You are here

John McCain says he may be too busy campaigning during the RNC convention

Our biggest RINO, whose head is hopefully mounted in the conservative den next to Cantor's, Graham's, and any other RINOs I can't think of off the top of my head, says he may be too busy campaining to hold onto his seat during the RNC convention:

This is the latest in a trend of lawmakers who are up for reelection and are considering skipping, including Mark Kirk of Illinois, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Richard Burr of North Carolina. Some who don't like Trump won't go if he's the nominee, like Rep. Charlie Dent, a moderate from Pennsylvania.

This would be the first time in thirty years that McCain, whose life mission is to die while in office, probably while voting for some Marxist legislation, or sponsoring some bill written by his Saudi bosses, will skip the convention.  The CNN link contains videos from his speeches at the convention throughout the decades.

I'm trying to read the tea leaves.  Why would he skip?  Would he not be able to bring himself to support Cruz?  Is he actually having to campaign?  If he is campaigning, why?  Are his challengers really closing in on him?  If so, does he have the GOP support, or are they putting him out to pasture like Lindsey Graham?  Why are they forcing this poor old Marxist to campaign?  The conservative, tea party movement is turning up the heat in the primaries for these RINOs.  It tells me they know the conservative movement is sweeping over the country, bringing out the Cruz supporters who would turn over these Marxists, forcing the tougher primaries.  Still, it feels like he should just run over his challenger Ann Kirkpatrick, a Democrat who currently represents Arizona's 1st district.  He's neck and neck with her in the polling.

What about Kelli Ward, his Republican primary challenger?  She's apparently in the Trump camp, working with Roger Stone.  Alex Meluskey?  I don't know enough about him, except he has the "businessman" label, and we know how that goes lately.  I hope he's solid, but I need to learn more about him.

Let's pretend McCain gets past his primary.  Here's where I make other conservatives clutch their pearls: if I lived in Arizona, I'd switch over and vote for Kirkpatrick.  I am very much against voting for the lesser of two evils, and voting for Romney in 2012 was officially the last time I would ever commit that dirty sin again.  However, I'd make an exception, like in the 2014 Kentucky Senate race, where I was willing to sacrifice McConnell's seat to Allison Grimes.  I was willing to give up a Senate seat to a junior, wide-eyed Marxist who would stay pressured by her pro-gun constituents in a coal state, for the sake of removing an entrenched Marxist with decades of power and corruption who was actively at war with the conservatives in the GOP.  I can't vote for the worse enemy simply because they have a (R) next to their name.  In retrospect, I'm told how right I was.  She was by far the lesser of two evils.  Think about it this way: what if we had the same November landslide in 2014, but the only difference was McConnell lost to Grimes, and Boehner lost his seat.  That would have been a much greater statement with those two turned over than the tsunami we had where anyone who slapped an (R) next to their name trounced their Democrat challenger.

If you follow politics and what goes on in DC, and understand and appreciate the damage McConnell has done to our Republic, would you be willing to give up his seat to a junior Democrat senator with no power, just to get him the hell out of there?  I sure would.  I have the same outlook for Arizona.  Imagine a world where we have two extra junior Democrat Senators, but no McConnell or McCain.  That sounds like a good trade-off to me.  It's not like we'd take that much of a step back.  Actually, I'd consider it a step forward when you factor in McCain's and McConnell's power.  Back to the Arizona race, Ann Kirkpatrick has a nice solid F rating on Conservative Review.  McCain has an F as well, except he has power.  Why not rip that up from the roots and put in the benign Marxist?

I don't advocate this as practice, of course, but I do if we need to oust an entrenched, corrupt Marxist with deep, deep roots who is openly at war with conservatives.  It seems that in McCain's case we won't have to put up with him too much longer, thankfully.