Posted on 04/18/2007 10:04:30 AM PDT by writeblock
There is a political lesson behind today's Supreme Ct decision on partial birth abortion that some of you who now oppose Rudy Giuliani need to think about.
Back in 2004, Pat Toomey challenged Arlen Specter in PA for the nomination to the U.S. Senate. Both Rick Santorum and George Bush backed Santorum. They did so for three reasons. First, they believed Toomey had little chance to win in the general election whereas it was virtually certain Specter would win if nominated. Second, the Senate was too evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans to risk losing even one seat--which would mean losing control of the Supreme Ct. nominating process as well. It was no time for risk-taking by backing a conservative like Toomey who was a long shot to win in a state trending leftward. Third, they made sure Specter would cooperate with the President if he ascended to the chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee in the next Congress.
Specter, as expected, won in the general election and the Republicans kept control of the Senate by a narrow margin. Specter kept his word and ushered-through his committee the two Supreme Court nominees, Roberts and Alito. The rest is history.
I mention all this because Santorum--the real unsung hero behind today's Supreme Court decision--paid a heavy price for his backing of Specter--even though he was the main impetus behind the new law banning partial birth abortions. Ungrateful social conservatives, vowing to seek revenge for his failure to back Toomey, took it out on him in 2006 by voting him out of office. Santorum took the hit for taking a course of action that was wise both politically and morally--and far more principled than the peevish social conservatives could appreciate at the time.
A similar situation is going on regarding the candidacy of Rudy Giuliani. Many conservatives understand that we must win back the Congress for us to be successful in achieving our principles in the long run. They appreciate that only Rudy Giuliani promises to win states that are now either trending left or wholly in the Democratic column. And they appreciate that he stands the chance of winning big, thus returning the Congress to the GOP. But as was the case with Santorum, a core of disgruntled social conservatives are out to sabotage Rudy's candidacy at any cost. This is myopic--and not unlike their reading of what Santorum was doing back in 2004 when he supported Specter. They fail to appreciate that the name of the game is to win elections. If we lose them, we lose everything, including any hope at all of furthering our principles in the long run.
I am not asking you for your opinion. I am simply stating a fact about my Conservative Congressman. He's a limp-dick in a sea of Democrats. His agenda is done. Border security? Pfffffffffttt! Finito! Nada! Zip! This is happening now, in real time.
Indeed. Writeblock's "Italian vote" argument has been debunked, but he keeps making it. It's one of the things that makes me sure he's a troll.
You see, if someone comes onto FR and posts on only one subject (without exception!) for months on end, I just figure they're obsessive.
If they come into threads and repeatedly spout half-truths to support their guy, I figure they're just a jerk, or their logic unit was damaged by the public schools.
If they spend ALL their time on FR spouting half-truths about one subject, then that means they're a troll.
Enough of you. You are just making crap up and refuse to answer a simple question. Like talking to a liberal, you are all over the place.
If Hillary suddenly switched to the Republican Party and “could win big”. I still wouldn’t vote for her liberal a$$.
Neither will I vote for the current Republican Liberal.
You have a Pubbie...so hold the fort and keep his feet to the fire. Many districts need to get a "win" next year.
I live in PA too and people were furious over the housing situation and the schooling. So don’t blame pro-lifers or conservatives. You can’t say that supporting Specter was the reason he lost. There was a long list of reasons, but you have to use the Specter ticket. Why?
Ass one of Italian descent, I find it a bit offensive that you'd assume I'd vote for someone based on his last name.
I'm right where I am, right where I have been, pointing to Rudy's stated positions and extrapolating.
If you think his stated positions and political record are not a predictor of his future behavior, why on earth would you consider supporting him?
The sad fact is that on the abortion issue, Rudy is to the left of many Senate Democrats. The is certainly to the left of Justice Kennedy. So that ius the sort of SC candidate he give us. Or worse. It could be a Souter.
He’s from Distric 7 here in Houston. That district is Bush 41’s old district. As for hold the fort, well, I would have much rather have seen the fort advance: border security, social security, etc. But that’s over with for now — because the conservatives are busy “teaching” the Republicans a frikin’ lesson! Pffffffffffffffttt that!
“Santorum compromised his principals for political expediency. I am convinced that the longer an elected official stays in office - the more they “grow” leftwards. It’s probably as good an argument for term limits as can be made.”
What was in it for Santorum except political trouble? But he risked his career to protect the GOP majority in the Senate—in order to get men like Roberts and Alito through the nomination process. You refuse to accept that he acted from the highest motives. You do this in order to deflect blame from where it really belongs—with the pro-life ingrates who voted him out of office simply because they were ignorant of how power-politics is played. Read some of the posts on this thread. It’s the same sort of political naivete at play. And believe me, it’s dangerous. It only helps the Democrats.
No here are the REAL Facts.
1. Gungrabber
2. Abortion supporter
3. Flip Flopper
4. Illegal Alien supporter (by default bad for security)
5. Because of number 4. No different than Hillary.
There would be no repeal if Rudy’s elected—because he would win back one chamber of Congress for the GOP at the very least—probably both.
You must be looking at life differently than I am. Both Chambers? How do you suppose picking Rudy is going to give us the Senate for instance. Democrats have 11 seats to our 22 seats to reelect. Please explain that one. And how you think the almighty Rudy will do this.
It is better for conservatives to have a liberal democrat in office then a liberal Republican. By voting a liberal Republican into office we basically skew the entire political spectrum to the left. The ideals of the conservative movement would no longer be represented by either party.
Well said! I have said before that if my choice is between Souter and Scalia, I will take Scalia, and I do not care if they get another Ginsburg. There simply is not that much difference between Souter and Ginsberg for me to bother crawling out of bed!
Ah, but you still have that proof problem.
It only helps the Democrats.
"Power politics" are about democrat v. republican. "Principle politics" are all about CONSERVATIVE V. LIBERAL, and your boy is the liberal.
Personally, I think a lot of people just didn't bother to vote because they didn't see a dimes worth of difference between the candidates. I don't think there was a lot of "That'll teach 'em!" going on, as much as just no reason to vote, period. Americans stay home at the drop of a hat.
What principles? Abortion? Gun-Control? Total disdain for the Constitution? Open Borders? Please, we would love to know just what principles the Rudybots hold!!
We’re NOT going to elect an abortionist to the presidency from the conservative party. Might as well get that nonsense out of your thick skull now!
“Guiliani is not going to be good for pro-lifers. Period.”
Santorum was good for pro-lifers—and they stabbed him in the back. So I would put it another way: single-issue social conservatives are bad for the Republican Party. Nor would their preferred candidates win any blue or purple states. It’s time to start thinking outside the box.
I’m hoping the realities of the Primaries knocks the BS off the liberal big-city Mayor that wants to be president. How on Earth anybody could confuse him with any kind of Conservative has me awed by the power of the media.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.