Cranky Old Men
The cover story of the February 7th edition of the Las Vegas Penny Press.
I had the privilege of voting in my first election in 1976 and cast a ballot for Gerald Ford and Bob Dole. I watched the national tragedy of the impeachment of President Nixon and while I would have liked to see the president prosecuted for his crimes against the nation, I also agreed that to pursue the case\e would have ripped our nation apart and created a bigger rift between our government and the people. I forgave President Ford for his pardon of President Nixon, and felt he deserved a term of his own to give his presidency a chance to earn its place in history.
I also felt no trust for Jimmy Carter and seriously couldn't cast a ballot for him.
But I had another reason for voting for the Ford/Dole ticket.
I was born and bred in Kansas, watched Mr Dole and met him in his prior campaigns for the Senate.
I wanted Bob Dole out of the Senate.
Unfortunately, Dole kept getting reelected. Time and time again.
Finally in 1996 he ran for president and bailed from the Senate.
Watching Dole's campaign you can see why he lost.
His is an example of the worst run campaign in presidential political history. His campaign was an embarrassment to his political legacy.
Now he's written a letter to Rush Limbaugh (and by proxy, to the entirety of talk radio) about Limbaugh's relentless slamming of the campaign of the Cranky Old Man, John McCain.
Here's the letter in it's entirety:
Rush,
I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain.
Not that many care but I have not been involved in the Republican Primary contest because Elizabeth, a good conservative, is running for reelection in North Carolina where Romney, McCain and Huckabee each enjoy considerable support.
I was the Republican Leader from January 1985 until I left the Senate voluntarily in June 1996. I worked closely with Senator McCain when he came to the Senate in 1987 until I departed. I cannot recall a single instance when he did not support the Party on critical votes. (At my age, I cannot be entirely certain but here are a few key conservative examples
1. Consistent pro-life record
2. Strong advocate for strict constructionist judges (We were misled on the Souter nomination)
3. Supported voluntary school prayer
4. Supported Constitutional Amendment for a Balanced Budget (needed two-thirds and lost by one vote — 66-34)
5. Strong advocate for reducing spending and opposing pork barrel "ear marks" which has, I might add, angered some of his colleagues
6. Consistent on defending Second Amendment rights
7. Opposed "Hillary Care" which would have been devastating
8. Probably the Senate's strongest advocate for strong national defense
9. Of course he has cast many votes since I left. I totally disagreed with the McCain-Feingold legislation. On immigration, Senator McCain was not in the Senate when Congress passed President Reagan's immigration legislation which passed overwhelmingly. It granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. It was not much different than the 2007 McCain, Kennedy, Bush effort.
I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent and I do not agree that Governor Romney ever suggested a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq.
McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the "Hanoi Hilton." I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost.
Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough.
Gob Bless America,
BOB DOLE
P.S. Rush, I just came across a document from the Senate Library which shows Presidential Support scores. Let me give you ratings for "Mr. Conservative" Senator Helms through 2002 (Helms retired in January 2003) and Senator McCain through 2004.
Disappointing, to say the least. I have to say that Mr. Dole's memory is perhaps as weak as other parts of his anatomy. He forgets to mention perhaps the strongest integrity issue that McCain faces. A number of people remember the Keating 5 scandal, which occurred while both Dole and McCain were in congress.
And more than a few in Congress have mentioned McCain's tendency to go ballistic at a moment's notice. Even temperament is something that we perhaps need in a presidency.
Perhaps Mr. Dole should go back to being spokesman for that “little blue pill”. Maybe he would be less cranky....
Limbaugh is not alone in desiring a candidate with less baggage than McCain.
Conservative author Ann Coulter told Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes on their Fox News Channel program that if McCain won the nomination, she was voting for Hillary. Ditto Laura Ingraham. Hannity has also endorsed Romney.
Talk Radio will not be a friendly place for McCain if he indeed wins the nomination.
Limbaugh responded in what I consider a classic quote.
"If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit . . . rather than a Republican causing the debacle," he said. "And I would prefer not to have conservative Republicans in the Congress paralyzed by having to support, out of party loyalty, a Republican president who is not conservative."
"My success is not defined by who wins elections," he said. "Elected officials come and go. I am here for as long as I wish to stay. . . .
"Yesterday it was Limbaugh vs. [Donovan] McNabb, Limbaugh vs. Michael J. Fox. Before that it was Limbaugh vs. Bill Clinton. Tomorrow it will be Limbaugh vs. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. And I note the media never applies this template to anyone else in media. Not to anyone in cable news, not to any of the endorsements of the major newspapers. Why are the New York Times and Washington Post not asked about the setback they both suffered when George Bush beat both their endorsed candidates in 2000 and 2004?"
Why indeed? Because they don't claim to be almost always right 99.7% of the time!
Wyatt Cox continues to polish his Ron Paul for President button while arranging more downloadable coupons for visitors to his website at wyattcox.net
I had the privilege of voting in my first election in 1976 and cast a ballot for Gerald Ford and Bob Dole. I watched the national tragedy of the impeachment of President Nixon and while I would have liked to see the president prosecuted for his crimes against the nation, I also agreed that to pursue the case\e would have ripped our nation apart and created a bigger rift between our government and the people. I forgave President Ford for his pardon of President Nixon, and felt he deserved a term of his own to give his presidency a chance to earn its place in history.
I also felt no trust for Jimmy Carter and seriously couldn't cast a ballot for him.
But I had another reason for voting for the Ford/Dole ticket.
I was born and bred in Kansas, watched Mr Dole and met him in his prior campaigns for the Senate.
I wanted Bob Dole out of the Senate.
Unfortunately, Dole kept getting reelected. Time and time again.
Finally in 1996 he ran for president and bailed from the Senate.
Watching Dole's campaign you can see why he lost.
His is an example of the worst run campaign in presidential political history. His campaign was an embarrassment to his political legacy.
Now he's written a letter to Rush Limbaugh (and by proxy, to the entirety of talk radio) about Limbaugh's relentless slamming of the campaign of the Cranky Old Man, John McCain.
Here's the letter in it's entirety:
Rush,
I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain.
Not that many care but I have not been involved in the Republican Primary contest because Elizabeth, a good conservative, is running for reelection in North Carolina where Romney, McCain and Huckabee each enjoy considerable support.
I was the Republican Leader from January 1985 until I left the Senate voluntarily in June 1996. I worked closely with Senator McCain when he came to the Senate in 1987 until I departed. I cannot recall a single instance when he did not support the Party on critical votes. (At my age, I cannot be entirely certain but here are a few key conservative examples
1. Consistent pro-life record
2. Strong advocate for strict constructionist judges (We were misled on the Souter nomination)
3. Supported voluntary school prayer
4. Supported Constitutional Amendment for a Balanced Budget (needed two-thirds and lost by one vote — 66-34)
5. Strong advocate for reducing spending and opposing pork barrel "ear marks" which has, I might add, angered some of his colleagues
6. Consistent on defending Second Amendment rights
7. Opposed "Hillary Care" which would have been devastating
8. Probably the Senate's strongest advocate for strong national defense
9. Of course he has cast many votes since I left. I totally disagreed with the McCain-Feingold legislation. On immigration, Senator McCain was not in the Senate when Congress passed President Reagan's immigration legislation which passed overwhelmingly. It granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. It was not much different than the 2007 McCain, Kennedy, Bush effort.
I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent and I do not agree that Governor Romney ever suggested a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq.
McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the "Hanoi Hilton." I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost.
Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough.
Gob Bless America,
BOB DOLE
P.S. Rush, I just came across a document from the Senate Library which shows Presidential Support scores. Let me give you ratings for "Mr. Conservative" Senator Helms through 2002 (Helms retired in January 2003) and Senator McCain through 2004.
Disappointing, to say the least. I have to say that Mr. Dole's memory is perhaps as weak as other parts of his anatomy. He forgets to mention perhaps the strongest integrity issue that McCain faces. A number of people remember the Keating 5 scandal, which occurred while both Dole and McCain were in congress.
And more than a few in Congress have mentioned McCain's tendency to go ballistic at a moment's notice. Even temperament is something that we perhaps need in a presidency.
Perhaps Mr. Dole should go back to being spokesman for that “little blue pill”. Maybe he would be less cranky....
Limbaugh is not alone in desiring a candidate with less baggage than McCain.
Conservative author Ann Coulter told Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes on their Fox News Channel program that if McCain won the nomination, she was voting for Hillary. Ditto Laura Ingraham. Hannity has also endorsed Romney.
Talk Radio will not be a friendly place for McCain if he indeed wins the nomination.
Limbaugh responded in what I consider a classic quote.
"If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit . . . rather than a Republican causing the debacle," he said. "And I would prefer not to have conservative Republicans in the Congress paralyzed by having to support, out of party loyalty, a Republican president who is not conservative."
"My success is not defined by who wins elections," he said. "Elected officials come and go. I am here for as long as I wish to stay. . . .
"Yesterday it was Limbaugh vs. [Donovan] McNabb, Limbaugh vs. Michael J. Fox. Before that it was Limbaugh vs. Bill Clinton. Tomorrow it will be Limbaugh vs. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. And I note the media never applies this template to anyone else in media. Not to anyone in cable news, not to any of the endorsements of the major newspapers. Why are the New York Times and Washington Post not asked about the setback they both suffered when George Bush beat both their endorsed candidates in 2000 and 2004?"
Why indeed? Because they don't claim to be almost always right 99.7% of the time!
Wyatt Cox continues to polish his Ron Paul for President button while arranging more downloadable coupons for visitors to his website at wyattcox.net
Comments