archived: 24 Feb - 1 Mar, 2008         Back                 Next

UPDATED:  FEB 26, 2008 

 “GENTLEMAN JOHNNY MCCAIN, PART 2”

In this column, the second of this series, we first take a further look at some Gentleman Johnny’s real positions on critical matters.  These are not those imagined either by the media who like his public demeanor (just as they like the Christian Reconstructionist [shhh!] Huckabee’s) or created by his public relations operatives.  Then we look at what could be the substance of another speech concerning a central part of his campaign platform, this time on the domestic side, presenting his real positions on real matters of policy, which, however, he is very unlikely to make.

On the Matter of Religion and its Role in Public Life

To begin, on religion and matters of political concern to the Christian Right (so incorrectly always given the “neutral” sounding moniker, “Evangelicals,” as if all evangelicals were Christian Rightists when many, many are not),  “moderate,” “maverick,” sane guy” John McCain has really said the following (courtesy of The National Jewish Democratic Council (January 8, 2008,

http://www.njdc.org/issues/detail.php?id=767&iss=3):

 

1.   “[t]he Christian right has a major role to play in the Republican Party” [New York Times, 4/3/06]”

 

2.   “McCain stated that a candidate’s Christian faith is ‘an important characteristic for a President, that he would prefer a Christian president, that the ‘Constitution established The United States of America as a Christian nation,’ and that ‘America is a Christian nation, and it is hardly a controversial claim’ (The New York Sun, October 1, 2007).”

 

3.   “The Arizona Daily Star [from, it should be noted, McCain’s home state, hardly a bastion of radicalism] reported that McCain ‘sided with the president’ on ‘teaching intelligent design in schools.’ McCain ‘told the Star that, like Bush, he believes “all points of view” ' should be available to students studying the origins of mankind.”
 

4.   “McCain has endorsed an Arizona ballot initiative that banned both gay marriage and civil unions by writing discrimination into the Arizona constitution (Arizona Republic 1//8/06).”
 

5.   “In an April 16, 2007 letter to the Service member’s Legal Defense Network (SLDN), McCain stated that the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy instituted in 1993, ‘unambiguously maintains that open homosexuality within the military services presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion and discipline’  (http://www.sldn.org/templates/press/record.html?record=3877§ion=2).” 

One final note here on McCain and religious matters.  It is well-known that this past December McCain picked up the endorsement of the party-less Sen. Joe Lieberman.  It was surmised in some quarters that Lieberman was angling/being-considered-for the Vice-Presidential nod on a ticket headed by McCain.  Unfortunately for Lieberman (perhaps poor Joe was unaware of the fact), McCain had previously declared that he did not regard non-Christians as qualified to govern (The Progress Report, "Blackout and Brownout," Oct. 1, 2007).   

Oh gosh, I guess while he is riding around on the Straight Talk Express Gentleman Johnny should read up on the Constitution.  Article VI does state, pretty straight-forwardly, that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”  As for Lieberman, it seems that the fact that McCain, if not the Constitution, has disqualified him for public office has not prevented him from frequently appearing with “his dear friend” at McCain campaign events. 

On the Matter of “Congressional Earmarks” 

Let us turn now to the consideration of “Congressional earmarks,” one of McCain’s favorite topics.  He says that he could save the national at least $35 billion in the current fiscal year by wiping them all out.  Wow!  That would pay for two-plus months of the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars and McCain says that the US will be in the former for 100 years.  (He hasn’t yet told us how long he plans to have the US stay in the latter.)   But hey, consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, is it not?  Furthermore, when people talk about Congresspeople “voting for pork for themselves,” that’s “bad.”  However, in home states and districts, “bringing home the bacon” is good.  In this era of Georgite starvation of support for maintaining/expanding our national infrastructure, research, education and indeed any other kind of national domestic spending, in my view most “pork-barrel” spending is a good thing (other than, of course, “bridges to nowhere.”)  National domestic spending should be planned and should be national, but in the absence of that approach, something is better than nothing. 

Be that as it may, last week we took a look at the speech McCain will never make about what would really have to be done right here at home in order to support a 100 Years War on Iraq.  As I sad then, I think that we will wait a long time for that speech.  But now, in terms of “pork barrel spending” we find that President Bush who, since the Democrats have taken charge of Congress (but not in  the previous six years when Republicans set all kinds of records for authorizing it) is a major pork barrel roller (February 10, 2008, NYTimes, “From Bush, Foe of Earmarks, Similar Items,” by Robert Pear).  I think that we would be waiting an equally long time for a speech by McCain dealing with this issue.  Here are some excerpts from the Pear article.

“President Bush often denounces the propensity of Congress to earmark money for pet projects. But in his new budget, Mr. Bush has requested money for thousands of similar projects.  He asked for money to build fish hatcheries, eradicate agricultural pests, conduct research, pave highways, dredge harbors and perform many other specific local tasks. The details are buried deep in the president’s budget, just as most Congressional earmarks are buried in obscure committee reports that accompany spending bills.   

“[T]he president requested $330 million to deal with plant pests like the emerald ash borer, the light brown apple moth and the sirex woodwasp; $800,000 for the Neosho National Fish Hatchery in Missouri and $1.5 million for a waterway named in honor of former Senator J. Bennett Johnston, a Louisiana Democrat. . . . $894,000 for an air traffic control tower in Kalamazoo, Mich.; $12 million for a parachute repair shop at the American air base in Aviano, Italy; . . . $6.5 million for research in Wyoming on the ‘fundamental properties of asphalt. . . . $3 million for a forest conservation project in Minnesota, $2.1 million for a neutrino detector at the South Pole and $28 million for General Electric and Siemens to do research on hydrogen-fuel turbines. . . . $125,000 for a new rapid bus line on Troost Avenue in Kansas City, Mo., and $11 million for bus-only lanes along parts of Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles.   

“Mr. Bush has often derided Congressional earmarks as ‘special interest items’ that waste taxpayer money and undermine trust in government. Congress, he said, included more than 11,700 earmarks totaling almost $17 billion in spending bills for the current fiscal year.  But some of those earmarks were similar or identical to ones included in the 2009 budget that Mr. Bush sent Congress last week. For example, Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the Democratic whip, obtained an earmark of $1.5 million last year to deal with the emerald ash borer, a beetle that attacks trees, lawns and crops. Mr. Bush now wants more money to fight that insect. . . . Senator John McCain of Arizona, the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, is winning support with a different tactic. Mr. McCain regularly receives cheers and applause when he declares, ‘I will not sign a bill with earmarks in it, any earmarks in it.’ ” 

OK, John. Let’s hear that speech from the “Straight Talk Express” attacking Bush on the “earmarks” and telling us what you would do about them, as President, and right now, as a Senator considering the Bush Budget.  Ho, ho, ho. 

Let’s finish off this column with a couple of quotes from the Senator indicating just how inappropriate my “Gentleman Johnny” moniker is for him.  On his campaign bus in March of 2000 Sen. John McCain told reporters, "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live" (Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 3/2/00).  In November, 2007 a John McCain supporter in South Carolina asked him "How do we beat the bitch” in reference to Senator Hillary Clinton. Senator McCain response was to laugh and respond "That's an excellent question" (New York Times 11/14/07).

________________