The Only Good Republican Is A Loser Republican

It’s been so refreshing to see the bipartisan respect for John McCain this week. Democrats everywhere are reminding us how much they love John McCain. He was a patriot, a hero, and a statesman. It’s a real shame that McCain didn’t die before he ran for President—he might have won.

Because, of course, before he died, he was none of these things. He was a racist and sexist bigot. He used Botox excessively. He might have had Alzheimer’s. Actually, he was really racist.

But once the left got a taste of a winning Republican (in the person of one Donald J. Trump), they decided that McCain was just fine. Always a lovable loser, the Washington Generals to the Dems’ Harlem Globetrotters, the left was happy to deify McCain upon his passing. All of a sudden, they decided that respect for the flag was a really important thing. All because of just one thing—McCain was essentially a #nevertrump guy.

The media has decided to make a Faustian deal with the neo-con GOP establishment—rebuke Trump, and we’ll change our position on you.

They did it with W, and now they’ve done it with McCain. Mainstream media would certainly prefer a GOP that looks like the one that John McCain represented, not the one that is currently making Trump the most popular president inside his own party in history. They’d prefer a GOP that is willing to be part of the Gang of Eight rather than Tea Party caucus.

Make no mistake about it—McCain was a RINO. He was a thorn in the side of the Trump agenda. He was the deciding vote on Obamacare reform. So of course the media loves him.

And they loved the final “fuck you” that McCain shot at Trump from beyond the grave—McCain requested that Barack Obama and George W. Bush speak at his funeral, and he asked that Trump not be invited at all. But even in this final act, McCain showed that his most enviable trait was that he was a loser. He asked two men who beat the snot out of him to eulogize him. His best friend in the Senate, Lindsey Graham, said of McCain that “John taught us how to lose. He failed a lot, but he never quit.”

That’s why the Left and the media love him. Not because he was a hero in a war that they think was immoral. Not because he was a good man. They love him because he lost, and he was happy doing it.

 

 

52 Replies to “The Only Good Republican Is A Loser Republican”

  1. Josh Howard

    If this week has taught me anything about the media, it’s that the only Republican they love is a dead Republican. So much patting the back of a dead horse they kicked for years.

    Reply
  2. stingray65

    As is often the case, McCain hated Trump because they were so much alike. Both are thin-skinned, and don’t take criticism well. Both gained considerable wealth from family connections – Trump from his father and McCain from his 2nd wife’s family. Both were questionable conservatives when running for President, although Trump has proven his conservative standing while in office, something that McCain never did in the Senate. Both wanted to be liked by the mainstream media, and both generally did receive favorable coverage until they dared to run competitively against a Democrat. I think this tongue in cheek headline captures your sentiments pretty accurately:

    http://scrappleface.com/blog/2018/08/27/4-in-5-democrats-would-elect-mccain-president-now/

    Reply
  3. Fred Lee

    The one truth in this post is that DJT has made others who were formerly vilified look good by comparison.

    To the above poster, in what way has Trump proven himself to be a conservative? His embrace of organized labor? His love of protectionist policies? His ignorance of economics? His propensity for nepotism? His lack of common decency? Which of those are you trying to attach to the conservative movement?

    There is no longer a place in the Republican party for conservative principles of individual liberty, economic freedom, and small government.

    McCain was not perfect. In my mind his biggest sin was to bring Sarah Palin into the limelight, indirectly giving rise to those who would eventually destroy the Republican Party. I’ve had to redirect my vote to that other perennial loser, the Libertarian party…

    Reply
    • stingray65

      Well I’m just a deplorable Trump supporter, but I thought he showed his conservative bona fides by cutting taxes, cutting regulations, trying to shut down socialized medicine (aka Obamacare), trying to enforce immigration laws, budgeting a stronger national defense (and getting NATO allies to pay their share), trying to get better trade deals (based on lower barriers to American exporters), and bringing a bit more sanity to the EPA, Dept of Education, and HUD. So far his judicial picks have been the best in history in terms of finding people who actual believe in following the Constitution. I note that he hasn’t been totally successful mostly due to wimpy RINOs in congress and Democrat “resistance”, but overall I think it is safe to say that Donald Trump is the most conservative US President since Reagan.

      Reply
      • Fred Lee

        Cutting taxes: This is laudable only if it includes a commensurate cut in spending. Trump and his allies in congress managed only the easy part of that equation. I will grant that the corporate tax cut is long overdue, and is the one highlight of the tax bill. With a “Republican” in the presidency and a “Republican” controlled congress, they had the ability to finally enact meaningful income tax reform. And they whiffed.

        Cutting regulations: I will grant you this.

        Enforcing immigration laws: Are we giving trophies for “best effort” now? Trump has been simultaneously ham-handed and ineffective here. Illegal immigration levels are virtually unchanged.

        Trade: *sigh*. The principles regarding free trade are well established. If our trading partners artificially lower the price of their exports, this is a *good thing* for the US. Trump’s trade war will hurt consumers and hurt workers.

        I’ll refrain from commenting on his court appointments. There is much nuance in that discussion.

        Reply
    • MrGreenMan

      He has returned to a pre-Dewey stance on a large number of things. The Church of Globalism and the Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism were infectious, alien species on the traditional Republican estate, where the chief virtue was letting the world go to its own hell so long as they left us alone.

      The GOP hasn’t shrunk government. Pretending that the likes of Paul Ryan, John McCain, or anyone who presided over the GOP destruction of budget restraint by greenlighting a doubling of debt under Bush and then a doubling of debt under Obama is small government is to engage in the most extreme form of double think imaginable.

      The last GOPer that shrank the Leviathan was Newt Gingrich, who endorsed Trump. Mr. Trump has set his people to shrinking the federal bureaucracy in real, tangible terms by refusing to fill administrative positions and engaging in the old Tom Tancredo tactic of refusing to fill the bureaucratic holes with bodies that would remain on the government nipple forever.

      Remember, we were told by sore loser NeverTrumpers that Pres. Trump would nominate his sister. Go cry in the Sykes beer that he actually put up Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and he’s flipped the ideological balance on two circuits with two more coming. Remind yourself – Trump was the one capable of winning. You come to defend the lost cause, the National Review desire of being a well-loved loser, because all the David-French-approved and Bill-Kristol-Inspected candidates couldn’t even beat Mr. Orange P*ssy-Grabber in a Republican primary.

      Reply
  4. Mopar4wd

    Enemy of my enemy is my friend. Old as time.

    Both side’s latch onto people who cross over, but it never has the effect they think it will have.
    Trumps popularity is entirely due to the fact that the left hates him, based on merit he wouldn’t win a race for a town council in West Virginia.

    Reply
  5. rambo furum

    You say neo-con, others say cuckservative, I say traitor and Zionist warmonger. He was all of these, if they even mean different things at all.

    Reply
  6. Factchecker

    @Fred Lee

    There is no place in an OVERWHELMINGLY HISPANIC COUNTRY for conservative principles of individual liberty, economic freedom, and small government.”

    That is not a racist statement, it is a multicultural statement: if you disagree, study the culture and politics of Mexico and South America and provide counterexamples.

    And that is the world that McCain worked tirelessly to create.

    Reply
  7. Rod Jones

    It totally blows my mind how Republicans can forget everything the GOP has historically stood for and support Trump. Any generic Republican president (say, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio) would have slashed taxes, rolled back regulations and appointed conservative judges. But no honorable man or woman in public life would have even dreamed of doing the following:

    Ridiculed a Vietnam POW. Lied compulsively about everything. Trusted felons like Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen. Viciously and repeatedly attacked the integrity of the FBI, the Justice Department and the national security establishment.

    Declared war on a free press. Started a absurd trade war that is already costing Americans jobs and farmers their markets. Cozied up to authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin. Kept secret what happened at the Helsinki summit. And continually treated Canada like a major enemy.

    Trump is mad about what a Google search on him comes up with. Wail until he sees what the history books have to say.

    Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      “Declared war on a free press.”

      Okay, I was kind of nodding my head until you said that.

      The so-called free press is a oligopoly that works tirelessly to destroy the reputation and livelihood of even its meekest critics.

      Reply
      • Mopar4wd

        So how would you fix it. As much as you don’t like it having press separate from the state seems to have served our country well?

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          We don’t need a press that has anything to do with the state.

          We need a truly free press. One where the ownership of every major outlet doesn’t resolve down to a handful of corporations. One where the talking points aren’t distributed every morning and followed precisely across every television station and newspaper. One where we don’t have 96% of major city newspapers endorsing the same candidate. One that doesn’t doxx and intimidate its critics. Shall I go on?

          Reply
          • -Nate

            No need Jack ;

            You said it succinctly : all press and media in America is corporate owned and so by definition isn’t free nor can it possibly be ” liberal ” . that’s a dog whistle sheep like to hear even knowing it’s 100 % bullshit .

            There used to be a “Fairness Doctrine” that prevented this situation guess which party killed it off ? .

            Yep, your bought and paid for gop, the corporate lap dogs .

            -Nate

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Nate,

            I think you’re operating from the idea that a corporate media can’t be socially liberal.

            The Democratic Party as it exists right now is fiscally conservative, hawkish on war, but socially liberal.

          • Mopar4wd

            I agree with corporate ownership. However the current admins FCC has been cutting back on regulations that prevent that not increasing them.
            Also on the 95%thing that may happen either way. Lots of Journalist tend to lean left by the nature of the way the left nurtures the proffesion. You also have a bit of self selection., Like car guy auto writers, lots of Honda fans thanks to self selection. So I could see a world where every bit of the media was owned locally and the same thing happening.
            I have been reading a bit on regulating web platforms lately. There is some question whether that would have the effect conservatives want. If it was completely unbiased the percentage of users who lean left on the most popular platforms would still drown out the right which leads to the Fox news effect of each side of my getting their news from like minded sources.
            What said given the size of their effect on the economy I would like to see some oversight of these platforms.

    • arbuckle

      It was either him or Clinton. Given that choice I went with Trump. Seeing how a generic Democrat president is likely to raise taxes, increase regulation, and appoint liberal judges it is extremely likely I’ll be voting for him again in 2020 if he’s the candidate.

      Look, there’s a lot about Trump’s personality I don’t like, but Calvin Coolidge isn’t going to be walking through that door anytime soon. I’ll take some Twitter rants and weird talk on Canada if it means holding back the leftist agenda.

      Reply
  8. David Florida

    Tragically flawed, yet I voted for him twice. Most ‘journalists’ will not meet his standard of sacrifice (he didn’t have to stay in Hanoi for five and a half years.) In summation, I’ve more principles in common with McCain than Tom Hayden. I wonder how many people writing hagiographic obituaries this week can say the same?

    Reply
  9. Factchecker

    @Rod Jones: you are correct to the extent that the mainstream GOP has tacitly supported open borders, and therefore the GOP establishment “has historically stood for” exactly what Aexandria Ocasio-Cortez stands for. And most Republican voters had had a huge problem with that.

    That’s why his approval among Republican voters is so high.

    If there were another candidate who would a) Represent actual mainstream Americans and b) actually win elections and c) have more of a statesmanlike persona, then perhaps I’d prefer that candidate.

    Jeb! was a pathetic joke of a human being and candidate. Rubio wasn’t much better. Both were obviously unconcerned with the fate of non-Hispanic Americans.

    If you wish to live in a Latin American country, why not just move to Mexico or Guatemala, rather than expending so much effort to remake “El Norte” in their image?

    How many cuckservatives does it take to change a lightbulb?
    A: 220 million. 100 million to elect an open-borders traitor, and 20 million illegal aliens so that they can hire one to change it for them instead of an American.

    Reply
  10. Factchecker

    Yes, I made a math error. But you get the point. Or no, you won’t, because a cuckservative’s entire intellectual effort is devoted to not getting the point.

    Reply
  11. Shrug

    Rest assured The Left (the actual left and not just the CNN Anchor Left) have absolutely no love lost for McCain because of the reasons you point out. He was a racist whose actions led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. He had his moments (McCain-Feingold, dubious though its effect actually was) and the ACA vote among a couple others, but by and large he was trash.

    He even left on one last fuck you by refusing to resign when it was clear he was not long for the world, where the people of Arizona could have voted for his replacement. No, instead he decided to be a bit of a twat and die in office, allowing the governor to appoint his successor.

    Like most of the old guard in Congress, he was a shitty do nothing whose brief positives are far outweighed by his overwhelming negatives he

    Reply
  12. SIV

    I didn’t like John McCain one bit (excepting that hilarious Chelsea Clinton joke) but despite my low opinion of him I’d like to think that disinviting Sarah Palin to his funeral was done against his final wishes.

    Reply
  13. hank chinaski

    He was a warmonger, and of all people should have known better. If he had had his way he would have reignited the Cold War in Eastern Europe and doubled down on failed ‘regime change’ in the Levant, same as Hillary.

    Yes, he and the likes of Ryan and Rubio and McConnel are nothing but controlled opposition.

    I’m finding the ‘Al Capone tax dodge’ strategy to strongarm his cronies amusing. Dig enough on anyone and you’ll find dirt to nail them with. The NKVD would be proud.

    A clever man would test his and Teddy’s Gliobastomas for a genetic match, or more amusingly for a TyrellCorp style micro stamping of the letters ‘MAGA’.

    Reply
  14. Doug

    McCain is the only candidate for president that I regret pulling the lever for. The only thing that makes me feel better about voting for this bitter spiteful man is that the winner did more to destroy America than anyone else in my lifetime has done.

    Reply
    • CJinSD

      When I vote for Trump in 2020, it will be the first time in my life that I have voted for a Presidential candidate instead of against a worse choice. I’ll be the first to admit that I was wrong about Trump. I really just thought he’d slow the rate of our decline’s acceleration, not actually go great things for our economy and security.

      Reply
  15. Widgetsltd

    So tax evasion is not a real crime now? Is this true for all of us, or just for the wealthy, powerful, and well connected? Whether Trump has engaged in criminal activity or not, the fact that several in his inner circle have done so does not reflect well on him. Can Trump pick ‘em, or what?!?

    Reply
  16. Daniel J

    John McCain kept getting voted in again and again. Anyone outside of Arizona can talk all they want about his politics but the only people he was responsible for representative was his voters. So while we we all talk about him being a Rino and how he’s hijacked policies and Senate votes, all he has to do is represent his people.

    I sure hope my senators do the same damn thing, even if it means ruffling the party feathers.

    Reply
  17. -Nate

    I’m shocked that any American, much less ones who call themselves ‘Patriots’, could call Senator McCain a coward or a loser .

    Regardless of your views on his politics .

    -Nate

    Reply
    • rambo furum

      He’s a traitor. He volunteered military secrets to the enemy before even asked. Were he not the admiral’s son, he’d have been court martialed for that. Of course absent preferential treatment, he’d have been grounded or worse for causing the death of 134 people aboard the USS Forrestal with his “wet start” stunt.

      Anyone with a positive view of McCain just doesn’t know enough.

      Reply
  18. manfromlox

    Fuck you too Bark.

    You didn’t have to take a shit on his grave, but you did.

    Fuck you.

    You’re part of the problem.

    Reply
    • rambo furum

      Yeah, he killed a bunch of people trying to do a backfire trick. He should have been doing hard labor if not executed for that. That is called privilege. Sorry if I’m not impressed by that 20 flight hours he had before ejecting improperly and smacking his arms up. Everybody else payed attention and remembered to fold their arms as they were taught in flight school. But not the admiral’s son.

      Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          It is believed that McCain was responsible for some of the disaster, if not all of it.

          That’s up for debate to put it mildly; what is not up for debate is that McCain was taken off to Saigon for “some much needed R&R” while the Forrestal was still burning. It is also public record that he spent most of the first few hours sitting in the pilot’s ready room watching a video feed of his fellow sailors working to put out the blaze.

          Reply
          • Beneath Contempt

            Didn’t an electrical issue cause a rocket to hit his plane? How is he at fault for that?

            How many other pilots were involved in fire control? I wouldn’t let them do it, they’re expensive.
            As for the R&R, what do you expect from the spoilt son of an Admiral?

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            I’m not particularly well versed on this whole thing. From what I can see, there are a couple of competing theories:

            0. He was trying to do a “wet start”, which was a favorite showoff move of the Naval aviators, and he overloaded the electrical system on the Skyhawk. This seems implausible.
            1. He claims that his fuselage-mounted bomb dropped all by itself, but it may have happened as he was scrambling to get out of the plane, and that bomb made things far worse. This seems more reasonable.

            I have no dog in the fight. I don’t give a shit what he did in Vietnam. I’m more concerned about all the young men in Ohio who are missing limbs or their sanity because John McCain sent them to war when it wasn’t necessary.

  19. tifoso

    It’s hard to say who’s more contemptible, the now fawning media who vilified McCain during his campaign against Obama, or McCain himself who threw his vice-presidential running mate under the bus, even though she was unwaveringly loyal and never uttered a word against him.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.