According to main moonbat Arianna Huffington,
Original Post: At a dinner party in Los Angeles not long after the 2000 election, I was talking to a man and his wife, both prominent Republicans. The conversation soon turned to the new president. "I didn't vote for George Bush" the man confessed. "I didn't either," his wife added. Their names: John and Cindy McCain (Cindy told me she had cast a write-in vote for her husband).
Allahpundit at Hot Air doesn't really know what to make of it and neither do I. The problem is that Arianna is such a moral void that she could easily have made this up. McCain has, of course denied it but it is just another reminder of how much he is disliked and distrusted by his own base that it is so easy to believe that it is true.
Just when you start to really hate McCain he gives a great speech about the kind of Supreme Court Justices he'd pick. According to the Washington Times he said,
"My nominees will understand that there are clear limits to the scope of judicial power, and clear limits to the scope of federal power," McCain told a crowd of several hundred at Wake Forest University's Wait Chapel, as he stood in front of nine American flags and mock-ups of the preamble to the Constitution.And conservatives are encouraged:
Ed Morrissey at Hot Air compares the kind of Justices McCain is promising with likely Obama choices and finds McCain looking good:
Edward Whelan, a former clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia who heads the Ethics and Public Policy Center, called the speech "very encouraging" and added: "McCain has drawn a clear line between his support for judicial restraint and Obama's promise to appoint liberal judicial activists." In a reference to Justice David H. Souter, who was appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush but has staked out a liberal voting record on the court, Whelan added: "McCain has promised that his Supreme Court nominees will have 'a proven record of excellence in the law, and a proven commitment to judicial restraint.' In other words, no more Souters."
The question, as Michelle notes, is which candidate can we trust to nominate better judges. Given the votes on Samuel Alito and especially on John Roberts, we can see a marked difference between the three candidates still left in the race. If we expect to end judicial activism, then we have to have a President willing to nominate justices in the mold of Roberts and Alito. We can’t even get Obama and Clinton to follow the majority of their Democratic colleagues to confirm such choices, let alone appoint them.Do you think John McCain is trying to make this hard for us?
PS: I'm still not voting for him. I swear.