Popular blogger and radio talk host Hugh Hewitt wrote a book about Mitt Romney before the current campaign began in earnest, A Mormon in the White House, which was a very favorable portrait of the former Massachusetts Governor. Since the book came out early last year, Hewitt has become almost a full-time Romney partisan on his show and blog. He's one of "those types" of supporters who cannot acknowledge the slightest error or imperfection in their man's record, conduct, or character. Every candidate has them, and they are very annoying.
However, the partisans serve a purpose in the campaign. They don't let any hint of a mistake by or weakness in an opponent escape anyone's notice. That's not a bad thing in itself, as long as the "oppo" information they spread is truthful and undistorted. Hugh delivered some of that stuff yesterday in his interview with former Senator Rick Santorum, still very popular with conservatives. From the synopsis at Hugh Hewitt:
When Santorum says of McCain that on "the environment, he's absolutely terrible. He buys into the complete left wing environmentalist movement in this country," he is speaking from Republican Caucus experience.When Santorum says that about the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill that "John McCain was the guy who was working with Ted Kennedy to drive it down our throats, and lectured us repeatedly about how xenophobic we were, lectured us, us being the Republican conference, about how wrong we were on this, how we were on the wrong side of history," he was there, heard those lectures.
* * * * *
When you consider McCain, keep in mind Santorum's warning: "John McCain looks at things through the eyes, on these kind of domestic policy issues, looks at it through the eyes of the New York Times' editorial board, and accepts that predisposition that if you are not, if you stand for conservative principles, there's some genetic defect."
Read the whole post at the above link, or the entire radio transcript.
I think Santorum fairly summarizes the conservative case against John McCain. He was an eyewitness to the incidents and attitudes he describes.



Comments (5)
There's no question that on... (Below threshold)1. Posted by JJ | January 13, 2008 12:10 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There's no question that on many if not most domestic issues McCain would be horrible. Ghastly, in fact.
But there's no question either that he would finish the job in Iraq, continue beating al-Qaeda utterly senseless, and that his SCOTUS picks would be 1,000 times more conservative than Hillary's.
If he's the next president the best case scenario -- IMO -- is that he quickly gets an opportunity to replace Stevens and Ginsburg (and perhaps Souter too, who wants to retire), he mops up in Iraq, the GOP Senate blocks him on domestic stuff, then he steps down and doesn't seek re-election because of age/health, turning things over to his Veep, hopefully someone along the lines of Santorum and not at all someone like Lindsay Graham.
One thing's for certain, however: If he gets the GOP nomination he'll be the next president. He easily would defeat Obama (if Obama somehow pulls off the upset) and he absolutely would mop the floor with Hillary in the general. Hillary's ceiling, in fact, against McCain, would be less than Kerry received.
Cheers,
Jay
1. Posted by JJ | January 13, 2008 12:10 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 13, 2008 12:10
2. Posted by Alan Orfi | January 13, 2008 1:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I really disagree that McCain is a shoo-in for the White House should he win the nomination. There may be a number of disenchanted core conservatives who will consider sitting this one out if a socially liberal candidate such as McCain is the nominee. He is not the best debator in the world and does represent the establishment in this apparent tidal wave of "change" that Americans supposedly want in November. I hope Republicans think long and hard about McCain's positions before casting votes this week.
2. Posted by Alan Orfi | January 13, 2008 1:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 13, 2008 13:39
3. Posted by Jim Addison | January 13, 2008 2:04 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Yeah, I wouldn't be picking out curtains for the White House just yet. I do think McCain would have an excellent chance of winning, but any Republican will be swimming against the tide to win this year, if for no other reason than we've held the White House for two consecutive terms. Since WWII, that's only happened once, 1981-1993.
Add to that historical resistance the completely insane public attitude toward the economy, which has been uniformly negative during one of the best periods of sustained growth in our history, with low inflation and low unemployment, and our nominee will not be the favorite going into the campaign.
Fortunately, the Democrats promise to help us, as usual, by nominating an extremely flawed candidate themselves.
Which brings us back to the old 'possum wisdom from Pogo: "We has met the enemy, and he is us." Republicans may not turn out in force to back our nominee because each of the potential candidates has weaknesses with one or more factions of our coalition. If we don't support our nominee, it won't matter how many independents he can attract.
3. Posted by Jim Addison | January 13, 2008 2:04 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 13, 2008 14:04
4. Posted by Alan Orfi | January 13, 2008 8:36 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
So, which Republican is our best nominee? I loved Fred and even got to speak with him for a few minutes back in the fall, but I quickly realized he wasn't going to happen. Huckabee won me over as the only candidate who has crossover appeal and still could hold the base. Romney is so... manufactured. I agree with you wholeheartedly about the independents being worthless if McCain cannot turn out all conservatives. We are facing utter disaster in November (the Democrats will likely take both houses of Congress for two years) if Republicans cannot unite immediately.
Maybe Huckabee can pull a surprise in Michigan and use the momentum in SC. Or maybe Rudy will emerge in Florida. I still hope Republicans will realize at the last moment that McCain is not the answer.
4. Posted by Alan Orfi | January 13, 2008 8:36 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 13, 2008 20:36
5. Posted by Jim Addison | January 14, 2008 1:04 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I wish I had the answer. It's uphill for anyone.
I think Giuliani, McCain, or Thompson probably have the best chances in the general election - the first two for cross-party/independent appeal which could help in the closer blue states, Thompson by rallying the base. But Romney and Huckabee could possibly win it, too, although they have some bigger built-in targets on their backs.
Our best hope, and secret weapon, remains the flawed and unqualified candidate the Democrats will put up (no matter who of the top three), and their actual policy positions which won't command broad support either. It's no way to win an election, but it worked well enough in '88, '00, and '04 when we won against the odds going in.
5. Posted by Jim Addison | January 14, 2008 1:04 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 14, 2008 01:04