Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Republicans Flip-Flop for McCain

The Republican campaign charade is finally drawing to an end. One by one, prominent conservatives are "coming around" to the candidacy of Sen. John McCain after excoriating him for months as nothing more than a liberal in sheep's clothing. Did anyone really doubt this would happen? Did Democrats get fooled into thinking die-hard right-wingers like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Tom DeLay and James Dobson would actually stay home on election day or, worse, vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? Get real. That was the absolute worst demonstration of feigned objectivity in the history of American politics. The truth is, Republicans belong to a cult, unlike Democrats, who, albeit in an often disjointed, politically inexpedient manner, relish freedom of thought, dissent, and choice. And at the end of the day, the cult members follow their leader. And come election day, they will march in lockstep to the polls and robotically throw their support to the same guy who they've been saying will be a "disaster" for the party. They'll follow McCain and his partisan pipe into the death water just like The Pied Piper's rats.

To be sure, the party is coalescing around McCain, the same candidate whom they've relentlessly vilified over his positions including immigration, campaign finance and torture. But now he's their guy when it comes to taxes, the war, fighting terrorism, marriage and abortion...yada, yada, yada. The latest flip-flopper is Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family. Dobson, heretofore highly critical of McCain, appeared on Hannity's radio program last week extolling the candidate's many conservative virtues. And Hannity joined the lovefest. It was Republican hypocrisy at its finest: two of the party's most cultish figures engaged in newfound hero-worship of their devil incarnate.

And incredible hypocrisy it was/is. Dobson's 180 on McCain, he said, is because the candidate shares many views, especially those on key social issues. For example, said Dobson, Obama "has the most radical views on marriage," unlike McCain. Oh really? Last time I checked, Obama is in a happy, respectful marriage and has never been divorced. To the contrary, McCain not only divorced his first wife Carol, but he allegedly cheated on her with his current wife, Cindy, who he married at 43 when she was just 26 (McCain and Carol stopped living together in January 1980. He married Cindy five months later. You fill in the blanks). Who's the "radical?" If "protecting marriage" is truly Dobson's motive, then it should be clear which candidate he and Focus on the Family should support, right? But we all know when it comes to Republican politics it's "do as I say not as I do."

Personally, I never really got the whole "protecting marriage" mantra. It's sheer hypocritical, convoluted narrow-minded bullshit spewed by a bunch of uptight, twisted, homophobic, controlling old white men (or, as in the case of Sen. Larry Craig, closeted gays). What are these fanatics really trying to say, that only heterosexuals can enjoy a healthy, productive, successful marriage? Well, tell that to Nicole Simpson, or Laci Peterson, or Ted Ammon, or Mary Jo Buttafuoco or Hedda Nussbaum or Christie Brinkley or Suzanne Craig or Jackie Battley (Gingrich) or Marianne Ginther (Gingrich) or Hillary Clinton or any other lesser-known spouse who's been killed, beaten and/or cheated on by their "normal, heterosexual" mate. When, on a good day, 50% of all straight marriages end in divorce, just what exactly are these Republican hypocrites protecting? Perhaps it's time to let gays get a legitimate, legal crack at this sacred institution. They can't do any worse.

As for McCain and his flip-floppin' Republican detractors, you can be sure he'll continue to capture more of their support, passion and votes as election day nears. Because that's what Republicans do. It's what cult members do. They do what they're told. And what they're very effectively being told right now by their elected leaders, their TV and radio hosts, and by their religious and spiritual leaders is that Obama's the new devil in DC, and McCain, well, he ain't so bad after all.

HELP ELECT BARACK OBAMA PRESIDENT: It's now time for us to pull together as Democrats and unite behind Obama and his historic candidacy. These are exciting times. I urge you to support Obama by sending the campaign whatever you can afford. In politics, money is key. There are many swing states this year--Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri among them. With a sizeable war chest for campaigning, ground teams/staff, ads, mailings, Internet/email promotions, etc, he can win these states. We are commited to raising $25,000 for the campaign between now and November. Click here to make a contribution and help me reach this goal. Together we can change America.


Anonymous said...

A rightie is sending all kinds of racist stuff about what Michelle wrote in college.

This is the Repub game plan: Scare the hell out of white voters.

Anonymous said...

I and others who supported Obama don't need anymore "stuff" to scare the hell our of us. He scared me beyond even considering him as president when he voted to erode the Constitution, and then his other incomprehensible flip flops. The Republicans who weren't going to vote probably are afraid of Obama's presidency too.

A Voice of Sanity said...

Well, tell that to ... Laci Peterson, Christie Brinkley ... or Hillary Clinton or any other lesser-known spouse who's been ... cheated on by their "normal, heterosexual" mate.

You left out Halle Berry. How could you forget Halle Berry?

Anonymous said...

"Democrats...relish freedom of thought, dissent, and choice"

Really...how self-deceived can you possibly be? I'm republican. I'll be voting for Obama most likely. So down with your typical democratic stereotype of republicans.

Is the overdone bluster of the New Yorker cover promoted by you and every other lefty blogger an example of your relish for dissent? Are the hateful and ignorant comments spewed out of blogs towards the supreme court justices for their decision in the recent 2nd amendment case another such example?

Relishing dissent looks something different to me. It expresses itself as a reasoned attempt to understand both sides of the argument and engage in meaningful debate about the issue.

Anonymous said...

Its not that conservatives flip flop over McCain - we just know that he is a hell of a lot better than Obama. Obama has no credentials to be Commander In Chief. For example, look at his bumbling response to a question that he didn't have a scripted answer:

"If you had to do it over again, knowing what you know now, would you support the surge:"

Obama: "No, because keep in mind that question, you wouldn't ... but keep in mind that kind of hypothetical is very difficult to know hindsight is 20-20 ... later ... but I think that what I'm absolutely convinced of is that at that time we had to change the political debate because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with."

Obama is a fool with no track record, no credentials to be Commander In Chief, and no idea how to run a country.

Anonymous said...

Good on you, Andy, for calling out the GOP blabbermouths for what they are... people who have no real ideological or philosophical core. First, last and only they are businesspeople to the very core and all decisions made by them are based on how it impacts the "brand" they have created for themselves.

Anonymous said...


James Dobson, Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh most certainly are flip-flopping on McCain. During the primaries all of them attacked McCain mercilessly as not being a conservative.

Coulter ripped him for saying he's the only one who supported the surge in Iraq and that he was attacked for this support by Republicans. She categorically denied this and stated she would support Hillary Clinton over John McCain.

Limbuagh wrote on his website that McCain winning the GOP nomination would destroy the party and that McCain's simply out for revenge against the party for what it did to him in 2000.

"Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances." - James Dobson, 1/13/07.

You cannot simply wipe these statements away. Either the people who spoke the words believed them at the time and are now flip-flopping for expedience or they did not believe them at the time which makes them slanderous.

The GOP is going to get the ass-whipping it so richly deserves and you'd better prepare yourself by either sitting down at home on Election Day or by stuffing a pillow in the rear of your shorts.

Anonymous said...

Who cares if Coulter, Limbaugh, Dobson or any of them flip-flop. They have little effect on our country or its citizens. The flip-flop that bothers me and has made a flip-flopper out of me, is Obama. I was so for him until he flipped over to the Republican point of view on vital issues. And, today in a press interview, he said, no matter what Petraus, or any military authority says, he, Obama, as president will have to understand how the Iraqi people and their government feel. He'll have to look at the "bigger picture" and consider everybody. I paraphrase but the meaning is the same. If he is president, I will worry that he will flip-flop over to the Iraqi side or any other side he considers is in need of "equal time" and consideration when he makes his decisions for the United States of America. Bush has done that with Mexico and look at the mess that's made. What's must come first is what's good for America, which I do believe means negotiating, but keeping our interests first.

The Ostroy Report said...

Anon 5:43...Obama doesn't have what it takes to be Commander in Chief? I suppose you'd rather vote for the guy who just this weekend said Iraq is on the Pakistani border? Or who last Spring repeatedly confused Iranians with Iraq's Sunnis and Shia? (luckily, Lieberman was by his side to correct him in front of the cameras). As for me, I'll stick with the guy who (a) was right on Iraq from day-1; (b) has a strategy/timetable for withdrawal that's shared by al-Malaki and Iraq's parliament; (c) knows where the hell Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan are; and (d) knows his Shia from his Sunnis...and who we're fighting in Iraq.

Anonymous said...

Not only does Obama not have what it takes to be Commander In Chief, Obama will also:

- Increase taxes everywhere
- Increase government spending
- Increase cost for all energy sources
- Continue to pander to the most destructive union in America - the NEA
- Destroy the economy by making America inhospitable for businesses
- Increase unemployment
- Decrease freedom of speech by labeling all criticism of his administration as 'racist'

Obama will do nothing about the Mexican invasion of America while also promising free health care to anyone that illegally enters America.

Anonymous said...

I see the trolls are out posting their usual incoherent nonsense. Those of us who did our research do solidly support Obama. So the trolls can stop wasting our time because our minds are made-up.

Aside from the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Coulters, O'Reillys, etc. cult-like followers there are many more conservatives and republicans who still retain a modicum of principle and integrity.

What I find so distasteful about the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Coulters, O'Reillys, etc. is their penchant to whip up the public's fear on any given subject or person. They do not care about principle or the truth. Yet they are paid hundreds of millions of dollars to do what they do.

Recently Hannity signed a $100 million dollar contract and Rush Limbaugh signed a $400 million contract to sell the public a political ideology based on fear, red-herrings and strawmen.

Have you ever asked yourself why a company invests hundreds of millions of dollars in radio and/or TV personalities? Putting the "right" political party in office that believes in deregulating the FCC rules means they are free to consolidate a higher market share with higher profit-margins. Therefore hiring the best salesperson to sell the public on a bill of goods is top priority.

This is a high stakes game for the corporate media so paying hundreds of millions of dollars is nothing compared to what they could reap in return.

It is a win-win situation for the corporate owned media and the Hannitys, Limbaughs etc... albeit a lose-lose situation for the public for obvious reasons.

TV personalities even on CNN and MSNBC have followed different scripts to paint Obama in unflattering ways. Their latest description: cocky and too sure of himself is nothing more than unsubstantiated opinion. Saying it repeatedly does not make it true.

Moreover acting cocky and being self-confident are two completely different things. The latter applies to Obama.

Having confidence in oneself also translates into forming an opinion based on your own capability to judge for yourself, not what someone else tells you.

I'll bet even a few trolls will come to their senses before election day once they recognize what Obama has to offer the country.

That is if they decide to think for themselves!

Anonymous said...

Obama "caves" to the other side in order to be conciliatory. That's his reputation and he's evidenced his willingness to switch sides.

8:13 is right. He'll allow the illiegal immigrants to erode our welfare, healthcare and school systems, and he indicated today he will be conciliatory to the Iraq government. Obama will "give" our country away. He'll probably start a welfare system for Iraq to help those oppressed people who have suffered so get back on their feet. I'm for helping those in need but after we've stripped all our resources there will not longer be the great open-hand Americans have for those in need. As it is, Bush has helped Iraqi schools get in shape more than he's helped our schools here in the U.S.

Anonymous said...

Nice job, serena1313.

For those harping on illegal immigration destroying the United States, please recall that John McCain co-authored a bill that was deemed an "amnesty" bill by the right of the GOP. McCain then caved on his own bill and said he would not vote for it.

Also, it's worth mentioning that a year and a half ago the Texas State Comptroller issued a report finding that illegal immigrants had a net POSITIVE effect on the economy in Texas. It set off a firestorm among those hoping to use illegals as a political wedge issue but they could not rip the report as partisan. The Comptroller was a Republican.

Anonymous said...

Let us also recall that McCain is NOT promising government (taxpayer) sponsored health care to any and all illegal people that sneak into America.

Obama is going to drive the average health care into the gutter for taxpayers. Health care costs and taxes will go through the roof because of Obama. Companies will be leaving America for more favorable tax burdens faster than a liberal can say "God Damn America" which will drive unemployment up to European levels (at best).

Anonymous said...


What a bunch of unsubstantiated BS.

Do some research and find out why a majority of doctors in the US, nearly 60%, are now supportive of some form of universal health care. While you are at it, get a clue as to why the citizens of this country spend a great deal more per capita than citizens of other Western industrialized nations (most of which have universal coverage) on health care - and it isn't because of "illegals".

Ignorance touted as fact is not only ugly, it's dangerous. But I suppose it is common coming from those who follow a man who daily proves he does not know his ass from a hole in the ground - John "by 2008, I think I might be ready to go down to the old soldiers home and await the cavalry charge there" McCain.

Anonymous said...

9:26 I guess yours is "substantiated BS"

No one has said the people who break the law by entering our country and who steal our identities to work illegally are totally responsible for the huge medical bills. In fact the report is they're responsible for only about thirty perdent - I don't know if that's including school expense or not.

We have two choices for president unless the delegates switch and choose Hillary in August. Neither of them is perfect and some think neither is even acceptable. However, McCain, with all his faults, is the wiser, more experienced, and surely more appreciative of the USA, and is thus the safer choice.

Anonymous said...

Unsubstantiated, my ass. There is a substantial amount of supportive documentation for my statements but here's just a sampling for you:

Doctors opinion on universal health care: http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN3143203520080331?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Health care spending per capita: http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

Also, you claim about illegal immigrants costing being responsible for 30% of the medical burden in this country is patently false: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2640739320071126

Lastly, your claims about McCain being wiser and more appreciative of the US are nothing more than conjecture. They are simply your opinion - based on what, we don't know. As for experience, I suppose if you make the claim that he's been a member of Congress longer than Obama, you win. But many can rightfully make the claim that such "experience" is an albatross for McCain.

Are you satisfied with his support of George Bush 95% of the time over the last 8 years? Is this the experience you are looking for?

Anonymous said...

10:36 I don't trust Obama because people with your lack of the ability to think logically are supporting him. "Like attracts like."

Anonymous said...


Please make clear for everyone what statements made by anon10:36 are lacking in logic.

Anonymous said...

Alas, 6:23, you're the only one who doesn't know which ones are lacking in logic; and, therein lies your problem.

Anonymous said...


Wow! The ancient taunt of the fact-challenged... "if you don't know, I don't have to tell you." You could have saved time and just typed "nyah, nyah, nyah!!!"

Seems to me the logic displayed by the other person is sound. It also seems that the best way to prove him/her wrong is to point out his/her fallacies and not with juvenile rhetoric.

Anonymous said...

Of course Andy is immune from an election flip-flop. In January he said:

"The culprit, in my opinion, is Obama and his surrogates, who have ratcheted up the incendiary rhetoric to a reckless, embarrassing level. For Obama, it's not about black or white, but gray. He's become quite adept at saying one thing and doing another. Of presenting himself as the candidate of change; one who'll bring civility and honorability back to the campaign trail. Of staying "above the fray," but then fraying with the best of 'em. Of blurring the racial lines in this hotly contested race and using race in both an inspirational manner and a devious, calculating one. And that's what we saw this past week. The real Barack Obama."

Nice hypocrisy Andy.

Anonymous said...

The entire set of sanctimonious Republican lick-spittles, exposing themselves with trite remarks about Obama, ought to know that the hate meter is running and no amount of veneer can prevent the real truth about them from getting out. I think they should all don their terrorist smock and cone attire for the next McCain gathering.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of the "hate meter":

- Democrats have called for the assassination of the President of the United States.

- Democrats tried as hard as they could in the 1960's to keep blacks from being treated the same as whites

- Democrats had to be beaten into submission in their quest to keep slavery.

So, let us have the 'real truth' - I welcome it.

Anonymous said...


If you truly welcome the truth:

Republicans have called for the assassination of the President of the United States as well as candidates running for the office. They've also called for bombing of the CIA and UN as well as heralding the onset of AIDS as a way of reducing the homosexual population.

The southern Democrats who supported slavery and Jim Crow became Republicans. LBJ recognized this was a probable outcome when he signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nixon and the GOP devised the racist Southern Strategy as a result of the Civil Rights Act and the south moved in lock-step from the D column to the R column.

In 2005 the RNC chairman at the time, Ken Mehlman, acknowledged it was wrong to do play such racial politics and apologized for it.

Neither party is immune from stupidity. But the fact is you are not likely to find many members of the most virulent racist groups in this country voting in large numbers for Democratic Party candidates.

You shouldn't have to look deep in your heart to know why.

Anonymous said...

To be clear, my previous post is referrign to Byrd as the highest ranking KKK member in Congress, not the highest ranking KKK member in the KKK.

Anonymous said...

If you support Affirmative Action, you support racism. The Democrats overwhelming support Affirmative Action.

Hire people based on their skills - not their skin color.

Anonymous said...

So if I support laws aimed at ensuring employers do not discriminate on the basis of skin color, gender or religion then I am somehow a racist?

How did George Bush get into Yale and Harvard Business School? How did John McCain get into the Naval Academy and Naval Flight School?

Neither of them earned it. They got in on the ancient form of "affirmative action". Their accomplished parents affirmed that their children's lives were set before they were born. No skill test, just birthright. The American form of aristocracy.

Anonymous said...

Sen. Harry Reid Is Right About Iraq War. If Reid Is Wrong, Bush Should Demostrate Successes in Iraq

I can't imagine Obama wanting any kind of endorsement from someone who has porcelained himself into such a loser's corner.