John McCain Censured By Arizona Republican Assembly (moved from ATSNN)

The Arizona Republican Assembly just passed a resolution to censure John McCain. This has come as a result of John McCain separating himself recently from the Republican Party and siding with Democrats on many issues such as immigration, judicial nominations, and Gitmo.


The wording of the resolution is definitely strong, using statements like

Whereas, Senator John McCain is presently working with his Democratic soul mate, the Senior Senator of Massachusetts to draft a reform of the Immigration Policy of the United States after years of neglect,

It does not, however, have any binding effects. The censure was simply to let McCain know the Arizona Republicans aren't happy with him and that they won't support him for a presidential run.

In 2001 a recall effort was begun to have McCain removed from office by the voters of Arizona, but was shelved due to the attacks on September 11th.

John McCain has always been a moderate, but because he's a fairly powerful senator, it has never sat well with the Republican party just as Zell Miller's moderation never sat well with the Democratic party. Censuring him makes sense, because the Republican party is simply making it official that he is ignoring the goals the party as a whole is striving for. I doubt, however, that this will change anything McCain does in the future.

Related News Links:
ssl.capwiz.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">https:
arizona.indymedia.org

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
politics.abovetopsecret.com...'

[edit on 6-21-2005 by junglejake]

This is an excellent story, though I doubt my reason is the same as the submitters.........

Definition of censure

Source: Merriam Webster
1 : a judgment involving condemnation

This illustrates partisanship at it's worst.......a condemnation for a man who has differing viewpoints than the guidelines of an affiliation........keyword.....affiliation

Political views help to direct an individual in his/hers actions and decision-making endeavors..........they shouldn't be the defining point. Does this story now imply that McCain has no validity? Of course not, but because we have an official 'censure' from the republican party, many people are going to discount what he may have to say........

Authority by association........too many people are going to discount a man because his opinions differ from their affiliation. Likewise the converse is probably true. Too many people are missing the point.........

Edit: To fix the ATS link in the primary post.......backspace that end tick mark......


[edit on 21-6-2005 by MemoryShock]

[edit on 21-6-2005 by MemoryShock]

I think this is silly. Censuring should be used to condemn wrongdoing, not be used to show dissatisfaction with someone's politics. I agree McCain wanders off the reservation far too often, but I don't think this is the way to deal with it.

McCain was on Meet the Press on Sunday and he was asked if he thought Sen. Dick Durbin (D, Il) should be censured for his remarks comparing Gitmo treatment of prisoners to Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. He said no. That really pissed off a lot of people in his party I'm sure. I admire McCain's backbone a great deal. He seems to be one of the few in his party that's willing to stand on his own if he really believes in something that doesn't agree with his party's line.

This guy should really run for President as an independent. I know he wouldn't have much of a chance then but it would be interesting to see how well he'd do and it would also be interesting to see how many ways his former party would find to bury a hero. It might change a lot of minds about the Republican party.

Peace

[edit on 21-6-2005 by Dr Love]

While it is partisan to censure him for breaking with the party, the resolution pointed that out. The whole resolution was condemning him for breaking with the party. The examples they used used some rather extreme language (soul-mate with Kennedy?). All in all, this was a pretty petty move by the ARA, but it sounds like they're pretty upset with him for breaking with what his campaign pledges were. Dunno for sure, though, since I don't live down there and never followed that election.

Also, if you think this is unique to the Republican Party, look into Zell Miller. While his state's democratic party didn't censure him, many, many Democrats were awfully vocal about condemning him for being a conservative Democrat just as many are McCain for being a liberal Republican.

Finally, what's wrong with the headline? I've been getting messages saying this had been rejected for the headline...

More proof that McCain is one of the few Republicans with both a spine and a sense of integrity. I can think of no higher endorsement than the condemnation of a bunch of extremist partisan hacks. Sadly, his unwillingness to cater to the fanatics will probably cost him any shot at the Presidency, a shame, because I think he'd be good for the country.

More proof that McCain is one of the few Republicans with both a spine and a sense of integrity.

Again, this could cut both ways. I've said it once and I'll say it again, I respect McCain for standing on principle over party lines. That's also why I respect Zell Miller so much. Many Democrats, too, just follow what their party tells them, not what they truely believe.

Originally posted by junglejake
I respect McCain for standing on principle over party lines.

And the Republicans went and made it about them......which is where I stand on this story......the whole partisan issue is just being re-emphasized when it is the real problem.