Politics: McCain is looking better and better
Careful readers will note that I have NOT said which presidential candidate is getting my vote. Although, I do believe I might have mentioned once or twice a desire to move to small Central American nation should Hillary actually win. And I have defended Barack Obama against some of the racist bile coming out of a certain Peoria radio station.
Nevertheless, I have not endorsed anyone. I generally shy away from labeling anything I write as an “endorsement” since I want people to be able to read my posts and know where I stand and what I think about the candidates I write about. Newspaper endorsements, on the other hand, often ignore the content of news articles and endorse the guy who plays golf with the publisher, or who can grease the wheels legislation the media company favors.
But I have to say, Sen. John McCain is getting real close to getting an endorsement from me. I like his statements against the signing statements that Bush is using to get around legislation he doesn’t like. And of course, McCain has the correct views on torture (it’s insane that America is actually debating whether or not to torture people).
Here’s the most recent reason: McCain has come out against locking up journalists who refuse to participate in the prosecution of their news sources. He’s in favor of a shield law protecting reporters from prosecutors and judges who want to toss them into jail until they reveal the sources who tell them information.
I’ve written often of my utter disgust at how U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald managed to get reporters tossed in jail until their revealed their sources.
And I’m similarly offended so so-called liberals turned away at this fascist-like behavior because they didn’t like the pro-war tone of the reporting that happened.
There’s a line that’s often attributed to Voltaire: “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it.” Apparently, not so much if you are a Bush-hating anti-war liberal. But I digress.
Here is what McCain said:
McCain said his decision to support a reporters’ shield law was a close call.
“It is, frankly, a license to do harm, perhaps serious harm. But it also is a license to do good; to disclose injustice and unlawfulness and inequities; and to encourage their swift correction,” the Arizona senator said.
“I know that the press that disclosed security secrets that should have remained so also revealed the disgrace of Abu Ghraib, a disgrace that made it much harder to protect the American people from harm,” he added.
At the same time, he said, “There will be times, I suspect, when I will wonder again if I should have supported this measure. But I trust in your integrity and patriotism that those occasions won’t be so numerous that I will, in fact, deeply regret my decision.”
In other words, McCain gets it. He understands that the harm from stifling the press is far greater than losing a prosecution. Is the Scooter Libby prosecution worth using the Bill of Rights like so much toilet paper? Liberals seemed to think so.
Think about it for just one second. Had prosecutors and judges assumed the power to toss reporters in jail at the rate happening these days, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein would have been hauled into court and forced to reveal Deep Throat long before that evil vampire Richard Nixon been forced from office for the crimes he committed.
Please note that McCain is not some shill for the press who sees no wrong in the industry. He warned that there will be abuses. But as someone who actually put his own life at risk to defend pour liberties he’s willing to take that chance.
Kudos to McCain.
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
I agree. I think it is McCain’s election to lose. Unless he makes a huge mistake, I believe that his victory will be sizable. (Think Carter v. Reagan.)My very liberal, retired public school teacher (who has never voted for a Republican for anything) is voting for McCain because, “McCain has proven that he will cross party lines to make things better.” True. I like him -in part- because he had the testicular fortitude to stand up for immigrants (People, the first illegal immigrant arrived in the U.S. in the year 1492!) and has called pharmaceutical giants “evil.” I am troubled that he hasn’t spelled out a specific plan for Iraq and by his own savings and loan scam (he was censured). Compared to the Clintons, however, he appears squeaky clean.
Mother. My very liberal, retired public school teacher MOTHER is voting for McCain. Left that out. Sorry.
I heard one of the radio right wingbats saying that he couldn’t support McCain because McCain was only a 60% conservative. My take: the consevatives are correct about 60% of the time. Perfect fit for me.
McCain received my unenthusiastic vote in the primaries because he had the most reasonable stated position about maintaining troop levels in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Imagine the crossover voting if he could snag Lieberman as a running mate — another centrist candidate who is considered a maverick in his party. Lieberman, if he returned to his Pro-Life status (as he was before joining up with AlGore), could even help McCain solidify support among the right-wingers.
While Barack and Hillary continue to bash each other, McCain should simply remain silent about their bickering. Remaining clear of their mudslinging could really be a benefit for him.
Just Background for Nightowl
Candidate/Party/% Pop vote/ Electoral votes
Ronald Reagan Republican 50.7% 489
Jammy Carter Democratic 41.0% 49
John Anderson (none) 6.6% 0
Ed Clark Libertarian 1.1 0
As was the case in 1992 and 2000, a strong showing (in 1992 a VERY strong showing) by a third-party/Independent candidate helped doom the candidate of the incumbent party (Carter, GHW Bush, Clinton-Gore).
I do not think that Nader (or any 3rd party candidate) will play the spoiler this year.
Also, the 1492 event Nightowl is speaking of we must assume to be a reference to Columbus and his ships. He did not land on the continent then or in any of his subsequent expeditions.
The oldest surviving settlement in the continental U.S. is St. Augustine, FL, founded in 1565, pre-dating the landing of the Pilgrims @ Plymouth (1620) and the founding of Jamestown (1607) by several decades.
Liberals do what? Liberals supported what?
Libby would have gone down one way or another… then have his sentence commuted by the crooks in the white house.
I’m pretty damn liberal, and I’ve criticized the U.S. for this. Even on a recent blog.
Anyway, one good quality for McCain does not eradicate the myriad of bad ones. I can’t say I dislike the guy, but when I hear the term “Bush lite” applied to him, I find it very difficult to disagree.
Well, you are one. Most liberals I know were giddy over Miller serving time.
Meh, probably caught up in the moment if you ask me. I’m guessing they were so happy with the end that they overlooked the means. But to have a journalist locked up? I can’t think of anybody who is, was or would be happy with that.
Fox News pundits, on the other hand, I could understand. They’re not even journalists.
If we’re honest with ourselves, we must admit that the first amendment is so integral to liberalism as a whole the ideology could not freely exist without it.