If principles matter, so does McCain

THE CONSERVATIVE REVIEW   
March 4, 2008   

If principles matter, so does McCain   
By Mark Hillman   

It's not about John McCain.   

Nor is it not about Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham or   
James Dobson, although their views harmonize more closely   
with my own and those of most conservatives than do   
McCain's.   

This election isn't about party or personalities, but   
about principles that will guide our country for the   
next four years or more.   

Will our nation trend in a direction that is generally   
conservative or one that reverses modest gains of the   
past 28 years and lurches toward cradle-to-grave   
paternalism?   

That's why, despite several disagreements, John McCain   
gets my support against whomever the Democrats nominate.   
It's also why principled conservatives should check   
their McCain disdain at the ballot box.   

Recently, some conservatives behave as if they have   
nothing to lose if McCain loses. But a McCain loss   
equals a Barack Obama win, and we have plenty lose   
from that.   

Conservatives remain unified on three key policy objectives:   
pro-growth tax policy and no-nonsense budgeting, judges   
who respect the constitution, and a resolve to defeat   
Islamic terrorists.   

On these key issues the choice between McCain and Obama   
cannot be dismissed as the lesser of two evils. The choice   
is clear and the stakes are enormous.   

McCain is one of just five Senators who flatly reject   
pork-barrel budget earmarks. He has vowed to veto any   
spending bill containing earmarks and has already in-   
curred the wrath of several pork-loving Republicans.   
That's a welcome change from the you-scratch-my-back,   
I'll-scratch-yours spending of the last eight years.   

By contrast, Obama has promised programs calculated to   
grow the already bloated budget by $900 billion.   

Despite his vote against the Bush tax cuts, McCain has   
vowed to fight to preserve them. Obama conveniently   
forgets that middle class families benefited most from   
the Bush tax cuts and instead demagogues against "tax   
cuts for the rich." However, he can't pay for his big   
government utopia without squeezing the working class   
hard.   

As a Vietnam veteran, McCain understands the lasting   
consequences of an ignominious defeat. America's stature   
was badly damaged for years after Vietnam. We now see   
that McCain's prescription for Iraq after Saddam was right,   
and the Bush-Rumsfeld strategy was wrong.   

Had Obama's policy of surrender and retreat carried the   
day, the now-vindicated surge would be merely another   
paper gathering dust on a shelf, Iraq would remained mired   
in bloody sectarian attacks, and Iran would be emboldened   
to direct its terrorist accomplices toward Afghanistan.   

Perhaps the most critical, principled reason to support   
McCain is the Supreme Court. Judging by their appointments'   
adherence to the text of the constitution, Republican   
presidents have had mixed success in rolling back judicial   
activism.   

However, two things are indisputable: the constructionist   
justices on today's court were all appointed by Republicans,   
and the Democrat appointments are all undeniably liberal   
activists.   

John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the two justices   
most likely to retire soon, are both activists who re-write   
the constitution in contravention of the plain text.   
Replacing either or both with another John Roberts, Antonin   
Scalia or Clarence Thomas — each of whom McCain supported —   
could at last restore the court's historic role as a   
defender of broad individual liberty and a restraint against   
over-reaching government.   

If Obama makes the next appointment, we can be certain he   
will fortify the court's activist wing. Should a con-   
structionist justice retire or die, Obama could swiftly   
reverse the gains of the last 28 years.   

Finally, the candidates' views on the sanctity of human   
life provide another stark contrast that conservatives   
dare not forget. McCain has consistently voted to restrict   
abortion, parting with pro-lifers only on stem cell research.   
Obama not only supports abortion on demand but callously   
voted to deny medical care to infants born during un-   
successful abortions.   

Some conservatives argue that a Democrat victory would   
galvanize Republicans for 2010 and produce a public back-   
lash, a la 1994. That's a tremendous gamble.   

Democrats controlled Congress for 40 years from 1955 to   
1995. In the Senate, Democrats ruled for 34 of those years.   
Here in Colorado, perhaps more than anywhere else, Re-   
publicans should realize how quickly political fortunes   
can change and how hard it is to reverse that tide.   

Conservatives generally recognize short-sighted self-   
indulgence when practiced by others. Now many conservatives   
are in danger of practicing a suicidal self-indulgence of   
their own.   

We must put aside self-pity and frustration and do what   
we always have done: choose the right and responsible   
course for our country.   

If instead we purposefully withhold our votes to gratify   
our personal pride and prejudice, the surrendered freedoms,   
suffocating tax burdens, and national insecurity that   
result will be as much our responsibility as that of those   
we "helped" to elect.