Wes Vernon
RenewAmerica
February 4, 2008

On the eve of Super Tuesday, conservatives nationwide were coming smack up against the prospect of their worst nightmare.... Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain. All these years, we kept saying to ourselves — oh, please — surely that won't happen. Lifting our eyes skyward — we have begged please don't let it happen. What have we done to deserve this?

The Republicans

This column cannot fully explain why the Republicans are having such a difficult time finding a more acceptable candidate for their party's nomination. We can only hope that somehow in the primary contests that are left, GOP voters are in a mood to begin a rollback of the McCain steamroller so as to give America a more clear and decent choice in November.

The Democrats

As of now, Barack Obama is all that stands in the way of a Hillary Clinton nomination for the Democrats. But let's face it: though the young Illinois senator is an attractive candidate, there is not "a dime's worth of difference" between his views on the issues and those of Senator Clinton. Comparing him to John F. Kennedy? JFK had fourteen years in Congress when he ran in 1960. Obama has had only three years. Though he has Kennedyesque "charisma" (as noted by some members of the Kennedy family), that doesn't mean much when you've got your finger on the nuclear button.

Back to reality

But barring the unexpected — always a possibility in politics — conservatives must come to grips with the dreadful consequence of a choice in November between the two major party candidates who (1) are vindictive and hateful; (2) are possessed of a mentality that is flirtatious with the police state; (3) have tempers that are way beyond the pale and just downright vicious and ugly; (4) have proven a willingness to use the levers of government power to shut up those who dare to disagree with them; (5) have played the class hatred card on the issue of raising or cutting taxes; (6) have bought into the hoax of man-made "global warming," complete with its job-killing "solutions"; (7) reject drilling for oil in ANWR and elsewhere, while we pay through the nose at the gas pump; (8) have displayed on some occasions a minimal acquaintance with truth-telling, beyond the normal disingenuous eyewash routinely expected of politicians; (9) have a visceral contempt for "values" voters; (10) have arguably stretched political opportunism into other more serious territory.

That's the Hillary/McCain top 10. We would present it to David Letterman for his consideration, except that this is no laughing matter. The question is: What can do about it?

Some suggestions

Conservative icon (and good friend of this column) Paul Weyrich says he will instead look for a third party candidate in November if John McCain is the GOP standard-bearer. We're not there — yet. We may get there in the end, but we have nine months to see how the political landscape develops.

Columnist Ann Coulter is so turned off by McCain's self-righteous hot-headed arrogance that she says if the Arizona senator is the nominee, she will not only vote for Hillary, but will actually campaign for the New Yorker (or Illinoisan or Arkansan — depends on her audience). We are not only not there, we never will be. And we doubt that Ann will be there when and if push comes to shove. The emotional shock of a McCain nomination understandably does drive some good conservatives over the top.

Some other suggestions

Right now, an impressive parade of "big name" Republicans is lining up for McCain. To a huge extent, this is based on a calculation that the Arizona senator is as good as nominated, and therefore it is smart to get on board "before the train leaves the station." It's a perceived good "roll of the dice" for the advancement of their own careers.

Conservative political leaders in the McCain camp (yes, there are some) would do their candidate a favor — forget about any "favor" for conservatives — if they were to advise him quietly on how to "reach out" to conservative voters. Herewith, some modest proposals:

McCain-Feingold

1 — The senator can credibly acknowledge that his anti-free speech McCain-Feingold campaign finance "reform" bill — whatever its noble aims — has had and will continue to have unintended consequences. He claims that the measure to shut down independent campaigning 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election would curb "special interests." Surely, he can be shown that about 80 percent of the electorate belongs to one "special interest" or another.

To stick by a measure that flies in the face of what the Senator calls "so-called free speech" insults the "so-called" Constitution, fought for by our "so-called" Founding Fathers to create a "so-called" land of the free. His law is not only wrong; it gets him no political mileage. Promising — and sticking by a commitment — to push for a corrective revision of the law — would be morally and politically wise. We realize that Senator McCain — in co-authoring the law — was prompted in part by his anger at Club for Growth ads that zapped him in the 2000 South Carolina primary. But surely, one who aspires for the highest office can "rise above himself" and forget angry grudges that harm a lot of people who desire only to exercise their First Amendment rights.

Supply-side

2 — Arrange an early meeting between Senator McCain and a group of respected supply-side economists. If McCain claims to be "the Reagan candidate," as he has advertised, someone needs to educate him on how Reagan gave us "Seven Fat Years" of the greatest economy in history. (Actually the late Bob Bartley's book by that name was written in 1989-1990 at the end of the first seven years of a prosperous era that really lasted far longer, interrupted by some blips in 1991, right after 9/11, and — if current indicators are correct — in the near future.)

Senator McCain was one of only two Republicans in the Senate to vote against the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. In so doing, he fell for the liberal Democrat class hatred line that they were "tax cuts for the rich." More recently, the senator has said he was right in voting against the tax cuts then, but that he would not — as president — allow them to expire because that would amount to a tax hike. (At this point, we will resist the aching temptation to mutter "Duh!") Suffice it to say Senator McCain has publicly (and quite unnecessarily) acknowledged that economics is not his strongest suit.

But the mere fact that he himself is uncharacteristically humble enough to admit that shortcoming to the world is a good start. A serious brainstorming session with the likes of Lawrence Kudlow, Steve Forbes, Richard Rahn, and Arthur Laffer can supply candidate McCain all the economic ammunition he needs to take the Reagan optimism to the campaign trail.

Dynamic scoring tells you that tax cuts (applied as incentive for the productive and job-supplying sector) can actually raise government revenues because more people will be working, making more money, and therefore, more people will be paying more taxes. That is how you "pay" for tax cuts. It is not brain surgery. Senator McCain, whatever else one might say of him, is not a stupid man. Stubborn, but not stupid. Only the former characteristic stands between him and a viable message of hope for Americans having more money in their pockets.

You can be certain that President Reagan would never succumb to the temptation of offering the Bush-Pelosi-Reid "stimulus" package of just sending out checks to people and imploring them to rush to the mall. As a creator of wealth, that idea ranks right up there with flying a helicopter coast to coast and tossing out twenty (or fifty or hundred)-dollar bills. Candidate McCain needs to abstain from that short-term snake oil.

Temper, temper

3 — Someone who cares about Senator McCain should put him in touch (on the q.t., of course) with an expert on anger management.

It is frightening that someone with his low boiling point might have his finger on the nuclear button. Hillary also has a vile temper, but it gives one no comfort to observe that, unlike Hillary, McCain is not known to have thrown a lamp at his spouse.

Space does not permit us to plow though all the explosions of the McCain temper where he has variously screamed at his colleagues such epithets as "F--- you!" you "f---ing jerk!" an "--- hole!" The stories making the rounds in the Senate cloakroom are legendary. At one time, he actually scuffled on the Senate floor with 92-year-old Strom Thurmond. Earlier when he was in the House, he had a similar physical encounter with Congressman Marty Russo. Even Ted Kennedy — in a closed meeting — once advised a hot-headed McCain to "act like a senator." That may be presumptuous coming from someone so behaviorally flawed as Kennedy, but the fact that even he could feel comfortable lecturing his colleague reflects badly on John McCain.

To be continued (over time)

We will likely be back with further suggestions as to how to go about the task of helping John McCain — again — to "rise above himself." As of this writing (pre-Super Tuesday), he appeared headed for the nomination. But who knows? If that turns out not to be the case, then, of course, the problem will take care of himself. Americans deserve a better choice than Hillary Clinton and John McCain.