ome of my usual crowd are aghast at my announcing Sunday that I'm voting for John McCain March 7, when five New England states get their crack at the presidential primary candidates.
''I am beyond bewilderment at your enthusiasm for John McCain,'' writes Amy Z. of South Strafford, Vt., who normally enjoys the liberal-populist brew served up here thrice weekly. She checked out McCain's Senate voting record online at the Web site www.vote-smart.org and found ''that record would appall any liberal, or indeed any moderate, voter.'' Well, Amy, not this one.
I am not with McCain on dozens of issues: He's progun, antiabortion, anti-minimum wage hike, anti-Clinton, anti-union, so why am I with him?
I know him. I've seen him in action. I've talked with him lots of times. He's got - hmm, let's see what euphemism for courage I'm allowed to type here - guts; that'll have to do.
He's a Southwest Sun Belt conservative and a Republican, which means he must buy into that partisan claptrap about smaller gummint, lower taxes, the this-a-and-that-a of party divisions. But I learned something when I worked in Washington, covering White Houses back to Nixon and Congresses back when Democrats ran everything: This is a big country, and Washington is where they sort out issues that fracture less sturdy societies.
On the overarching issues - war and peace, corruption in government, the ruthless influence of dirty money sloshing through the bilges of our ship of state - he's in the right place. He's the political enemy of people like Senators Trent Lott, the Senate majority leader, and Mitch McConnell, the shrewd Kentuck ian who corrals soft money for the Republican Party.
''Enough, already, with McCain,'' gripes Isabelle C. of Randolph. She doubts he's the ''maverick'' I affirm. Echoes Jack B. of Fort Lauderdale, ''You journalists are in love with McCain for a reason the general Republican electorate will soon realize - he's really a Democrat.'' Somehow, Jackson, I doubt that will assuage Amy Z. up in Vermont. ''His election would be disastrous for women and likely the poor and lead to increasing militarization,'' writes Lynne W. of Somerville. In fact, I'd argue his ascension might well purge the money-changers from the temple and be good for the oppressed.
Al R. from Lowell says he had eight guys sign up for the National Rifle Association when they caught me (''that flat-out-leftist w acko from the Globe'') on ''Crossfire.'' Al claims anyone for outlawing soft money ''is a loon in the first place.'' Hey, Al, can you shoot loons in Massachusetts? In fact, the NRA and the loudest antiabortion fund-raisers fear McCain because they feed out of the soft-money trough McCain would eliminate. McCain can be cantankerous, but he does not go in the tank like so many others.
The gun lobby is with Bush, as are the whole trainload of Washington lobbyists who helped fork over $70 million to the governor, whose claim to be ''The Outsider'' is ludicrous. The Bush camp is throwing all kinds of phony claims at McCain in South Carolina, using massive phone banks to raise doubts about McCain's character and truthfulness. The Arizonan turned the other cheek and pulled his one negative ad about Bush - comparing Bush's truthfulness level to that of Mr. Clinton's. My view is it's a mistake to turn the other cheek when the other guy and his pals are mugging you in the alley. But McCain wants to win honorably, which is more than you can say for Bush.
One valuable Web site for reliable campaign finance info is the Center for Responsive Politics at www.opensecrets.org, where you get lots of straight dope. The center's Holly Bailey gleaned from federal records that Bush has done exactly what he attacks McCain for doing - flying on cut-rate corporate jets furnished by campaign contributors who do business with the government. Except ''Dubbaya'' doubled McCain. ''The Bush campaign reported more than twice as many flights than McCain on planes borrowed from 35 companies, reporting 77 flights that cost Bush more than $152,000. In contrast, McCain last year reported 35 flights on corporate jets, for which his campaign reimbursed 13 companies $77,431.''
In other words, Bush used the corporate jet-reimbursement loophole twice as much as McCain, whom he maligns daily for that practice. It's all legal if the firms are reimbursed for the cost of a first-class ticket. This is a big bargain, because chartered jets cost much more. McCain flew jets of Bell South, rail giant CSX, Westfield Corp., and Paxson Corp. But Bush rode the jets of Enron Corp., whose executives donated more than $92,000 to his campaign; Occidental Corp., whose execs donated $20,000-plus; Texas Utilities; Union Pacific; and other companies that do business with Texas state government. Bush reimbursed Enron for eight rides last year, to the tune of $25,000, but he was still ahead with Enron givers by $67,000. Enron is vitally interested in Texas regulation of pollution.
Bush's attack ads continue to run round-the-clock in South Carolina, where Bush is desperate to prevent another New Hampshire. McCain is outgunned by 3 or 4 to 1 in the air, and his guerrilla band on the ground is outmanned by the GOP establishment, which dreads another Bush meltdown.
Bill Forry, the street-smart young Boston journalist for theweekly Dorchester Reporter, rooted around the vote-heavy precincts of Dorchester and came up with a new breed of old-style Reagan Democrats who are voting McCain March 7: ''I call them the ` McCain-iacs,''' said Forry - independents, and voters who usually vote ''D'' but are attracted to McCain's cause.
David Nyhan is a Globe columnist.
