ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

John McBush

Updated on February 12, 2009

If You Tell A Lie Often Enough, Eventually People Believe It

Back in 2000, John McCain was running for President as an outsider. This was necessary because Boy George Bush already had all the insiders locked up, so if his candidacy was going to have any chance at all of succeeding, he needed to attract votes from outside the traditional ultraconservative evangelical base of the Republican Party. As we well know, McCain's 2000 campaign ended in failure, but he did manage to convince many Americans that he was a different kind of Republican, a Republican who was a maverick.

The fact that 2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry reportedly considered McCain as his running mate before settling on John Edwards, further bolstered McCain's image as a moderate Republican, and just the type of Republican who could give Democrats fits if he could make it through the primaries.

The only problem with this scenario is that it's all a lie. A big, fat, hairy, Republican lie.

McCain will point to rare occasions when he bucked the party leadership and went in his own direction as proof that he's not really a cookie cutter Republican dittohead. No less authorities than and Congressional Quarterly Voting Studies reported that McCain had supported President Bush 95% of the time in 2007.

It is true that over time, McCain's support of the Republican party positions have not always been this strong. However, after losing so handily in 2000, McCain, 72, knew that his last chance to be elected President was in 2008. He knew that without a Bush or a Dole in the mix, he finally had the opportunity to be the candidate of the Republican establishment. Such a stature, however, does not come without a price. In order to be that candidate, he had to show Republicans that he was able to play nicely with them.

And so he has virtually marched in lockstep with the Republican Party, and all those evangelicals who flocked to Bush in 2000. Now, do you suppose that after working so hard to gain their support that McCain is going to throw it all away after he gets into office? Of course not, especially if he wants to run for re-election in a few years. So the 95% voting record with the present administration is the John McCain we can expect to see.

Of course, McCain and Palin are likely to continue to advance the lie that they are mavericks, ready to reform the government in Washington, no matter who they have to steamroll. That's the John McCain moderate voters will like. Those of us who see his appointment of Palin as his running mate as the ultimate pandering to the evangelicals of the world know the truth. It is incumbent upon us to say, "Stop! You can't have it both ways John!"

The Republicans like to say that Barack Obama is the most liberal Senator in Washington, the same way they said that John Kerry was the most liberal Senator in Washington four years ago. They say it as if being liberal is a bad thing. Liberals, however, would not have waged an ill-advised war in Iraq that has killed thousands of our brave men and women, injuring many times more.

John McCain deserves our respect as a veteran who sacrificed much for his country in Vietnam. That does not mean he deserves to be President. Tell John McCain to stop proliferating this lie. It cheapens his legacy.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • blangrehr profile image

      blangrehr 9 years ago from Spartanburg SC

      The comment was based on the certain fact that you are to smart not to know most of what you just posted was just not true.

      “In recent weeks, Senator Obama has increased his attacks upon John McCain, once again trying to define him as no longer being the 'maverick' that he was once perceived as. During his acceptance speech Obama pointed out the John McCain has voted with George Bush 90% of the time, a sentiment echoed in the remarks of Joe Biden a day earlier when he stated McCain voted with Bush 95% of the time. So which one is, 90%, 95%, or is does the argument have any actual weight.First, on a lighter note, let me state that it is 100% impossible for John McCain to have voted with President Bush, after all the President has no voting powers in the Senate. But that's just a laughable technicality. In reality, however, the problem with the McCain/Bush voting argument and the attempts to paint McCain as some radical right winger is that there are organizations that track the votes of congressional members. According to the Washington Post's Votes Database Project, Obama and the DNC's claims are 100% false.McCain, unlike his Democratic Rival, has continued to maintain one of the highest levels of independence demonstrated by any US Senator since 2000. For instance, during the 110th Session of Congress, McCain ranked 65th among his colleagues having voted along party line 88% of the time, a far cry from the 12th place rank of Obama. Yet, McCain's voting record during the current session of Congress is likely to hold closer to party lines due to the nearly 50 bills that contained Troop Withdrawal Timeline. During the 109th session of congress, McCain ranked 94th out of 100 Senators, having voted along party lines 79.4% of the time. This ranking and percentage are nearly identical to his 93rd place rank during both the 107th and 108th Congressional Sessions. McCain has not voted with his party or George Bush 90% or 95% of the time. Obama's statistics are not based upon any actual statistical data, but rather a soundbite taken years ago at a highly partisan rally in which McCain made a misstatement. But then again, that misstatement would be no different from the fact that even Obama and Biden can't seem to keep the rhetoric straight. McCain should take Obama to task on the partisan voting issue, after all, Barack Obama, the self-proclaimed moderate, has voted along party lines more often than even Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have.That's right, according to The Votes Database, During the 110th Congressional session running from Jan 2007 to now, Senator Obama ranked 12th among 100 Senators, having voted along party lines 96% of the time; an amazingly high percentage for someone who claims to be able to reach across the isle. The Obama campaign and pundits will argue that Obama's voting record during this session was driven by a need to shore up support among his base supporters. Yet, if that were true then we would expect his record during the 109th session of Congress to reflect a greater level of moderation. According to the Vote Database Project, During the 109th session Obama was ranked 5th in the Senate having voted along party lines 94.8% of the time. Ironically, during both sessions of congress, Obama voted along party lines more often the Senator Kennedy, Senator Reid, and Senator Kerry. For a candidate who talks about unity and his ability to work with the side, he certainly has not demonstrated it. After all, how can a candidate claim moderation when the current Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has crossed party lines during the past two sessions of congress more often than Obama?Rank & % of time voted with party2007-2008Obama - 12th - 96.0%McCain - 65th - 88.0%2005-2006Obama - 5th - 94.8%McCain- 94th - 79.4%2003-2004Obama - NOT IN CONGRESSMcCain - 93rd - 84.5%2001-2002Obama - NOT IN CONGRESSMcCain - 93rd - 76.2% John McCain's voting record has proven consistent with that of a candidate who is unwilling to sacrifice his principles and beliefs in order to appease party leadership. He has upheld his ability to work with both sides of the isle. Democratic leadership can attempt to demonize McCain as a mini-me Bush, but the record will never support that claim.”J BrownSeptember 2nd, 2008

      This stuff is easy to find and public information. Most people don't take the time to find out for themselves, they just read blogs like this one and believe it. Congressional voting records can't be easily fabricated by liberal hacks, and smart people should at least be's okay not to like John McCain and there are many issues to argue against him; being another Bush is just silly and disingenuous  

    • crashcromwell profile image

      crashcromwell 9 years ago from Florida

      This is all speculation, of course, but I'm much more harsh on Bush than McCain. I believe McCain has a decent brain, and he uses it, although I question his judgement. Bush, on the other hand, I think was the punk who wasn't too bright, but got by with a little bit more than just a little bit of influence from daddy. Ask yourself, would he have been President if senior hadn't been? Heck, I heard that he became owner of the Texas Rangers because of his dad's help.

      The amazing thing about Boy George is that in the Bush family, it was generally expected that his brother Jeb would be the heir to Daddy Bush. However, he was defeated in his first attempt to become Florida's governor, and George pulled it off that year in Texas. By the time Jeb got elected in Florida, George had leap-frogged past him. Now, God willing, the brighter Bush will never be President because his brother screwed things up so massively.

    • Storytellersrus profile image

      Barbara 9 years ago from Stepping past clutter

      I read an article about McCain in Newsweek just now- he was presented in good light, as was Sarah Palin.  Some of her information has been disproven since this article was written- she isn't the larger than life Wonder Mom the Newsweek writer envisioned.  But the effort was interesting and I read it all with an open mind. 

      One similarity to the current Bush did interest me- "McCain was a scamp and a cut-up who was highly skilled at amassing demerits at (both Episcopal High School in Alexandria and at the Naval Academy)...

      "There is a kind of egotism in McCain-- he loves attention, always has, and takes glee in confounding the expectations of the institutions of which he is a part." 

      My reading of George W runs along these same lines- a wealthy cut up who never performed to his potential in the elite educational institutions he attended, preferring to get by, rather than apply himself. 

      Do you agree with my conclusion?  I really think George W's propensity for frat fun, though first inspiring camaraderie, wound up delivering two disastrous terms for the American public and I am not anxious to repeat this by voting for a man with similar leanings.

    • crashcromwell profile image

      crashcromwell 9 years ago from Florida

      I agree with you pgrundy and I hope you're right William. Blangrehr, I've approved your comment, but if I have something of which I should be ashamed, a little more detail would be appreciated. I tell it like I see it, and what I'm seeing is John McCain wanting to be both the sheep and the wolf at once. If you disagree with that sentiment, exercise your freedom of speech and tell us so!

    • profile image

      pgrundy 9 years ago

      Why should he be ashamed? I don't understand that comment at all.

      I'm having a hard time getting a handle on why McCain even wants to be President at this point. He has nothing new to offer, he's really old, and he looks perpetually irritated. I don't get it.

    • William F. Torpey profile image

      William F Torpey 9 years ago from South Valley Stream, N.Y.

      The Republican National Convention is going strong at this moment, crashcromwell, but there seems to be somebody missing. Is the GOP unaware that Dubya has been president for the past 8 years? Dubya, and his puppetmaster, Dick Cheney, appear to be missing in action! Considering the record of the Republicans for two straight terms, who in his right mind would want to vote for more of the same? Keep telling it like it is, crash. There's a big change coming on Jan. 21.

    • blangrehr profile image

      blangrehr 9 years ago from Spartanburg SC

      You should be ashamed.