Posted on 11/08/2010 8:08:06 PM PST by FTJM
In the heat of the 2010 election, Sen. Jim DeMint got a call for help from his old friend Rep. Bob Inglis, a fellow South Carolina Republican locked in a tough primary battle.
The two men had played together, prayed together and politicked together for nearly two decades. Mr. Inglis hoped an endorsement from Mr. DeMint, a tea-party icon and rising GOP star, might appease constituents who thought he'd been too conciliatory to Democrats, despite his broadly conservative record.
Mr. DeMint turned him down. "He's still a friend," Mr. DeMint says of Mr. Inglis. "I've got lots of friends." The two are now barely on speaking terms, say several people who know both.
The unraveling of the DeMint-Inglis friendship is emblematic of the balkanized state of American politics after last week's historic midterm election. The two men fell out over disagreements that to outsiders might appear less significant than the many things on which they agree. That phenomenon now marks the political landscape: Both parties, largely shorn of centrists, are feuding within their ranks in addition to fighting the other side.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Too bad. But good for DeMint.
Meanwhile, the Dems are struggling to know what to do to get rid of the Messiah, and have sent him out of the country for a few days while they heal their wounds.
But let’s talk about the Republicans, instead.
In 2007, Mr. Inglis supported a Democratic resolution opposing the troop surge in Iraq, taking the position that nation-building couldn't succeed.
"Bob who?" Mr. DeMint told a Greenville reporter who asked for comment.
As the tea party last year embraced issues Mr. DeMint had championed, he embraced the tea party. He published "Saving Freedom," a manifesto to "stop America's slide into socialism" that endorsed revamping the tax code and privatizing Social Security. In the book, he recalled that his "first close encounter with politics was as a volunteer strategist for a friend running for Congress." He didn't mention Mr. Inglis by name.
Mr. Inglis continued to rile constituents, particularly by proposing a health-care plan mandating insurance for most Americans. After Republican Rep. Joe Wilson shouted, "You lie!" at President Barack Obama's address to Congress, Mr. Inglis was one of only seven Republicans to join Democrats in reprimanding the lawmaker. Many Republicans misconstrued Mr. Inglis's response as backing the president, says Mr. Nelsen. Rather, "he wasn't criticizing him in the same way as they were," says Mr. Nelsen.
Bob Inglis tried to get too close to the Democrats. South Carolina voters didn’t like it and swept him out of office.
DeMint doesn't toss over a friend lightly even though the comment that he has a lot of friends makes it seem that way. That he did so over Constitutional principals speaks volumes about how DeMint thinks and in fact lives.
Regards
Oh Please... if DeMint fails, we all fail! If that happens, you can kiss you 401 goodbye!
Not being much of a follower of SC politics, I didn’t realize what a turd Inglis had become. Another one bites the flush!
Sounds like inglis was fraternizing with the enemy and rest assured they are the enemy of freedom loving Americans.Good riddance to the rubbish.
I think every single person knows someone, whom is close to them or a friend, or family member or whatnot, that, they wouldn't trust doing certain jobs in which that person is supposed to be a professional at........
Unfortunately, the SC GOP establishment was prepared for that and slipped in another RINO ringer named Trey Goudy to prevent a real conservative from taking the seat.
>>> “He’s still a friend,” Mr. DeMint says of Mr. Inglis. “I’ve got lots of friends.” The two are now barely on speaking terms
A revealing quote, Clintonian in it’s way.
“....Both parties, largely shorn of centrists, are feuding within their ranks in addition to fighting the other side....”
What is a centrist? I wonder if anyone at the WSJ could tell me exactly where a centrist stands on, say, five specific issues.
How about troops in Afghanistan—what’s the “centrist” position on that? In? Out? One foot in, one out?
Or taxes. Between raising or lowering them the centrist position is....?
How about freedom of religion? I believe God should be in the classroom, Joe doesn’t, Jimmy walks in the room and advocates the “centrist” position. He says......???
The bank down the street is failing. The government can bail it out, ignore it and let it fail, or take the “centrist” position and...... What? Do I run down there and withdraw my money or deposit more?
I know. I’m up on the 89th floor of a skyscrapper and a jihad loon has just crashed a jumbo jet into the 87th floor. So, I can jump 89 floors to my death or wait until the burning jet fuel immolates me. Is there a real sharp cookie over at the WSJ I can call and find out if there is some sort of “centrist” position I can take??
No?
Yes?
Um....
What is a centrist?
****************
An equal opportunity target.
When it gets down to the nitty gritty, in Washington, there are men & women of principle, and men & women without conviction. If one hangs around long enough in DC, one’s character will be tried and found to be TRUE to his/her principles, OR, one will surrender principles for the sake of personal preferences, personal gain, personal greed, personal power...
It is patently obvious where DeMint and Inglis parted ways. DeMint stayed true to his principles, and was strengthened in his convictions. Inglis, over the years, had become much less “conservative,” much less principled, far more pragmatic and “flexible” in his views about moral, financial, social and political matters.
In such a situation, Inglis could very easily grow to hate Jim DeMint. And while DeMint could honestly regard DeMint as a “personal friend,” he would never lend his endorsement to him, having seen him depart from the conservative principles he once championed.
I totally understand DeMint’s position here. Inglis, I’ve never understood. Of course, I’ve never understood anyone who would betray their own principles — or jettison them for the sake of temporal gain or convenience.
My opinion is that Bob is going through a mid-life crisis. He knew what it would mean to side with the Democrats on the Iraq resolution, vote to censure Wilson, vote for TARP, vote for TARP again, advocate mandatory health care, etc. etc. It wasn’t one thing.
He was tired of doing what his voters wanted and wanted to be his own man. We in SC were happy to oblige him 70% to 30%.
What do you mean by that? Is there something specific?
Yet another high point for DeMint.
“How about troops in Afghanistan—what’s the “centrist” position on that? In? Out? One foot in, one out?”
I’m a lifelong conservative and Republican who is a Navy veteran.
I understand why we returned to hostilities in Iraq (most folks are puzzled when I tell them Saddam Hussein violated an armistice and we had every right to go back in, restart Desert Storm, and take him out) and that success was highly likely there because Iraq had been a nation-state before and could be again. Nation building there, as in Japan, Germany, and Italy, made sense.
Afghanistan is a totally different situation. You cannot do nation building in a region which has as much national coherence as North America did in 1491 AD.
The above DOES NOT make me a centrist.
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.