PHOENIX — The Arizona Republican Party formally censured Sen. John McCain on Saturday, citing a voting record they say is insufficiently conservative.
The resolution to censure McCain was approved by a voice-vote during a meeting of state committee members in Tempe, state party spokesman Tim Sifert said. It needed signatures from at least 20 percent of state committee members to reach the floor for debate.
Sifert said no further action was expected.
Are those people out there nuts? What, pray tell, is McCain liberal about? Apparently there is a litmus test for real. AZ Republicans are really over the top with this gesture.
Utter madness.
Even assuming one could measure such things accurately, since when is the Republican Party the Conservative Party? It would have been a more interesting story if they had censured him for being insufficiently “Republican”.
What an excellent point, Scout.
@Scout
+1
Immigration is a big issue in Arizona and John McCain is at odds with most Arizona Republicans on it. In some circles you’ll see him called “Juan McCain”
McCain Feingold wasn’t very popular with the GOP either.
McCain isn’t exactly a liberal, but he’s not very conservative either.
He was sure too conservative for my tastes, starting with selecting Sarah Palin for his running mate.
Sounds like the Virginia republican convention. Put out a call to have a floor motion which will be voted on with a yay or nay from the crowd.
Isn’t yay or nay from the crowd on a floor motion how the last Dem national convention voted on God? If it’s good enough for God……….
@ Furby: I fail to see how immigration policy has much to do with “conservative” or whatever the alternative is. McCain’s approach to immigration seemed to reflect a lot more conservatism than some of the nonsense that was coming out of other quarters in Arizona. Conservatives want labor and capital to move as freely as possible across national and internal boundaries. There are a lot of pols in Arizona who have taken a more statist, and anti-constitutional position that localities and the state of Arizona should control policy on the immigration front. McCain opposed that. I think he gets the “conservative” and the Republican laurels for that.
@Wolverine
Wha t the hell ar e you talking about?
Scout,
I never said I what I supported on immigration. Only that McCain’s position is at odds with most Republicans in Arizona. I think most people would agree with that.
With that said, it seems like many Republicans who consider themselves to be conservative oppose a broad amnesty (or even any amnesty) I believe they favor immigration reform that is based more on enforcing existing immigration laws and increasing border security. That’s at least the position National Review seems to take and I think it’s pretty reasonable to use them as an example for conservative Republicans.
George Harris, I think Wolverine is talking about a voice vote at the last Democratic convention over two platform changes. One was about recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the other was recognizing God. They were voted on together and it was supposed to be a pro forma thing. But a large number of Arab activists on the floor were against the Jerusalem part and were booing it. That was very easily spun into Democrats booing God. There’s almost certainly video of it on YouTube but I’m too lazy to find the link.
Oh I remember that…it was also the content involved that bothered people. It really wasn’t about God but easily turned into it for political fodder. I, like you, am just too lazy….
I don’t know how supporting a path to citizenship for stable, job- holding contributors to our economy could be a negative for a conservative OR a progressive politician. On the conservative side, it promotes family values (less breakup of families) and contributes to the tax base without raising taxes, and on the progressive side it promotes humanitarianism.
Now, from a xenophobic standpoint, I can clearly see why some folks oppose it…
Why does Arizona keep reelecting McCain if they hate hm so
That’s the best question I have heard all day.
Sorry, Furby, I wasn’t contesting you. I was just using your comment to get at the lunacy of these so-called Republicans (and so-called “conservatives”) in Arizona.
Existing immigration laws don’t work at all. That’s why we have millions of illegal immigrants. I can’t think of any “conservative” reason why one wouldn’t want to find a better way.
@Scout
The problem is that these various amnesties promote MORE illegal immigration. The problem is never solved. Might as well just open the border……
When the reality of the onslaught of baby boomer retirement hits this country, we will be begging for immigration reform. People are too ignorant to see our population need before us once our skilled workforce no longer exists. NOW is the time to plan for the need in the future, not when we are in the crisis.
I can’t wait until the crisis hits the world of teaching and jurisdictions have to pay teachers big bucks, just to find teachers. That time is coming. My brother who works at a major university in the Midwest just told me that the 300 education majors 5 years ago has now dwindled to 30 or 40. People just aren’t going in to education because they are tired of the BS, threatened pensions and general lack of respect. Many current teachers haven’t had a raise in a long time.
OUCH!
Cargo: no one has proposed amnesty. All proposals going back several years have included the payment of fines for illegal entry. The trick is to make legal immigration as efficient and easy as possible. Illegal immigration always happens across borders of disparate economies, whether it is in North America, Europe or Asia. Our current system incentivizes illegal immigration.