The Targeting of McCain
George W. Bush and Karl Rove apparently accomplished something the North Vietnamese in five years of captivity could not do–get John McCain to consider switching loyalties.
The story surfaces, just before Super Tuesday, in The Hill today, of McCain’s temptation to leave the Republican Party after being savagely smeared by the Bush campaign in the 2000 primaries.
In persuasive detail, it reports the approach of a McCain aide to Congressional Democratic leaders about the possibility of the Arizona Senator emulating Vermont’s Jim Jeffords in becoming an Independent and aligning himself with their party.
McCain’s disaffection in 2001 was no secret. Fellow Republican Trent Lott criticized him publicly then for keeping “unusual company.”
But why does the story surface now? The cui bono is obvious as Mitt Romney tries to persuade Republicans that he is the party’s legitimate standard bearer, and Ann Coulter reflects the weird vote by announcing she would back Hillary Clinton before McCain.
There must be déjà vu in all this for the Republican front runner. The rabid Right hated him back then, still does and will stop at nothing to derail him. But Romney, Coulter, Rush Limbaugh et al are no Karl Roves in the art of demonizing those they oppose.
When McCain gets the nomination, rational Republicans and Independents may be drawn to him by what these attacks reveal about his character–and the people who are targeting him
Cross-posted from my blog.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
5 Responses to “The Targeting of McCain”
[...] Redstate | Conservative News and Community wrote an interesting post today on The Targeting of McCainHere’s a quick excerptThe cui bono is obvious as Mitt Romney tries to persuade Republicans that he is the party’s legitimate standard bearer, and Ann Coulter… [...]
I'm not surprised you got this wrong, too. But there are arguments in favor of McCain on the Right, such as this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Ar…
Aside from the fact that Sen. McCain denied any such discussions took place there is also the matter of his then Washington chief of staff, Mark Salter, who also denies that this was a possibility. Since Sen. McCain had recently run and was still considered a viable candidate for the presidency becoming the minority member of the Senate Commerce Committee doesn't make much sense. Especially considering that a Clinton surrogate, Terry McAuliffe, was the DNC chairman and highly unlikely that he would help any Arizona apostate run for president ahead of Mrs. Clinton.
As to the push poll charge, the LAT on Feb 16, 2001, found no evidence that the slanderous call ever existed and to this day no one has produced a tape of the call that Mrs. Duren claimed her son had answered. Mrs. Duren never has submitted to any interview concerning this issue Only six other voters were referenced by McCain's people and none had heard anything approaching what was being claimed other than that a small sampling (300) termed “advocacy polls” had been targetted by what Sen. McCain called push polls and which clearly did not contain any references to babies, illegitmate or otherwise. Gov. Bush released the scripts and recordings But I guess if a lie is repeated enough it becomes common wisdom and therefore becomes a simple difference of opinion.
The latest on McCain
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/f80b5d3e-9f1b-4c…
Uh, that LAT article was on Feb. 16, 2000.