As a conservative, I am pleased to see the many conservatives revolting against McCain and the Republican party. Even Chris Buckley, who owns 1/7 of the National Review. Colin Powell. Conservative papers that endorsed Bush. None have said it better than The Chicago Tribune:
This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party’s nominee for president.
Wow.
The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause–the Republican Party. The Tribune’s first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.
In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft. The Tribune’s decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.
We see parallels today.
The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way. <snip> They abandoned their principles. They paid the price.
We might have counted on John McCain to correct his party’s course. We like McCain. We endorsed him in the Republican primary in Illinois. In part because of his persuasion and resolve, the U.S. stands to win an unconditional victory in Iraq.
It is, though, hard to figure John McCain these days. He argued that President Bush’s tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible, but he now supports them. He promises a balanced budget by the end of his first term, but his tax cut plan would add an estimated $4.2 trillion in debt over 10 years. He has responded to the economic crisis with an angry, populist message and a misguided, $300 billion proposal to buy up bad mortgages.
McCain failed in his most important executive decision. Give him credit for choosing a female running mate–but he passed up any number of supremely qualified Republican women who could have served. Having called Obama not ready to lead, McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. His campaign has tried to stage-manage Palin’s exposure to the public. But it’s clear she is not prepared to step in at a moment’s notice and serve as president. McCain put his campaign before his country.
Matthew, I agree with everything the trib says here. I don’t like McCain either. As a fairly new father, I hope you know the alternative though. FYI – As many as 5 supreme court justices may be replaced in the next 8 years.
Illinois Senate floor – March 2001
-go to page 84, read “senate bill 1093.”
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf
Hi Matt,
Great to hear from you. Did you read the article on Politifact about it? Whether or not we agree with his stance on abortion, Barack was representing his constituents on that issue. I will not fault him for that.
OTOH, I have much to fault todays Republicans with. They have stripped away oversight in the marketplaces, free-spent into record deficits, grown government at unimaginable rates, and trampled all over civil liberties. Whether by choice or not, McCain is surrounded by many of the same advisors and leaders that “served” Bush. I’ll admit, those guys have more experience than anyone else on the political landscape. But I don’t think experience will solve this mess. For that, we need good judgement. McCain has not demonstrated that.
So I choose someone else. Anyone else. I don’t see a way to lose by voting for Obama. If indications are wrong and he turns out to be a poor leader, us “moderate conservatives” will have sent a strong enough message to the Republican party that perhaps we’ll get a better candidate next time. And some better representation in Congress.