Home

McCain's "Eco-Friendly" Campaign Merchandise

By Steve Foley - Posted on May 14th, 2008
Tagged:

McCain's campaign folks say this new eco-friendly merchandise is not pandering to environmentalists but I don't know what other conclusion we're supposed to reach.

With McCain's nonstop climate change rhetoric over the last few days and this new mech popping up on this official website the intention here seems clear -- and we conservatives again have good reason to be disappointed with our nominee!

It’s not quite Birkenstocks and tie-dyed T-shirts, but presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) has shown he’s willing to go the extra mile to embrace the global warming movement.

The latest sign of that is the recently introduced “eco-friendly” campaign merchandise the McCain campaign has showcased on its Web site. Included are his and hers “Go Green” McCain embroidered polo shirts, T-shirts, hats and visors with or without the recycle logo. Organic cotton onesies for the babies. You can also find “Go Green” McCain tote bags, notebooks and travel mugs (with up to 100 percent recycled material and an “enhanced biodegradability additive”).

This is the latest move by McCain to show his willingness to include so-called “green” issues as part of his campaign’s platform. This comes on the heels of a May 12 speech in which he addressed global warming. He also used the opportunity to take a swipe at policy under the Bush administration.

Sticking to conservative principles doesn't mean one cannot support John McCain! Both can be obtained but boy he's not making it easy for any of us.

Pandering to "greens" in this way is not the way to go...My hope is someone over there in the McCain camp will figure that out sooner rather than later.

I don't want this site to degenerate into a 24/7 we hate McCain fest -- for one I don't hate McCain but we need to use this forum to point out were we think he's wrong on certain issues and voice our dissatisfaction in those areas.

login or register to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
DocJ's picture
There's another 10k-votes for Bob Barr.
Submitted by DocJ on Wed, 2008-05-14 10:16.

Pretty soon, Nader's 2000 take of 2.7% is going to start to look like the floor for the LP this year, not the ceiling.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

login or register to post comments
Steve Foley's picture
wouldn't surprise me if they hit
Submitted by Steve Foley on Wed, 2008-05-14 10:21.

10% or 12%?

login or register to post comments
DocJ's picture
There's an interesting exercise there...
Submitted by DocJ on Wed, 2008-05-14 10:34.

Project vote precentages for Bob Barr as an LP candidate for President - recognizing that he's certain to be on the ballot in at least 48 states (WV and OK are holdouts) - and then try to project how those votes hurt the major party candidate.

My guess is that half of Barr's votes above, say 0.5% of the electorate come right out of Johnny Mac's hyde, proabably 5% come out of Obama's and the rest would either not have voted or would have voted LP. Smear that evenly (a dubious exercise to be sure, but this is just for fun) over the 48-states where Barr is certain to be on the ballot and see what that does to the vote totals using 2000 and 2004 results.

If I can't sleep tonight, perhaps going through those statistical gymnastics will help!

My completely unscientific guess is that Barr at 3% would toss NM, IA, and OH to Barack, put NV, FL and CO within reach for the Dems, and put WI, NH, MN and MI totally out of Maverick's reach.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

login or register to post comments
Neil Stevens's picture
Why is this reason to be disappointed?
Submitted by Neil Stevens on Wed, 2008-05-14 20:10.

I thought we only opposed government mandated stuff like this. This is McCain letting the free market decide. If people choose to buy, it works. If they don't, it fails.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

login or register to post comments
DocJ's picture
Straight Talk Express == Pander Bear now?
Submitted by DocJ on Thu, 2008-05-15 03:34.

That's some evolution there, Neil. So when we couple this with the signing on to "government mandated stuff" like cap and trade, how, precisely, are we supposed to react?

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

login or register to post comments
Neil Stevens's picture
He's always been a pander bear though
Submitted by Neil Stevens on Thu, 2008-05-15 05:57.

And he's always been pro-government mandates.

But get worked up about the government mandates, not harmless pandering, I think, heh.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

login or register to post comments
DocJ's picture
My bad, Neil.
Submitted by DocJ on Thu, 2008-05-15 06:00.

I'm not the one who's upset by the pandering (I think Steve-o is, though) - I think it's kinda silly and highly mock-worthy, but I can't admit to being upset about it.

Sorry for the confusion, mea culpa.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

login or register to post comments
Neil Stevens's picture
Mock-worthy? Agreed (nt)
Submitted by Neil Stevens on Thu, 2008-05-15 06:27.

--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

login or register to post comments
Steve Foley's picture
Mock-Worthy and disappointed
Submitted by Steve Foley on Thu, 2008-05-15 08:29.

but to angry or mad!

login or register to post comments