« Poll shows Huckabee moving up in Iowa | Main | Unions question Edwards' past stances »

McCain defends "Gang of 14" in SC stop

At a recent stop in Charleston, SC, Senator John McCain admits the need for border security but vigorously defended the "Gang of 14" Senate compromise when questioned by Mike's America. The report is at Flopping Aces:


Q. Following Senator McCain's remarks he invited questions from the group. I introduced my question by saying: "Many conservatives in South Carolina were disappointed because you and Senator Graham (McCain's SC Co-Chairman) 1. participated in the "Gang of 14" to block the "nuclear option" and break the filibuster of President Bush's judicial nominees, 2. highlighted the "torture" of terrorist detainees weeks before the 2006 election and 3. Your previous stand on immigration." I also mentioned that many conservatives felt that they "could not trust" Senator McCain and I asked: "What can you say to them so they give your campaign another look?"

His answer was direct and clear:

"If you don't agree with the "Gang of 14" solution then I am not your candidate and you should vote for someone else."


Senator McCain went on to highlight the fact that under the Gang of 14 solution, the Senate did confirm conservative judges like Alito and Roberts. He went to say "I shudder to think what would happen if we had pulled the trigger on the nuclear option and one day Hillary Clinton was appointing judges." He asked me: "would your blogging friends still want to blow up the Senate" if Hillary Clinton was in charge? If so, I am not their candidate!

On immigration, Senator McCain admits that he's learned his lesson. "Americans want a secure border first" he said, because they "have no confidence, no trust in government" to implement a workable comprehensive reform. Under McCain's plan "border state governors will certify" whether or not the border is secure.

On torture: Senator McCain points out that "I have the same position as Colin Powell and many military leaders...those who have served will understand...Colin Powell said we had a 'higher obligation' and the morality" to distinguish ourselves from Pol Pot in the Killing Fields of Cambodia and the Burmese government that recently waterboarded protesting monks.

McCain emphasized the point that if we do it to the enemy, they will do it to us.


The whole report is at the link above. One of McCain's advantages as a candidate is his reputation for "straight talk," a rare attribute among politicians, but it can also be a weakness. His refusal to admit error on the "Gang of 14" cabal which undermined Bill Frist as Senate Majority Leader is one example. While McCain notes that both Roberts and Alito were confirmed after the "Gang" interfered, many Circuit and District Court nominees never got a vote as a result, and we still have many open judicial seats today - which now seem unlikely to be filled, since the Democratic Senate will run out the clock on Bush in the hopes of a Democratic President in 2009.

McCain also cautions we might have regreted outlawing the filibuster of judicial nominees if Hillary wins, Republicans have never done this (and no, before some fool suggests it, Abe Fortas was NOT filibustered; all Senate Republicans ever objected to was an expedited consideration - pushed by LBJ as Fortas' ethical problems were being made public - without the normal debate time). Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed 96-3 by a Republican Senate.

The Senator has made a remarkable comeback in the last several months to return to viability for his campaign, but digging in on positions like this one will not help sustain his momentum.

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (1 votes cast)


Close

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


AddThis Feed Button

Comments (3)

McCain can be impressive at... (Below threshold)
COgirl:

McCain can be impressive at times, but then he'll do (or say) something stupid. Personally, I'm glad to see him moving up in the polls for the simple reason that he and Giuliani are probably the only 2 Republican candidates who can beat Hillary. The press is working real hard to tear down Giuliani and we may "need" McCain. The reason I say this is because conservatives must keep their eye on the prize and that is the White House. That is what's most important otherwise we end up with Democrats in charge of everything. I can just hear their cash register now.

Welcome back, Jim. Missed you.

Okay, so McCain's learned h... (Below threshold)

Okay, so McCain's learned his lesson on a few things. Fine. But in each case, it's after-the-fact. Some lesson's are too expensive. Once laws are passed, it's either impossible to change or too late to undo the damage.

On immigration, Senator McCain admits that he's learned his lesson. "Americans want a secure border first" he said, because they "have no confidence, no trust in government" to implement a workable comprehensive reform.

I mean really - just when did he finally come to these realizations? What cocoon has he been living in that the fact that people have been steadily losing confidence in Congress for decades has just occurred to him? It's only recent that he's discovered that Americans want a secure border so long after 9/11?

This one cinches it for me, McCain emphasized the point that if we do it to the enemy, they will do it to us.

If one wants to use the morality argument, then fine. But this 'they will do it to us if we do it to them' is bull. They'll do it to us anyway. The difference is that we will be the only ones held accountable.

I'll vote for McCain if he's nominated because the Democrats are just not an option for me, but I don't have to like it.

I think, in all fairness, t... (Below threshold)

I think, in all fairness, that the Gang of 14 hindsight can be played 20-20 either way. Having Roberts and Alito on the court now has to count for a whole lot when you look at the next two decades. Yet there is no telling what sort of havoc would have resulted from changing the cloture rule.

One might say that, considering that the Dems took over the majority, the change would have enabled a bunch of judges to be appointed last year, but it would be a disaster now. I can't imagine Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid controlling the process. And I wonder if the number of vacancies would be any different.




Advertisements






rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Categories

Monthly Archives

Wizbang Politics Blogroll

Credits

Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Jim Addison, Bill Jempty

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

DCMA Compliance Notice

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Site Meter