Skip to content

What is the Difference Between a Maverick and a Turncoat?

May 11, 2008

 What is the difference between a maverick and a turncoat?

  That is the question I would like to pose to everybody today. I forget who first used the term or how long ago it was first used to describe John McCain, but I do know one thing, the media has loved referring to John McCain as a maverick. He is a maverick when he opposes the president, and he is a maverick when he votes against his own party. He is a maverick when he sides with Ted Kennedy to sell our country out to illegal aliens. He is a maverick when he sides with Russ Feingold to restrict free speech before an election, we wouldn’t want the truth about a candidate getting out just before an election, would we?

 While he did all of this, the media glowingly called him a maverick. He was a straight talker who told us how it is. To me he sounds like a turncoat. To me he sounds bitter (sorry Barack) about losing the 2000 election. To me he sounds like a man who was trying to sell his party out. Hell, he even almost left the Republican party and became a Democrat. And of course, the maverick label was thought of so highly that John Kerry asked him to be his vice presidential running mate before settling for John Edwards.

 Yet he was the media darling. The maverick senator. The straight talker. 

 Then there is the story of another senator who turned on his party. He was never branded a maverick, he was never heralded as a man who rises above party affiliations. He was never called a straight talker. This man was Joe Lieberman. He did not receive the same media accolades when he opposed his party and declared we must not pull out of Iraq. He was not called a straight talker for telling America that we must fight until we win in Iraq. Quite the contrary, the media jumped on him, they did not glowingly refer to him as anything. How did the party voters respond? He lost his seat in the primary to an ultra liberal moonbat, that’s how. Luckily for Lieberman more sane voters showed up in the general election and voted him in as an independent. Now he is a man without a party, a turncoat. But is what he did really any different than what McCain did? I don’t think so. So it is pretty interesting to see how two candidates can be treated and labeled so differently by the media.

 We know the reason for this, it is a no-brainer. One opposed President Bush, and the other joined President Bush. Maverickization is in the eyes of the beholder. And we know how the media beholds President Bush, don’t we?

 Remember Zell Miller? He was a Democrat, who was also a hawk, but he spoke at the Republican convention in 2004 claiming that the Democrat party left him behind. His speech was aimed pointedly at John Kerry as he said the following:

The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40 percent of the bombs in the first six months of Enduring Freedom. The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein’s command post in Iraq. The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadafi’s Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora. The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation’s Capital and this very city after 9/11. I could go on and on and on: against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein’s scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile; against, against, against. This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces? U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?”

 Was Zell Miller branded a maverick? No. Was he called a straight talker? No. He was a turncoat. There was no room for him in the Democrat party and the media didn’t paint him as a maverick or a straight talker. He was labeled as a crackpot.

 What was the difference between him and John McCain? The same as the difference between McCain and Lieberman. One opposed President Bush and one joined President Bush.

 So the difference between a maverick and a turncoat depends on what party you vote for, and in the media’s case they have made it perfectly clear on which side they stand.

 I would call Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller mavericks, while I would brand John McCain as a turncoat. Democrats and the media, just the opposite.

 Your maverick is my turncoat, and visa-versa I suppose.

3 Comments leave one →
  1. May 12, 2008 2:10 am

    I so agree with you on this. I think very highly of Lieberman. I actually wish he would come over to the Republican side. As for McCain he is worse than a turn coat. He, like Kerry, has no core conviction, thus he flounders around an hops on whatever band wagon is passing by. Without core convictions that drive us and guide us, we are apt to follow whatever and whomever.

    When McCain recently said that “America wasn’t special” I lost an shred of respect I might of had for him. If he doesn’t believe America is special, than why the heck is he running to be president? And better yet, what kind of president will he be?


  2. May 12, 2008 2:11 am

    BTW – I chose you blog as the “Blog of the Week!”


  3. May 12, 2008 4:53 am

    It is sad that this is the best we could do for candidates, isn’t it? Thanks for the honor and kind words, I appreciate it.
    You are almost home now!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: