info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Michael Ejercito
Jul 22, 2017, 1:17:33 AM7/22/17
to
http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20093/the-media-love-mccain-but-will-republicans
The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
by Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe
July 21, 2017
IT ISN'T NEWS that John McCain is a media darling. Nobody in national
politics gets the kind of adoring coverage that Arizona's senior senator
gets. "Good press" scarcely captures the worshipful tone of it all. "John
McCain Walks on Water" was the headline on Esquire's May 1998 profile, and
the editors weren't being sarcastic.
The Wall Street Journal's Al Hunt, no fan of Republicans, calls McCain "the
most courageous and one of the most admirable men I've ever known in
American politics." Mike Wallace says that if the GOP nominated McCain for
president, he'd consider quitting "60 Minutes" to become his press
secretary. "The McCain swoon is now so conspicuous," Andrew Ferguson wrote
in The Weekly Standard, "that NBC News, The Washington Post, and other news
outlets have assigned reporters to do favorable stories explaining why the
stories about John McCain are so favorable." That was more than a year ago,
and they're swooning still.
Some of this can be chalked up to McCain's Vietnam war record. He was shot
down over Hanoi in 1967 and spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war. For
saying no when the Communists offered to release him early — to accept would
have violated the Navy Code of Conduct - McCain was badly beaten and
tortured. He paid a huge price for his integrity and it is impossible not to
respect him for it.
But there is a difference between respecting a politician and falling in
love with him. Other senators have paid a high price in service to their
country — Max Cleland of Georgia, for instance, left two legs and an arm in
Vietnam — and nobody writes that they walk on water. What's more, McCain's
story has its seamy side. There is the philandering that wrecked his first
marriage, the ugly temper, the Keating Five scandal — unlovely episodes that
would not be ignored if his name were Forbes or Bush or Buchanan.
Not everyone in the press is in the grip of the McCain Swoon. Some left-wing
journalists have pointed to McCain's conservative voting record and wondered
whether their fellow media liberals have lost their minds. The New
Republic's David Grann noted in May that McCain is more conservative than
the man he replaced in the Senate: Barry Goldwater. He supported the
Contract with America and voted to convict Bill Clinton. He was against the
Martin Luther King holiday, against raising the minimum wage, against legal
abortions, against gun control, against gay rights.
Yet McCain is no idol to the right. There is nothing in the conservative
press liked the McCain love-fest in the liberal mainstream media. His
hard-right voting record hasn't dazzled conservatives, and for a good
reason: McCain doesn't want to be thought of as one of them. He wants to be
thought of as a maverick, bucking his party so he can fight Big Tobacco and
reform campaign finance.
On McCain's web site, you can read that he is pro-life; ask him about taxes
and he'll say they should be cut. But if you don't bring up those issues, he
won't, either. The issues he wants to talk about are punishing cigarette
makers (he was lead sponsor of a bill to impose massive penalties on the
tobacco industry) and campaign-finance (the McCain-Feingold bill would
sharply restrict the freedom to raise money and advertise in political
campaigns). Those are his marquee issues, and they go over well with
liberals and the media. To conservatives, they are anathema.
In a July session with reporters, McCain was asked where he would like to
see less government action. Any conservative worth his salt has a ready list
of obnoxious federal programs that America would be better off without, from
arts subsidies to racial preferences to the Legal Services Corporation.
This, slightly edited, was McCain's answer:
"In the case of the Department of Education, I'd like to see most of the
money go to the states. But I do think there is a purpose to the Department
of Education.
"The Department of Energy I think we could examine very carefully. It was a
product of the energy crisis in the 1970s. You could easily give some of its
responsibilities to other departments of government.
"We could more carefully tailor a lot of programs that fall under the
Department of Commerce. I applaud the vice president for trying to do this
'reinventing' of government.
"A lot of my conservative friends think we have to spend a lot more money on
defense. I think we have to spend some more money on some programs, but
we're wasting literally tens of billions of dollars on programs that are
only geared to the Cold War. We could, by restructuring the military, do a
whole lot of good things that would not require us to spend a whole lot more
money.
"I would look at corporate welfare. Giving McDonald's millions of dollars to
sell burgers overseas — the list goes on and on. I would reduce and
eliminate many of those programs. Ethanol subsidies are around $700 million
a year, and most of it goes to Archer-Daniels-Midland. All the studies show
it helps neither the consumer nor the environment. But that doesn't make me
as mad as the sugar subsidies do. Because the sugar subsidies increase the
cost of a pound of sugar to the consumer by about a third."
Is that a conservative talking? There is almost nothing in McCain's reply
that Ted Kennedy couldn't endorse. He may be Goldwater's successor, but
McCain isn't running as another Goldwater. He is running as a conservative
who has seen the light. That may not win him any GOP primaries. But the
media certainly eat it up.
(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe).
The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
by Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe
July 21, 2017
IT ISN'T NEWS that John McCain is a media darling. Nobody in national
politics gets the kind of adoring coverage that Arizona's senior senator
gets. "Good press" scarcely captures the worshipful tone of it all. "John
McCain Walks on Water" was the headline on Esquire's May 1998 profile, and
the editors weren't being sarcastic.
The Wall Street Journal's Al Hunt, no fan of Republicans, calls McCain "the
most courageous and one of the most admirable men I've ever known in
American politics." Mike Wallace says that if the GOP nominated McCain for
president, he'd consider quitting "60 Minutes" to become his press
secretary. "The McCain swoon is now so conspicuous," Andrew Ferguson wrote
in The Weekly Standard, "that NBC News, The Washington Post, and other news
outlets have assigned reporters to do favorable stories explaining why the
stories about John McCain are so favorable." That was more than a year ago,
and they're swooning still.
Some of this can be chalked up to McCain's Vietnam war record. He was shot
down over Hanoi in 1967 and spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war. For
saying no when the Communists offered to release him early — to accept would
have violated the Navy Code of Conduct - McCain was badly beaten and
tortured. He paid a huge price for his integrity and it is impossible not to
respect him for it.
But there is a difference between respecting a politician and falling in
love with him. Other senators have paid a high price in service to their
country — Max Cleland of Georgia, for instance, left two legs and an arm in
Vietnam — and nobody writes that they walk on water. What's more, McCain's
story has its seamy side. There is the philandering that wrecked his first
marriage, the ugly temper, the Keating Five scandal — unlovely episodes that
would not be ignored if his name were Forbes or Bush or Buchanan.
Not everyone in the press is in the grip of the McCain Swoon. Some left-wing
journalists have pointed to McCain's conservative voting record and wondered
whether their fellow media liberals have lost their minds. The New
Republic's David Grann noted in May that McCain is more conservative than
the man he replaced in the Senate: Barry Goldwater. He supported the
Contract with America and voted to convict Bill Clinton. He was against the
Martin Luther King holiday, against raising the minimum wage, against legal
abortions, against gun control, against gay rights.
Yet McCain is no idol to the right. There is nothing in the conservative
press liked the McCain love-fest in the liberal mainstream media. His
hard-right voting record hasn't dazzled conservatives, and for a good
reason: McCain doesn't want to be thought of as one of them. He wants to be
thought of as a maverick, bucking his party so he can fight Big Tobacco and
reform campaign finance.
On McCain's web site, you can read that he is pro-life; ask him about taxes
and he'll say they should be cut. But if you don't bring up those issues, he
won't, either. The issues he wants to talk about are punishing cigarette
makers (he was lead sponsor of a bill to impose massive penalties on the
tobacco industry) and campaign-finance (the McCain-Feingold bill would
sharply restrict the freedom to raise money and advertise in political
campaigns). Those are his marquee issues, and they go over well with
liberals and the media. To conservatives, they are anathema.
In a July session with reporters, McCain was asked where he would like to
see less government action. Any conservative worth his salt has a ready list
of obnoxious federal programs that America would be better off without, from
arts subsidies to racial preferences to the Legal Services Corporation.
This, slightly edited, was McCain's answer:
"In the case of the Department of Education, I'd like to see most of the
money go to the states. But I do think there is a purpose to the Department
of Education.
"The Department of Energy I think we could examine very carefully. It was a
product of the energy crisis in the 1970s. You could easily give some of its
responsibilities to other departments of government.
"We could more carefully tailor a lot of programs that fall under the
Department of Commerce. I applaud the vice president for trying to do this
'reinventing' of government.
"A lot of my conservative friends think we have to spend a lot more money on
defense. I think we have to spend some more money on some programs, but
we're wasting literally tens of billions of dollars on programs that are
only geared to the Cold War. We could, by restructuring the military, do a
whole lot of good things that would not require us to spend a whole lot more
money.
"I would look at corporate welfare. Giving McDonald's millions of dollars to
sell burgers overseas — the list goes on and on. I would reduce and
eliminate many of those programs. Ethanol subsidies are around $700 million
a year, and most of it goes to Archer-Daniels-Midland. All the studies show
it helps neither the consumer nor the environment. But that doesn't make me
as mad as the sugar subsidies do. Because the sugar subsidies increase the
cost of a pound of sugar to the consumer by about a third."
Is that a conservative talking? There is almost nothing in McCain's reply
that Ted Kennedy couldn't endorse. He may be Goldwater's successor, but
McCain isn't running as another Goldwater. He is running as a conservative
who has seen the light. That may not win him any GOP primaries. But the
media certainly eat it up.
(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe).
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jul 22, 2017, 3:27:34 PM7/22/17
to
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 22:22:47 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20093/the-media-love-mccain-but-will-republicans
>
>The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
>by Jeff Jacoby
There you go AGAIN, dreckgook...zsucking Jeff Jakobstein's fat jew
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20093/the-media-love-mccain-but-will-republicans
>
>The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
>by Jeff Jacoby
rectum at EVERY POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY!
Cheers!
RJ (preferred jew aliash)
- -
"We CAN hide forever."
- Klaun Shittinb'ricks (1940 - ), acknowledging that he will
NEVER prove where he infests or give his real jew name
"Die Juden sind unser Unglück!"
- Heinrich von Treitschke (1834 - 1896)
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out
because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade
Unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Trade
Unionist. Then they came for the jews, and I did not speak out
because I did not give a shit. Then they came for me and there
wasn't a single commie bastard left to speak for me."
- Martin Niemöller (1892 - 1984)
Illuc nisi Dei gratia vadam.
- Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe (? - )
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jul 22, 2017, 3:59:29 PM7/22/17
to
In article <po97ncdpj6v1881jc...@4ax.com>,
A shiteating cowardly nazoid sub-louse PEDO named Andrew "Andrzej"
Baron (aka "Ron Jacobson"/etc") wrote:
> There you go AGAIN, dreckgook...
LOL!
Oriental guy is super math genius (so much smarter than sick old
pedo Andrew "Andrzej" Baron, who made a "living" peddling defective,
pirated software!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Tao
"Tao exhibited extraordinary mathematical abilities from an early age,
attending university level mathematics courses at the age of nine. He
and Lenhard Ng are the only two children in the history of the Johns
Hopkins' Study of Exceptional Talent program to have achieved a score
of 700 or greater on the SAT math section while just nine years
old. Tao scored a 760.[3] In 1986, 1987, and 1988, Tao was the
youngest participant to date in the International Mathematical
Olympiad, first competing at the age of ten, winning a bronze, silver,
and gold medal respectively."
Further achievements:
- Ph.D at age 21 (Princeton).
- full professor at UCLA at age 24.
- Won the Fields Medal (highest award in math), at the age of 31.
- Breakthrough Prize in Mathematics (2014)
- Royal Medal (2014)
And numerous others
(see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Tao#Notable_awards).
!Jones
Jul 22, 2017, 7:09:10 PM7/22/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 22:22:47 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "Michael
Ejercito" <meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
I'd have voted for him in '08... then he chose a bobble-headed cunt
for a running mate. I preferred McCain over Obama; however, I
preferred Obama/Biden over McCain/Palin... I was worried that McCain
might die in office.
Jones
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 22:22:47 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "Michael
Ejercito" <meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>The media love McCain, but will Republicans?
for a running mate. I preferred McCain over Obama; however, I
preferred Obama/Biden over McCain/Palin... I was worried that McCain
might die in office.
Jones
Balthazar Jones
Jul 22, 2017, 7:19:41 PM7/22/17
to
On 7/22/2017 5:09 PM, !Jones wrote:
> I'd have voted for him in '08...
Bullshit lie, ESAD burnout.
> I'd have voted for him in '08...
0 new messages