by Mark Silva
This is one of those reports that one can take two ways (but know, first of all, that the McCain campaign maintains that the tale is "not true"):
"At a dinner party in Los Angeles not long after the 2000 election, I was talking to a man and his wife, both prominent Republicans,'' Arianna Huffington writes today. "The conversation soon turned to the new president. 'I didn't vote for George Bush,' the man confessed. 'I didn't either,' his wife added. Their names: John and Cindy McCain (Cindy told me she had cast a write-in vote for her husband).''
Now, for those who want to tie McCain and Bush at the hip, portraying the possible election of the senator from Arizona as "the third term" of the former governor of Texas, the tale, if true, suggests that McCain wasn't always the booster for Bush that he has been made out to be lately-- If the upshot of their divisive 2000 primary battle indeed was a withheld vote. They they have parted ways on a number of issues since then.
Trouble is, McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds says flatly: "It's not true'' -- and asks, here in the Swamp, that we consider the author's own partisan leanings.
But, for those, such as Huffington, who want to portray this disputed tale as a measure of "how far McCain has fallen'' since the campaign of 2000, when he ran as his party's selfstyled "maverick, it's a benchmark of sorts. That's the way Huffington writes it in The Huffington Post:
"The fact that this man was so angry at what George Bush had done to him, and at what Bush represented for their party, that he did not even vote for him in 2000 shows just how far he has fallen since then in his hunger for the presidency. By abandoning his core principles and embracing Bush -- both literally and metaphorically -- he has morphed into an older and crankier version of the man he couldn't stomach voting for in 2000,'' Huffington writes.
"His fall has been Shakespearean -- and really hard to watch for those, like myself, who so admired and even loved him. His nobility and his true reformer years have given way to pandering in the service of ambition.''
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
John McCain voted for whoever his lobbyist handlers told him to vote for. His positions are based on what's best for them and him, not what's best for the Party or nation.
Posted by: K-Street owns McCain | May 5, 2008 6:27 PM
Just because McCain can't stand Bush personally doesn't mean he doesn't agree with him on many, many things--like how to run this country straight into the ground.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4506988/
Posted by: Cheryl | May 5, 2008 6:32 PM
"MCCAIN SPEAKS"
I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM, BUT I WILL FLIP FLOP FOR HIM.
MY WIFE DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM, BUT SHE TOO WILL FLIP FLOP FOR HIM!
I DIDN'T VOTE FOR "MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY" IN MY HOME STATE, BUT I WILL FLIP FLOP AS THOUGH I DID!
I DIDN'T EVEN VOTE FOR "CIVIL RIGHTS" ON MY "BIRTHDAY" BUT I WILL FLIP FLOP AS THOUGH I DID.
I DIDN'T DENOUNCE HAGEE!
I DIDN'T DENOUNCE PAT ROBERTS! BUT I WILL FLIP FLOP AS THOUGH I DID.
I'M 73 YEARS OF AGE, AND CINDY IS ONE OF THE "RICHEST WOMEN" ON THIS PLANET! BUT GEORGE BUSH IS JUST MY "ENABLER" THAT HAS BEEN IN MY WAY! OF COURSE I DIDN'T VOTE FOR GEORGE BUSH, NEITHER DID THE 49.1 MILLION CLAIMED TO HAVE ALSO, THE "SUPREME COURT" HAD THE LAST VOTE NOT ME AND CINDY, I MEAN VICKIE, I MEAN, MY FIRST WIFE, OH YOU KNOW WHAT I MEANT.
NOW LETS TALK ABOUT "FAMILY VALUES" INSTEAD OF MY VOTING RECORD!
Posted by: Roger Morris | May 5, 2008 6:59 PM
Watch out for this guy. Here's the religious sanction McBush actively sought out.
-
Here's McCain's big supporter talking about the Catholics; (Makes Rev. Wright sound almost normal.)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uViQ0hVV57Q
-
Here's a good editorial re. the above.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/opinion/04rich.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
Posted by: C.Morris | May 5, 2008 7:08 PM
I think Arianna Huffington is being unfair in her judgment of Senator McCain.Senator McCain has been a solid social and economic conservative during his time in public office.He has been a tremendous advocate for the war against terrorism.He has stated in unequivical words that the war in Iraq is on the main front of the war on terror.Senator McCain has been a strong proponent of cutting waste in government and reducing the federal deficit.John McCain has supported the right to life.He has voted for strict-constructionist justices to the Supreme Court.I am a pro-life Christian who voted for Senator McCain in my state's presidential primary and will proudly cast my ballot for him in November.
Posted by: Shawn M. Hussey | May 5, 2008 7:11 PM
Well if he didn't vote for him, he might has well of.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | May 5, 2008 7:16 PM
While I rarely agree with Ms Huffington, on this issue, she has made some sharp observations! It is unfortunate to see Senator McCain, wasted on the wheel of ambition. All of his principles, spent, his reputation, on the rocks and he has a general election to look forward to. I admire him as a war hero, in my eyes, but as far as him being President, I can't see it. He has been involved in too many questionable activities and judgements. He has nobody to blame, but himself!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, Chicago | May 5, 2008 7:32 PM
Why does the Swamp pay so much attention to the Puffington Post and other kookie left wing websites??
Posted by: John D | May 5, 2008 8:15 PM
"The fact that this man was so angry at what George Bush had done to him, and at what Bush represented for their party, that he did not even vote for him in 2000 shows just how far he has fallen since then in his hunger for the presidency. By abandoning his core principles and embracing Bush -- both literally and metaphorically -- he has morphed into an older and crankier version of the man he couldn't stomach voting for in 2000,'' Huffington writes.
"His fall has been Shakespearean -- and really hard to watch for those, like myself, who so admired and even loved him. His nobility and his true reformer years have given way to pandering in the service of ambition.''
Ain't it the truth! I used to really like and respect him, but no more. He is a PANDER BEAR and a let down. Still a pretty nice guy on a good day. A grumpy old man with no good ideas on a bad one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFDc4M_PMNk
Posted by: Former Brainwashed Republican | May 5, 2008 8:31 PM
Which has less credibility: partisan leftist nutjob Arianna Huffington, or partisan leftist Swamp reporters who repeat her every silliness?
Posted by: Bruce | May 5, 2008 9:34 PM
It's amazing that John McBush is still called a "straight-talker" by the media. He just said last week that if he's elected President we won't get into anymore wars for oil....like the one in Iraq....that he and Billary Clinton BOTH voted for... OOPS!!!
John McCain admits Iraq war was about oil:
-
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/05/02/john-mccain-admits-iraq-war-was-over-oil/
Posted by: John E | May 5, 2008 9:44 PM
We would really like to hear from some of the Republican Catholic contributors here in regard to Hagee's comments, re. Catholics. (see Morris above.)
And secondly, how would those statements affect your support for Mr. McCain?
Posted by: The Lenin Sisters | May 5, 2008 10:03 PM
John McCain gets a 58000 dollar pension, tax free, that's no taxes paid on it. He gets national health care from the taxpayers. I pay taxes on my pension and my social security checks. He says that health care one size fits all from the government wouldn't work. I would settle for that size. I had health care when I retired, until the company sent me a letter saying I no longer qualified.
Posted by: Whiteagle38 | May 5, 2008 10:45 PM
when obama s done sending mc cain ti the nursing home i m going to drop by and kick over his checker board
Posted by: show me | May 6, 2008 5:39 AM
"...partisan leftist nutjob Arianna Huffington"?
No wonder American elections are so confused.
Huffington is Right-wing with a touch of tolerance on social issues.
The story on McCain is clearly intended to cast him in a favorable light, that is, anti-Bush. Anyone branded as a Bush-clone, as some have branded McCain, has no chance of winning in November.
Huffingtpon is puffing McCain up because he represents just about what she does.
Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | May 6, 2008 9:14 AM
You're assuming that if he didn't vote for Bush that means he voted for Al Gore.
The Libertarian Party was on the ballot in Arizona as well as 49 other states in 2000. The LP has been quite popular in Arizona for decades.
Voting Libertarian is almost like voting Republican. So, what's the story here?
Posted by: Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008 9:48 AM
"Asked why Huffington would make up her story about McCain not voting for Bush, longtime McCain aide Mark Salter — who has previously tangled with the Huffington Post — ripped into her. "Why would she make something up? Because she's a flake, and a poser, and an attention seeking diva. And that's on the record.""
From the Washington Post.
Others have noted that McCain campaigned with and for Bush in 2000. They've also noted that Ms. Huffington never mentioned this revelation for 7+ years, despite its large implications.
Mr. Salter has Huffington pegged.
Posted by: Bruce | May 6, 2008 10:16 AM
"Why does the Swamp pay so much attention to the Puffington Post and other kookie left wing websites??
Posted by: John D | May 5, 2008 8:15 PM"
It's easy to appreciate John D's frustration. Every item published paying attention to the left is attention that isn't paid to him and other rabid Right-wing propogandists. I feel sorry for them, I really do.
Posted by: Op109 | May 6, 2008 10:21 AM
McCain personally loathes Bush. Everyone who remembers 2000 knows this. I don't know if he voted for him or not and I don't care. Arianna Huffington has made this type of stuff up before so she has no credibility.
We McCainiacs were trying to stop Bush when you lefty kooks were too busy trying to decide whether or not Al Gore should wear polo shirts.
Posted by: Jeff | May 6, 2008 10:37 AM
I don't know if he voted for him or not and I don't care.
Posted by: Jeff | May 6, 2008 10:37 AM
I just love the big Pander Bear no matter what he says or does.
Love,
Jeff
Posted by: Vicki Iseman | May 6, 2008 11:16 AM
Jeff, I might have voted for the 2000 version of McCain but he seems to have traded in his convictions for the support of the Bushies. I won't be voting for McBush.
Posted by: Tom O | May 6, 2008 12:14 PM
Voting Libertarian is almost like voting Republican.
Posted by: Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008 9:48 AM
A libertarian would not support a war of aggression against a country that was not a threat to us.
A libertarian would not tolerate secret wiretaps of citizens.
A libertarian would not tolerate social engineering laws, such as laws against drugs, prostitution and certain types of sexual conduct.
A libertarian would not advocate blank check deficit spending.
Like you, John McCain's no libertarian.
Posted by: a blinkin | May 6, 2008 12:51 PM
McCain personally loathes Bush. Everyone who remembers 2000 knows this. I don't know if he voted for him or not and I don't care. Arianna Huffington has made this type of stuff up before so she has no credibility.
We McCainiacs were trying to stop Bush when you lefty kooks were too busy trying to decide whether or not Al Gore should wear polo shirts.
Posted by: Jeff | May 6, 2008 10:37 AM
And now McCain has adopted every policy of the Bush Administration as his own. Now McCain willingly associates himself with the President, happily accepting his endorsement.
Flip flopper or hypocrite? You make the call.
Posted by: Kendle | May 6, 2008 12:59 PM