Comparing John McCain and George W. Bush

There’s been quite a bit of discussion about how the right should address the impending nomination of John McCain; reaction has run the gamut from strong support (yours truly – although I’ve supported him since before the Florida primary, so it shouldn’t be much of a surprise) to outright opposition.  This, of course, is in stark contrast to 2004, when President Bush, who was re-elected with near unanimous and deeply animated support from the right.

Of course, the President was a “true conservative,” while McCain supposedly is not.  However, a comparison between the two may surprise.

Political speech: McCain, as we all know, was the author of McCain-Feingold, and has called for further restrictions, particularly against “527s.”  Yet in 2004, President Bush’s record included signing McCain-Feingold into law despite an earlier pledge not to do so, and during his campaign against John Kerry, Bush also called for restrictiond against “527s.”

Energy:McCain’s support for a cap-and-trade policy certainly puts him to Bush’s left, as does his (McCain’s) opposition to ANWR.  However, while Bush famously (and correctly) “unsigned” Kyoto, he has never challenged the questionable theory of “global warming.”  Since his re-election he has also publicly supported a Kyoto successor, so long as Communist China and India were not exempted (as they were in Kyoto) – a position identical to McCain.  Still, on this one, Bush was and is better.

Gun rights: Bush publicly and repeatedly stated he would sign an “assault-weapons ban” if it ever came across hi desk.  McCain, meanwhile, voted against it in 1994 and 2004.  This one is McCain’s.

Abortion (and embryonic stem cell research): On the broader issue, both men are terrific; on the narrower ESCR, both are imperfect.  Bush has pledged federal funding to existing stem-cell lines only, while McCain supports broader funding.  So this is slightly Bush; however, neither candidate is prepared to ban ESCR (my position), and the dramatic breakthroughs in “adult” stem-cell research is quickly making this irrelevant.

Government Spending: McCain’s history on this was strong enough to win Tom Coburn’s endorsement before the South Carolina primary (i.e, when Fred Thompson was still in the race).  McCain has, among other things, opposed the disastrously huge Medicare Part D, ethanol subsidies, and of course, earmarks.  President Bush, meanwhile, had a propensity for budget busting that even in 2004 was starting to worry some people.  Clearly, McCain is head and shoulders over Bush here.

Taxes: Nearly everyone by now is aware of McCain’s opposition to the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003; however, they were enacted (and I’m glad they were) and McCain has rightly concluded that to let them expire would be a de facto mammoth tax increase.  He also supports eliminating the Alternate Minimum Tax and cutting the corporate income tax.  Bush, of course, had the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which is stil enough for me to give Bush the slight edge.

 Trade: One word – steel.  The President’s steel tariff did more damage to the economy than anything else this side of 9/11.  Sadly, Bush was egged on by several Rust Belt Republicans.  McCain, by contrast, asked the President not to impose the tariff.  With identical records on other trade issues, this makes McCain the superior one on trade.

Illegal Immigration: Does anyone remember the first time the President presented his egregious plans?  That would be February 2004, when it caused such a stir that John Kerry experienced his only lasting lead in presidential polls.  The infamous McCain-Kennedy plan was largely based on Bush’s 2004 offering.

So what do we have?  Bush 2004 was better on ESCR (somewhat), taxes (somewhat), and energy (by a country mile), while McCain 2008 is better on gun rights, spending, and free trade.  Yet Bush was revered, while the reaction to McCain is (at best) reserved.

There are reasons for this.  Bush took far more time wooing the right in 2000, to the point of using the language of dissenting conservatives whenever he took a moderate position.  Additionally, Bush’s persona reflected his New England WASPish family.  No matter how controversial his position, he was always personally disarming (he all but patented the phrase “good people can disagree on this issue”).  McCain, by contrast, has an aggressive personality derived form his Scotch-Irish roots.  As someone who is more “pure Irish,” I can attest to the fact that any Gaelic in the bloodstream leads to more heated conversations.  In fact, a quick look at Irish and Scotch-Irish politicians (Andrew Jackson, McCain, Reagan, Jim Webb, etc.), finds a relatively similar reaction: revered by supporters as principled and energetic statesmen, and reviled by opponents as dangerous and unstable lunatics.

My point is this: while McCain is certainly far from perfect, he’s hardly less perfect that President Bush is today or was in 2004.  Back then, most right-wingers – including those troubled about the President’s record – supported him wholeheartedly due to the WBK War.

That war is still ongoing.