GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
Bob Dole (still neutral in the race) has written a letter to Rush Limbaugh today defending Sen. McCain from many of Limbaugh’s unfair criticisms of the Senator over the past month.
Rush,
I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain.
Not that many care but I have not been involved in the Republican Primary contest because Elizabeth, a good conservative, is running for reelection in North Carolina where Romney, McCain and Huckabee each enjoy considerable support.
I was the Republican Leader from January 1985 until I left the Senate voluntarily in June 1996. I worked closely with Senator McCain when he came to the Senate in 1987 until I departed. I cannot recall a single instance when he did not support the Party on critical votes. (At my age, I cannot be entirely certain but here are a few key conservative examples:)
1. Consistent pro-life record
2. Strong advocate for strict constructionist judges (We were misled on the Souter nomination)
3. Supported voluntary school prayer
4. Supported Constitutional Amendment for a Balanced Budget (needed two-thirds and lost by one vote - 66-34)
5. Strong advocate for reducing spending and opposing pork barrel “ear marks” which has, I might add, angered some of his colleagues
6. Consistent on defending Second Amendment rights
7. Opposed “Hillary Care” which would have been devastating
8. Probably the Senate’s strongest advocate for strong national defense
9. Of course he has cast many votes since I left. I totally disagreed with the McCain-Feingold legislation. On immigration, Senator McCain was not in the Senate when Congress passed President Reagan’s immigration legislation which passed overwhelmingly. It granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. It was not much different than the 2007 McCain, Kennedy, Bush effort.I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent and I do not agree that Governor Romney ever suggested a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq.
McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the “Hanoi Hilton.” I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost.
Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough.
Gob Bless America,
BOB DOLE
P.S. Rush, I just came across a document from the Senate Library which shows Presidential Support scores. Let me give you ratings for “Mr. Conservative” Senator Helms through 2002 (Helms retired in January 2003) and Senator McCain through 2004.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Uh…tax cuts? Hello? Like, McCain’s opposition to 52 different tax cuts??
February 4th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
LJ - who cares? I thought we were moving on past the GOP race and looking to the DEMs.
We need to unite!!! We’ve been distracted for the last 3-4 days and the clock is ticking! We can’t afford to not unite around John McCain for one more second!!!
Please stop posting these types of threads as they do not project a unity ticket.
We’re calling the game for John McCain - we’re not going to let it play out anymore - so let’s all have a group hug and start aiming our guns at Obillary now. Every second is precious.
We’ve decided to run the next in line candidate - John McCain. An honorable war hero who has great appeal and will win the election in a cake walk.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
It is great that Bob can come back to remind us what happens when we nominate an old moderate who’s next in line from the republican elites.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
murphy,
Can you read? Dole was talking about during his time as GOP Senate Leader that McCain supported the party on critical votes. Dole left the Senate in 1996. Bush proposed the tax cuts in 2001.
He also says: “I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent “
February 4th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
LJ,
I can read. As far as I’m aware, McCain has been opposing tax cuts since long before 2001.
The Bush Tax Cuts were two.
So if you’d like, I’ll amend my comment to address the 50 tax cuts Bob Dole did not mention McCain opposing.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Oh, LJ, here’s my source, straight from Rudy’s website. He still has it up, that joker!
McCain Has Voted For Higher Taxes More Than 50 Times.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
thanks bob..still not voting for him….and if Paul runs third party in the general..well…
February 4th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Can you read? Dole was talking about during his time as GOP Senate Leader that McCain supported the party on critical votes. Dole left the Senate in 1996. Bush proposed the tax cuts in 2001.
Oh, how convenient..? Let’s just pretend that those years don’t exist, or what?
February 4th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
The problem with the Dole nomination was that he trailed in the polls from day one and it was never a competitive race. That sounds alot more like Romney than McCain.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
http://www.mypartypost.com/watchflashbig/5972/Family_Guy-_Bob_Dole
February 4th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Dole isn’t exactly neutral in the race. Back around April, Dole said about Thompson, “I’m a McCain guy, but I’d back fred in a second if McCain isn’t in the race.” I’d have to dig around to find the link, but it’s basically what he said.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
I remember when Dole wrote a letter to the Des Moines Register just before Iowa reprimanding Huckabee. Funny that it was posted here and elsewhere and met with scorn from all the non-Mitt camps (especially many McCain supporters) with complaints of “Dole’s a loser”, or “Who’s he?” etc . . .
Funny how the tables turn, eh? NOW he’s important. I get how this works.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
A crusty old ‘war hero’ senator who was ‘next in line’. SOUND FAMILIAR!!!????
February 4th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
So, Bob Dole reaches out from the grave to inflict yet more damage on the Republican Party….Senility is a terrible thing. Santorum seems to have a much more intact memory of McCain’s transgressions against the party.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I really laughed at “not that many care” in the beginning of the letter. I miss the Bob Dole self-deprecating humor. (Incidentally, McCain was one of Phil Gramm’s biggest backers in 1996 against Dole, although McCain spent a lot of time travelling w/ Dole in the general election that year. Gramm is fully behind McCain this year as a result of that support in 1996.)
February 4th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
That’s funny Murphy!
February 4th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Bob Dole was a fine Senator. I’m getting tired of all the poo flinging by the Rombots. It seems you want a small tent party that cannot win. I’ll bet that works out for you.
Let me guess: Bob Dole was a liberal, too. Anyone who doesn’t support Romney is a liberal, amirite?
February 4th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Interesting letter I wonder if he actually wrote it or if he was given a draft to sign. Wasn’t Dole gone by the time McCain started all his dirty stunts.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I’ll repeat my comment from the previous thread.
My wife saw somewhere where they said that McCain reminded them of Bob Dole, just lacking Doles charm, conservatism, and good ideas.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Isn’t Dole the one that McCain is always being compared to, war hero, next in line? Didn’t Dole lose the election.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
If mccain is such a conservative, explain his ACU ratings over the last few years(Average 60):
2000 — 61.7
2001 — 66.8
2002 — 59.8
2003 — 62.2
2004 — 51.7
2005 — 59.2
2006 — 56.7
February 4th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Dole was just on Hannity and Colmes. He was put up to that letter. Dole said he wasn’t endorsing anyone.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
2000 — 61.7 2001 — 66.8 2002 — 59.8 2003 — 62.2 2004 — 51.7 2005 — 59.2 2006 — 56.7
Oh, wow. That’s bad.
Are those real? Really? Wow.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
His “83″ lifetime rating is pumped up by his pre-2000 ratings.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
How many Republican Senators were more liberal during those same years? That’s the question.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Hold on a minute.. those aren’t right. Someone pasted them to me and i double checked… those are off i apologize. Let me retrieve them. They are low but not that low
February 4th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
If you plot where mccain is over the years you’ll realize he’s in the bottom half of the pack each time.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Here are the actual numbers, my bad on the wrong numbers from earlier:
2000 81
2001 68
2002 78
2003 80
2004 72
2005 80
2006 65
February 4th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
TLG,
The american thinker did a more indepth study of Mccain’s ACU ratings. His 82.3 lifetime rating placed him 39th out of 100 senators in 2006. He’s even lower than i thought, that places him at the 30th percentile of republican senators.
Here’s a very eye opening study:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/mccains_acu_ratings.html
February 4th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
I liked Dole’s line on Hannity that he’s not endorsing anyone, but “my heart’s probably with McCain.”
Anyhow, I’m surprised the campaign hasn’t rolled out Trent Lott to defend his faith to the party.
With Lott and Dole on board, that’d be, oh, about 17 of his 22 years on the Senate where he’d be a “good soldier.”
February 4th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
That article is required reading. Paging Kavon.
February 4th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
[...] More at The Politico and Race 4 2008. [...]
February 4th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
TLG,
When the race becomes McCain vs. Hillary or Obama, these rankings will actually serve as a reminder to recalcitrant conservatives of the significantly less desirable alternative for the next four to eight years.
Senator John McCain’s lifetime rating of 82.3% from the American Conservative Union is often cited as proof that he is conservative.
Generally, McCain has voted less conservatively in more recent years. His average for 1990-97 was 88, but was only 74 for 1998-2006.
On the other hand, Senator Clinton (D-NY) has a lifetime ACU rating of 9 (83rd place) and Senator Obama (D-IL) has a rating of 8 (86th place).
February 4th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Only a fool thinks that the totality of the future will be determined in the next four years. Think long-term. Why settle for the lesser of two evils when, after 12 years of Republican rule, a Democrat (or two) will inevitably be next? We get mediocrity under McCain followed by liberalism. If we surrender this time, we get liberalism, but we get a chance to have a serious economic conservative in ‘12. We’ve gotta think long-term, here.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Thinking long-term, I fail to see the logic in allowing a liberal like Hillary or Obama replace up to six Supreme Court justices between 2009 and 2017.
Most conservatives will eventually come to their senses and recognize that, all things relative, the mediocrity of more O’Connors and Kennedys is far preferable to future Ginsburgs and Stevens.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Supreme Court doesn’t trump all to me; the Constitution is dead as it is. I know that most of the anti-McCain base might be able to get rallied around overturning Roe v. Wade, but it’s not that big of a deal to me. People stopped caring about the Constitution a long time ago. It can’t really be saved. I want to try to preserve the market for as long as we can, and McCain shows no path to doing that effectively.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
TLG, you’re thinking short term with wishful thinking. But then you’re a kid, so that’s not too surprising.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
If Hillary or Obama were to serve two terms, the current Supreme Court justices would be the following ages in January 2017:
Roberts, 62
Alito, 66
Thomas, 68
Souter, 77
Breyer, 78
Kennedy, 80
Scalia, 80
Ginsburg, 83
Stevens, 96
February 4th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Maybe TLG can afford to wait 20 or for his perfect candidate. But many of us do not. But a long term strategy and a short term win are not mutually incompatible.
74% conservative is better than 8%-9% if one favors conservatism. You’ll never get 100%. You’ll learn that as you get older. Being a purist means never getting what you want.
February 5th, 2008 at 1:34 am
John McCain/ Jim Leach 2008!!!!!!!!!
February 5th, 2008 at 2:38 am
Maybe TLG can afford to wait 20 or for his perfect candidate. But many of us do not. But a long term strategy and a short term win are not mutually incompatible. 74% conservative is better than 8%-9% if one favors conservatism. You’ll never get 100%. You’ll learn that as you get older. Being a purist means never getting what you want.
A “purist”? I supported Giuliani, who was not a purist. You should read that American Thinker article dissecting McCain’s ACU rating that SDGOP posted. It’s enlightening stuff.
TLG, you’re thinking short term with wishful thinking. But then you’re a kid, so that’s not too surprising.
Aw, cute — ad hominem; much easier than replying with substance.
February 5th, 2008 at 2:42 am
If Hillary or Obama were to serve two terms, the current Supreme Court justices would be the following ages in January 2017:
Roberts, 62
Alito, 66
Thomas, 68
Souter, 77
Breyer, 78
Kennedy, 80
Scalia, 80
Ginsburg, 83
Stevens, 96
All the more reason to oppose McCain. Suppose McCain gets to pick replacements for Stevens and Ginsburg…okay, then we get squishy moderates, most likely. McCain is most likely followed by a Democrat, who will replace Scalia, Kennedy, and Breyer — yikes. With three liberals. So, a net loss, if you think long-term, which you should.
If Hillary or Obama replace Stevens and Ginsburg, that’s just like maintaining the status quo. Then we have a good shot at getting a Republican to replace Scalia, Kennedy, and Breyer — much bigger prizes.
We’ve got more to lose, long-term, on the SCOTUS if we send in McCain.
February 5th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Hey we need to wake up and throw our support around McCain before we screw this election up.
Romney aint gonna win. A Moderate is our only chance again Obama (It ain’t gonna be Hilary).
It will be funny to watch Fox news during the next four years with a moderate republican in office.