Under The Bus: DeMint Says McCain Betrayed Republican Principles

  •  November 15, 2008

Of course, so has a big chunk of the entire GOP in recent years, but it’s nice to hear this anyway.
I’m actually surprised he mentioned President Bush too. Not unhappy about it, because it’s deserved, but surprised. And refreshed.

MYRTLE BEACH, South Carolina (CNN) – South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint on Friday became one of the first high-profile Republicans to publicly criticize John McCain following his electoral defeat, blaming the Arizona senator for betraying conservative principles in his quest for the White House.
The conservative senator, speaking to a group of GOP officials gathered in Myrtle Beach at a conference on the future of the Republican Party, described how the party had strayed from its own “brand,” which, according to DeMint, should represent freedom, religious-based values and limited government.
“We have to be honest, and there’s a lot of blame to go around, but I have to mention George Bush, and I have to mention Ted Stevens, and I’m afraid I even have to mention John McCain,” he said.

This is exactly where Republicans need to go. Frankly, I think Bush did some positive things in office (tax cuts, etc.) but he did a lot of stupid things too (established a massive new prescription drug entitlement, signed McCain/Feingold, etc.) and defending him at this point isn’t going to do the GOP any good.
But what’s even more important than words at this point is action. Saying that Republicans need to get back to bedrock conservative principles is a much different thing than actually doing it. Let’s hope DeMint is committed to leading the way.
By the way, notice who DeMint didn’t mention here? Sarah Palin. And he’s right not to. Palin may have said some disappointing things on the campaign trail, but let’s remember that she was running on McCain’s ticket. She’s her own woman now, and I think she’ll be making significant contributions to the causes of liberty and limited government.

Tags: ,


«
»
  • http://Array Realist

    McCain was never a true conservative, so it seems a little goofy to be saying that he “betrayed Republican principles”. If he’d have waffled, he’d be betraying his own principals. And it was the Republicans that nominated him, knowing full well what those principals were, and knowing that there were more conservative candidates available.

    Even so, I don’t think it would have mattered if Huckabee (my choice) or Romney or whoever was on the ticket, it was still a pretty tough row to hoe, given the state of the country and the mood of the populace. On the plus side, someone who was not likely to ever run again gets stuck with the stigma, while the rest of them can run in 2012 without the “loser” tag associated.

  • Neiman

    I did vote for Linseed Graham

    You deserve to be punished for that! 10,000 whacks with a wet noodle at least!

    Bush was near greatness in historic terms in leading the war against Islamic Terrorism and in Defending America. He was absolutely great in the tax cuts and providign us with a booming economy under perilous times when the economy could have completely collapsed. But, he made too many concessions to libralism, horrible growth in the size of government, a huge budget deficit, amensty for illegals and etcetera.

    McCain was never a maverick, he was just a moderate to liberal Republican and only pretended to have any conservative principles and he was a poor messenger for the party. He couldn’t lead anyone anywhere!

    The problem is, other than Palin and she could be great in time – I don’t know for sure, we have no one else on the horizon with the ability to deliver a vision for America in clear and compelling terms that captures the hearts of ordinary Americans. We have no one with the courage of a Reagan, to stand on conservative principles no matter the criticism. In short, we have no leader with national recognition and the ability to inspire and lead on the horizon. Certainly not Jindal, perhaps Palin in time, but other than her, name a Conservative Republican with the looks, charm, abilities and the ability to inspire with a clear and simple vision for America.

  • http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

    Jim DeMint tells The Truth. Period. He is one of the few.

  • robert108

    When a belief becomes a ‘value’, no God is necessary, nor is a religion.

    Pure parsing, and unworthy of you. He did not advocate for the establishment of a particular religion, as you indicated.

  • Neiman

    I have been amazed that the Republicans anninted McCain as their leader.

    The MSM pushed through his selection as the GOP Nominee, many Demorats crossed party lines to get him nominated, and Huckabee, Romney and others had too much baggage. So, before the convention McCain had it nailed down. But, the party was never enthusiastic about him, most conservatives just held their noses and he lost before he started, until Palin energized conservatives and then, had he stepped up and laid out a vision for America, he could have won. But, McCain was old, scar faced, a poor public speaker, he ran as as moderate to liberal Republican, not a true conservative and it was NOT the economy that hurt him, it was his inability to offer America an understandable and clear vision for how he would rescue the economy. McCain lost, it is totally his fault and there is no one else to blame!

  • di butler

    Realist,

    Republicans had a little help electing McCain.The Dems crossed over and voted for him, Huckabee gave him a hand, and the RNC and big money donors wanted him. Tough to fight against that.

  • robert108

    Thank you for clarifying that Christian values have nothing in common with the Christian religion.

    You lie again. Christian values are derived from the words of Christ, not a particular human formulation and codification of same. You’re confused, as usual.

    pp: I stated very clearly what I said, so why did you ask? If you don’t understand simple concepts, that’s not my problem.

  • pparets

    rbb said:

    Why would De Mint want to change what our founding fathers set out for us?

    Well, see? You just had to go and open that can of worms, didn’t you?

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men…

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    Thank you for clarifying that Christian values have nothing in common with the Christian religion.

  • pparets

    DeMint calls for “religious-based values”. Sounds good on paper, but whose religious-based values should the party adhere to?

    Catholics? Methodists? Presbyterians? Baptists? Lutherans? Quakers? Episcopalians? Black theology?
    Mennonites? Mormons? Anglicans? Seventh Day Adventists? Unitarians? Free-Will? Greek or Russian Orthodox?

    Judaism? Buddhism? Hindu? Islam? Wicca? Baha’i?

    “… Folks, the best way not to mess with a can of worms is, don’t open it.” Will Rogers

  • robert108

    When a belief becomes a ‘value’, no God is necessary, nor is a religion.

    Absolutely false! As has been said countless times on this blog, the US is founded on Christian values, not a particular religion or a particular sect of Christianity.
    “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and render unto God what is God’s.” I believe that defines the Christian relationship between religion and politics. That value is at odds with the secular humanist values that are trying to turn us into an atheist nation.
    Whose side are you two on?

  • pparets

    Understanding the difference between values and principles is hardly parsing, as you well know.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    What would you like to chat about Neiman?

  • Neiman

    Rbb: by the way the U.S. Flag for your avatar is offensive, maybe the Hammer and Sickle would be more a accurate reflection of your belief system.

  • Neiman

    Pparets: Actually, just for the record, Jesus taught us how to have an intimate, eternal relationship with God the Father in and through Him. He did not teach principles or values, but the way of Life for all that believe. He was no philospher, he was, is and always will be the Fountain of Life.

  • pparets

    No, 108, I’m not.

    The very phrase “religious-based values ” is a liberal secularization of the meaning of faith.

    When a belief becomes a ‘value’, no God is necessary, nor is a religion.

  • MrJohn

    SC leaders were wrong about the civil war and are probably wrong about leading the party into the future.

  • pparets

    108 said:

    Christian values are derived from the words of Christ, not a particular human formulation and codification of same. You’re confused, as usual.

    No, robert, you’re the one who is confused. Christ taught no values. Christ taught principles.

    Values are exactly waht you just said above – a human formulation.

  • robert108

    pp: You’re missing the point; “religious based values” don’t mean a particular religion, only values based on a Higher Power, not what social engineers find fashionable or lucrative at any point in time.

  • HG

    Can you name even one of a unifying set of principles on which all these faiths would agree, that would still set them apart from non-believers?

    natural law.

    When a belief becomes a ‘value’, no God is necessary, nor is a religion.

    Not sure I would agree with the first part, but definitely the second. It seems to me that if values (principles and standards) are the product of a belief in God (not a religion) than a God is necessary. Help me out here if I’m missing something.

  • robert108

    DeMint is right.

  • Eneils Bailey

    SC leaders were wrong about the civil war and are probably wrong about leading the party into the future.

    MrJohn,
    It’s 2008…not 1860…you want me to send you some new calendars?

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I like it how they get after Bush when he acts like a Democrat.

  • robert108

    Apparently you are more committed to your parsing than in admitting to the truth.

  • Neiman

    The very phrase “religious-based values ” is a liberal secularization of the meaning of faith.

    When a belief becomes a ‘value’, no God is necessary, nor is a religion.

    I agree!

  • robert108

    It seems to me that if values (principles and standards) are the product of a belief in God (not a religion) than a God is necessary. Help me out here if I’m missing something.

    Absolutely! You stated it more clearly than I did, but the truth is the same. Values derived from God are not separate from God; they are simply expressed in universal terms, instead of in the context of some particular religion or sect.

  • pparets

    HG: ‘Values’ are a secular answer to principles. Values are presumed to be shared among reasonable people, but are subject to the conditions and times in which they evolve. Thus, values are ever-changing. Once, the nuclear family was a ‘value’, then it was ‘open marriage’, then single-parent, and now is to be extended to homosexuals.

    Principles do not change. 108, of all people, should know that. The Bible and the Constitution are not fonts of ‘values’; they are the bed-rock of principle.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    Why would De Mint want to change what our founding fathers set out for us?

    Does he hate America that much?

  • pparets

    Whistler said:

    I’m sure that could find a unifying set of principles that 90% of those people would find acceptable.

    Really? Can you name even one of a unifying set of principles on which all these faiths would agree, that would still set them apart from non-believers?

  • robert108

    rbb moron: I clearly stated that our country was founded on Christian values, not the Christian religion. I have made this point several times now, so try to keep up with the adults. If you have trouble understanding, get an intelligent adult to explain it to you.

  • robert108

    So, the Constitution is a set of values too? Is that what you’re saying?

    False! I clearly said our country was founded on Christian values. Why do you continue to lie about what I said? It’s very clear in what I wrote.
    The Constitution expresses Christian values. Someone from a totalitarian country might be inspired by the values upon which our country was founded, or that resulted in the formulation of our Constitution, without being a member of any particular religion or sect.

  • robert108

    Still parsing, I see.

    Thus, values are ever-changing.

    Not values based on God. You’re still missing it. Obviously, “values” is some kind of buzzword for you.
    The values taught by the Ten Commandments don’t change.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    Our flag offend you?

    Why do you hate America?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    I thought Jimmy De was a Romney guy.

    That’s not conservative.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    How would you explain that in 1796 a unanimous vote in the senate confirm that the US was not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion?

    And that document was later signed by President John Adams?

  • robert108

    No, robert, you’re the one who is confused.

    Wrong again; you missed the verb “derived”, didn’t you? Values are derived from principles. Duh.

  • pparets

    So, the Constitution is a set of values too? Is that what you’re saying?

  • Neiman

    Thank you for clarifying that Christian values have nothing in common with the Christian religion.

    Robert108: It is useless to debate anything with this guy, he pretends a Christian faith and attacks both Christ and Christians daily; he offers no rational, intelligent arguments; he copies and pastes amd thinks himself wise; his is a wasted life and you are only wasting you time because he is filled with self hate. Like hius father he twists everything, he has no love of truth or desire for knowledege, he is just on earth to sow seeds of strife!

  • pparets

    Wrong again; you missed the verb “derived”, didn’t you? Values are derived from principles. Duh.

    Proof that even a sage can be childish.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/some_hints/ AKAJOEL

    [values change]Principles do not change. The Bible and the Constitution are not fonts of ‘values’; they are the bed-rock of principle.

    Fides Et Ratio or Sola Fide -are these different Christian Values?

    Are Christian values being expressed in the following paragraph?

    From the annual meeting of the Standing Committee of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of the Americas (SCOBA)

    We acknowledge that our capitalist system is no less predicated on purely materialist principles, which also do not engender faith in God.

    There is no place in the calculus of our economics to account for the “intangibles” of human existence. Reflect on how the simple accounting phrase “the bottom line” has shaped our whole culture.

    I’ll support the principles. Let’s leave the values for Orwell’s Children.

  • pparets

    108 said:

    The values taught by the Ten Commandments don’t change.

    A ‘commandment’ is not a ‘value’.

    Value is relative, as you well know. Principle is not!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob
  • Doc

    I have been amazed that the Republicans anninted McCain as their leader. It seems that I just awoke one day to see McCain as the nominee. I would have preferred Huckabee or Romney as the leader. They should strongly consider the Louisiana governor in 2012. Also, if they continue to push the right-wing agenda, they will lose. People are tired of that approach. The primary reason McCain lost, he was just being….well McCain. I’m getting tired of always voting for “the lesser of two evils” in every national election. BTW, Bush has contributed to the ruination of this country.

  • sc

    davidrude: Do an internet search for a 1999 NY Times article “Fannie Mae Eases Credit to aid Mortgage Lending” by Steven A. Holmes. Then READ the article and then come back and tell us all that it was Bush’s fault for putting poor people into “subprime” mortgages in the 1990′s during the Clinton Admin. Now these people have defaulted on their loans. Bad Plan – Bad Results – Bad Economy

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    Yep, Jimmy De was a Romeny guy alright.

    I guess the concept of conservative evolves.

  • Neiman

    No rbb, it only offends me when people like you or Obama or a host of other liberals use it, when you hate everything it stands for! You are the one that hates America, at least the one our Founding Father’s gave use, you desire a Socialist States of America and hate the one so many people gave life and limb to defend and preserve. Yet, you wrap yourself in a flag you hate, and as you do so many other things, pretened to be something you are not. You are a beguiler, like the one that caused Eve to sin with clever lies.

    Now, I simply have to go back to ignoring you, I admit that you really aggravate me with your copy-and-paste and juvenile comments; and I often get irritated and speak in uncivil ways to you and others because I cannot stand your kind. You are as many have suggested a troll of the worst order and like an idiot I too often allow myself to get entangled with you and always to my regret. To everyone else, I apologize for allowing rbb to irritate me and then behave in less than Christian ways in response.

  • robert108

    You apparently have a very narrow view of what values are, and are parsing that word to agree with your personal prejudice against it. Christian values are what this country was founded upon. To deny that is just silly.

  • pparets

    r108 said:

    Why do you continue to lie about what I said?

    I didn’t say you said anything. I asked you if that’s what you meant.

    Try to stay on track.

  • Eneils Bailey

    Can’t agree with DeMint any more than I do now.

    He is one of my US senators; can’t wait to vote for him….AGAIN.

    But, sadly, in this past Senatorial election, I did vote for Linseed Graham. Not going to send another democrat to the state house or Congress. The brown spot is still in that pair of drawers I wore on election day.

  • http://davidrude.today.com/ DavidRude

    Man are you serious…..If John McCain and Sarah Palin are the best you can come up with to lead the free world, in these kind of times, after you just had George Bush for 8 years, in which caused all these problems, and your not going to talk about Sarah Palin making contributions after you guys got creamed like that, are you gonna really be telling me that because if so I think maybe you should not worry so much about politics and go worry about something else like having conservative biceps….

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Catholics? Methodists? Presbyterians? Baptists? Lutherans? Quakers? Episcopalians? Black theology?
    Mennonites? Mormons? Anglicans? Seventh Day Adventists? Unitarians? Free-Will? Greek or Russian Orthodox?

    Judaism? Buddhism? Hindu? Islam? Wicca? Baha’i?

    I’m sure that could find a unifying set of principles that 90% of those people would find acceptable.

    Now selling those as religions ideals probably isn’t the best way to go. Explaining the underlying justifications is the way to go.

    If you can’t justify it without resorting to the “it’s in the bible” meme then it’s probably something you’re going to lose on.

  • patriot

    Davidrude: Which “problems” are you referring to exactly? Are you referring to keeping us safe for the last 7 years after 9/11? That problem? Or the “problem” of taking out a dictator that killed over half a million people in his own country, including using chemical weapons on them? Including not letting that Dictator nor his country harbor the 9/11 terrorists Al Qaeda. That problem?

    Or could you be referring to the “problem” of this ridiculous “bailout” that the democratic leadership has gotten us into? Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Kent Conrad, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick (who also played a role in allowing 9/11 to happen) Rahm Emmanuel, Jim Johnson, and Bill Clinton.

    And remember more democrat House members voted FOR the $700B bailout than Republican house members; and more Democrat Senators voted for the bailout than Republican Senators. Gee, whose problem do you think this is? Look in the mirror. Signed by a lame duck Republican President and executed by one of the worst Treasury Secretaries in US History. Which is why I am also very happy that Jim DeMint is not afraid to say our Republican President and “Republican” candidate from 2008 have strayed FAR from their Republican principles.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Actually Bush tried to regulate Fannie and Freddie that led to this situation and the Democrats blocked him.

    But yeah, we agree about McCain.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development