Ferocious Debate on Iraq War

I was on BlogTalkRadio Thursday evening with Eric Dondero (host) and Murray Sabrin (Republican primary candidate for NJ U.S. Senate). The broadcast is avaiable (on podcast) at www.blogtalkradio.com/libertarian.

I urge you to listen (only partly because I'm on it and you get to hear my Rochester, NY accent) but mainly because Eric and I launched something you haven't heard recently: a ferocious defense of the Iraq War (and John McCain's position on it). Would love to hear your thoughts at TalkTop65@aol.com.
or on the blog comments.

I'll write some on Friday after what Eric and I said. I remember saying that the primary goal of Islamic extremists in the MidEast "was to kill Jews -- all of them if possible" (and the secondary goal was "to kill Americans"). Eric noted -- and I agreed -- that one great reason to be fighting in the MidEast was "revenge for 9/11." He added that most soldiers are willing, if necessary, "to die for their country."

We didn't exactly hold back. Dr. Sabin said 75% of New Jerseyites wanted U.S. withdrawal. I said that "Then 75% of New Jerseyites are just plain dead wrong." i added that if we fled the MidEast, al Qaeda would take over, oil would go $250 a barrel, and our economy would collapse.

On the show, I read a statement by Republican congressional candidate Marina Kats. She said, "I am supporting the withdrawal of American troops as soon as possible, but only when it is safe to do it for us and our national security interests."

In a story in The Philadelphia Bulletin, Marina suggested what America means to her, an emigre from Russia: "Ms. Kats differs with Mrs. Schwartz [her left-wing Democrat opponent] strongly on whether Washington should act presently to phase out the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Speaking to The Bulletin from her law office in Feasterville, she described looking upon an American flag that was flown for a year and a half over the base of her colleague Christopher Hudock when he was called to active duty in Iraq. Upon returning, he gave Ms. Kats the flag to hang in her office. She describes it as a reminder of the imperative that America prevail."

Marina, meet Tom Manion, a former Marine colonel and also a Republican congressional candidate in PA. Sadly, his son Travis was killed in action in Iraq. Say a prayer for Tom and his son.

Here are the links to Marina's site, Tom's site, and those of other outstanding Republican candidates.

Hart: http://www.peoplewithhart.com/
Gilhooley: http://www.gilhooleyforcongress.com/
Livingston: http://www.livingstonforcongress.com/
Kats: http://www.katsforcongress.com/
Manion: http://www.votemanion.com/

Media, candidates, activists, and others: Please feel free to post, reprint, forward, or discuss this piece. Candidates: I hope you'll establish a link on your own web site and tell your visitors that I'll be writing regularly about your campaign. The url for this blog is: http://pennsylvaniaforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/.

Eventually, our combined efforts should result in tens of thousands of "hits" on your web sites, which will generate various form of support, including contributions. "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately." (B. Franklin) I receive no financial support or direction from any candidate. If you need to correspond via e-mail, you can reach me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.

Livingston, Hart, Kats, Tom Hritz

The critical point: It is absolutely essential for the nation's future that John McCain win the election on November 4, 2008. However, if the U.S. House and Senate that await him are filled with liberal Democrats, there is no way McCain can be a successful President. It's essential that activists know who the outstanding Republican candidates are -- and support them. I very much want Republicans -- conservative or libertarian -- around the world to "adopt" exemplary congressional candidates, especially the ones I've been writing about.

Mike Livingston, Republican candidate for Congress in PA's 2d congressional district (Philadelphia). There's no truth to the rumor that Mike recently won the national "Brad-Pitt-Lookalike-Contest."

Mike Livingston, the law professor who's running for Congress from PA's 2d congressional district (against Dem. Chaka Fattah) and I have been corresponding regularly. I sent him the following today about his own race, Melissa Hart's race in the 4th district (against Dem. Jason Altmire), and Marina Kats's contest in the 13th (against Dem. Allyson Schwartz):

Dear Mike Livingston:

I think I can bring attention to candidates I support. My "bull-in-a-china shop" approach online works better than I could have imagined.

Melissa Hart, who is running in the 4th District in western PA is a good friend of mine, and I keep trying to get people nationally to "adopt" her -- with some success. One of Melissa's big advantages this time (as compared to the mid-term election of 2006) is that John McCain should win the 4th by a large margin, particularly if Rev. Wright keeps spreading his cheerful message of ignorance and animosity. Altmire has yet to denounce Obama's "bitter" comments -- presumably because he agrees with them.

Mike, when your own campaign is done, maybe you can write a book about it. Running against Chaka Fattah may be in some ways a thankless task. However, there are tens of thousands of people in the 2d CD who will vote for Mike Livingston if you can get your message out.

At the very least, your presence in the race is going to force Fattah to reconsider some of his militantly leftist positions. He's also going to have to explain why his seven terms in Congress have left at least 150,000 people in the district mired in poverty. If Fattah has a clue about economic development, he has fooled me -- and the people he supposedly represents.

If you haven't heard yet from Eric Dondero of BlogTalkRadio/Libertarian, you will soon. When libertarian Republicans learn who you are and what you believe in, many of them will support you -- by "support" I mean send money! I truly believe what I said earlier about how to get voters' support: to ask for it. The process is just that simple.

Many of the Republican candidates for Congress have a lot in common -- although you're not as good looking as Marina Kats (nobody is)! Marina has a great chance to make Allyson Schwartz, a terrible legislator, sweat. Allyson claims she's a powerful defender of the "middle-class." Somehow she thinks raising their taxes, discouraging energy development, and basically rooting for al Qaeda in Iraq constitute defending the country.

On libertarian (freedom loving) Republicans. One notable member of that group was a popular columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Tom Hritz. He liked to smoke and one day a busybody at the P-G asked him if he was going to participate in "The Great American Smokeout." Irritated, Hritz said he was going to promote a new holiday called "National Mind-Your-Own-Business-Day."

Another Hritz-ism: Somebody asked him what he thought about the performance of Robt. Casey, Sr., father of Senator Bob. Hritz said, "Listen, after two terms of Bob Casey as Governor, Pennsylvania is lucky it's still a state."

Tom and his wife (also very funny) have passed away, but they're obviously still here in spirit. They'd have loved the chance to vote for people like Mike Livingston, Melissa Hart, and Marina Kats.

LIBERTARIAN REPUBLICANS SHOULD BACK MCCAIN

Eric Dondero, an important writer and radio talk show host, asked me to write a piece for his blog (http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com) on why libertarians -- believers in economic, social, and political liberty -- should support John McCain. He printed it yesterday.

Why Libertarians Should Support John McCain

It appears likely the next President of the U.S. will be either John Sidney McCain or Barack Hussein Obama. As good a man as Bob Barr is, he will not become President in 2009 – or any other year.

When it comes down to actually voting, the vast majority of Libertarians will reject the more liberal candidate (Obama) – and vote for the more conservative one (McCain). That’s because Libertarians reject the liberal narrative and generally accept the conservative one.

George Will recently described the liberal narrative as portraying “most Americans [as] victims of this or that sinister elite or impersonal force – and are not content to cope with life’s complexities without government supervision.” http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2008/04/13/fooling_ourselves_into_entitlements

That nanny-state-narrative is completely at variance with the libertarian view of life.

What is the conservative narrative? Here’s how “Lexington,” a super writer for The Economist (and a libertarian) describes it: “American conservatives tend to believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can succeed. This makes them more optimistic than liberals, more likely to feel in control of their lives and, therefore, happier.”

Conservative is not exactly the same thing as libertarian, but the two are compatible, as William F. Buckley, Jr. found 50-plus years ago when he staffed the National Review with a combination of economic libertarians and social conservatives. In contrast, liberalism, the friend of Big Government, generally is the polar opposite of libertarianism.

If you listen to Barack Obama (and Hillary Clinton) on the campaign trail, you hear some scary things. They portray “too many Americans’ as one step away from economic and social disaster. They see as people badly in need of major assistance – their assistance.

John McCain, imperfect as he may be, sees a very different America. It’s the same country whose liberties he was willing to give his life for in Viet Nam. We may not agree with him on every issue, but we can’t disagree that a love for liberty is at the central core of this man’s being.

Even Bill Clinton has said of McCain: “He’s given everything he has to his country – except his life.” President Clinton has never spoken truer words.

In contrast to McCain, Obama essentially portrays America as something resembling Matthew Arnold’s “Dover Beach,” where “ignorant armies clash by night.” As “Lexington describes Obama’s world-view, America is “a coalition of groups that define themselves as victims of social and economic forces, and . . . [where] its leaders encourage people to feel helpless and aggrieved . . .”

If Obama becomes President, we would become a society of “victims,” all of us clamoring for the government to bail us out of our misery. That would be a disaster not only for libertarians, but for all Americans.

I hope all libertarians do the right thing: voting for John McCain. Also, ask your friends and family members to do the same thing. The future of liberty in this society depends on free people standing up and supporting a man who has devoted his entire life to defending American values and liberties. John McCain is the right man for our cause.


Steve Maloney is a writer and political activist living in a small town near Pittsburgh, PA. He’d like to inform Senator Obama that he is not now – and never has been – “bitter.” He blogs at: http://stevemaloneygop.blogspot.com.

Note: If you'd like to reprint this piece on your own blog or publication, please be my guess.

THE CASE FOR JOHN MCCAIN

I'm working hard on one of my book summaries that I do for a company in the Midwest, so I'm going to hold off on my much -promised column regarding the Washington County GOP web site, which is a good one. The following material is new, but I wrote it after my appearance on Eric Dondero's Libertarian Republic show on BlogTalkRadio. Eric opposes John McCain for reasons that remain mysterious to me.

I was on Eric Dondero's BlogTalkRadio.com/Libertarian, and the host and I got into a good exchange about McCain. His point was that McCain was too liberal. My point was that the facts, such as the ratings by the American Conservative Union ratings and the Club For Growth, indicated that McCain was a conservative.

The host continued to disagree. I said that he had an intellectual and moral obligation to support McCain. I cited the "Club for Growth" rankings for 2005 and 2006 that gave McCain a (good) rating of 76% for both years. The host wondered if Hillary Clinton didn't also have some decent ratings from that group. I cited The Almanac of American Politics, which showed the Club (fiscal conservatives) gave her a rating of 8% and 0% for the two years.

Thus, when Ann Coulter tells Sean Hannity that "Hillary is our gal," one wonders exactly is going on. Ms. Coulter is not a stupid person, but she is driven mainly by malice and a desire to say outrageous things, which endear her to some of the conservative "base."

Coulter's entire career manifests a commitment not to Republican politics, but rather to often pathetic attempts to call attention to herself. Her support for Hillary Clinton, who doesn't have a conservative bone in her body, illustrates that she has an agenda which is less conservatism than narcissism. Ann Coulter may be something or other, but her backing of Mrs. Clinton shows that she is not in any sense a conservative. Calling someone a "faggot," as she did John Edwards, does not miraculously transform a woman into Margaret Thatcher. Name-calling is the last refuge of those who lack a coherent political philosophy.

Recently, the Austin Statesman in Texas endorsed McCain and noted that over the years his rating from the American Conservative Union was 82.3%, which is a very conservative performance. The ACU rankings for Hillary Clinton in 2005 and 2006 were an anemic 8% and 12%. The FACTS -- a category not much valued by Limbaugh and Coulter types -- show that McCain is a conservative and Mrs. Clinton (like Obama) is a robotic liberal.

That is NOT my opinion. Rather, it is what the facts show. John Kasich, former Ohio congressman who is one of the great conservatives of our time, said on FOX yesterday: "John McCain is NOT a liberal. In fact, John McCain is not really a moderate. John McCain is a conservative." Kasich, like many national conservatives (Tom Coburn, Rick Perry, Peter King, Saxby Chamblis, Jonny Isakson, Jon Kyl, Lindsay Graham) is strongly endorsing McCain.

McCain is a conservative with a conscience. He is not anti-gay, nor anti-Hispanic, nor anti-Black, not anti-women professionals, not anti-young people. He is a Republican in Arizona who wins his races there by huge margins (79% to 21% in his last race).

So why do the Limbaughs, Coulters, and Hewitts dislike John McCain so much? Part of it is their effort to boost ratings by making outrageous comments. A big element is the fact that McCain despises them for their shallowness and ideological fanaticism. Rush and his "proud dittoheads" have lost their grip on the Party. Their conservative alternatives -- Tancredo, Hunter, Gilmore, (Fred) Thompson, (Tommy) Thompson, and Paul -- couldn't come close to winning elections. They have NO support. Republicans across the country have rejected them. The voters have declared Rush and Sean and Laura and Ann and Hugh to be irrelevant to the nation's politics.

I told my host/friend last night that he really didn't have a "right" to his opinion, because there were no facts behind his views. We have a constitutional right, I guess, to be wrong, but we don't have an intellectual or moral right to ignore reality.

I disagree with John McCain on a few of his votes, but frankly that doesn't mean I must be "right" and he must be wrong. When he voted against the anti-gay-marriage amendment, he said it was "antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans." He added, "It usurps from the states a fundamental authority they have always possessed and imposes a federal remedy for a problem that most states believe does not confront them." Is he really "wrong" when he cites the obvious? The American people's stance on something like gay marriage is that they're bored by the subject.

You will not find McCain's thoughtful, constitutionalist statements coming out of the mouth of Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham or Ann Coulter. Their listeners want red meat. They want slogans and venom. They live for polarization and animosity. The wear their bloody banner of Red State simplisms as if it were a badge of honor.

John McCain rejects the politics of hatred. He will go down in history as a great man and, hopefully as a great President. His talk show critics will continue to express their half-baked "opinions" to a diminishing group of people who drool heavily and think infrequently.

Note: Anyone who'd like to honor me by using this column on their own blog or elsewhere, please do so. The only thing I ask is that you cite my main blog as the source (http://camp2008victorya.blogspot.com)