IBD cited McCain's " 'maverick' positions" on taxes and immigration, failed to note his reversal on those issues
SUMMARY: An Investor's Business Daily article claimed that the Supreme Court ruling that overturned a handgun ban in the District of Columbia "is a potential lifeline for [Sen. John] McCain, who has failed so far to unite conservative voters behind him," many of whom "still resent his 'maverick' positions on taxes and immigration." But the article did not mention that McCain has reversed his positions on taxes and immigration, adopting positions more closely conforming to the views of the GOP base on both issues.
In a June 26 Investor's Business Daily article, staff writer Sean Higgins wrote that the Supreme Court ruling that overturned a handgun ban in the District of Columbia "is a potential lifeline for [Sen. John] McCain, who has failed so far to unite conservative voters behind him," many of whom, Higgins asserted, "still resent his 'maverick' positions on taxes and immigration." Higgins did not mention, however, that McCain has reversed his positions on taxes and immigration, adopting positions more closely conforming to the views of the GOP base on both issues. While McCain opposed President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, he now supports making the tax cuts permanent, while misrepresenting his stated reason for previously opposing them. And on immigration, McCain stated during the January 30 Republican presidential debate that he would no longer vote for the immigration bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) if it came to a vote on the Senate floor. McCain now says that "we've got to secure the borders first" -- a position at odds with his prior assertion that border security could not be disaggregated from other aspects of comprehensive immigration reform without being rendered ineffective.
As Media Matters for America has noted, numerous news articles have uncritically reported McCain's past positions on issues such as immigration and taxes without noting that he has since reversed himself.
In contrast to Higgins, Elisabeth Bumiller reported in a March 3 New York Times article that McCain has made a "striking turnaround ... on the Bush tax cuts, which he voted against twice but now wants to make permanent," and has "moved from his original position on immigration." Bumiller also noted that "McCain went so far at a debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in January to say that if his original proposal came to a vote on the Senate floor, he would not vote for it."
Similarly, The Boston Globe's Brian Mooney wrote in an April 20 article that McCain's maverick image "has been scuffed on his way to becoming the presumptive Republican presidential nominee," adding: "The policy shifts are evident: He abandoned comprehensive immigration reform last year as it threatened to sink his candidacy and is supporting tax cuts for the wealthy he had criticized for years and twice voted against in the Senate."
Additionally, in a June 20 Politico piece, contributing columnist and Washington journalist Gebe Martinez reported on McCain's reversal on immigration:
McCain, the Arizona senator, dismayed Latinos last year when he stepped back from his immigration bill that would have tightened the borders and legalized undocumented immigrants. As boos and hisses from angry Republican conservatives grew louder at campaign events, he switched course and vowed to "first" secure the borders. Were his failed bill to come up again, he would not vote for it, he said.
[...]
Trying to regain Latino support, McCain has chastised Republicans who stoke the fires of the immigration at election time. And at a private meeting with Chicago-area Latinos last week, he promised to push for a comprehensive immigration bill.
"It sounds like he's trying to have it both ways, and it's not convincing anyone," said Frank Sharry, who also was involved in immigration bill negotiations when he headed the National Immigration Forum.
This is not the McCain Hispanics thought they knew. Even after the 2001 terrorist attacks placed an emphasis on national security, McCain's speeches to Latino audiences and on the Senate floor prioritized the compassionate side of the immigration argument.
He understood that border security "first" means "deportation only" in the eyes of immigrant activists, and he championed a broader approach.
As the Senate mulled immigration in 2006, McCain often stood in the Capitol's corridors, pounding his fist in the air, arguing that border enforcement would not work without simultaneously penalizing employers who hire workers illegally, creating a temporary worker program and finding a way to bring 12 million illegal immigrants "out of the shadows" of society.
"It won't work! It won't work!" he protested of suggestions to do enforcement first. The stool cannot stand on one leg.
From Higgins' June 26 Investor's Business Daily article:
Sen. McCain, R-Ariz., is "clearly for Roberts- and Alito-type justices," [Sen. Sam] Brownback [R-KS] said, mentioning two of the conservative justices who voted with the majority.
That is a potential lifeline for McCain, who has failed so far to unite conservative voters behind him. Many still resent his "maverick" positions on taxes and immigration. The court ruling, which McCain had called for in an amicus brief, may help him rally those voters.
The reaction of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., to the ruling was muted but still critical. In a statement, the Democratic presidential nominee said that "crime-ravaged communities (need) to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures."















I agree that there has to be some regulation on handguns - no approval for anyone with a criminal history or mental illness. And it goes without saying that you shouldn't bring one to a public place like a courthouse or ballpark or school. However, trying to ban then for law abiding civilians to protect themselves in their own homes is absolutely disgusting.
The statistics dont lie that they show the overwhelming majority of deaths and crimes with handguns come from those who are not authorized to own them (have them illegally). The ban attempt shows how blind politicians are. Do they really think that anyone who is going to commit a crime with a gun (murder, etc) is going to want to do it with a legally obtained firearm? Criminals have them illegally, I should be able to protect myself agains them legally.
However, I may be reading this article incorrectly, but I am assuming that the term "Maverick" is assuming that McCain is one because he stands by his positions - which he has flip flopped to gain votes by siding with majority of Americans on those issues. But this article isn't containing false info that I can tell because it clearly states that republicans resent him on his Maverick stances, because we still dont believe him on Illegals.
I can tell because it clearly states that republicans resent him on his Maverick stances, because we still dont believe him on Illegals.
Republicans should love his position on illegal aliens. It means more cheap labor.
This is just a continuation of what the talking heads does. They turn a complete blind eye to what McCain is doing while spending countless hours of instilling doubt and fear where Obama is concerned. (who is he, the middle class doesn't like him, white men will not vote for him, blah, blah, blah).
McCain's gaffes are ignored and the bulk of his flip-flops are ignored. I see this as an aggressive act to get the American people in line to keep this race tight (obviously to justify 24/7 news coverage).
I only wonder if they (the talking heads) have lost touch with reality and completely miss how desperate Americans are for a change and that talking points that have no real substance will not appease the people or delude them; much less force them to entertain making this an election anything that McCain will want to remember.
which is why he trails Obama by double digits in the polls right now.
This is a fairly inaccurate statement. I've only personally seen 1 poll, I believe the LA Times poll, which only surveyed about 20% or so of republicans. All other polls are in a virtual tie at +/- 3% error.
From the LA Times: In this national poll's random sample of voters, 39% identified themselves as Democrats, 22% as Republicans and 27% as independents.
Hardly consider that to be an accurate way to poll data. If anything, the double digit lead would go to McCain if the polling was 39% repub, 22% dem, and 27% ind.
McCain needs both conservatives and independents. While conservatives may sit on their hands this election, they will be encouraged to vote against Obama. The "Maverick" label helps McCain with independents.
-- McCain has reversed his positions on taxes and immigration, adopting positions more closely conforming to the views of the GOP base -- mmfa
-- Sen. Barack Obama is risking his brand as a political reformer...he has moderated or changed positions on a number of politically-charged issues, leading to criticism from demoralized Democratic activists -- Huffpo
-- In recent weeks, he (Obama) toughened his stance on Iran and backed an expansion of the government's wiretapping powers. On Wednesday, he said states should be allowed to execute child rapists. When the Supreme Court the next day struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handguns, he did not complain...
..."I've been struck by the speed and decisiveness of his move to the center," said Will Marshall, president of the centrist Progressive Policy Institute... -- LATimes
-- the Democratic Party's progressive wing and the liberal blogosphere...are warning the senator that in his quest to reach voters in the middle of the political spectrum, he risks depressing the enthusiasm of the voters who clinched the nomination for him. -- WashPost
With both of these candidate's ability and willingness to double talk the American public...it points to one thing...the need for unmoderated, side-by-side debates...how else can we judge the depth of their convictions on the issues?
"Straight Talk Express" and "Yes, We Can" are both empty slogans.
Want to lead the greatest country in the world? Then stand side-by-side and show the public why they should vote for you. Otherwise, it's just two pandering milquetoasts seeking political power...rather than offering leadership and solutions for America...I'm not holding my breath!!