Inasmuch as our esteemed host is a big fan of Matt Welch’s Reason piece on John McCain, I pass along that Welch promotes his book on McCain in an interview with Amy Goodman for her lefty “Democracy Now!” program, with a transcript and audio/video at the link.
****
update by Jeff G: For those of you who may be interested — and who hadn’t read as much in the comments to this post before it was bumped from the front page — I recorded an interview with NPR’s David Folkenflik re: “conservative” opposition to McCain that will air tomorrow on “Morning Edition.”
Unfortunately, I was heavily medicated at the time, and I may have misidentified Ronald Reagan as Gary Coleman. Apologies in advance for any embarrassment I cause the conservative movement.
I don’t listen to the show, but David tells me it will also be made available on their website. So. Just an FYI.
****
update by Karl: You can stream the medicated Jeff on demand via NPR, just about 2:00 into the 3:57 story. (h/t Serr8d.)
Cappy Ed’s not going to like that. No, sir!
If Welch’s article is supposed to convince me not to vote for McCain, it doesn’t succeed. Not in the least.
It wouldn’t succeed with me either, steph. But for much the same reason that a book on the dangers of eating dynamite wouldn’t convince me not to eat dynamite.
Some things you don’t need to learn from a book.
Have you tried it with lemon juice, capers, garlic and cilantro with a fresh Seviche?
The flavors positively burst onto the tongue! *rimshot*
An excellent article, but let’s assume for a moment that McCain has enough momentum to wrap up the nomination now (which I think he does). Assuming that, what’s the motivation for Conservatives to tear down McCain at this point?
To help Hillary? Obama? Some sane reason that doesn’t currently come to mind?
McCain has a 82.3% Lifetime Rating from the ACU
Obama has a 8.0%
Hillary has a 9.0%
This ain’t a real hard decision.
The one fault I found with Welch’s article is that it tends to psychologize a bit too much. But other than that, I think the foundational material is spot on, and should (Steph, inexplicably, notwithstanding) give anyone considering voting for McCain pause. Or at least, those who consider themselves legal conservatives, or small government conservatives, or classical liberals.
An aside: McCain says the right thing about judges. But his history shows that McCain does what McCain thinks is best (with the Constitution used only as a type of useful guide) — and he has a tendency to micromanage policy. Which makes me believe that he will select a judge much like, say, Miers or O’Connor, one who is putatively conservative, but who, ultimately, is a political animal, one who is willing to punt on certain social issues, or even rule from a populist position (see, eg., O’Connor and Miers on race-based affirmative action).
This is all part of his “Maverick” image: he comes across that way because he acts on policy beliefs in a way that often puts the ends he desires at odds with the Constitutional means at his disposal. And in those instances, he pushes forward toward the ends he desires, and declares the Constitutional means of secondary concern. (See, for instance, some of his statement on the First Amendment).
Re: Welch. I’m not sure the guy even likes me. For all I know (and given that he runs in the same circles), he is attending Reason happy hours with people like Jim Henley, who tells perfect strangers that I am a “despicable human being.” Without ever having met me.
But unlike Henley, at least Welch has integrity going for him. He blasted the press for their Katrina coverage (rather than circling the wagons, ala Jonah Goldberg, who I otherwise admire), and he was equally critical of the Nader campaign as he is of McCain.
Matt and I have had our disagreements (over what constitutes torture, for instance), but I completely respect him as a journalist, regardless of what he might think of me personally.
Which means that I take what he writes seriously, because I believe his arguments proceed from good faith. I may think him wrong, but I don’t doubt his attempts to remain objective — or, if otherwise, that he will acknowledge of his own biases.
This has been covered, Scape-Goat Trainee. First, McCain’s rating over the last couple years is 65. He is moving leftward. Second, he will give Republican/Conservative cover to progressive policy and Constitutional assaults.
To some pragmatists, making sure a Republican is in power (the lesser of two evils) is of paramount importance; in some instances, I’d even agree. But I’m not willing to vote for a progressive, no matter what party designation he or she wears. McCain is a progressive and a statist who happens to agree with a lot of conservative positions. But on those that he disagrees, he has no problem trying to finesse the Constitution in a way that suits his needs — including a desire to police speech.
That, to me, is a deal breaker.
The other volunteers at the community radio station just love it when I refer to Amy as the “Limbaugh of the Left.” The debates quickly devolve into “B-b-b-but that can’t be true! I agree with her!”
I had been leaning toward McCain-at-all-costs, but Jeff’s objections gave me pause. The Welch article (though agreed that it spends too much time with the pop-psych) has me coming around to that way of thinking.
I guess I’m on the fence now.
Should McCain deputize Chuckabee as VP, that would push me all the way over, but maybe further reflection will do that on its own.
If I decide to go all-repub with a write-in for prez, I may go with Ben Stein. A commenter at Hot Air mentioned he may be in the race ….
Bueller?
Bueller?
NPR’s David Folkenflik wants to talk to me about my anti-McCainism. I don’t listen to NPR very often. Any of you have a sense of this guy? Is he likely to be fair at framing my responses? I’ll probably go ahead and do it anyway — though my being on cold medicine won’t help when it comes to trying to articulate my fears of McCain.
Jeff G – I am not familiar with him at all. I try to listen to an hour of NPR a day, kind of softening myself up for the progg that is going to take office in NOV, and I do not recall hearing that name before, and it is a memorable name. Best of luck. Take a shower after you are done.
Jeff,
I think happyfeet would be the resident expert on that.
That is not a sentence I expected to type today. (Just kidding, hf — you know I think your comment-fu is unstoppable.)
Geraldo Rivera of the Fox News Channel once described David Folkenflik as “a really weak-kneed, backstabbing, sweaty-palmed reporter.”
He has good taste in enemies and he is a Cornell alum. Might not be too bad.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4459112
“This has been covered, Scape-Goat Trainee. First, McCain’s rating over the last couple years is 65. He is moving leftward. Second, he will give Republican/Conservative cover to progressive policy and Constitutional assaults.”
All true Jeff. I noticed that as well on his recent rating (sorry, I actually meant to mention it). Still, he’s got a really, really long way to go to catch up with the alternatives, and I would hope we can keep him somewhat honest if he wants a 2nd term (though I’ll grant you, he could just decide to go leftward to make that happen). Not happy times I’m afraid.
Not so. The ACU numbers give a lot of cred for progressive-in-origin ideas that by historical accident have been adopted by Republicans. The “C” in ACU is Republican-electoral, not conservative-philosophical.
Here’s a list of the ACU votes where McCain disagreed. People can decide for themselves whether psycho’s description is accurate.
Jeff,
Aside from looking dismayingly like Zack Braff, he was a reporter in your old stomping grounds for the Baltimore Sun. He’s interviewed Jeff Gannon (and his GAYPORNCOCKOFLIES!) and did a story on potential bias at the NYT as it relates to Linda Greenhouse. His name returns no hits at opensecrets.org.
I just don’t like being led into a game of Prisoners’ Dilemma when I’m not a prisoner.
David Folkenflik is the “media reporter.” I think absolutely you should do it for sure, but he’s as much a spinner as the rest of them. A lot of that is in what he doesn’t report though with respect to any given story. He does his narratives, but usually his angles are fairly CW – he doesn’t dig for new angles a lot.
What I mean mostly is that his stories fairly obviously are tailored to the frame they decided on in the editorial meeting. His stuff feels very commissioned… he doesn’t seem to really have his own ouevre.
His beat is media so usually I’m ahead of him on his stories and he’s mostly just sort of boring, but for sure he’s not one of the ones I sort of steel myself for. Tepid. I really don’t think NPR is particularly interested in burnishing the media savvy of its audience. They used to do some fairly real if tedious meta-media pieces but that’s dried up a lot.
Particularly after they all digested their Lakoff.
He used to have a call-out on the front npr.org page but it’s gone, so I guess that means they did think a lot of him at one point. If you can, ask him how NPR justifies not naming a new ombudsman going on eighteen months now.
I’m excited to hear this really. Remember though if they really seem to like you and try to cultivate you as a regular voice then something has gone terribly terribly wrong.
What Psycho said is pretty much what I just told David Folkenflik — and I get the sense it is that bit he might use for the piece, though I suppose it’s possible he’ll use instead the bit I wrote from the “McCain Mutiny” post.
Being on cold drugs unfortunately didn’t leave me as articulate as I might otherwise have been, but essentially — and in answer to the question why wouldn’t I vote for McCain when the alternatives are Hillary or Obama — I noted that I won’t vote for ANY progressive, even if s/he wears an elephant pin, and that in the long run, doing so only provides cover for progressivism (or, if you prefer, a big, virtuous federal bureaucracy) by allowing it a conservative/ Republican face.
Pace steve (who accused me last night of being a party man), I noted that such a philosophy of governance goes against my classical liberal principles, and so that’s what I find most troubling. I noted that the GOP selecting McCain thus far as the nominee may prove that “Republicans” are more comfortable with progressivism than I am.
Anyway, whatever soundbites (if any) that David uses can be heard tomorrow on “Morning Edition.” For what it’s worth, he seemed like a nice guy. It remains to be seen how my comments will be used, though.
Oh. That would be that then.
Hey! He can bite me!
Dan,
Be careful what you wish for.
Well, sure . . . he can have cerebral interpretation from Jeff.
But he could have gotten visceral vulgarity from me.
Congratulations Jeff!! I’ll listen to morning edition tomorrow, hope to hear you. (Yes I listen to NPR a few times a week, and even the BBC. Usually it involves a lot of me yelling at the radio.)
I may have misidentified Ronald Reagan as Gary Coleman
I think if you said Ron Coleman or Gary Cooper, you’ll still be on firm ground. Never cede your point.
he could have gotten visceral vulgarity from me.
and count-to-ten dead air from me?
If I miss the radio, I’ll be hitting the recap online. I couldn’t ask for a better spokesmodel.
As a guy what likes the Constitution and all, you ought to be supporting TEH Ron Paul rEVOLution!
Well, except for the whole being a Joooooo thing, that is.
But, still, Constitution! And the gold standard, too!
It’s there! (Well, here, starting at 2:00.
Sounds great, Jeff.
Thanks for the link, serr8d, and once again, congrats to Jeff!
I [Jeff G.]recorded an interview with NPR’s David Folkenflik re: “conservative†opposition to McCain that will air tomorrow on “Morning Edition.â€Â
That explains all the *BAM!*s during my commute. I don’t usually hear alot of them during ME
Woo and YAY, JeffG.
Annoying NPR segment title down the page : McCain Too Moderate, Some GOP Conservatives Say
Trans – McCain just too normal for
that twitching troglodyte Sexist Racist Patriarchy of Guys with more money they can use, blocking your governmental protection from misleading “Sweeney Todd” trailers, etc.It’s not THE MODERATENESS that is the sticking place, for me. It’s the notion that because of various defects involving character and outlook and understanding, he will knock down load bearing walls of the constitution to make room for some a Sub-zero refrigerator of convenience, which the public may use to hold a lot of party platters. And keep our vegetable marrows sorted, as it is proven many people do not attend their bins themselves.
Or even put end tags where they go. Damn his progressive eyes.
Strikeout on the loose! Somebody call HTML control!
Jeff, he described you as a blogger. Don’t you think that was a bit strong?
Trans – McCain just too normal for
conservativesthat twitching troglodyte Sexist Racist Patriarchy of Guys with more money they can use, blocking your governmental protection from misleading “Sweeney Todd†trailers, etc.It’s not THE MODERATENESS that is the sticking place, for me. It’s the notion that because of various defects involving character and outlook and understanding, he will knock down load bearing walls of the constitution to make room for a Sub-zero refrigerator of convenience, which the public may use to hold a lot of party platters. And keep our vegetable marrows sorted, as it is proven many people do not attend their bins themselves.
I may have misidentified Ronald Reagan as Gary Coleman.
Hey, it’s an easy mistake to make.
McCainjust testing, testing…if it doesn’t work, Sara W’s honored.
in defense of McCain/Feingold…doncha think the Keating Five was a setup? like then guys like 1600 sat scoreing Rep. Chuck Schumer and other Dems and Repubs were for the deregulation of the S and Ls and then both parties wanted ‘fall guys’ such as the honorable sen. John Glenn and antiFascist crusader Sen. Cranston to take the heat for what the high finance sector had wrought with their ripping off of taxpayers of 400 billion dollars. Doncha think (?) McCain got burned for being the maverick back then. His mild prescriptions against wholesale BigMoney-indentured propaganda to dominate the Public airwaves was seen by me as a rectification of his being framed by corrupt parties in the past: Reagan’s minions (ala Jake Garn and the whole Executive branch which never was prosecuted for their causing the S and L debacle) and proBigFinance Dems like Chuck Schumer and Steny Hoyer…ha. Keating was just the tip of the iceberg adn Clinton’s were even a blip…but were also framed by the same bunch that scooped up those Billions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garn_-_St_Germain_Depository_Institutions_Act
Not only that, but they lowered the standards of educational programming enough to turn our beloved cartoons into commercials for the Japanese toy industry! DAMN YOU MCCAIN! YOU AND YOUR AUTOBOTS TO HEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLL!
…and knowing is half the battle.
datadave almost had a point there. McCain — and one of the other of the K5 (DeConcini or Glenn, I forget) actually had much less involvement than Cranston and Riegle. There was discussion at the time that these two were included so that McCain’s presence would make the scandal “bipartisan.”
<strike><giggle>
Datadave does have a point about the Keating scandal. But McCain essentially shopped around logistically for his first Congressional seat, and wildly outspent his opponents. He married into some money, which — along with early boosters like Keating — helped finance his campaigns. If I’m remembering correctly.
Do as I say, not as I do. This is McCain.
Also. I’ve been invited to do the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. They want to have a conservative cage match, pitting me against a McCain supporter. Don’t know that I can make it to the studio, though. Which is just as well, given that I need a haircut, anyway.
just wear the sexy rimless glasses and it will all go well. ;D
Now’s the time to put the Krav Maga to the test.
Anybody still think McCain is a Reagan Republican, or that Barry Goldwater would approve of Congressional oversight of boxing?
I really want to know what was on those videos.
No, not the CIA ones, you idiot; the Patriots ones. It’s vital to the national morale.
Which is just as well, given that I need a haircut, anyway.
No, no! You *need* to represent Conservatives as wild-eyed and wild-haired as you simply and rationally explains your/our reasons for not having any interest in voting for McCain.
As an experiment. My hypothesis is that the wild-haired and wild-eyed will win. Oh, yeah, if you are seen munching on grasshoppers and dressed in sack-cloth that would help the experiment’s veracity.
And try to use the phrase, “petulant grandstanding” at least once.
Hear, hear!
If I do it, I’ll be wearing an MMA fight t-shirt. I don’t believe I have time to get a teardrop tattoo on my face or neck, though.
Oh. News Hour with Jim Lehrer. He used to live sorta where I used to live, so I have a very very tiny soft spot for him. But I think to go there would be a good good thing. Going on NewsHour is how you get a more gooder agent. Does that sound crass? It’s not my fault I have lived here too long. But really. You, sir, have a destiny. You’ve already run the gamut of all the crappy parts of notoriety is all. It’s time for the funstuff I think.
eyeliner, Jeff. the liquid kind works best. doesn’t smudge as easily.
And of course, I’d have to show up drunk.
Tell me, would 4 oz Hayabusa cage gloves be too much, do you think?
And also for real they brand as NewsHour not News Hour. One time I left the ! off of Yahoo is all. Perilous, that.
I don’t know. What’s the proof?
I’ll be wearing an MMA fight t-shirt.
Oooh, very nice touch. That’s right, you’re kinda buff and stuff too. Perhaps a single “you talking to me?” with the McCain supporter… I dunno, it’s just a thought.
idiot… that what the i in italics stands for doesn’t it? The first one, I mean.
Also, really, I feel like I don’t always get enough SarahW in my diet. Could be why I’m not sleeping well lately.
Jeff,
You could get Melvin Costa’s belly button tattoo. See here: http://www.mmaplayground.com/forums/i/pi/117342_1.jpg
otaku of Goldstein.
yes to NewsHour.
cult of personality…i can play that on guitar hero.
Otaku of Goldstein sounds like an exotic Malt-o-Meal.
Did a pre-interview. Not sure I’m what they’re looking for. I was going on about ideological principles and the underlying philosophy of governance McCain exhibits, and what I think they want instead is someone to rail against illegals taking our jobs, and how McCain won’t just throw up a giant net along the border because he hates America.
So we’ll see.
It would be nice if NewsHour allowed for the voicing of real “conservative” opposition to McCain, as articulated by someone who likes to get drunk with his armadillo pal. But alas, it may just turn out that they’ll get Dan Riehl or somebody, instead.
Story of my life.
Having said that, the interviewer was really nice and friendly. And it was a good chat.
Oh. No, you’re right. They don’t want to hear ideas cause they aren’t trying to give voice to the conservative objections to McCain really. Mostly they want to do the fractious and dispirited Republicans angle I would bet to set up the argument for laters that McCain would have difficulty governing. Or something. On the other thing I usually boil the water and then dissolve some of mom’s jalapeno jelly in and then add the Malt-o-Meal and then when it’s ready I mix some skim milk in that I nuked a little. It comes out kind of green that way.
Damn. That means McGehee was right… and this time I really, really, really believed the football wouldn’t be pulled away.
Also for real they brand as Malt-O-Meal. God I get tired of me.
I’m told I was on as well, though I haven’t heard it. I was, I thought, pretty inarticulate — and I don’t even have the heavy medication excuse . . . But they could have made me sound better or worse with editing.
No calls from Jim Lehrer for me . . .
I thought you sounded good, Pat. It may be one of those deals, like listening to your own voice on tape or reading something you wrote when you were young and radical or standing in front of the bathroom mirror with a head full of mescaline. Theoretically.
Just heard back. They found someone in DC to do the show.
I think I’m destined to remain a cult figure. With a very small cult. And no prospects for the future.
They fear what they do not understand.
I guess.
But I fear poverty and marginalization. Which is why I’m thinking about becoming Mary Katherine Ham.
Thanks, Dan. Like I say, I haven’t heard it, so maybe they managed to edit me so I sound more put together than I actually was.
I’m looking forward to getting home and listening to Jeff.
So…uh…how was she?
If you become her, can I become you?
Only less smart and only half as funny?
But with a bigger head.
Oh. Ok. Now I can say for real what I think about Jim Lehrer. Him goes here I think. What’s less than charmless?
That’s a little disturbing, Jeff. I’m not sure that I can get used to the idea of admiring your cans.
. I was going on about ideological principles and the underlying philosophy of governance McCain exhibits,
You did not!
To a reporter type?!
Ha ha…hahaha…BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Good Lord Jeff! You’re lucky a shepherds staff didn’t extend from behind, hook your neck, and drag you, arms&legs flailing, out the door!
Talking principals to a reporter…too funny.
Will this book about McCain help voters to see the real him? Maybe I should read reviews about it.
What real him?
That too.
MORE HELIUM!!!
Jebus! Never look in a mirror with a head full of mescaline. You’ll see yourself as you really are and that’s a cruel blow to any psyche.
[…] For Republicans, this angry internal battle rages. […]
[…] For Republicans, this angry internal battle rages. […]