Pence leads off Embryonic Stem cell debate

Mikepence.house.gov ^ | 5-25-05 | Matt Loyd

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Congressman Mike Pence one of the very few genuine conservative Republicans I see on the '08 radar, but the RINOs will likely devour him before then.

At this point I'm kind of rooting for Tancredo but it doesn't matter, anyone who refuses to follow the RINO line will be devoured, especially by the news media who have already made the decision they want McCain to be the nominee.

[ConservativeDude]

Hey, I love Ron Paul. In fact, I love him more than I love Pence, or for that matter, Ronald Reagan.

But as Douglas MacArthur used to say, there is no substitute for victory.

My hero, Dr. Ron, ain't ever gonna be President. If he runs, I'm with him.....

But Pence is significantly to the right of Delay. Delay is significantly to the right of Gingrich. Gingrich is significantly to the right of Bob Michel. And even Bob Michel is significantly to the right of Dick Gephardt.

I am for the right-most candidate with a chance to win. That man better be a lot like Reagan. Today, in 2005, Pence is the only man who comes close.

[ConservativeDude]

Geez, you guys, seems to me like you are probably being harder on each other than Pence and Paul are on each other. So let's try to put a few things to rest.

First, Ron Paul is a true, true conservative hero. There are none better. Truly. Most of us don't agree with him on foreign policy. But I think his words should definitely be listened to, even when we take a different course. (I do think he should pipe down once the country sets on a course b/c teh C in Chief should speak for us without help from the peanut gallery...). But even with that, Paul is the greatest man in American politics today.

But he's also a party of one among elected officials. Well, maybe now with Dr. Coburn, there are two of them.

We need more.

I have not asked Ron Paul this directly, but I can almost guarantee you that he would say that Pence is probably the best Republican member of Congress there is (except himself). Paul would say he is probably about 3/4 of the way there.

But the beauty is, that Pence might actually be able to lead not just a philosophic movement, but an actual electoral one.

Now, while all this is going on, we also have to make sure that we can put up a candidate who can beat the Gores, the Kerrys, and the Hillarys. Unfortunately, in 2000, that meant putting up someone who was not much of a conservative. But it was unquestionably better than the alternative. And we damn near lost. Likewise, in 2004, the other party put up a traitor to the country, literally. Thankfully, we had a candidate who could take him out.

What we need to do as activists who might be internally pure is to find the candidate who is the furthest to the right and who can win an election.

I dream for the day when I can support a Ron Paul Republican over a Ronald Reagan Republican - knowing that when whichever one we nominate will kick the ass of the Joseph Stalin Democrat.

We're not there yet. So, in the meantime, I'm going to - again - do what I can to help the right-most candidate who has a chance to win.

Pence is the man. His shortcomings on "winnability" are overcome by his conservative bona fides.

If he fails, then I guess we will have to ease a bit on the conservative bf's and look more to the winnability. That will mean George Allen.

If Allen, stumbles...well, then it looks like ...well, I guess at that point we are with Mitt Romney.

And all the while, we are going to have to make sure that we put up someone who can beat Hillary, heaven help us.

So ...to the extent possible...let's keep our fire on the true enemies: D's and RINOS. Neither Paul nor Pence are even remotely in that camp!!!

[ConservativeDude]

A final note. Paul may not have saved us any money by just voting "no" on the floor. But those no votes are still important.

No one who doesn't either wield a bunch of votes as a block (like Pence) or who is not on appropriations can save us money. Someone like John Culberson (the only Texan except for Paul who voted about the prescription drugs boondoggle) can actually save us money.

It takes all types to lead a conservative revolution.. Both of these guys are heroes, as is Culberson, Tancredo, Coburn..a few others, including Delay ..and including Gingrich for that matter.

Paul is a good keeper of the goal posts. He is where we want to end up. But we are going to have to promote men like Pence to get there.....

[Badray]

What Paul said was right in principle.

What Pence did was right in practicality. He is taking an incremental step in the right direction which in the present Congress is the best we can hope for.

But it IS a step in the right direction and every journey, no matter how far, begins with a step in the direction that you want to go.

[Gipper08]

Perfectly said.I love Paul too.I just got mad that the thread about a great Pence speech got trashed by someone trashing Pence's conservative credentials. I over reacted.(perhaps my liberal friends are right when they call me a reactionary? That is not true though because is was just a big a hawk on 9-10 as I was on 9-12)Thank goodness we have you DUDE.Perfect post.

[ConservativeDude]

"MIKE PENCE IN 2008Ron Paul VP"

Talk about a ticket I'd walk about broken glass for...WOW!

[Gipper08]

I also I have to admit that I have been upset at Paul lately for saying that there is a national Id law in the National Drivers license standards act. I asked Pence's LA(Pence's office helped write the bill) and both he and Pence said it just plain and simply was not in there.Now millions of libertarians think Pence sold them out when all HE did was try and prevent illegals from getting DEFACTO citizenship. Pence "promised "on the Garrison radio show that nothing in the bill(house version) could evolve into national ID.When the conference report comes we should all take another look.But I feel that some hurt Pence with the libertarians when there was no need.

[Badray]

The only thing that I will take issue with you on is how you define the most rightward leaning candidate.

I will not support a Romney or a Rudy or a McCain if they get the GOP nod. The reason that the GOP has a tough time winning is that all too often they run as, or are, moderates and they do not present a clear and distinct choice for voters. Reagan ran as an unabashed conservative and governed (pretty much) that way and that is why he won big.

If we act as though we are ashamed of our values and policies, why in the world would people be excited about voting for them?

Other than that particular nit, your posts on this thread have been right on, especially on Paul. Even when I find myself in disagreement with him, when I examine his position he has a sound Constitutional reason for it and I can't fault him for that.

[Austin Willard Wright]

You are confusing realpolitik (nothing wrong with that) with outright fraud. If Pence is *really* for reduced federal funding for stem cell research (as you guys imply, or do you?) but voted for increases, he stands guilty of fraud, pure and simple. It is like voting for a tax increase but secretly believing at the same time to be for lower taxes.

Actually, I give Pence more credit for honesty than his own supportors seem to! I think that Pence truly thinks that more federal funding for stem cell research is a good idea and voted accordingly.

Let's clear one thing up. Voting for an incremental increase in governmental size (as Pence did with his vote) is *not* an incremental step toward smaller government. The two ideas are contradictions in terms.

[Badray]

To be honest, I have only seen headlines on the RealID bill and no actual details. If Paul says there is a problem, there likely is or great potential for it. It is so easy to change a good bill into a bad one and all too often there is no scrutiny and we only find out the real problem after it's too late.

That's okay. I've gone with an ID before (for 3 1/2 years) because I refused to give the State my SSN to renew my license. In that time, I got around just fine and even purchased 3 firearms through legal channels.

[ConservativeDude]

I believe an unabashed conservative can win...at least one with a good personality. That is why Reagan was such a genius. Plus he looked good on TV.

Certainly this shouldn't turn into a Romney thread...but the only reason I put him in as sort of third-best is b/c I think he is still to the right of Giuliani or McCain. I guess a campaign would flush that out. Hopefully it won't come to that.

I agree that asking a conservative to support Giuliani or McCain is just too much...at that point you have crossed the line from taking as good as you can get to actually promoting evil. I don't think if Romney runs he will be in that same camp, but, as I say, hopefully it won't come to that. (I think Romney may well be further right than we think....).

[Gipper08]

Pence spent two weeks on it and swears it is a great bill.
I would prefer VP Paul to be less vague on his problems with the bill.He needs to give details.We will see what comes out of conference.

[Gipper08]

This is why McCain is such a threat.When the campaign starts he will run to the Right of a Pence -less field fiscally.He will run to the right of Allen on spending.If Pence does not run I am afraid McCain will get a lot of Fiscal support and Allen will get little.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Gipper:

I must be winning you over! Though you called Paul an appeaser and isolationist who would imperil future generations, you now want to put him a heartbeat away from the presidency!

Come to think of it, I may be willing to meet you halfway on this one. Pence for prez, and Paul for veep in 2008! I'll take that deal.

Best,

AWW

[Gipper08]

I still think he is an appeaser, LOL. If the good Lord decides to kill President Pence then so be it.We can all be appeasers with a very small government ! Would I trade the capture of Saddam for the Abolishing of Social Security? I probably would.

[ConservativeDude]

"We can all be appeasers with a very small government ! "

With the amount of money we would save in a Ron Paul government, each of us could practically afford to hire a personal mercenary army to battle thugs around the globe. Free enterprise forever!!!

That is, of course, tongue in cheek...well...partly.

[Gipper08]

On a serious note where does Paul stand on Missile defense?
or China?

[ConservativeDude]

I would wager that Paul would say that since defense is a constitutional function, he would support it, if it looks like a reasonable probability that it has sufficient science behind..as an MD and former air force flight surgeon, he would be able to analyze that pretty well.

However, since it would also come in an appropriations bill, he would probably vote against it, as most DOD appropriations bill are laden with unconstitutional make-work programs.....

On China? Paul is probably for free trade (ie, smaller government) but not at the expense of sovereignty and with a lot of other regulations (ie, big government..and foreign government to boot). I'm quite sure he would gladly vote to repeal WTO..and probably NAFTA as well..though he strongly supports allowing us to buy prescriptions drugs in Canada and Mexico.

For Paul, it's all about the Constitution. If you stick with that, that answers most questions.

Alas, 99% of what the federal govrnment does is unconstitutional. So he votes no just about all of the time.

[Gipper08]

This type of appeasement could work!We would have such a great economy that we would be the cash cow to the world(like we aren't already) China would not dare attack us.
A better option would be to have a libertarian government and destroy our enemies.