McCain Madness

by Chuck Baldwin

A few weeks before Super Tuesday, my friend Howard Phillips asked me who I thought the Republican Presidential nominee would be. I predicted John McCain. With the results of Super Tuesday now history, most political pundits are also predicting that the Arizona senator will gain the Republican nomination for President. And with Mitt Romney now out of the race, McCain is all but assured the nomination. One did not need to be a seer to figure this one out.

For one thing, President George W. Bush all but destroyed whatever conservative influence was left in the GOP. Peggy Noonan is right about that.

Furthermore, the capitulation and compromise of principle by the Religious Right has also significantly sealed the death warrant of conservatism within the GOP. For the sake of not offending George Bush or losing whatever seat at the table the various leaders of the Religious Right felt they had, their spirit of resistance waned to the point that the very name “Christian Conservative” has lost all meaning, not to mention power.

As a result, Republicans have come to accept Big Government, runaway federal spending, the Welfare State, the Warfare State, the Nanny State, empire-building, gargantuan trade and budget deficits, warrantless eavesdropping, the loss of 4th Amendment rights, ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

Therefore, how could anyone expect the vast majority of Republican voters to suddenly rediscover a huge commitment of conviction to conservative principles? Add to that question the fact that there is only one true conservative/constitutionalist who made it to the Republican primaries: Congressman Ron Paul. And virtually the entire media and political establishment pummeled Congressman Paul to the point that his limited success in the race can be categorized as nothing short of miraculous.

Make no mistake about it: the establishment wants one of its own to succeed George Bush. In order for that to happen, they must manipulate the primaries to ensure that, no matter who wins in November, one of their fellow elitists will still wield power in Washington, D.C. On the Democratic side, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama fit the bill. And on the Republican side, John McCain is the ultimate insider.

A long-standing member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), John McCain will pursue the goals and ambitions of the globalists with a vengeance. As Pat Buchanan said recently, “John McCain will make Dick Cheney look like Gandhi.” Buchanan is right on with that prediction.

Despite a liberal, Big Government track record, many Republican “conservatives” who have always been critical of John McCain are already beginning to warm up to him, feeling that his nomination is inevitable. Include in this list such notables as Grover Norquist, Tony Perkins, and fellow CFR member Richard Land.

Fortunately, not all of the conservative “talking heads” have jumped on the McCain bandwagon. Include in this list: Ann Coulter, who said she would campaign for Hillary Clinton if McCain is the Republican nominee; James Dobson, who said he would never vote for John McCain—no matter what; and Mr. Republican Cheerleader himself, Rush Limbaugh.

Then there is Mike Huckabee: the candidate to whom the evangelical George Bush robots have gravitated. Huckabee is every bit the Big Government liberal that is John McCain. In fact, Huckabee and McCain have developed a very close friendship, according to numerous sources.

Many are even predicting that Huckabee will be McCain’s running mate, in order to dupe evangelicals into accepting the McCain candidacy. (I have been saying this myself for months.) Even Rob Schenck said this about Huckabee: “After careful and prayerful consideration, I have concluded that an evangelical vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for John McCain, and a vote for John McCain will be a disaster for this country.”

But just who is this man, John McCain?

John McCain’s father and grandfather were both admirals in the U.S. Navy. John was schooled in one of the most elite boarding schools in America. He graduated from the Naval Academy where he ranked 894th out of 899 students.

According to Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief, February 1, 2008, “[John McCain] used nepotism to get ahead: When he was rejected by the National War College, he used his father’s contacts with the Secretary of the Navy to make them reconsider.” Skousen also notes that “McCain cheated on his first wife after she had a severe accident. He then divorced her and married his multi-millionaire mistress, whose daddy bought McCain a spot in the Congress.”

It has also never been explained why the son and grandson of Navy admirals would not rise to the rank of Admiral himself. (He exited the Navy as a Captain.) Was it his numerous adulterous affairs or his violent temper? Or both?

John McCain’s biographer Robert Timberg chronicles McCain’s numerous sexual affairs with subordinates both when he was an Executive Officer and later Squadron Commander. Obviously, such fraternization is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Skousen and many others have chronicled McCain’s violent temper. Even as a young man, McCain was “a strikingly violent man.” Timberg quotes McCain describing his propensity for violence, even as a youngster, saying, “At the smallest provocation I would go off into a mad frenzy, and then suddenly crash to the floor unconscious.”

McCain says his vicious temper was transformed after being held as a Prisoner of War by the North Vietnamese. There is no doubt that John McCain was tortured by his Vietnamese captors, but it also seems clear, by both the written and oral records of many, that McCain spent the bulk of his captivity collaborating with his captors.

It is more than interesting that former POW John McCain would use the power of his senate seat to stop the investigation and pursuit of American MIAs in Vietnam. What would possess a former naval officer to do such a thing? In fact, a group of Vietnam veterans has uploaded a web page dedicated to exposing the truth regarding John McCain’s record on this matter.

That John McCain still has a vicious temper is well known. We can all remember him singing “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran,” to the tune of the Beach Boys hit song “Barbara Ann.” He also said North Korea should be threatened with “extinction.” He often boasts of America’s 100-year war with Iraq and talks of pursuing enemies “to the gates of hell.” There is no doubt, John McCain is one mad man.

Furthermore, McCain’s position on a host of issues is extremely problematic for the future of America. On immigration, John McCain joined with Ted Kennedy to sponsor an amnesty bill for illegal aliens. He voted to give social security dollars to illegal aliens. His Hispanic Outreach Director, Juan Hernandez, is a dual American-Mexican citizen widely known for his “Mexico First” declarations.

He repeatedly voted against the Bush tax cuts. He co-authored the McCain/Feingold campaign finance bill that was ruled to be an unconstitutional infringement of the First Amendment. Regarding the Second Amendment, the president of the NRA called John McCain the “worst 2nd Amendment candidate,” and Gun Owners of America gives McCain a grade of F-.

John McCain co-sponsored the energy tax bill (along with his senate buddy Joe Lieberman), which would dramatically increase the cost of gasoline. He supports radical global warming legislation. He joined with Democrats (Gang of 14) to block the attempt to confirm conservative, strict constructionist judges. In 2000, he called Christian leaders “agents of intolerance.” He has received the endorsement of the pro-abortion Republicans for Choice Political Action Committee. And let’s not forget that John McCain was ringleader of the infamous Keating Five ethical scandal, which cost taxpayers more than $160 billion.

Consider, too, the top donors to John McCain’s campaign. One will find many of the same multinational corporations that support Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton also supporting John McCain. Include in this list Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Lehman Brothers, and JP Morgan Chase & Co. (By comparison, the top contributors to Ron Paul’s campaign are [in order]: 1. Members of the U.S. Army, 2. Members of the U.S. Navy, 3. Members of the U.S. Air Force.)

(And, in case one is interested, the same big Arkansas conglomerates that supported Bill Clinton also support Mike Huckabee.)

Even New York Post D.C. Bureau Chief Charles Hurt wrote, “[I]f history is any guide, the McCain we’ve seen of late on the campaign trail is the most conservative McCain we’ll ever see.” To vote for John McCain is madness!

Therefore, both social and fiscal conservatives—along with evangelical Christians—will have no one from either the Republican or Democrat parties for whom to vote this November. What, then, will they do? To vote for the “lesser of two evils” is no longer a legitimate option. There is no lesser in a McCain versus Clinton/Obama race. In fact, Ann Coulter might be right that in such a race, Hillary is the lesser of two evils.

What, then, are we to do?

First, Ron Paul should abandon his bid for the Republican nomination and declare himself a candidate for the Constitution Party nomination. If he did, he would doubtless receive the nomination and his campaign would continue to build excitement, donations, and momentum right up to November. (Ron Paul’s supporters should do everything they can to influence Dr. Paul to shake off the dust of the GOP and lead his fellow constitutionalists on a mighty crusade for a Third Party victory!)

Should Ron Paul decide to remain in the McCain-led GOP, conservatives and constitutionalists should rally around the most viable option available to them. And that option is to support the Constitution Party nominee, whoever he is. (They will select their nominee in April in Kansas City, Missouri.) As the nation’s third largest political party, the CP has the potential to be on all 50 state ballots and it is absolutely certain that the CP will nominate a constitutionalist candidate in the similitude of Ron Paul.

One thing is certain: with John McCain as the GOP standard-bearer, Christian conservatives and constitutionalists cannot vote for either the Republican or Democrat candidate this year. Staying home and not voting is an admission of defeat and should be dismissed out-of-hand.

2008 just might be the year to break the two-party stranglehold on American politics and vote for an independent conservative constitutionalist. And the platform and vehicle for this revolution already exists in the Constitution Party.

21 Responses to “McCain Madness”

  1. Red Phillips Says:

    Chuck Baldwin for the Constitution Party nomination for President! He gets it. I am afraid those who still have one foot in the old interventionist “conservative” movement do not.

  2. Michael Says:

    We don’t have to skip the race for president when we go into the voting booth in November, 2008. Alan Keyes For President!!

  3. Red Phillips Says:

    Michael, Alan Keyes is a hyper neocon. He is pro-war and pro-intervention. He will not be the CP nominee for that reason. He is also a Straussian Lincoln cultist which is bad enough.

  4. Cody Quirk Says:

    Alan is too ambitous and egotistical to be our nominee.

    Chuck may end up being a running mate.

  5. Trent Hill Says:

    Keyes’ Lincoln-praising, war mongering, debt incurring ways will keep him from the nomination.

    If Smith is the presidential nominee, Baldwin cant be,becuase they’re both from Florida. Im expecting Smith/Moore.

  6. Richard Says:

    Well said. Not much left for me to say.

    Thanks Chuck.

    I just hope and pray it will only take four disastrous years to galvanize American conservatives.

  7. Ronald Monroe Says:

    Make no mistake Chuck, now is the time for the Constitution Party to strike while the iron is hot. I am hearing from people who are unhappy with the manipulation of the primary dates and now the creation of the super delegates to control the primaries and take away the party members vote. I have spent the last three hours talking to new candidates for the U.S. Taxpayers Party of Michigan.

  8. Red Phillips Says:

    Trent, please explain the appeal of Smith to me. In 2000 he ran for President as a Republican and when he was getting nowhere left the GOP to become an independent. (He flirted with the CP back then also.) His speech when he was leaving the GOP was right on. Then his independent bid went nowhere and the GOP won back the Senate and he went hat in hand to the GOP to get his committee chairmanship back. Were the concerns he outlined in his speech no longer valid? In 2004 he endorsed Kerry and last year he endorsed hyper interventionist Duncan Hunter. What about that picture is at all appealing? Smith would just reafirm the impression that the CP is just begging for some semi-credible cast off from the GOP. When he was a Senator was he a Constitutionalist?

  9. Trent Hill Says:

    His independant bid went nowhere because people like Buchanan, Keyes, and Bauer were still in the race. He was getting a VERY small slice of the conservative pie.

    “His speech when he was leaving the GOP was right on. ”
    =So we can agree on that.

    “Then his independent bid went nowhere and the GOP won back the Senate and he went hat in hand to the GOP to get his committee chairmanship back. Were the concerns he outlined in his speech no longer valid?”
    =Of course they were still valid. But Smith, Like Paul, figured he could do something about it from the inside. Smith was offered a high-powered position if he’d rejoin the party—and he did. I’d have done the same, and any sane human would.

    “In 2004 he endorsed Kerry and last year he endorsed hyper interventionist Duncan Hunter. What about that picture is at all appealing?”
    =He endorsed Kerry because he claimed that Kerry and Bush (and by extension, the D’s and R’s) were two sides of the same coin: Exactly identical except for the deficit issue. So he endorsed Kerry,based upon Kerry’s aggresive push for a balanced budget and deficit improvement plan.

    “When he was a Senator was he a Constitutionalist?”
    =Absolutely. Was he a PERFECT Constitutionalist? No. Only Ron Paul is basically. But Smith had a real good record on taxes, guns, life, and Federalism. His low-spending record, maverick tendencies, and out of the UN policies all jive well with the Constitutionalist platform. His departures are few and perhaps not as large as we think. Afterall,we havent even heard much from him havent we?
    What about the picture is appealing? Having a big name that will bring more votes to our down-ticket races and bring lots of publicity and viability. Sen. Smith is an honest man, if nothing else—and he ought to at least be looked at as a credible alternative.

    Judge Roy Moore, Sen. Bob Smith, and even Jerome Corsi all have their problems—-but they’ll bring the money and press we’ve been lacking. They dont have to be PERFECT. They just have the change the direction of the debate enough so that we get some attention without losing our principles. Roy Moore and Sen. Smith accomplish that.

  10. Phil Sawyer Says:

    The Constitution Party should offer its presidential nomination to the Honorable Ralph Nader!

  11. Red Phillips Says:

    Trent, he was no where near a Constitutionalist. Meaning he opposes all spending and programs not specifically authorized by the Constitution. Did he vote against every Republican budget? He was essentially a fairly conservative Senator by modern movement conservative standards. He is a retread. If the CP really thinks Sen. Smith is a “big name” then that says a lot about the Constitution Party.

    He was not begged to rejoin the GOP, BTW. He was the one who went to them, hat in hand, tail tucked between his legs. Sen. Smith as the CP nominee would be nothing short of an embarrassment.

    Also, does he want to bring the troops home now? The troops in Iraq, of course, but also the troops in Germany, Japan, etc.? Is he a non-interventionist or is he one of these “conservatives” who sets around fretting about the “Islamofascist” menace “who want to kill us all“? Something I like to call Dondero syndrome.

  12. Tom the Trotskyist Says:

    Yes, I am very happy about the death of conservativism. Soon the advocates of freedom and constitutionalism and the ways of God will be utterly crushed by the Catholic masonic socialist organization of Clinton, Obama, Huckabee and McCain. Once this happens, they will adopt a non-interventionist policy. Non-interventionism is the one thing these constitutionalists are right on. But the values of economic freedom are worthless.

  13. Dave Williams Says:

    Look what I ran into over @ Glenn Beck today. Check out the featured video of a FOX26 news report here in Houston. http://www.glennbeck.com/

    @ 0:15 sec a photo of BHO is shown right next to Che Guevara on a Cuban flag. The ‘HOPE’, according to BHO, for Communism is not dead.

    I just wish the GOP hadn’t abandoned the last great hope for Freedom…Mitt Romney. After Obama takes over, it could take years for us to recover from his admins policies…decades…if any patriots are still left not jailed or dead for writing posts like this…time to head for the hills and bury the guns and ammo folks while we still have time.

    I’d like to kick down a big thank you shout out to the GOP, John McCain & George Bush for betraying us! Thanks for not following & supporting the Constitution, for pandering to Left Wing radicals and essentially joining them, for pre-emptive warfare that alienated us diplomatically from many nations around the world and which ignited a fire under extremists everywhere, for the illegal immigrant amnesty bill which encouraged countries to fund their terrorists to travel across the pond and work their way to our unsecured border…that should have been locked down post 9/11!! In addition to terrorists, thousands of people just like Guevara, (Marxists, the real ones not like the watered down crap that lives in Hollywierd) were allowed to enter our country to undermine the very thing that makes us Americans…FREEDOM!

    Undermine and destroy America from within has been at the core of Communistic strategic interests for decades…almost a reality now… Hmmm, even if Obama loses to Mac in ‘08 & Mac passes his amnesty bill, 12 to 20 million illegals will be eligible to vote ‘YES’ for Communism in 2012-2016.

    Thanks again GOP.

  14. Eric Dondero Says:

    Oppose the War, go down to defeat!

    Wayne Gilchrist has JUST BEEN BEATAN BADLY by Andy Harris in the Maryland GOP Congressional primary. Gilchrist, along with Walter Jones of NC and Ron Paul of TX, was one of only three Anti-War Republicans in the US House.

    Gilcrhist got crushed by Iraq War supporter and Marine Reservist Harris, 44% to 32%

  15. Ronald Monroe Says:

    Trent I am looking forward to meeting you at the Constitution Party National Convention. I am glade we will have the opportunity to hear and meet presidential candidates with name recognation.

    Trent, I need to meet and know more about Senator Smith before I vote for our nominee for President at the national convention. Here in Michigan we have a lot more local chapter meetings then every before. Ron Paul ignited that fire.

  16. Red Phillips Says:

    Eric, Gilchrist was an across the board RINO. Paul and Jones are not. And this just testifies to how small and out of touch the GOP base has become.

  17. Michael Says:

    Keyes-Smith. The others are not known outside CP circles. I’m willing to forgive Smith on his Kerry endorsement which I understood he made because they were both Navy in Nam. Both are nationally conservative names who are will to take a chance on the CP. Should it come down to D, R, Nader/McKinney, Barr, Bloomberg/Nunn, and the CP, then we are going to need those names otherwise it will be like 1992 with the CP getting only 43,434 votes (the hard line faithful) with the better known candidates getting the money, votes, and media.

  18. Red Phillips Says:

    Michael, I’m telling you, Keyes will split/ruin the party. His nomination would be a disaster. I could never vote for him, and almost all the CP members or CP sympathetic people I know feel the same way. Being pro-War is a non-starter among other things.

  19. Trent Hill Says:

    Keyes is a charlatan, and opposed by MANY stalwart Committeemen. Including MANY state chairs and officers in the party. Its his interventionist, pro-UN policies mainly.

    “Trent, he was no where near a Constitutionalist. Meaning he opposes all spending and programs not specifically authorized by the Constitution. Did he vote against every Republican budget? He was essentially a fairly conservative Senator by modern movement conservative standards. He is a retread. If the CP really thinks Sen. Smith is a “big name” then that says a lot about the Constitution Party.”

    =As I’v said. He was not perfect. He said in his most recent article,
    “The growth and size of the federal government highlights programs, bureaus and departments that have no connection to the Constitution whatsoever.”
    He voted against several Republican budgets. As iv said, he is not perfect. But im not looking for perfection.

  20. Red Phillips Says:

    Trent, you have already let the cat out of the bag. You are looking for a non-religionists. I now understand the appeal of Smith, which alluded me before.

  21. Trent Hill Says:

    Im looking for someone who non-theocrats can actually look at and vote for without shuddering.

Leave a Reply