McCain's Success Is Going To His Head

National Review Online: Candidate's Love For His County Seems To Dwindle As His Ego Grows

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Mona Charen

---

Usually the guy who’s ahead finds it within himself to be gracious to his competitors whereas the desperate runner-up goes negative and reaches for any stick. So it was peculiar to watch John McCain sneering and slicing his way through the debate with Mitt Romney at the Reagan library. When McCain was given up for dead last summer, he was witty and fun on the stump. Now that he is the frontrunner he is snarky and obnoxious. Dr. Freud, call your office.

They say that John McCain harbors a particular dislike for Romney. And why would that be? Well, Romney is pretty much the only candidate in the race who has had the temerity (a.k.a. cash) to run ads criticizing McCain. The senator from Arizona has some fine qualities but no one has ever suggested that enduring criticism manfully is one of them. He tried his best to make such effrontery illegal with the McCain/Feingold campaign finance law. Romney found a loophole and Sen. McCain is irritated.

McCain lashed out at Romney for supposedly endorsing “timetables” for withdrawal from Iraq last year, saying that Romney, like Hillary Clinton, wanted to “wave the white flag” and “Timetables was [sic] the buzzword for those that [sic] wanted to get out.” The two tangled for about this question for many rounds during the debate. After vigorously denying the lie, Romney, ever the gentleman, injected a note of graciousness by saying, “He’s a fine man and a man I respect, and I particularly respect his service in the military and his integrity and courage for our nation.” A few moments later, the audience no doubt leaned forward in their seats waiting for a correspondingly polite compliment from McCain about Romney and instead heard “Oh, I’m sure that, as I say, he’s a fine man. And I think he managed companies, and he bought, and he sold, and sometimes people lost their jobs.” Sucker punch.

Well, say McCain enthusiasts, the senator is simply offended by those who lack the courage of their convictions. Remember his snide dig at Romney (“Oh you’re the candidate of change, all right”)? There are two answers to that. In the first place, only a willful misreading of Romney’s timetable comment could yield the interpretation McCain ascribed to it. Second, Senator Unswerving himself had unambiguously talked of changing course in Iraq in January of 2007. Here and elsewhere it has been noted that McCain spoke of benchmarks in a newspaper interview a year ago. “McCain said Thursday that he hadn’t yet decided on precise benchmarks. ‘They’d have to be specific, and they (Iraqi government officials) would have to meet them,’ he said. Asked what penalty would be imposed if Iraq failed to meet his benchmarks, he said: ‘I think everybody knows the consequences. Haven’t met the benchmarks? Obviously, then, we’re not able to complete the mission. Then you have to examine your options.’”

“I don’t change my positions depending on what year it is or what office I’m seeking,” McCain has boasted. Yet in the California debate he was forced to admit that he no longer supports the immigration legislation he himself proposed last year. He was asked, would you vote for the bill if it came to the floor? “No, it would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first.” Oh. So Senator McCain has (whisper) changed his position? While we’re on the subject of political flexibility let’s recall that Senator McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts (thought they were too nice to the rich) but now wishes to make them permanent.

It’s no crime to change one’s views of course, and it would certainly be welcome if Senator McCain were to reexamine a few more of his positions, for example on detainee interrogations, drug reimportation from Canada, or suitable Supreme Court picks (he confided that he found Alito too conservative). And he could stand a little refresher course on Economics 101, particularly the part about where the wealth of this nation comes from. (Hint: Not from senators.) But his own flip-flops leave him with a huge H (for hypocrite) on his forehead when he singes Romney for opportunism.

McCain’s phosphorescent patriotism is his most appealing trait. But in the past few weeks, as he has been winning, his love of country has been riding in tandem with a signally unattractive love of self.

[kansas1946]

So much for freedom of speech! So this is where the lefties hang out. We are all free to say or write anything your approve of. What a bunch of bullies.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by mytheo at 10:18
***************************************

I don''t think any of these posters is representing the govenrment, and I don''t think Ms. Mona is going to go to jail for her comments. Your speech is protected from the government, not from criticism of fellow Americans. I love it when conservatives start screaming about freedom of speech. Then you know you are on the right track.

[kansas1946]

NRO, just tune in Rush and Sean and you can get your fill of John McCain bashing. I didn''t see you guys at NRO talking about how nasty everyone was to McCain when they were talking about his "illegitimate black child," his "mentally ill wife," "his acts of treason" while a POW.

"When McCain was given up for dead last summer, he was witty and fun on the stump. Now that he is the frontrunner....."

I think you thought he was "witty and funny" because you didn''t think he had snowball''s chance. Now that he is ahead, you have lost your sense of humor. It is over guys. Democrat or Republican, the far-right, neo-con, slime-machine, is dead. Not to rear its ugly head for another twenty years or so, when a new generation of voters is taken unawares by their slimeball methods of politicing.

[quatrops]

It is suggested by mferiante that a "well written article" will "incite . . antagonism".

I thought the purpose of op-ed articles was to educate and inform on controversial issues in hopes of eliciting discourse and discussion, not "incite antagonism".

Charen''s hit piece on McCain is replete with spite and vitriol, and is one of the poorest examples of op-ed commentarty offered by the NRO (a venue known for its frequent offerings of poor journalism).

[mytheo-2009]

So much for freedom of speech! So this is where the lefties hang out. We are all free to say or write anything your approve of. What a bunch of bullies.

[mferiante]

Mona, thank you for your candid remarks. Any objective reader can stand by these sound observations between these two candidates. Romney has shown himself to be a gentleman and a leader. McCain''s conduct is an embarrassment to himself and his followers. Obviously a well written article to incite such antagnosism from the postings by slanted commentators.

[quatrops]

This article is an embarassment to the NRO, and considering their generally twisted and misleading conservative rhetoric, THAT''S HARD TO DO!

If McCain becomes the Republican candidate, Charen has put herself out of the loop as far as getting anything published in conservative rags. She''s either PMSsing or is in the midst of a really bad menopause. She comes across as about as objective as a vindictive ex-lover who was dissed by McCain at some point.

As a progressive, I suppose I should be happy to see the probable Republican candidate torn apart by one of their own cannibals, but her diatribe is so over-the-top I suspect it will be seen primarily as an embarassment to the right-wing media. I wouldn''t be surprised that whatever NRO editor allowed this to go to print is looking for a job!

Keep it up, Mona (if you can get published)! A few more outbursts like this and the Democratic party will save millions in campaign dollars come the summer!

[sean7phil]

LOVE OF IDEOLOGY OVER LOVE OF COUNTRY.

The writer of this article seams more interested in crucifying John McCain because he is a moderate conservative rather than a ''true-blue'' extreme Right-Winger like herself. In this article ideology trumps country since John McCain is far and a way the best choice for president and the best man to lead the nation in these perilous times.

The arrogance of the author in trying to manipulate the sensibilities of the reader dwarfs McCains disdain for Romney who ran nine ads for McCains every one in Florida, mostly taking cheap shots at Mccain, attempting to sully his character to no avail...

Phil Murray, Colorado

[sean7phil]

LOVE OF IDEOLOGY OVER LOVE OF COUNTRY.

The writer of thios article sems more interested in crucifying McCain because he is a moderate conservative rather tha a true-blue extreme Righter like herself. In this article ideology trumps country since John McCain is far and a way the best choice for president and the best man to lead the country in these perilous times.

The arrogance of the author in trying to manipulate the sensibilities of the reader dwarfs McCains disdain for Romney who ran nine ads for McCains every one in Florida, mostly taking cheap shots attempting to sully McCains character to no avail...

Phil Murray, Colorado

[clestes-2009]

McCain is another bush. Neither of them are fit to be president.

[irliberal]

I''m waiting for another YEEEAAAAAAHHHAAAWWWWWAAAARRRRGGGGG moment that quite literally killed Howard Dean''s campaign!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5FzCeV0ZFc

[grumpas]

Sounds like another Bush in the making! You are either with him or against him! This country can''t afford another 4 to 8 years of failed Republican policies!