The Perfect is the Enemy of the Good

Republicans need to rally under a candidate, and cannot allow ideological vanity to bind them

Writing in an op/ed in The Daily Beast, Meghan McCain sounds an important alarm for Republicans eager to defeat President Barack Obama in 2012:

Rally behind a candidate. Do it quickly.

"Sarah Palin accused [Herman] Cain of being the 'flavor of the week,' and this is one of the rare times I agree with her," she writes. "The Republicans are suffering from what Bill Maher recently dubbed a 'promiscuous' problem with our candidates. We keep having one-night stands with politicians we think we only want to marry, and then get cold feet."

"The short list includes the likes of Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry with a possible addition of Chris Christie," she continues. "All of this excitement is soon followed by a quick fizzle of disappointment when these candidates look flawed under the spotlight of the media, incapable of pleasing the temperamental Republican base. It is as if we are more concerned with the drama of the electing a new prom king than concentrating on who the best person to beat Obama is."

McCain is precisely right to point this out as a serious problem, but she seems to fall short on elaborating why. Republicans actually don't have a good reason for it, either.

The reason, far too often, has turned out to be ideological vanity.

To date the favourites in the Republican primary have shifted from Mitt Romney, to Rick Perry, and now to Herman Cain. Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann have been promising candidates, but really only pretenders.

At each turn, Republicans have agonized over whether or not each candidate is the ideologically perfect conservative. In turn, both Romney and Perry have been found to be imperfect. Now it seems that it's Cain's turn.

And Cain will be found to be imperfect. Because he is imperfect. So are Romney, Perry, Pawlenty, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, et al.

In the search for the perfect conservative, Republicans may well cut themselves off from the best Presidential candidate. They should know this well already. In 2008, many conservative Republican voters didn't show up to vote for John McCain because he was deemed to be ideologically imperfect.

What was the result? President Barack Obama.

Republicans have already been bitten by this bit of political snobbery before. They shouldn't allow themselves to fall victim to it again.

To date, Cain appears like he may be the best conservative of all the candidates in the field, embodying each of the most important intellectual traditions of conservatism.

The remaining rational objections are not based on Cain's ideological characteristics, but of his political qualifications.

"We are a little more than three months away from the New Hampshire primary and Republicans need to start getting our act together. Cain has a very small window right now to utilize his momentum and prove that he should be the next GOP nominee," McCain notes. "But let’s face reality: as much as even I can find myself developing warm feelings toward Cain because he seems like a nice, charming and normal person, if that were the only qualifications for president, we should be nominating Zach Galifianakis. Although Cain has been outrageously successful as a businessman, he has almost no experience on politics and has never actually held public office."

"In the time of such extreme anti-Washington rhetoric, Cain may play like a good thing in the primary stump speeches. I admit that even I have found myself getting caught up in his moment," she continues. "But I assure you when the rubber starts hitting the road, voters are going to want someone with real experience in all areas of politics, especially when it comes to foreign policy, something Cain has quite no experience in (unless Godfather's Pizza delivers to Canada)."

Barack Obama didn't have any foreign policy experience either, and Americans still elected him President. Also, Cain's lack of experience in political office could prove to be refreshing for many voters.

Cain hasn't been subject to the horse trading that takes place on Capitol hill, and hasn't been subdued by the idea that everything is a matter of such horse trading.

This isn't to say that a relentlessly-uncompromising President is what would be best for America, or even that Cain would be such a President. Compromise that leads to, for example, a more equitable budget is far preferable than horse trading that leads to pork barreling.

Meghan McCain is precisely right that time is running out for the Republican Party to start giving its Presidential candidates a serious look. Hopefully she -- and all Republicans -- will remember that the search for the perfect candidate may well cost them their best candidate if they aren't careful.

Some Things Just Aren't About Same-Sex Marriage

Carrie Prejean's teenaged sex life is one of them

As the political left continues to drag Carrie Prejean's kicking and screaming personal life into the spotlight, a somewhat surprising figure has entered the fray.

Writing on the Daily Beast, Meghan McCain complained that Sean Hannity didn't rake Prejean over the coals enough in regards to her sex tape.

"This was Prejean's first stop on her book publicity tour, and when the sex tape came up, he proceeded to ask her if she was 'in love with her boyfriend at the time that she made [it].' I'm sorry, why would being in love matter when it comes to filming yourself in a sexual context?" she asked.

Sadly, one would expect that the answer to this question wouldn't so elude a woman who describes herself as pro-sex.

The better question, for McCain and for those who intend to use the video in question for rhetorical advantage, is this:

What does Carrie Prejean's video have to do with same-sex marriage? Or even with her position on same-sex marriage?

The answer, or course, is simple: the answer is "absolutely nothing".

McCain's confusion over this topic became evident as she continued writing:

"The problem I have with my fellow Republicans is why gay marriage is the trump card in any situation," McCain continued. "It seems that as long as you are against gay marriage, any scandal in your life can be overlooked or overcome. When you are in favor of it, however -- and I have been very vocal about my support -- that position defines you."

Many conservatives understand what Meghan McCain evidently does not -- that while the Prejean tape certainly serves the purposes of the scandal-mongering attack machines of the political left, it has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand: same-sex marriage.

McCain's support for same-sex marriage, however, very much is relevant to this issue (duh. -ed) and, rightly or wrongly, this is one of the issues that is causing McCain such difficulties within not only the Republican Party, but within conservative circles as well.

Meghan McCain certainly isn't obligated to agree with Carrie Prejean -- this author, in particlar, certainly doesn't.

But if anything, McCain ought to sympathize with Prejean. After all, it wasn't even that long ago that the left-wing hate machine heaped its vapid attentions upon her.

The Modus Operandi of the Living Dead

Coming from someone who likes to toss about examples of right-wing self-unawareness and conservative lack of self-awarness, one has to wonder if Enormous Thriving Plants is an ironic exercize in that very same zombie-like lack of self-awareness.

In her ideologically-motivated quest to prove the alleged death of conservative intellectualism, Audrey has dug up an interesting piece of minutiae: a Jonah Goldberg blogpost on NRO musing about differing strategies to survive a Zombie apocalypse.

In the post, Goldberg dicusses some amusing email conversations he's had about the notion of a zombie apocalypse, and how best to survive. Apparently, Goldberg thinks the best way to survive a zombie apocalypse is to hide out on a boat.

The post reveals precisely how much thought certain groups of people have put into the idea of zombie apocalypse preparedness.

More than anything, Goldberg's post is clearly a light-hearted jab at something that has become something of a pop cultural obsession -- the rapidly-proliferating crop of books, video games and movies on the subject address topics as diverse as biological warfare (Resident Evil) to a zombie Eddie Van Halen (Zombieland).

But for Audrey, the matter really seems to be finding something that she desperately wants to find. Considering the width and breadth of her quest to declare conservative intellectualism dead, it isn't terribly surprising that Audrey would attempt to conflate a facetious fluff bit into a full-time intellectual preoccupation.

After all, it's what individuals like Audrey do. It's their modus operandi: zeroing in on marginal thoughts, traits or individuals, and attempting to treat them as representative as the conservative intellectual whole.

This is seen in the effort to use individual racist expression to attempt to "prove" that all of those opposing Barack Obama's health care reforms are racist, inflate the importance of fringe lunatics, or attempt to discredit Meghan McCain with her cleavage or taste in entertainment.

It quickly becomes apparent what the true project of Audrey's blog is: the refinement of the ad hominem attack against conservatism in general, and declarations that conservative intellectualism is dead merely a prematurely-played endgame.

It would be an amusing enough shtick if there were anything original about it. But that entire modus operandi has been ripped off from another group of fringe lunatics, going to show that, much like the undead, the virus of intellectual vapidity spreads far too quickly to be contained.

This, amusingly enough, has become the state of the left-right intellectual discourse as Audrey and her cohorts have come to see it: that the matter of the debate has no longer become about ideas, but rather the attempts of individuals on either side of the "debate" to try to prove that the ideas of the other side simply aren't worth rebutting.

What else should one think of the insistence that the ideas of Jonah Goldberg prove the death of conservative intellectualism in lieu of any attempt to actually refute them? What else should one of think of the claim that Meghan McCain's breasts or taste in music and movies renders her intellectually unthreatening?

Then again, perhaps this is giving individuals like Audrey far too much credit. Even as they attempt to cherry-pick examples of the death of conservative intellectualism -- a task rendered all the more quaint by their evident inability to even define the term "intellectualism" in anything but a self-serving manner -- Audrey herself can only seem to do so in posts of one sentence or paragraph at a time.

This is what has rendered Audrey's intellectual endgame so premature: if anyone had sufficient credibility to declare conservative intellectualism dead, one would have to imagine that person would have to be more accomplished and significant than the author of a blog that itself is less an intellectual opus and more a collection of invective-riddled thought fragments -- a blog that sounds much less like The Shock Doctrine (itself produced by a troubled example of left-wing intellectualism) and more like the banal moaning of the living dead.

Demanding Better, part two

Oh Please, God, Let This Happen

Charlie Sheen challenges non-9/11 "truth"ers to a debate

Yesterday, on the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Charlie Sheen decided he has a bone to pick with media commentators.

Sheen, a central figure in the 9/11 "truth" movement, has come out of the woodwork to challenge Meghan McCain, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to a public debate about 9/11. He wants that debate to take place on Larry King live.

The general intellectual abortion that is the 9/11 "truth" movement aside, this is a proposal that should be slid into the "be careful what you ask for because you just might get it" file.

Charlie Sheen -- forever parroting Alex Jones-flavoured stupidity -- is probably one of the few people who could be subjected to Bill O'Reilly's famous "O'Reilly treatment" and not elicit so much as an ounce of public sympathy.

Discussing Sheen's challenge on The View, Meghan McCain noted that Sheen's challenge may simply be wrought from Sheen's bitterness over having some of the skeletons in his own closet poked at.

"I quoted Charlie Sheen yesterday about his experience with prostitutes, so really you're the one I should be listening to about 9/11?" McCain asked. "I am not going to take my political advice from Charlie Sheen."

"McCain's sophomoric reliance on attacking Sheen on the foundation of decades old events in his personal life, while failing to address even one of the 20 pieces of evidence raised in his letter to Obama, is typical of the media response to Sheen's challenge thus far," Sheen complained via a press release.

The problem for Sheen and company is that their theories have been addressed and demolished -- at length. Yet they never learn.

They continually base their theories on grainy, shadowy and distant videos taken of the event -- consider the general stupidity that swirls around the Building Seven collapse -- that contradict the testimony of eye witnesses at the scene.

Yet Sheen, Jones and their fellow 9/11 "truth"ers continually fling themselves into the flames, much like lemmings following each other over a cliff.

"Let's do it," Sheen said on the Alex Jones show. "I issue the challenge to debate Meghan McCain, Rush Limbaugh, Sen Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, bring them all, Bob Mcilvaine and I will join you on Larry King Live and you guys bring whatever you've got ...and we'll show up with the truth and we'll just see how it goes - we're not hiding."

Frankly, it would be hard to hide stupidity of Charlie Sheen's magnitude.

Hopefully, Larry King, Meghan McCain, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity accept Sheen's challenge. It would make for very satisfying theatre for those fed up with the delusions of 9/11 "truth".

Coulter, Malkin Better Get Ready for Round 2

Meghan McCain drops the gloves again

The last time Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham took aim at Meghan McCain, things did not turn out well for them.

Ingraham especially embarrassed herself when she mocked McCain as a "plus-sized model".

The latest battle comes after Michelle Malkin identified McCain as a conservative commentator who needs to "shut up" during a live public online chat about her new book.

"So Michelle Malkin successfully rounds out the trifecta of extreme female conservative pundits, following Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter, who believe that I, and Republicans like me, need to shut up and get out of the party," McCain wrote on her blog. "Is this surprising? Not really, given my father’s complicated history with the extreme right of the GOP."

"What do Malkin and the other conservative pundits hope to accomplish by arguing that people 'like me' have no place within the Republican Party?" McCain asked. "And who exactly are people 'like me'? Young people? Moderate people? Young female people? People with tattoos who go to biker rallies?"

One could expect that Malkin, Coulter and Ingraham would probably answer that people like Meghan McCain (and her father, John) aren't sufficiently conservative for their meager tastes. Few people credit them with an understanding that conservatism only truly succeeds as a "big tent" movement, and that moderate conservatives like the McCains are key to making such a thing possible.

"The Republican Party should be a place for all kinds of people, and I hope my fellow moderates come to see that the party is the place for them, too," McCain continued.

As McCain rightly notes, the mass exodus that people like Malkin, Coulter and Ingraham advocate would only help the Democrats.

"If the party continues to demand that people leave, I guarantee you that they will," McCain noted. "If you tell people there is no place for them, they aren’t going to fight for their right to stay. They are going to rush into the open arms of the other team."

One can imagine that the Democrats would be more than happy to have John and Meghan McCain on their team, even if Michelle Malkin lacks the wisdom to see the benefit.

"The old conservatives of the past need to start accepting that this is a new era and I am a part of a new generation," McCain concludes. "I am as sick of the infighting as everyone else, but I would like to point out that I am not the one starting this fight or demanding that the other half of the party leave."

A Republican party with Meghan and John McCain is a stronger Republican party -- especially since John McCain has begun out-networking President Barack Obama.

If Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham can't recognize this, they'd better get the hell out of the way for people who can. One thing is for certain: Meghan McCain is not taking the slings and arrows of the extreme right-wing lying down.

She's dropping the gloves and fighting back.

Stay Classy, Meghan McCain

Your detractors certainly won't

Ever since Meghan McCain started making waves in American conservative circles, she's been attacked with all kinds of unpleasantness.

Laura Ingraham made fun of her weight. She's often been mocked as a valley girl.

But the most shameful attack on Meghan McCain came recently, as Ken Layne, one of the authors of the Wonkette blog mocked her for giving a shit about an apparently suicidal individual.

"Please pray for me. SeriousLy please I want death. End it for. Me please. I hate http://myloc.me/enq5," the individual wrote.

Like any sane, compassionate individual, McCain was naturally distressed by the message and made great efforts to help this individual.

Layne, for his part, was all too happy to mock McCain for her care for another human being:

"Much like the earlier generations of unemployed bloggers, Meghan McCain is just so deep in the Internet right now that she’s going double insane. Behold her nervous, illiterate twitters about somebody she doesn’t know who may or may not exist, on the Internet, and perhaps at minimum exists on the other side of the country, typing some sadsack stuff about wanting to die. Teen-agers are hyper-emotional, Meghan, sort of like you, except you haven’t been a teen-ager since your dad almost joined John Kerry’s presidential ticket."

When McCain Twittered that her publicist was calling the Seattle Police Department to find help for the distressed individual, Layne continued his shameful theatrics:

"So, what happened? Who knows! Meghan actually went outside the other day and reportedly drove recklessly and the police had to stop her and punish her for being a dangerous monster trying to kill people on the public roads, and then she just holed up with her Twitter and went progressively more nuts while reading the random twitters of other people, and next thing omg she is making her poor publicist call the Seattle police department because Meghan is the new Bat Man of the Internet, and she will save you, but sort of like if the Bat Man just made his English slave 'Alfred' call various police departments when there was trouble, in Seattle."

When McCain Twittered about again later, Layne was content to reward her efforts with yet more snark:

"Well, one comforting thought is that nobody, ever, has written the suicidal message 'they want death.' Because, you know, it would be 'I want death,' and even then, probably not, because …. Meghan, are you even following the English-language feed of Twitter? Because we are starting to think you’ve accidentally connected to the Norwegian death metal twitters. Ask your publicist to maybe check your network connections!"

As it turned out, there very much was a situation in Seattle. The person who Twittered McCain messaged again later in the day.

"[T]here was no prank. Just a person who is confused and lost but lucky to see that people care," the person wrote. "I am seeking outpatient trtmnt."

"I am fine will be seeking more in depth help later. So embarrassed and sad," they continued. "I will be fine. Never realized even strangers cared. my friend is taking me to see someone about therapy and medication...again thank you so much..."

Suicide is known to be a serious matter. Well, at least by most people who aren't Ken Layne.

Of course, some might expect someone at the Wonkette blog to show some embarrassment over the general lack of redemptive human qualities among some of their writers.

Guess again.

That was Layne's partners in scumminess Sara K Smith and Jim Newell mocking both the Examiner and Cindy McCain for calling Layne to account for this shameful episode.

Unshockingly, Meghan McCain seems to have driven the collective "progressive" left to losing their minds. Not only are they willing to abandon any sense of personal dignity in mocking McCain for actually giving a flying fuck about a fellow human being, but some of the more "substantive" criticisms of McCain have proven to be just plain embarrassing.

Consider the following criticism from the serially-dishonest proprietor of Enormous Thriving Plants:

"

'Right now, I can not stop listening to this song "Phenomena" by the Yeah Yeah Yeah's. It is the song at the end of the movie "The Ruins" which is officially one of the scariest movies I have ever seen! Anyone that wants a good horror movie should rent it immediately. It gave me nightmares for days!'

Please, PLEASE make her the new face of American conservatism. The shift from racist, angry bigots like Coulter, Malkin, and Rush, to adolescent airheads like McCain's sideways-hat-wearin' daughter will be refreshing, entertaining and not the least bit threatening. Can't wait until the GOP base sinks its teeth into whatever progressive stances she might currently have. ...Might make for one mighty interesting 'schism'!"

Apparently, Ken Layne's most substantive criticism of Meghan McCain is that she doesn't consult her Grammar check when she's concerned about a human being whose life my be in peril. Likewise, Audrey II's most substantive criticism of McCain seems to be that she likes music and movies.

If that's the worst criticisms people like Layne, Newell, Smith, or Audrey can offer for McCain, she must be one awfully exemplary person.

But one thing is for certain: one should try to avoid falling into a position of mortal peril around Ken Layne, Jim Newell or Sara K Smith. They'd almost certainly be quite content to laugh at a drowning man while he slips under the water.

The Battle Over the Defining Face of the New GOP

Bill Bennet favours McCain over Palin

Speaking on CNN recently, senior Republican Bill Bennet frames with unequivocal clarity the choice that lays before the National Committee for a New America, the organization providing the thrust behind the efforts to re-brand the GOP.

That choice is very simple: rebuild the party around a Palin-esque image, or rebuild the party around a McCain-esque image. No matter what Rush Limbaugh may have to say about it, not rebuilding the party at all is not an option.

With equally unequivocal clarity, Bennet also has his own preference in terms of the identity the party should pursue -- a youth-oriented moderate image, as best exemplified by Meghan McCain.

However, Bennet contends that the media isn't doing the Republican party any favours by continuing to focus on figures like Palin.

“One of the things the media could do – some of the media – is to move the debate off Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh,” Bennett said. “This is probably not the future of the Republican Party."

"It could talk about a Paul Ryan or a Mike Pence," Bennet continued. "It could talk about a Bobby Jindal. It could talk even about a John Kyl or a David Petraeus. You know, there’s a lot of talent in this party."

"I ran into Meghan McCain last night," Bennet added. "And I have to tell you, Bill, she’s refreshing, she’s honest and she’s a face that could really help them galvanize young people and independents."

Despite what the most extreme conservative ideologues seem to insist, the Republican party very much does need to be able to reach out to independents and to fiscally conservative Democrats.

Sarah Palin herself seems to understand the need to rebuild the party for the 21st century -- something that should have been taking place in 1999 as opposed to 2009 -- as suggested by her recent membership in the NCNA. However, whether Palin intends to contribute to an effort to moderate the Republican party in the interest of being politically competitive or is merely looking for another political venue in which to hang her star is another matter altogether.

"Dirty" Moderates

McCains call for space for moderates within GOP

When Arlen Specter left the Republican party for the Democrats, Rush Limbaugh had one request for him:

"Well, Specter, take McCain with you. And his daughter."

Limbaugh's words underscore what has become an increasingly-hostile environment toward moderate conservatives in the Republican party -- a trend that began in the 1990s as the Republican party increasingly courted the religious right. Demagogues more interested in ideological purity than the pragmatic nuts-and-bolts of politics have increasingly led the Republican party astray.

John and Meghan McCain want to lead it back to the centre -- a task increasingly difficult with individuals like Limbaugh and Ann Coulter trying to drag the party even further to the right, and insisting that anyone unwilling to collaborate to that end be cast out of the party.

"I just wish that moderates like myself — more moderate Republicans and more socially liberal Republicans — weren’t looked at as, ‘Get rid of the dirty moderates. Get rid of them,’" Meghan recently complained, pointing to the Democrats' success in moderating itself.

“We need to be an inclusive party," she continued. "We need to be an umbrella party. We need to inspire 20-somethings, which is something the Obama campaign did very well.”

“And it’s not that I think that our message is neither good nor bad — I just think it’s that the Democrats package their message better, and I think if we could be able to communicate with my generation, the Republican Party can really rebuild itself,” she concluded.

The elder McCain, who seems to have accepted that his time to lead the Republican party is passing, impressed upon the need to embrace both youth and newer technologies. “By Twitter, by Internet, by all the things that frankly, the Obama campaign did a very good job at," he added. "That’s why we need lots of young people involved. If you are young, give us a call.”

McCain continued on the importance of mixing older conservative principles with these newer technological communication means. “I think we go back to old principles — and that’s less government, lower taxes, national security, etc, but we have to also have a new set of ideas and policies to implement and bring our principles into the 21st century.”

In order to find those ideas and principles the Republican party desperately needs to embrace moderate conservatives.

The Republican party's inability to accomodate moderates within its ranks have already cost it dearly. Once Al Franken is seated in the Senate -- and as the inconsistencies surrounding the Minnesota Senate election are cleared up it appears that he very much will win -- the Republicans will be seated across from a filibuster-proof Senate.

While all of this takes place, fools like Rush Limbaugh continue to sneer in the face of political reality. Faced with the fact that the world refuses to conform to their fantasies of ideological purity, individuals like Limbaugh have been revealed for the dinosaurs they really are.

Unfortunately they seem intent on leading the Republican party into extinction alongside them. Fortuantely, individuals like the McCains refuse to let them.

The High Road is a Hard Road

Meghan McCain's same-sex marriage appeal likely to win few friends in GOP

In a recent post on the Daily Beast, Meghan McCain has issued some advice to the Republican party that some people in the GOP will almost certainly not like.

She insists that Repblicans need to support same-sex marriage.

"Of all the causes I believe in and speak publicly about, this is one of the ones closest to my heart," McCain writes.

She goes on to note how important the Log Cabin Republicans are to the GOP, re-connecting them with some of their most important values.

"The Log Cabin Republicans’ mission 'is to work within the Republican Party to advocate equal rights for all Americans, including gays and lesbians,'" she continues. "The group is centered on core Republican values, such as limited government, individual liberty and responsibility, an economy based in free markets, and a strong national defense. And in the spirit of the GOP’s founding beliefs—personal freedom and liberty—they are dedicated to securing full equality for gays and lesbians in America to create a stronger, larger, and more-unified GOP."

Even Ronald Reagan, the United States' prototype arch-conservative, was wise enough to recognize how important organizations like the LCR are to the party.

"Yeah, you read that right," McCain continued. "The ultimate Republican rock star bucked the conventional wisdom of his advisers as they were planning his presidential campaign and helped fight the [California] anti-gay proposition because he knew it was wrong. Reagan’s argument centered around the idea that parents already had all the rights they needed to protect their children and that the government did not need to interfere. It was a perfect example of the Great Communicator doing what was right, but not in a way that further divided voters."

Few conservatives have made the case for conservative support for same-sex marriage quite as eloquently as Canadians Adam Daifallah and Tasha Kheiriddin. In Rescuing Canada's Right Daifallah and Kheiriddin argue that conservatives should support same-sex marriage as well as adoption rights for same-sex couples precisely because they're pro-family policies.

Kheiriddin and Daifallah's appeal made them highly suspect to religious conservatives within Canada's conservative movement. Fortunately, religious conservatives have been comparatively marginal within Canadian conservatism.

However, Meghan McCain isn't as fortunate. Her pro-same-sex marriage appeal will likely draw the ire of American religious conservatives, and give her detractors -- individuals such as Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham -- more ammunition to usse against her.

It doesn't change the fact that supporting same-sex marriage is the right thing to do. Certainly, the Republicans could support same-sex marriage for political gain, but this is the wrong reason.

The right reason is to follow the example of Ronald Reagan and support the Log Cabin Republicans because it's right. It's precisely the kind of right thing that ideologues like Coulter, Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh will not allow the party to do, except over its own dead body.

"At the most basic level, sexual orientation should not be a factor in how you are treated," McCain writes. "If the Republican Party has any hope of gaining substantial support from a wider, younger base, we need to get past our anti-gay rhetoric."

What Meghan McCain has done promises to make her life in the GOP extremely difficult. But the high road -- the right road -- is rarely an easy one to follow.

The high road is usually a hard road. Hopefully, Republicans share McCain's courage to walk it.

M Bantha Pudu

Shooting the Messengers

Tommy de Seno calls for John, Meghan McCain to leave the Republican Party

As one continues to assess the current state of the American Republican Party, one can't help but think that some honest, heart-felt criticism is certainly in order.

The Republicans have lost the White House and lost control of both Congressional houses. To make matters worse, far-right ideologue Rush Limbaugh seems to have seized control of the party's public image.

At a time like this, when times are so dark for the Republican party, Justified Right's Tommy de Seno wants to drive some of the party's most concerned supporters out.

John and Meghan McCain are in de Seno's sights. Their unforgivable sin is purported to be criticizing the American conservative movement and working with the enemy.

"I grew tired of McCain fighting our agenda, voting against tax cuts, bowing to global warming loons, insulting Christian leaders, ganging against us with his liberal 'Gang of 14' and passing useless laws with liberals like Senator Russ Feingold. — Not to mention snubbing CPAC," de Seno writes.

"The press rewarded McCain’s behavior by labelling him a “maverick” for bashing the Republican Party (if a Democrat bucks his party, like Lieberman, the press paints him as a traitor, not a maverick)," he continues.

De Seno then goes on to address Meghan McCain, who recently took on Ann Coulter in the press.

"Now comes his daughter Meghan McCain, proving the old adage that the poop doesn’t fall far from the pig’s rear end, Meghan has joined her father in the Republican bashing business," de Seno writes.

"Writing on The Daily Beast, an Internet blog, she takes on author Ann Coulter," he continues. "She says she 'straight up doesn’t understand' Coulter (probably all those big words Ann uses). She labels Ann’s followers part of a 'cult' (Meghan must be reading the papers — that’s how media refers to our whole party!). She takes a swing at CPAC, too (chip off the old block, that Meghan)."

If Meghan McCain doesn't understand Ann Coulter, she certainly isn't alone. In a blog post on the National Post's Full Comment blog, John Moore notes that Coulter's current rhetoric is incredibly out of sync with the comeuppance the GOP recieved in the recent election. Ironically enough, de Seno credits himself and his likeminded ilk for that comeuppance, when he notes their refusal to support the elder McCain.

"It’s painfully clear she has crossed the threshold of her half life," Moore writes. "Her mantra that liberals are pitiable, conniving, traitorous losers and that conservatives are valorous, patriotic administrative geniuses plays poorly against the backdrop of the hand-over from George W Bush to Barack Obama. Imagine penning a panegyric to dirigible travel while crossing the Atlantic on the Hindenburg."

Yet de Seno seems to think that criticizing Coulter -- who, along with Limbaugh, currently remains one of the best reasons not to support the GOP -- should be considered off-limits for Republicans.

Quite the contrary. What the Republican party needs more than anything is a critical voice from within the party to remind it that people such as Limbaugh, Coulter and de Seno are leading the Republican party too far into the political fringes for it to even possibly remain viable.

In the world of politics, some times one's worst critic is their best friend. Sadly, individuals like Tommy de Seno are all to eager to push any critical voice out of the Republican party.

Shooting the messengers will not solve the Republican party's problems. Unfortunately, individuals such as de Seno are afflicted with itchy trigger fingers.

Meghan McCain Gets It (Mostly) Right

Sean Hannity, unshockingly, gets it wrong

With the question of whether or not Guantanamo Bay detainees should have their rights respected hanging thick in the air, FOX News' Sean Hannity invited Meghan McCain, amongst a panel of other commentators, on his show to discuss the issue.

Hannity -- along with most of the panel -- is stringently opposed to "granting" the rights of Guantanamo detainees.

"They declared war on us and we're fighting a war and we know there is about 60-some odd detainees that have gone back to the battlefield. Why for the first time ever would we give rights to enemy combatants?" Hannity asked.

"What competent person thinks this is a good idea?" McCain asked. "Literally when I think of my brother and his people and his platoon, the people I know over there fighting for this so we can let them go so they can attack us again? It's insane."

McCain is right and wrong about this.

When, as the segment itself alluded to, the Guantanamo detainees accused of helping plan the 9/11 attacks admit their role in the plot and insist they're proud of it, it's pretty clear what they will do if they're released free and clear from Guantanamo Bay.

However, the topic of discussion wasn't merely about the notion that these men could be released. It was also about whether or not those detained should have any rights.

Since the United States began taking prisoners in the War on Terror, the "enemy combatant" designation has been used liberally as an excuse to avoid designating them as criminals or as prisoners of war.

If charged as criminals, those detained at Guantanamo Bay would be subject to Habeus Corpus and would enjoy a collection of civil rights that would rule out the treatment they've received at Camp X-Ray, including torture.

If declared to be prisoners of war, these detainees would be subject to the full range of rights laid out under the Geneva Conventions. Once again, torture would have been strictly forbidden.

Now, mercifully, the Obama administration is putting an end to the designation of Guantanamo detainees as "enemy combatants".

Wether as criminals charged under US law or as prisoners of war, these individuals will finally enjoy the rights mandated under law -- be it domestic or international -- and will finally be subject to some manner of justice worthy of the name.

As previously mentioned, one of these rights is the right to not be subjected to torture -- something that Hannity apparently thinks is acceptable even as a Christian.

McCain, for her own part, disagrees.

"I think it's what separates us from the terrorists," McCain explained. "My father could never lift me up as a child because he can't move his arm. He can't ride a bike because he can't bend his knee because he was tortured. I think he knows better."

There's also a serious issue at stake in pretending that the United States would be "giving" these individuals rights. In fact, the rights of these individuals are established within both US and international law.

Although McCain's approach to the issue of rights leaves much to be desired, her denunciation of torture is as effective, prescient and welcome is any. With the issue of how Guantanamo Bay detainees should be designated soon to be resolved, the voice of anyone with an understanding of the nature of torture is dearly needed.

A New Face for the Republican Party

Meghan McCain is the anti-Coulter

In the wake of the Republican party's electoral meltdown, some rather curious icons are beginning to take dominate centre stage in the Republican Party.

In the wake of any strong leadership in the Republican party, American conservative icons like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are quickly becoming the face of the party as well.

American centrist conservatives have plenty of reason to be alarmed.

Few people seem to understand this more than Meghan McCain, the daughter of John McCain. Recently McCain denounced Coulter in no uncertain terms.

According to McCain, Coulter is “offensive, radical, insulting and confusing all at the same time. If figureheads like Ann Coulter are turning me off, then they are definitely turning off other members of my generation as well.”

“I love the Republican Party, I spent two years campaigning with my father and I completely fell in love with the Republican Party, and I think it’s hard for me to explain to my friends that are in their 20s when these icons of the party say radical things,” McCain explained. “I have a friend that’s Jewish – she made anti-Semitic comments. It’s hard to defend that.”

“I just wish for more centrist icons in the Republican Party,” she concluded.

Oddly enough, McCain herself has every bit of the potential necessary to supplant Coulter as an icon of the party, and particularly of American Conservative women.

Even as a recent convert to the Republican party McCain's centrist credentials are solid. McCain is known to hold liberal views on social issues, including support of same-sex marriage and stem cell research.

McCain has even interned on Saturday Night Live. With the exception of the various fictions that many people are intent on peddling about her father, there's very little not to like about McCain.

Meanwhile, Ann Coulter's attitudes and behaviours speak for themselves. Those conservatives Coulter doesn't alienate she reveals for precisely what they are -- extremists every bit as radical as she is.

Meghan McCain would, at the very least, put a younger, prettier, much more moderate face on the American conservative movement.

For their own sake, one hopes that American conservatives recognize this.