn’t some new thing for McCain. He voted for it at least as far back as 2006. It also shows that numerous times during his presidential campaign McCain stated that the American people were not ready for a bill that authorized legalization of illegals and therefore he wouldn’t support a bill that did.

McCain has made some huge mistakes (McCain-Feingold being number 1) but supporting the border fence is not one of them.

I’m just glad that this attitude didn’t exist in 1980 or Reagan never could have been President, he definitely couldn’t be now, Michelle Malkin and the Hot Air gang would hound him over his support for FDR and the New Deal until he had a stroke.


FBI asked Homeland Security to hold off from notifying airlines about addition of Times Square bomber to no-fly list. Concerned that news leaks would alert him.

officials said, at the FBI’s request, some, but not all airlines, were notified of the new listing. The official said the FBI was concerned that giving out Shahzad’s name to too many people might fuel news leaks that grew into a torrent during the afternoon of May 3. Among the airlines which was not phoned with the APB about the new “no fly” listing for Shahzad: Emirates Airlines, the very carrier Shahzad had chosen to try to evade a massive dragnet by the FBI and various local partners, including New York Police Department, had set up to collar the Times Square attack suspect. Homeland Security officials have accused airlines of stalling federal efforts to get them to upgrade computer systems so that “no fly” information would move much more quickly from the feds who draw up the list to airport ticketing and check-in counters.

As we reported last week, Shahzad, possibly alerted by news leaks about how investigators were hunting for a suspect from overseas, somehow managed to slip out of a surveillance net which had been cast around his residence in Bridgeport, Connecticut. He drove, unhindered and apparently unwatched, to New York’s JFK Airport. There, even though his name had been officially added to the “no fly” list hours earlier, he managed around 7:30 pm to acquire a ticket and boarding pass for an Emirates flight to Dubai, where he planned to change planes for his native Pakistan. He managed to board the flight; the plane’s door was shut and the “jetway” linking the terminal to the door had already been retracted when officers of the Homeland Security Department’s Customs and Border Protection unit, who had sent the flight’s final passenger manifest to an interagency Terrorist Screening Center in Washington for a last-minute review, received notice that Shahzad had boarded the plane. The officers got the plane door reopened, and went on board the flight to retrieve Shahzad, who told them, with resignation, that he had been expecting them.

If Utah Elects Its First Democrat to the U.S. Senate in 40 Years, Thank the Tea Party
. Thanks guys.

OMG, Peter Baker, you cannot honestly be serious.

WASHINGTON — The selection of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to be the nation’s 112th justice extends a quarter-century pattern in which Republican presidents generally install strong conservatives on the Supreme Court while Democratic presidents pick candidates who often disappoint their liberal base.

That has to be the most ridiculous thing I have heard in weeks. Lets look at the record –

This is only going back to 1985 so not all the Justices will be on it

Roberts – 2005, so far conservatives are pretty happy with him, (Bush)
Scalia -1986, ditto (Reagan)
Kennedy – 1988, hated with a passion by conservatives (Reagan)
Thomas – 1991, liked by conservative (Bush I)
Ginsburg – 1993, hated by conservatives popular with liberals (Clinton)
Breyer – 1994, Ditto (Clinton)
Alito – 2006, Popular with conservatives (Bush)
Sotomayor – unknown (Obama)


Souter – 1990, Despised by conservatives (Bush I)

so the record shows that reality is 180 degrees reversed from what Baker claims.

6 Comments leave one →
  1. May 11, 2010 12:24 pm

    I agree with you re: a politician being allowed some room to move around on the issues over time, but it’s disingenuous to say that McCain has been solid on illegal immigration. Prior to 2006 he supported funded amnesty, then went to the fence in ’06 as you said, then went back to partial amnesty and now he’s strolling the fence like he’s The Rock in “Walking Tall”. Beyond this, there is, as you mentioned, McCain-Feingold, and the fact that he’s consistently shown more interest in getting favorable mentions from the NYT and the AZ Republic than in representing a very conservative constituency, many of whom are seniors that he basically holds down with the Navy credentials. I take nothing away from his service, but that’s already bought him quite a few terms, no? I know you’re not a Hayworth fan, but McCain is just played out, and he hasn’t redeveloped himself with any consistency a la Reagan, which I think was a stretched comparison. I wish we had some better choices, but it’s hard for me, having literally grown up with McCain’s constant incumbency, to not see this as a temporary thing, given his past and the context of the primary with Hayworth.

  2. jenn1964 permalink*
    May 11, 2010 1:47 pm

    I didn’t say that he has been solid on immigration I said his policy hasn’t changed since 2007, which is what the record shows. I am also not advocating for McCain’s re-election I am just pointing out that this is not an overnight change as many are implying.

    Even given McCain’s faults he has been consistent on taxes and spending, he has been consistent on abortion, he has been consistent on the second amendment, and he has been consistent on the war on terror. Now the abortion issue doesn’t matter much to me but it does to a lot of people. Hayworth can make most of the same claims but morally I think he is a weak comparison to McCain.

    (I will say that if it was my vote I would chop off my hand before I would vote for Hayworth. I would vote for Ralph Nader first. The only politician I can think of at the moment that I like less than Hayworth is Jesse Ventura and that is a close call.)

    I don’t think Reagan is a stretch comparison, although maybe I shouldn’t have used FDR and the New Deal, I just went for easy recognition.. I remember his first run for President in 76, when his VP pick was Bob Dole one of the complaints about him then was the fact that he raised taxes and signed legalized abortion into law in California. Both highly unpopular positions. It is the same type of situation.

    • May 16, 2010 11:40 am

      I will agree to a point, as I did in my comment, that his position hasn’t changed all that much since ’07. However, what you can dig up on the internet is not the entire scope of his policy. I’ve heard him, in person, make pro-amnesty statements OUTSIDE of a guest-worker program. That’s been in the last two years. Also, I ask you to take into account the fact that when the man’s been a Senator for my entire lifetime, five years counts as “overnight”. I guess what a lot of us that live here are seeing is the difference between “national” McCain and “local news” McCain, which is the McCain you see in those ads. We’re used to seeing him play this game at election time, and then switching around to a politically expedient alternative.

      As far as taxes and spending… yes and no. He consistently picks high-profile battles to highlight that he is pro-business, but then signs on to quite a bit of pork nationally, and also here at home in AZ was an advocate for the clean cars fiasco and a few of Napolitano’s crack-addled social revamp ideas.

      Abortion, yes. 2nd Amendment, yes. (This is AZ, he has no choice.) War on Terror, yes. I also never fail to give him credit on that.

      I think McCain’s a decent enough guy, he just represents and votes as an establishment Republican pretty much 100% of the time, and at this point, that’s not going to cut it. I’m not one of the chicken littles that thinks the sky is falling, but damned if it isn’t developing a stress bend in the middle.

  3. xbradtc permalink
    May 11, 2010 2:54 pm

    I dislike Hayworth quite a bit, but if I were voting in AZ, I’d vote against McCain just to show my displeasure with him.

    McCain has enjoyed far too much his past of sticking his finger in the eye of conservative Republicans.

    Cutting off my nose to spite my face? Maybe. But for too long we’ve played “go along, get along” with people that have an “R” behind their name that may well be Republican, but aren’t conservative.

    • jenn1964 permalink*
      May 11, 2010 3:31 pm

      Like I said I am not endorsing McCain and if there were someone else to vote for besides Hayworth I would definitely go that route.


  1. Tweets that mention This is interesting « A Conservative Shemale --

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: