LA Times: Is McCain Fit for Command?

Because he receives disability payments for having been tortured in Vietnam, the LA Times dares to question his fitness for service. The story is from FoxNews:

The Los Angeles Times is after John McCain, reporting that
while he boasts he is in robust health and can hike the Grand Canyon, he also
receives a 100 percent tax free disability pension from the Navy.
McCain has
said he receives a pension of about $58,000. He suffered extensive injuries when
his plane was shot down and he was tortured as a prisoner of war in North
Vietnam. He cannot raise his hands above his shoulders and walks with a slight
limp.
California tax lawyer Robert Schliemann tells The Times, "It is a
legitimate question to ask about the commander in chief: Is he fit to
serve?"...McCain senior adviser Mark Salter reiterated Wednesday that the
senator is in good health: "He is disabled from his war wounds which is why
receives the pension."

Here is the Times story. So in their view, this man would be unfit to serve in the high office:

Who led America through the Great Depression, fought and won World War 2, created the United Nations, and basically established the post-war world, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Is it McCain/Romney?

I sure hope so. What a ticket! From the AP:

In a show of Republican unity, one-time bitter foes John McCain and
Mitt Romney raised money and campaigned together Thursday for a single goal -
getting McCain elected president.
"We are united. Now our job is to energize
our party," the Arizona senator said in an airport hangar, flanked by Romney and
Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., an early McCain supporter. Both have been mentioned
as potential vice presidential picks, and McCain praised each.
Romney lauded
McCain and promised to do all he can to help, saying: "He is a man who is proven
and tested" and without question the right man to be president.

Reading the article, it seems all the old campaign animosities are set aside for the good of the Party. Also, McCain's lastest video is totally awesome!!!

Clinton Supporter Disparges McCain War Record

None other than uber-feminist Gloria Steinem. Via the Observer:

McCain was, in fact, a prisoner of war for around five-and-a-half
years, during which time he was tortured repeatedly. Referring to his time in
captivity, Steinem said with bewilderment, “I mean, hello? This is supposed to
be a qualification to be president? I don’t think so.”
Steinem’s broader
argument was that the media and the political world are too admiring of
militarism in all its guises.
“I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn’t
been trained to kill anybody. And she probably didn’t even play war games as a
kid. It’s a great relief from Bush in his jump suit and from Kerry
saluting.”
To the Observer, Steinem insisted that “from George Washington to
Jack Kennedy and PT-109 we have behaved as if killing people is a qualification
for ruling people.”

At first, I thought this just about McCain, but then she lambasts our country's heritage and great heroes. What's funny, its exactly the will to kill people who want to destroy our freedoms which gives Ms. Steinem the liberty to bite the hand that feeds and protects her. What a waste of good airtime!

And remember how unforgiving and quick to apologize McCain was when one of his own supporters repeatedly mocked Barack Hussein Obama's middle name at a campaign event? Where then, is the outrage from the Left concerning this attack on a selfless servant of the people? Thanks for nothing, I know!

And, John Kerry is at it again!

McCain's Eligibility

The Grey Lady never learns as she continues her amateurish attacks on the GOP front runner John McCain. The latest hitjob is an old and discredited story on whether the maverick, born in the Panama Canal Zone is a "natural born citizen". From Wash Park Prophet:

Is McCain a natural born citizen, even though he was born in
the U.S. Canal Zone? Yes.

As the New York Times notes:

"Mr. McCain’s citizenship was established by statutes
covering the offspring of Americans abroad and laws specific to the Canal Zone
as Congress realized that Americans would be living and working in the area for
extended periods."

Until the 14th Amendment was adopted after the Civil War (and
long after the current United States Constitution was adopted in 1789)
citizenship was a solely creature of statute, and the legacy of the statute
under which he claimed citizenship at the time of his birth has a long history.

The blogger sums it up best:

If you are a citizen when you are born, it is hard to see how the
natural born requirement should disqualify you from the Presidency.

I'm amazed at the audacity the paper has to put out yet another baseless charge against the Senator, so soon after its last debacle. The rogue liberal rag has become McCain best fund raiser, but I don't believe this was their intent!

McCain Beats Hillary, Obama

In a nationwide poll, the Maverick Iraq War proponent has the edge over his liberal competitors come November. From the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Presumptive Republican nominee John McCain, who has largely tied
his candidacy to the war in Iraq, narrowly leads both Barack Obama and Hillary
Rodham Clinton in a general election matchup, according to a new Los Angeles
Times-Bloomberg poll.
Among those surveyed, McCain won higher marks than
either Obama or Clinton for having the right experience and the ability to
handle Iraq and terrorism — and most other issues, except health care.

This is proof positive that the War on Terror, which the other side has ignored save for calling for retreat and withdrawal, is still important in the eyes of most Americans. The public realizes the dire need to avert a return to past defensive policies as during the Clinton era, or the Carteresque appeasement you would likely get from Obama.

Zero Credibility Vs. Mr. Credibility

Updates below!

The New York Times hitjob article on John McCain might be helping the GOP frontrunner. From Politico:

Few commentators on the right — including some who regularly
denounce ethical lapses or weaknesses of the flesh among Democrats — paused to
assess seriously whether the Times’ suggestions of conflict of interest were
well-founded.
Instead, many swallowed past misgivings about McCain to rally
to his defense, on the apparent theory that anyone under assault by the most
powerful institution in the mainstream media could not be all bad...

It
was a vivid illustration of the power of the longstanding anti-media grievance
among conservatives. In the past, McCain’s cozy relationships with establishment
journalists (“My base,” as he sometimes jokes) has been a major reason the
Arizona senator is viewed with such jaundiced eyes by many on the right. McCain
was able to leverage these feelings to turn a potentially devastating story into
something that arguably lifts his political standing.

Even Rush Limbaugh jumped in the fray to defend the Maverick:

At noon, the McCain campaign got perhaps its most important break.
Rush Limbaugh, who has been the senator’s worst tormentor since he effectively
seized the GOP nomination, came on the air and immediately denounced the Times.
Limbaugh warned McCain, who has close relations with the press, that such a
story was typical of what he calls the “drive-by media.” But he mostly shredded
the paper and the story, calling it “Page Six-type gossip.”

Looks like the Times article might have helped more than it hurt. A Republican being slammed by a liberal rag like the Grey Lady is a badge of honor. She'd have done better to endorse McCain a second time! The Old media continues its long, slow death spiral.

Update-Interesting headline from the NY Times "McCain Gathers Support and Donations in Aftermath of Article in The Times" Any regrets, editors? Maybe like Rush Limbaugh they were just trying to help the Senator by criticizing him! Riiiight....

More contrition from the Times, and editor Bill Keller-"I was surprised by how lopsided the opinion was against our decision, with readers who described themselves as independents and Democrats joining Republicans in defending Mr. McCain from what they saw as a cheap shot."

Another Shoddy Hit Job by the NY Times

Update below.
In their drastic quest to be counted as a tabloid, the Grey Lady launched insinuations against Senator John McCain with zero facts to back them up. From John Hinderaker at Powerline:

The New York Times smears John McCain in tomorrow's
paper, accusing him of ethics violations and insinuating that he had an affair
with a lobbyist. What is most striking, though, if you actually read the story,
is how thin it is. It's mostly about the Keating Five scandal, which dates to
the late 1980s. The "news" that gives the story a hook has to do with McCain's
friendship with a pretty blonde lobbyist that apparently ended in 2000. As for
the purported affair, the Times offers zero evidence...

The Times is a mouthpiece
for the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, nothing more. Its smear of
McCain--not the last, to be sure--is entirely consistent with the editorial
policies it has maintained for many years. Tomorrow's story is just one more
reminder of why no sophisticated person takes the Times seriously as a news
source.

First the paper endorses McCain, then trashes the likely GOP nominee? I guess now that they're sure there will no no die-hard conservative in the running, they feel no need to lend the Senator their support. If you lie down with dogs...

Update From the New Republic-Behind the Bombshell in 'The New York Times.'

Rush Tries to Have it Both Ways

I'm still incredulous that my favorite talk radio host Rush Limbaugh continues to suffer from McCain Derangement Syndrome. Now he's saying he's helping John McCain by criticizing him:

"If I really wanted to torpedo McCain, I would endorse him,"
Limbaugh said on his radio show. "Because that would send the independents and
liberals who are going to vote for him running away faster than
anything."
"What people don't realize is that I am doing McCain the biggest
favor that can be done for him by staying out of this," he continued. "If I
endorsed him thoroughly and with passion, that would end the independents and
moderates, because they so despise me and they so hate me."

All this sounds familiar, like when Hillary Clinton took credit for the improved situation in Iraq by saying it was because her Party threatened to pull out the troops. Forget the sacrifices of our brave men and women in uniform and how their mission was made that much harder when the terrorists had hopes we would cut and run prematurely.

Rush is trying to have it both ways as well, but he's only making the Right's chances tougher in the Fall, by giving the Leftist Media ammunition to use against our candidate, which ever day appears to be McCain. And instead of attacking the Dems' frontrunner, which now looks like Barak Obama, on his ties to Muslims, inexperience, and lack of substance, we are fighting one another.

Come off it, Rush! Admit you were wrong and stop going after the wrong side. Don't be like the Left and dig in your heels, no matter what the cost to our future security.

Petraeus for McCain VP

This is a silly notion that keeps cropping up, especially with the Iraq War barely won. He must also stay within the region for the near future to ensure his reforms have staying power. Still, I like this comment from Tim Hames at the Times Online:

America has a long tradition of looking to military leaders in
times of turmoil. This has stretched through Washington to Grant to Eisenhower
and might have placed Colin Powell in the Oval Office in 1996 if he had been
prepared to stand. General Petraeus, who holds a doctorate from Princeton
University, is the greatest military thinker of his generation. He has managed
to take a vast army that was effective at conventional fighting but close to
useless when confronted with a guerrilla enemy and turn it into an organization
that can today do counter-insurgency superbly. This is an achievement that makes
turning a supertanker around on the high seas during inclement weather look as
easy as clicking one's fingers. General Petraeus is a genius.

Good idea. Poor timing. Maybe in the next decade?

Fred Thompson Endorses McCain

The former candidate says its time to choose sides. From the Washington Post blog:

Fred Thompson, the one-time Republican presidential candidate, endorsed Sen. John McCain Friday, calling on the party to "close ranks" behind the presumed
nominee."This is no longer about past preferences or differences. It is about
what is best for our country and for me that means that Republican should close
ranks behind John McCain," Thompson said in a statement reported by the
Associated Press.

How about Thompson for VP? It would be his dream job, since he wouldn't have to actually do anything!

McCain Hits a Home Run at CPAC

Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference, John McCain made his case to the Hard Right of his Party. First off, he echoed Ronald Reagan with the following quote from the Gipper:

“A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers.”

This statement has been used against McCain by Talk Radio lately to question whether he is a true conservative, so I thought it significant to open with this line.

Throughout the speech he received loud and energetic applause from the audience, not what i expected. A few boos erupted from the crowd when immigration was mentioned, but was soon drowned out by the cheers, especially after he promised:

"I will secure the border first!"

He reminded how Hillary and Obama had plans to greatly increase the size of government but vowed "I will reduce it!" as well as declaring he will not sign any Bill with an Earmark. A bold statement indeed.

He closed with an astonishing defense of liberty, echoing his Vietnam POW days when he knew what it was to lose his freedom. It's sad we haven't heard the same defense of free will coming from the Democrats for decades, not since the JFK Era, whose ideals they claim to cherish and follow.

Oh, and Romney bows out with a great finale "“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention … I’d forestall the launch of a national campaign and, frankly, I’d be making it easier for Sen. Clinton or Obama to win. Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”

McCain Crushes Romney, Heads to CPAC

Stephen F. Hayes fills us in on what to expect, when the candidate heads to the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday:

McCain will not pander. His advisers think any attempt to do so
will undercut his "straight talk" reputation among independents and many
Republicans. What's more, they say, McCain doesn't pander well and would reject
any suggestion that he do so. (Remember when McCain read from a prepared
statement on the Confederate Flag in South Carolina eight years ago?)
McCain
said ten days ago that he would not reach out to Rush Limbaugh, but that he
would be open to communications with anyone. His advisers seem confident that
conservatives will come around without much targeted outreach, in part because
they don't have anywhere else to go.

It's pretty obvious now that McCain doesn't have to pander, but it would be great if everyone is on board to beat the Dems. Its oblivious to me why he snubbed the powerful conservative group for so many years, and it would require some big time schmoozing on his part to mend the fence. Why bother now?

McCain: Dragging the GOP Kicking and Screaming to Victory

The same group of conservatives who helped deliver Congress to Pelosi and Reid in the 2006 Elections are at it again. This time deducing that John McCain isn’t a true Republican, they are willing to concede the White House back to the Clintons’ for 8 more years of unbridled corruption, or to an inexperienced Media-darling Barak Obama. Their logic is they must destroy the GOP to save it, but the Maverick McCain is having none of it!

Their angst against the Senator and current Republican presidential frontrunner is his previous support for amnesty for illegal aliens, Campaign Finance, and his habit of reaching across the aisle to Democrats, frequently bucking the consensus of the Right. McCain Derangement Syndrome has reached the heights of lunacy, with uber-conservative Ann Coulter declaring she’d campaign for Hillary over McCain. Top conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, forgetting how he previously chastised fellow conservatives for staying home in 2006, has joined the Bash McCain bandwagon.

Despite the many cards set against him from fellow GOPers, McCain continues to surge in the polls, often besting Democrat frontrunner Hillary Clinton nationwide as more electable. He has received notable endorsements from Senator Joe Lieberman ( a liberal the Right can tolerate!) moderate governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger, and former candidate Rudy Giuliani, who he recently trounced in the Florida primaries.

The Maverick’s star hasn’t always shone so bright. As recently as 6 months ago he was struggling to maintain his presidential campaign, the first since being badly beaten by George Bush in 2000. Hurting for essential funds and often called down for the count, he was widely expected to end his long-held dream for the White House.

With nothing left to lose, the Vietnam Vet placed his support behind the then unpopular strategy, the Surge of troops into Iraq and a change of leaders for the boots on the ground. McCain was for victory before victory was cool, and when most experts wrongly considered the war, like his campaign, was in its death throes. The Senator kept on the attack, in spite of the odds and his many critics. Suddenly the war against the terrorists turned a corner, and his bid for the 2008 presidency now became a greater reality.

His critics on the Right are correct in that the Senator often sides with the Left on issues that concern the nation. Yet, his ability to get along with the opposition and even the antagonistic Media may be his greatest selling point, considering the dire need to bring the entire nation, not just conservatives, in the fight against Islamic Fascism. Hillary certainly couldn’t reach out to Republicans on this issue, and Obama would likely never try. The claim, then that “Mac” is a liberal is bizarre, considering his unflinching support for the Surge, and standing by the President against the terrorists. Especially since it would have been easy to take the opposite road.

Though I still disagree with many of his views, as on immigration and torture, I have also found fault with other GOP presidents from Reagan to Bush, who still had my full support on the issues that mattered the most. If Americans were to elect McCain in 2008, consider that we would have a President who:

1). Never claimed Iraq was a mistake, and that Bush lied to get us into war.
2). Supported the Surge, and the need for the generals on the ground to dictate strategy, not Congress.
3). Stood by the commanding general in Iraq, David Petraeus, never calling him a liar or a traitor.
4). Is pro-life.

I remember John McCain on 9/11, 2001, when he appeared on all the networks. The former Vietnam POW was a voice of calm and assurance in that chaotic period. How often he was against the GOP when we wanted him on our side, but as proven on that dark September morning, and even later when Democrats were calling for surrender and retreat from Iraq, the Senator was there when he was needed. For various reasons today the Republicans fortunes are less than stellar, but John McCain might just be the only candidate out of a less-than-perfect field of contenders who might sustain the Reagan Revolution for a little while longer.

Giving McCain His Day

Lets give him a chance, says Bill Kristol:

One might add a special reason that conservatives — and the nation
— owe John McCain at least a respectful hearing. Only a year ago, we were headed
toward defeat in Iraq. Without McCain’s public advocacy and private lobbying,
President Bush might not have reversed strategy and announced the surge of
troops in January 2007. Without McCain’s vigorous leadership, support for the
surge in Congress would not have been sustained in the first few months of 2007.
So: No McCain, no surge. No surge, failure in Iraq, a terrible setback for
America — and, as it happens, no chance for a G.O.P. victory in 2008.

McCain was my 3rd choice among the top GOP contenders for the White House early on. First, there was Rudy Giuliani, who I felt was the most experienced to govern the nation, but was doubtful he could beat Hillary. I liked Mitt Romney's personality and energy second, but felt him too much an unknown to beat the Democrat nominee. Then there was McCain, who, at first didn't seem to have a prayer, but now is actually beating Hillary in nation wide polls.

Feeling pretty good now about the Right's chances come November!

How Soon We Forget

Robert Kagan on John McCain and the Surge:

Whatever people may think about his positions on this or that
issue, his role in that effort ought to be reason enough to be willing to
support him fully and enthusiastically in the general election, especially
against Democratic candidates who to this day call for immediate withdrawal from
Iraq. It may also be worth pointing out that the only reason Republicans have
any chance of winning in 2008 is because of the surge. Imagine a Republican
running this year as the American position in Iraq crumbled, with images of
defeat and slaughter on the TV every night, instead of signs of progress. People
might reflect a bit on these facts before entering upon a crusade against
someone who behaved with such high-minded political courage, at the apparent
expense of his electoral prospects, at a time when many others tried to
duck."

Winning the war and defeating Al Qaeda is the calling of this generation. John McCain will continue the good fight for freedom.

And Rachel Lucas:

Don't get excited. I don't like a lot of his record, particularly a
long list of quotes he's given about class warfare and taxes. I think he's nuts
to want the Gitmo population put into American prisons. YEAH RIGHT. I think he's
an asshole for things he's said and supported about gun shows.
And I don’t
even have enough curse words in my brain to communicate my opinions about
McCain-Feingold. Jesus on a muffin, that is some bad, bad
stuff.
BUT.
Seriously, people. Seriously. You'd rather have Hillary? You'd
rather have Obama?
I don't even know you.

Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds.