1. Rob Jeffrey was right to say that below.
2. Fred’s attacks on Huck and what vote Fred did get hurt Huck among evangelicals and very conservative people. And they allowed McCain to style himself as above that sort of thing himself.
3. Romney’s decision not to fight until the end through attacking McCain helped McCain. And it was surely in Romney’s real interest that Huck win in SC.
4. Actually, no one worth talking about was attacking McCain in SC. Certainly not Huck, who apparently is looking for the VP nod. Terry Eastland at THE WEEKLY STANDARD is talking him up as McCain’s running mate this morning.
5. Huck praised McCain--not to mention himself--in his concession speech as men of honor. But notice that John didn’t return the favor by mentioning him.
UPDATE: George Will has decided to begin his negative campaign against McCain in today’s column. John is really a Democrat, with the moralistic tendency to attack corporate greed as the source of most evildoing and the real cause of our misery and who combines with Democratic senators to pass bills that don’t really benefit anyone. In short: McCain has no credibility on domestic issues and is actually to the left of even populist Huck on them. It goes without saying that there’s an element of exaggeration here, but there are also a lot of talking points that could have helped Huck and Mitt on the campaign trail and were, of course, probably known and ignored by Thompson. George may well have launched his campaign a little too late. But there still may be time for Mitt and even Huck, if gets off this band of honorable candidates kick, to take notice.
So the attacks on McCain have already begun. I thought they would wait till Monday morning.
As for Will's column that you took issue with, how does the "element of exaggeration" you noted in any way detract from the OVERALL thrust and theme of Will's piece, which is that McCain is NOT a reliable Conservative?
McCain values more bipartisan signing ceremonies on issues that are the fads du jour, than he does pushing SUBSTANTIVE legislation in the face of liberal and media opposition.
Here's a for instance. McCain tethers tax cuts to spending cuts. But in as much as Congress hasn't effectively cut non-defense spending since the LBJ years, and isn't likely to do so anytime soon, where then are these spending cuts going to occur that will allow the American people to enjoy genuine tax cuts. ??????? Don't hold your breath waiting for that answer. The spending cut excuse then is precisely that, AN EXCUSE, which enables McCain to glide away from withering criticism because he appears to be so statesmanlike on the issue.
The truth however is that McCain long ago made his peace with a big, bloated federal budget, and a big, bloated federal government. EVERY time that spending cuts are mentioned, he zeroes in on earmarks and bridges to nowhere. BUT THAT IS CHUMP CHANGE compared to the non-defense budget. I don't think it even arises to a single percentage point of the overall federal budget. So when he talks earmarks, he's talking bulls#@t! And what's worse, he's getting away with it! But if someone were to ask a follow up and say: "BEYOND earmarks Senator Straight-Talker, which cuts do you foresee a McCain administration making," the sound of Senator Straight-Talker choking that would ensue would be hilarious. But NOBODY'S asked him that follow-up.
The other candidates let him take SOLE credit for the Surge without rebuking him.
The other candidates let him pretend that all of our out-of-control spending problems are attributable to earmarks alone, and let him get away with it.
The other candidates let him spin his amnesty plan as a non-amnesty plan, and again, let him get away with it.
They let him affect a border hawkishness, WHILE HIS OWN BILL EVISCERATED the fencing mileage on a bill that was just signed mere months before his own was voted for. AND YET AGAIN, the other candidates let this guy get away with it.
And now rather late in the evening of this campaign season, as the witching hour approaches, they all stand stunned watching McCain, Lazarus like, with hands outstretched, walk forward towards the nomination.
They have no one to blame but themselves. And they have no one to blame if they're unhappy with the amount of coverage they received in the debates. They let the debates get out of control. They let Tommy Thompson stay in too long, they let Brownback stay up past his bed time as well. They let Ron Paul and his freakshow circus interrupt what should have been a serious engagement of the main GOP contenders.
Ah whatever........ Time to go watch the damn AFC Championship game.
George is pretty persuasive here.
My article on the SC election results will be up tomorrow.
People have been saying that there's no real conservative in the Republican race. But is it also not at least roughly correct to say that Republican primary voters are demonstrating discontent with conservatism? Except maybe for McCain, who seems to march more or less to his own tune, the frontrunners are all pretty `flexible,' when it comes to their, um, principles. If any of them had supposed that a genuinely Reaganesque posture would win, wouldn't he/they have adopted one by now? Or, more pertinently, started out with one? The most consistently conservative candidates are down at the bottom of the list. Time to wake up and smell the coffee?
They let Ron Paul and his freakshow circus interrupt what should have been a serious engagement of the main GOP contenders.
Yeah, those freaks who want to follow the Constitution. What nut jobs.