Now, I have been the first in line to say we need to support McCain if he gets the nomination, so don't think that I am saying we should sit this election out, or saying that McCain doesn't deserve our support, but I have to say, to those pundits who are trying to convince me McCain is a "real conservative", stop lying!

Yes, we need to get behind McCain for the good of the party and the country. Yes, McCain is a better choice than either Hillary or Obama. Yes, McCain is more conservative than those two as well. But there is no way that McCain qualifies under any but the most loose definitions of "conservative".

I will grant that McCain is tough on national defense and wants to continue the war on terror. But that is about it, as far as conservative credentials goes.

Oh, perhaps McCain entered into the "Gang of 14" with the laudable goal of getting conservative judges approved, but  if he did, then I question his judgment. The Gang of 14 agreement was a time bomb set up by democrats. In exchange for allowing a trickle of conservative judges they retained both the ability to fillibuster and the right to oppose any judges for whom they could find some semi-plausible objection. So, either McCain just went along with the Dems out of some senate "collegiality", or else he was tricked by the Dems into a deal far better for them than for him. Whatever his motives, he did not do the party any favors by striking out on his own, without the knowledge of the party leaders, and against the express wishes of the party. It may not tarnish his credentials as a conservative to go against the party leadership, but disloyalty doesn't seem to be a very conservative value either. (Especially disloyalty intended mainly to grab headlines for oneself.)

Now, on to the truly liberal positions.

McCain was behind McCain-Feingold, a truly nasty piece of legislation. It argued, in very socialist terms, that "big money" was "corrupting" elections, and so we needed more government interference with free speech. What is conservative about this?

McCain supports some sort of carbon-credit scheme intended to appease the anthropogenic global warming crowd. In other words, adding costs to business in order to possibly prevent a "crisis" based upon a few very unreliable computer models. Yes, it is popular with the green crowd, but, last I looked, winning votes from eco-freaks at the expense of industrial capacity was not a conservative value.

McCain has supported the "reimportation" of drugs from Canada, which amounts to de facto price controls in the US. This will effectively destroy profit margins for drug companies and end research on new drugs. Tell me how this is a conservative value?

McCain has not just supported amnesty for illegals, even using the word "amnesty" himself, but has smeared those who oppose him as "racists". He has opposed a fence and opposed any strengthening of border security. Of course, now that he is running for president he shies away from the word "amnesty" and emphasizes the toothless "fine" provisions of his amnesty bill, and promises (reluctantly) to guard the border and build a fence, but even as he pays lip service, it is still obvious to all but the most ardent McCain apologists that his heart is not in border security.  Now, some conservatives (myself included) may think immigration laws need to be changed, but to provide citizenship as a reward for law breaking seems a pretty poor reform, and definitely not one in line with conservative principles.

The list could go on, but I think I have hit the highlights.

McCain has repeatedly shown a distrust of "big money", "big business" and "corporate interests" which would not seem out of place in a Democrat candidate. He has a fondness for government solutions which is understandable in a life-long politician, but hardly conservative. True, he has been strong on defense, but that is the start and end of his conservative credentials. On every other issue, he accepts the basic premises of, not just the Democrats, but the left wing of the Democrat party : business is evil, money corrupts, government is the answer. He is far, far from being a conservative by any definition imaginable.

So, yes, I continue to support McCain because, for all his liberal positions, he is still better than anyone running on the other side, and because a third party candidate is unlikely to win. (And because Ron Paul is the most likely third party candidate, and my objections to Ron Paul have been well described below*.)

On the other hand, I do wish pundits trying to pull together Republican support would be as honest as I just was. Please, pundits, tell us to support McCain because he is still better than the alternative. Just stop trying to convince us that he is actually conservative. The man himself has been telling us for years he is a "maverick", so why are you now trying to sell him as to the right of Newt. Sorry, but no one is buying it.

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

Note: Should anyone care to object that McCain "must be" conservative, as he has an 82 lifetime rating from the ACU, please see my earlier essay "82%? So what?"

* See the following for some details on my objections to both Ron Paul in particular and libertarians in general:

Why I Am Not A Libertarian (Why I think top-down libertarianism will not work)
Why Ron Paul Will Lose (My concerns with Paul's supporters)
The Problem With Ron Paul (The title says it all)
An Informal Poll (Voter perceptions of Ron Paul)

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

UPDATED 02/12/2008

It appears Jack Kemp has joined those trying to convince us McCain really is a conservative, going so far as trying to convince us McCain is a "maverick" in the same way Churchill was a "maverick".

There is one problem with the analogy. Churchill left the conservative party because he supported free trade, thus becoming a maverick SUPPORTING conservative causes, fighting a liberal establishment taking over his conservative party.

McCain, on the other hand, was a "maverick" fighting AGAINST conservative principles, SIDING WITH the liberal establishment.

I think it makes Kemp's analogy a lot less convincing when he tries to argue that supporting free trade and supporting government restrictions on free speech are similar positions.

Sorry, but McCain is a big government, anti-business liberal. Yes, I still say he is better than Hillary or Obama, but I have no illusions about his beliefs. In the same way I went into the 2000 elections knowing Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was just "Socialism Lite", I also know that McCain would be more comfortable on the other side of the aisle (excepting his positions on defense, which are one of the main reasons he still has my vote).