One of the policy frustrations conservatives have experienced with John McCain has been his propensity to attack capitalists and hence capitalism. Despite high praise for his refusal to pander to the public with counterproductive government programs to address the mortgage crisis, McCain has, at least in tone and rhetoric, sounded a decidedly “unconservative” note in bashing the heads of mortgage companies for severance packages and profits they garnered from sales of stock. Although these stock sales were generally part of pre-timed plans that were perfectly legal and standard practice in executive compensation, this is an easy whipping boy for Democrats and now McCain too.

There is, of course, nothing logically to suggest the crisis would have been averted had these individuals not sold stock. Nor is there evidence that the executives had some nefarious motive to sink their own companies. But they are an easy, juicy target.
Conservatives contend this sort of populist rhetoric (similar to his attacks on the pharmaceutical companies) blurs the real issues and lends support to Democrats’ anti-business solutions (e.g. price controls or legislation on executive comp).

McCain is apparently walking a political tightrope–adhering to fiscally conservative policies while tossing in some rhetoric to show independence from business interests. Now, there is nothing to suggest McCain is not sincere in his invective toward the mortgage company executives or his belief that somehow drug companies are ripping off the public. Indeed, what troubles conservatives is that he does seem to believe his anti-business rhetoric.

But to the degree that his language does not mesh with his policy proposals (which tend to adhere to a market-based, limited government philosophy that shows skepticism about the wisdom of meddling in the free market), it will create a discordant message. And if he should be so fortunate to win the presidency, that rhetoric will pose a challenge to him as he constructs a governing agenda.