February 1, 2008
A Question for ThreeSourcers
If Barack Obama chose Phil Gramm as one of his economic advisors, would you vote for him? I may be wrong, but I anticipate that the answer would be 'no'. So why does John McCain get a free pass? McCain is out there spewing the economic rhetoric often reserved for the likes of John Edwards, but as long as Gramm and Kemp are by his side, all is supposedly well.
Before you answer, consider this nugget:
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was close to leaving the Republican Party in 2001, weeks before then-Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.) famously announced his decision to become an Independent, according to former Democratic lawmakers who say they were involved in the discussions.
In interviews with The Hill this month, former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) and ex-Rep. Tom Downey (D-N.Y.) said there were nearly two months of talks with the maverick lawmaker following an approach by John Weaver, McCain’s chief political strategist.
Democrats had contacted Jeffords and then-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) in the early months of 2001 about switching parties, but in McCain’s case, they said, it was McCain’s top strategist who came to them.
If McCain is the nominee, you may be voting for a Democrat either way.
GOP2008 Primary
Posted by Harrison Bergeron at February 1, 2008 10:21 AM
Last night, Kudlow was talking about Paul Volker joining the Obama team. Larry used to write speeches for Volker and assured viewers that the former Fed Chairman would do nothing like this for a cheap political stunt. A spirited dialog ensued, I'll leave it at that.
Keep in mind, hb, that I am on my third choice. I don't give the Senator "a pass" for having Gramm on his team, but it allays some of my fears. I certainly don't think I went easy on McCain after the debate. I miss my man Rudy, I miss Fred.
What I got left is McCain, Romney, Paul, Huckabee, Obama, and Clinton. I find it pretty easy to pick the Arizona Madman out of that lineup. Here's why:
-- The War. C-in-C McCain would be beloved by the men and women who serve and hated by our adversaries. He has the moral authority and eloquence to convince a war-weary nation to keep up the fight. Others might do well; Senator McCain is money in the bank.
-- Free Trade and Immigration. If he loses the nomination, it will be over his position on Immigration where he was right. He has been one of the staunchest defenders of free trade in the Senate. Like the war, the Executive has great power in this area and he is the only one left who has both immigration and trade correct.
-- His economic beliefs frighten me. But there is nobody left who excites me (Rep. Paul has a shot but his monetary policy disqualifies him for even this pick in my book). By bringing on Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm, and promising to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, I have to think this man might be getting it.
Out of the six, I'm not voting Democrat, I neither wish nor expect Rep. Paul to get the GOP nomination, and I'll not pull the lever for Governor Huckabee. So it is Romney vs. McCain. I have not heard any supply-side or free trade rhetoric from Gov Romney. He is an immigration hawk, he mandated health care in the Commonwealth as a Governor, he told Michiganders that they were free from Schumpeterian gales, and he wants to amend the Constitution to promote two social issues.
Go John! WooHooo!
Last night, Kudlow was talking about Paul Volker joining the Obama team. Larry used to write speeches for Volker and assured viewers that the former Fed Chairman would do nothing like this for a cheap political stunt. A spirited dialog ensued, I'll leave it at that.
Keep in mind, hb, that I am on my third choice. I don't give the Senator "a pass" for having Gramm on his team, but it allays some of my fears. I certainly don't think I went easy on McCain after the debate. I miss my man Rudy, I miss Fred.
What I got left is McCain, Romney, Paul, Huckabee, Obama, and Clinton. I find it pretty easy to pick the Arizona Madman out of that lineup. Here's why:
-- The War. C-in-C McCain would be beloved by the men and women who serve and hated by our adversaries. He has the moral authority and eloquence to convince a war-weary nation to keep up the fight. Others might do well; Senator McCain is money in the bank.
-- Free Trade and Immigration. If he loses the nomination, it will be over his position on Immigration where he was right. He has been one of the staunchest defenders of free trade in the Senate. Like the war, the Executive has great power in this area and he is the only one left who has both immigration and trade correct.
-- His economic beliefs frighten me. But there is nobody left who excites me (Rep. Paul has a shot but his monetary policy disqualifies him for even this pick in my book). By bringing on Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm, and promising to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, I have to think this man might be getting it.
Out of the six, I'm not voting Democrat, I neither wish nor expect Rep. Paul to get the GOP nomination, and I'll not pull the lever for Governor Huckabee. So it is Romney vs. McCain. I have not heard any supply-side or free trade rhetoric from Gov Romney. He is an immigration hawk, he mandated health care in the Commonwealth as a Governor, he told Michiganders that they were free from Schumpeterian gales, and he wants to amend the Constitution to promote two social issues.
Go John! WooHooo!
Posted by: jk at February 1, 2008 12:18 PMSorry, I failed to answer your direct point about McCain switching parties or being a Democrat.
I have heard the bit about party switching. We'll never know how true, how close, or how serious that was. We all know that McCain felt that he had not been treated fairly by the party or by President Bush in the 2000 primaries. He is known to have a temper and I can certainly believe he was flirting with the idea. All the same, he did not pull the trigger, and he would have been a much better prize than flaky-flinty Senator Jim Jeffords.
I will give him a pass because he had a clear shot in 2004 as Senator Kerry's running mate. He could have had the spot on the ticket -- and I strongly believe they would have won -- but he said "no, I am a Republican."
His voting record, for all the Conservative antipathy, is solidly conservative. He's a cranky, prickly Republican who loves the "maverick" label, but he is no Democrat.
Posted by: jk at February 1, 2008 12:49 PM | What do you think? [2]