But perhaps not one you’d think. From the Arizona Daily Star, via Wonkette.
On Tuesday, though, [John McCain] sided with the president on two issues that have made headlines recently: teaching intelligent design in schools and Cindy Sheehan, the grieving mother who has come to personify the anti-war movement.
McCain told the Star that, like Bush, he believes “all points of view” should be available to students studying the origins of mankind.
The theory of intelligent design says life is too complex to have developed through evolution, and that a higher power must have had a hand in guiding it.
There are liberals out there who are fond of John McCain because he’s some sort of “maverick.” This time he’s lining up with the majority, it would seem.
Update: And now he’s flip-flopped on gay marriage, in the wrong direction. I hope he enjoys life as a pandering politician more than he did as a principled statesman.
Liberals like McCain because he’s not a party whore. He’s still a politician, though, and his biggest political problem is winning a Republican Primary, where the Religious Right hit above their weight. If he wins the Primary, he can probably walk the presidential election, but he must be thinking that he can’t win the Primary without courting the evangelicals a bit.
Adam — lately he’s been doing a lot of whoring, hoping for that Primary bid.
Oh sure, but he’s not primarily dedicated to the Republican Party line (which is what I meant by ‘party whore’). He tries to win his votes by picking issues that appeal, often outside party lines. That’s a pretty good thing if the alternative is wholly partisan hackery; sure, it’s a long way from ideal, but it’s hard to see what else we’re likely to get, given the way that the system works.
Not that I’m a big fan of his, I must say.
I am sorry to hear this (on both counts). My opinion of Mr. McCain just dropped tremendously. I had thought he was the only person in the Republican party who hadn’t lost their senses.
God, this is depressing.
He has always stressed his ‘christian credentials’, particularly on abortion. He can carry on winning Arizona forever, so long as he isn’t caught in bed with a pair of underage sheep sisters, but he’s threading the eye of the needle to try and win that Republican nomination.
Quite how anyone, including McCain, thinks this isn’t an intrusion of religion into the affairs of state is another matter.
McCain is just another delusional Republican, like Bill Frist, Mitt Romney or George Pataki, who thinks he has a shot at the 2008 nomination. Watching these fools suddenly about face on abortion or evolution or whatever, as if that’s gonna keep Rove from gutting them like fish as soon as Jeb ‘reluctantly’ decides to enter the race.
Whenever the issues are framed in terms of what manifests as maintaining the conservative voting bloc, McCain has always chosen the political over the correct/truth. This is not surprising at all. Frist is more so, in that one might expect a physician to support science over craziness; but he too chose the politically expedient path.
From their point of view, they toe the general party line, or they give up their political ambitions. The days of people reluctantly taking on a campaign for high office because of pressure from their friends are well over, if they ever reallyexisted at all. They’re in it to advance themselves, the people mentioned here.
It’s not a defence of their actions, but it’s not as if Democrat hopefuls are any better, with respect to toeing the party line. People will just divide according to which party line they prefer, which is almost the point of their being a party line at all.
I just read that all but 12% of US citizens support teaching ID in school.
Science has lost this battle and McCain just goes with the majority.
I am unclear about what ID really means (and by “really” I guess it is more apt to say, “how it would be taught in the public schools.”) Does it mean that evolution is not the only way of understanding how life appeared, rather it was placed on earth –as in the creation myth of Genesis (which seems to contradict Darwin and every evolutionary biologist thereafter) or does it mean that evolution is correct (ie organisms with favorable mutations are selected for by environmental conditions) except we replace “environment” with higher power/intellegence.
The first just seems plain scientifically wrong, whereas the second seems like a correct model, just a gloss that might be more appropriate for social studies class.
As for Sen. McCain, I think that liberals would like to make the senator out to be a liberal in disguise. He is a republican for a reason (despite the fact he thinks global warming does exist).
By the way, if you want to be truly depressed, read this article
http://columbiamissourian.com/news/story.php?ID=15569
(I found the link on Dave Bacon’s page).