Thursday, February 07, 2008

Live at CPAC With John McCain

2.45pm The Conservative Political Action Conference really is a gathering of the 'faith, flag and family' wing of the Republican Party. I don't mind admitting that my definition of the word 'conservative' differs somewhat from theirs. So does John McCain's I would wager. However, this afternoon's speech by John McCain will signal his conservative vision for America and the delegates here must embrace him and his ideas if they are to unite behind his candidacy. There are people here whose natural instinct is to boo him. With Romney pulling out, the time for debate is over. Today's speech by McCain should be received with enthusiasm and lustre by the people here. It's not a debate, it's a coronation.

2.55pm I'm sitting in a packed hall awaiting the arrival of Senator McCain. Placards have been handed out. There's a sense of anticipation in the air. Most of the people around me seem to want to give McCain the benedit of the doubt. But there are a few who are chuntering about 'stage management'. They don't get it. They don't understand that the eyes of America are on them this afternoon. They don't understand that the eyes of the liberal media are on them too.

3.15pm McCain is now speaking. He got a great welcome and his speech is punctured with applause. There are a few boos, but they are being drowned out. He's making a powerful defence of his conservative views and heritage. He's actually sounding like a leader ... nay, even a President. He's never going to be a great orator but he carries a reassuring, moderate demeanour which perhaps this country needs at the moment.

3.30pm He's sought to reassure the audience about his views on immigration and border security. There followed a powerful passage on promises and leadership. "I will offer a clearly conservative approach to governing... I will stand on my conservative convictions."

3.35pm Standing ovation when he commits to smaller government, lower personal and business taxes. "I won't let a Democratic Congress raise your taxes".

3.40pm On Iraq accuses Obama and Clinton of political expediency. "I will win the war". It's getting a bit evangelical. Lots of cries of "that's right!".

3.45pm A cheering, enthusiastic standing ovation for a speech which has deserved it. He was clear, honest and at times inspirational. I didn't think he had it in him.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul played a blinder!

Anonymous said...

Glad your journey across the Atlantic is producing such up to the minute news and information. His speech was live on Sky, BBC, CNN, Fox & France 24. Unless you have personal reasons for visiting Washington has your trip across the pond been worth while? I am struggling to see any benefit for readers of your diary. Any major domestic stories you seem to ignore or be unaware of.Whilst I agree that for the UK the US Presidential Elections do have an impact, I don't recall you doing a live on-the-spot blogging for the French Presidential Elections? Surely they also have an impact on British politics?Surely as "Westminster's early warning system," wouldn't you have been better saying 'I'm off on holiday for a few days. Back soon?' Checking for updates on your blog at the moment is like waiting for the postman. You have no idea when (or if) they are due; when they arrive you think I've been waiting for this!!!!!!Sorry Iain to go on. But I've been very very unimpressed by your junket.

Wrinkled Weasel said...

So it's a done deal then - President McCain, VP Huckabee.

Thank God we can all go back to chuntering about Bogie Brown aka That Lying Bastard.

Come back to blighty Iain, job well done.

Daily Referendum said...

Hillary will not be happy. I understand that the republicans see Clinton as their preffered rival. McCain just stepped up and took a good grip of the Presidency. If he can keep it up, I think he will walk the election.

Iain Dale said...

The anonymous comment above is actually from peter king. The reason this post was delayed was because there was no signal at the hotel. Then the same post appeared six times. Peter's comment appeared on one of the other five, so I had to repost it.

This is not a junket. I'm paying every penny myself. Not that it is anyone's business.

My traffic levels are identical to the last two weeks.

I didn't do a live blog on the french elections because I wasn't there and even if I had been, I don't speak french.

I have also covered british stories over the last week, rowan williams, bugging, just scroll down.

This blog is a diary. If I am away, naturally it carries more stuff about where I happen to be.

Sorry that I can't please everyone!

Anonymous said...

Peter King - I believe Iain went to DC for reasons other than the US election. That Super Tuesday was included in his time there was coincidental. I expect we will read more later.

He could hardly be in DC and ignore the fact that the primaries for the next President of the US were occurring!

Anonymous said...

So are we safe to come out or should we head for the hills? With McCain as President, Broon or Cameroon in charge in the UK, Sharia law and the place full of Polish prostitutes and Albanian mafia I reckon it's time to head to New Zealand and stick my head firmly up my backside as only Kiwis know how.
PS. Iain who?

Anonymous said...

Mr King: if you don't like the service that Iain is providing, please ask for a refund. Oh sorry, I forgot. We don't pay a penny to read this blog.

As far as I am concerned, Iain is entitled to blog about what he likes, from where he chooses and at whatever frequency he thinks best.

Anonymous said...

Given that the US President determines a large chunk of our foreign policy, it's entirely sensible for Iain to cover it extensively.

Anonymous said...

Maybe we should all chip in and pay for Iain to cover the elections in Pakistan. That would certainly be a good read!

Anonymous said...

"You didn't think he had it in him."

You're right - he doesn't.

MCain is too feeble and his delusional thinking about the 'Iraq war' will be his downfall. All he does is talk about the past.

McCain is out of touch.
The next president is a Demoocrat.

Paddy Briggs said...

Standing ovation when he commits to smaller government, lower personal and business taxes. "I won't let a Democratic Congress raise your taxes".

How depressing. Weasel words just designed to reassure the country club brigade and the corporate giants that he is one of them at heart. Utterly meaningless, of course, and reminiscent of similar claptrap here in Britain from the Tories at successive (losing!) General Elections. Even Maggie increased the tax burden and even her Government was hardly "smaller".

The irony is that the target group for this bollocks are those who ought to have the ability to see it for the nonsense it is. Just wait for Hillary or Obama (hopefully both) to demolish this opportunistic rhetoric...

David L Riddick (aka The Aged P) said...

I watched that speech of McCain - it was well crafted and honest. He was in front of a potentially hostile audience and played them to perfection, not seeking to cover up their differences but spelling out clearly the gap between a McCain and a Clinton/Obama Presidency. Notice,as well,several references to Independents and Democrats - brave words in front of a group of people who often regard anybody outside the Conservative tent as Liberals or Socialists. This man will appeal across party boundaries, an essential attribute for any Presidential candidate. Remember that these primaries mainly involve the party faithful - in November the appeal must be to the whole electorate.

Anonymous said...

Watch Ron Paul at CPAC on the daily dose:
http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates

Anonymous said...

Peter King - I've enjoyed reading Iain's account of the Presidential race, for the same reason I read this blog: it's like having a discussion with a well-informed and opinionated friend. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't, but we enjoy the debate, and I value Iain's input.

You are not required to pay for this blog in any way, so if you don't like it, you are free to go away.

Paddy Briggs said...

Why does McCain need to spout the intellectually shallow conservative rhetoric that he now seems ready to opine? He’s got the nomination all but sown up without the need to compromise his values or try and unwind his positions. True the Bushies and (worse) the NeoCon fraudsters can’t stand the man. But by moving even an inch or two in their direction he risks looking no more than an opportunist. If the new Republican Party is going to be McCain’s then why would he try and keep on board those symbols of failure – the Texas mafia and the Wolfowitz mobsters whose days are numbered? Does he really think that the conservative Right is going to desert him come November in favour of Hillary or Obama? Does he really believe that the repulsive religious Right will do the same (therefore that he needs the shallow and foolish Huckabee as a running mate?)

If McCain does go pragmatist on us and start to try and embrace the remnants of Bush’s failed, discredited and fallen regime then he risks not just damaging his own status and credibility but of alienating the moderates who he must corral if he is to have a chance in the General Election.

Anonymous said...

Weren't there boos when he mentioned illegal immigration?

Anonymous said...

Hey Iain, are you outing anonymous commenters now?

FWIW, if you want to go to DC and blog, it's your time, money and energy. Going to the capital of the world's leading power, and talking to people is always worthwhile.

John Trenchard said...

"I don't mind admitting that my definition of the word 'conservative' differs somewhat from theirs"

indeed it would . there are 3 parties in the GOP.. faith, wealth and defense.

hence you got McCain (defense wing) , Romney (wealth/economics wing) and Huckabee (faith)

it does surprise me how the GOP can be at each others throats, and yet still manage to unite in the face of a Democrat... the Conservatives over here have a lot to learn.

if they sniggered less at the Yanks , they might actually learn something.

John Trenchard said...

"I don't mind admitting that my definition of the word 'conservative' differs somewhat from theirs"

indeed it would . there are 3 parties in the GOP.. faith, wealth and defense.

hence you got McCain (defense wing) , Romney (wealth/economics wing) and Huckabee (faith)

it does surprise me how the GOP can be at each others throats, and yet still manage to unite in the face of a Democrat... the Conservatives over here have a lot to learn.

if they sniggered less at the Yanks , they might actually learn something.

John Trenchard said...

"Glad your journey across the Atlantic is producing such up to the minute news and information."

god almighty . that has to be the worst comment i've read in ages.

if you dont like this blog - GO SET UP YOUR OWN BLOG!

what are you? some sort of Iain Dale Welfare dependant who cannot think or write for himself?

jeez. get a life!

Rush-is-Right said...

Daily Referendum said...
Hillary will not be happy. I understand that the republicans see Clinton as their preferred rival.


You can say that again. In fact it is the entire GOP strategy now. McCain will say, look if you don't vote for me, you'll get HER. Mrs Clinton (or HillBilly) is widely disliked on a personal level across party lines. Indeed there are lots of Democrats who hate her guts (though don't expect the liberal MSM to point that out), and it might be enough to compensate McCain for his failure to attract large parts of his own party faithful.

But none of the above applies if Obama wins the nomination of course, which I am sure is the GOP's greatest worry.

Rush-is-Right said...

Paddy Briggs said... Even Maggie increased the tax burden and even her Government was hardly "smaller".

Paddy, I usually ignore your posts because I have learned that they are usually nonsense. But I happened to see this one and just this once I'm going to reply.

What you say is not quite true. In fact it's 100% bollocks. She did what President Reagan was to do a few years later. Namely, she reduced the rates of tax. (The top rate was 98% when she became PM, remember that Paddy?)

And low and behold the economy improved out of all recognition, people earned more money and the tax take went up.

As an aside, Milton Friedman once percipiently observed that "if you cut tax rates and the tax take goes up, then you haven't cut them enough).

And her government was smaller. In 1979 the government by virtue (if that's really the word) of it's ownership carried direct responsibility for the steel industry, the coal industry, most of the car industry, the entire telecomms industry, and enormous parts of the housing industry. All were privatised with benefit to everybody.

So Paddy there you go. Get back in the kennel.