Why do so many conservatives detest — and yes, “detest” is the most accurate word — John McCain?
Why are radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Hugh Hewitt abandoning their customary stance on Republican unity by endorsing or supporting Mitt Romney?
Why would the right-wing queen of provocation, Ann Coulter, claim that she would rather campaign for Hillary Clinton than the longtime Republican senator from Arizona?
Why, many talking heads marvel, are conservatives ambushing their only real shot at a general election victory in November?
Well, just maybe, to conservatives, the principle is worth more than the victory.
After all, hadn’t conservatives won the presidency with George W. Bush? Hadn’t they won both houses of Congress in 2002? How many conservatives are celebrating this week’s news of the first-ever $3 trillion budget unveiled by the president?
Anger towards McCain, despite the spin of his supporters, isn’t exactly irrational. McCain has shown an elastic sense of principle. To conservatives, it seems like temperamental predilections are just as likely to determine his positions as poll numbers. He’s a man they have trouble trusting.
Conservatives may remember that after losing the South Carolina primary in 2000, McCain derided conservative evangelical leaders as wielding “evil influence” on the Republican Party. (“Evil influence” apparently means convincing people not to vote for John McCain.)
Now, he’s one of the believers.
Conservatives may wonder why McCain joined Russ Feingold in writing legislation that allows the federal government to dictate free speech in ways never before imagined. Or that he joined Ted Kennedy on an immigration bill that was opposed by most conservatives. Now, McCain sounds like he’s ready to join the Minutemen.
Free-market types may wonder why John McCain supports cap-and-trade schemes. Others may wonder why he not only buys into end-of-world global warming scenarios, but opposes drilling in ANWR — comparing that stretch of tundra in Alaska to the Grand Canyon and Florida Everglades.
Fiscal hawks may wonder why McCain was one of two Republican senators to vote against Bush’s across-the-board tax cuts. He justifies the position by claiming he believes it should have been tied to spending cuts.
A perfectly reasonable stand — if McCain has actually taken it. But the maverick must have kept those concerns to himself, instead brandishing the liberal rhetoric of “tax cuts for the rich” during the debate.
None of these issues, on their own, would be deal breakers. No candidate can meet all ideological expectations. But conservatives have been asking themselves: Other than Iraq, what does McCain offer us?
We’ll soon find out. This week McCain will be stopping in at the Conservative Political Action Conference to cultivate the hard hearts of the rank and file.
He will, self-effacingly, forward the fable that he was a mere “foot soldier” in the Reagan Revolution. Serving in the house beginning in 1983, McCain was, at best, a soldier in mop-up operations.
Who knows? The mood of the country might be swinging towards John McCain pragmatism. Conservatives might be an ideological minority in the Republican Party, once again. But things change.
After all, one day Karl Rove is planning a permanent Republican majority, the next day he’s a Fox News analyst, pondering whether Democrats will have a veto-proof majority in the Senate in 2009.
And perhaps conservatives are dead wrong. Maybe McCain will become a great Republican president. Still, there’s nothing shameful about holding your ground on principle.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at 303-954-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
Ed Quillen’s Tuesday column will now appear on Wednesdays.
