Posted on 07/13/2007 8:13:55 AM PDT by oldtimer2
Not Worth Fighting For: Defeatist Republican Senators By Hugh Hewitt
Thursday, July 12, 2007
I have written three books in the past three years that deal in whole or part with the differences between the Republican and democratic parties: If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat, Painting The Map Red, and A Mormon In The White House.
I believe in party politics, and the silly folks arguing for “non-partisan” or “bipartisan” approaches to politics distinguish themselves chiefly as ignorant of American political history or thoroughly deceptive in their appeals to the public.
What, I wonder, was the non-partisan approach to slavery? In 1860, the Democrats were for it, and the newly created Republicans against it. There wasn’t a lot of “common ground” on which to meet and confer.
Now we are engaged in another great debate about in which there is almost no middle ground, because the parties are –by and large, with some rare exceptions—approaching the issue from wholly different points of view: the war.
Democrats look at the world and see a necessary policing action against the Taliban that has been bungled and allowed to metastasize into a global conflict that has destroyed America’s standing in the world while crippling its ability to pursue the al Qaeda remnants hidden in the caves of Waziristan.
Republicans see a global jihadist crusade made up of two distinct but equally deadly branches of Islamist radicalism –the al Qaeda-led Sunni radicals, and the Iran-led Shia radicals. These branches hate each other but sometimes cooperate, and their deep desire for and attachment to violence and chaos is not rooted in poverty or powerlessness, but an understanding of religious mission.
Democrats see Iran’s nuclear program as a problem to be accommodated; Republicans as an existential threat not just to Israel but to the world because of the obvious consequences that would follow from a WMD attack on the Jewish state.
Democrats see the invasion of Iraq as a tragedy, a profligate expenditure of American blood and treasure in a horrific exercise of filial piety. Republicans see the invasion as the absolutely necessary second expression of a doctrine that holds that no maniac regime will be permitted to possess or appear to possess WMD that used against the West, either directly or through proxies.
Democrats see Lebanon and Gaza as unfortunate and even grievous reactions to the long- standing injustices suffered by victims of Zionist oppression. Many Democrats refuse this characterization and declare themselves staunch supporters of Israel, but their votes betray their deepest feelings. Saddam was, after all, the man who launched missile after missile at Israel and paid bounties to the families of suicide bombers. No genuine friend of Israel can regret his overthrow or the attempt to build a democracy in his wake.
Republicans understand Israel as America’s strongest ally in the Middle East, and its most vulnerable friend. They worry that Iran’s Ahmadinejad means what he says and intends to obtain the means by which he can implement his feverish ambitions. They see Israel as the survivor of six decades of relentless hostility and war, always ready to make peace but always rebuffed by its ideologically driven enemies.
Democrats see a glass not half full, but overflowing but for America’s continual upsetting of the table.
Republicans see shards.
Which brings me to Oregon’s Gordon Smith and other Republicans siding with the Senate Democrats in demanding defeat in Iraq.
I think most Republican senators up for re-election in 2008 who are seen by GOP voters to side with Harry Reid on the war will be swept away by Democratic challengers powered by fierce grassroots organizations even as they are deserted by Republican activists for whom resolve in the war is a non-negotiable priority. These races won’t even be close. The divide between the parties on the war is deep, and the base of the GOP simply will not turn out for, much less work for, round-heeled Republicans.
Parties matter, and the Republican party will purge the defeatists from its ranks, even if it means a horrible cycle or two. Clarity on this issue matters more than a couple of more votes in the Senate. The Republican Party is the party of resolve, the party committed to victory in the long war, and it will not welcome among its numbers, defeatists, no matter what their views on the advantages of low marginal tax rates.
This is as obvious as anything in American politics can be, but still many GOP senators –driven to distraction by MSM and polls?—think otherwise. They read in the results of the elections of 2006 a rejection of the war as opposed to a rejection of stalemate, profligate spending and scandal. Because they cannot conceive of victory, they cannot conceive of voters for whom only victory matters. What a surprise they are in for.
I hope the GOP senators who are good votes on most issues realize that the dynamic is completely different on the war votes. Voting with Harry Reid on the most important issue of our time makes that senator an afterthought –an incumbent not worth fighting for. Indeed, it makes him or her worth defeating.
Hugh Hewitt is a law professor, broadcast journalist, and author of several books including A Mormon in the White House?: 110 Things Every American Should Know about Mitt Romney.
Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
RINOs...not worth voting for.
Do not contribute to the RNC. One third of your money will go to re-elect RINOs.
Case in point: As goes RI(nos), so goes the nation.
Funny I listen to Hugh a lot. He sure got on the “no amnesty bill” bandwagon just in time. For months he has been ridiculing Tancredo and other supporters of tough enforcement of our existing laws. He has refused to even discuss the border patrol agents who were targeted and are now jailed for doing their jobs.
In summary I find Hugh’s conservative credentials less then stellular. I was represented by Gordon Smith for a long time and he’s a good man. I’d be a lot more likely to vote for Smith who came out against continuing in Iraq some time ago, than for the ‘open borders’ crowd. Where is Hugh’s outrage of Arlen Spector, who today introduced a trillion dollar Global Warming bill?
Hugh might like to redefine the Republican Party as the party of the War on Terror but there has always been a significant thread of opposition within our party. Ron Paul (who I do not support) represents this thread in the current election. Pat Buchanan represented it in the run up to the war. His magazine has carried this viewpoint for years.
Not all Republicans agree with Hugh’s hyperventilated view of Iraq.
And so, sadly, while Hugh finds some Republicans who disagree with his Iraq war stand “not worth fighting for”, increasingly I find Hugh Hewitt “not worth listening to”. Luckily even in Portland there are many talented conservative talk radio options, and we even have our own Air America station which can be an amusing comic relief.
I just got off the phone with Senator Domenici’s office. I first called the Albuquerque office and was transferred someplace else, I am assuming the Washington office.
I asked the following questions with the following answers.
Did Senator Domenici state he wanted to pull the troops from Iraq early next year as is being reported in the media, newspapers, magazines, etc.?
The answer was: No he did not advocate any early withdrawal.
Did President Bush name Domenici in his press conference of yesterday, 7/12, as one of the defecting Republicans advocating an early withdrawal?
The answer was yes and PRESIDENT BUSH WAS WRONG in so stating.
Does Senator Domenici endorse SB 1545?
The answer was yes, very much so.
Are you aware that SB 1545 will mandate a drawdown of US troops from Iraq by March, 2008?
The answer was It has no mention of any withdrawal of troops. The document you are looking at is either a forgery or an invalid copy.
When I stated it was from Domenici’s office, dated July 7, 2007, and included in paragraph six the mandate to drawdown troops by March, 2008, there was no answer.
Should that drawdown be considered an early removal of troops from Iraq?
No, it is a simnply re-deployment of troops.
But they would be coming from Iraq?
Yes.
Then how can it be that Domenici is against early withdrawal of any troops from Iraq?
The answer (and this blew me away) is Senator Domenici hopes for AN IDEAL WORLD where the Iraqis would take over their own security.
Give me a break. In an ideal world there would be no terrorism, there would be no laws, and there would be no need for Senators to make those laws.
I am 70 years old, a Republican for the last 40 years, and am fed up with this weak kneed bunch of cowards.
Better yet, call them. Tell them you are withholding financial and political support and watch them squirm.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Thank you. I am 69 yrs old and have been a Republican since 1959 and have the same feelings.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
You may recall that Hugh supported Spector over his conservative rival Pat Toomey in the 2004 GOP primary in Pennsylvania. His rationale was that Spector was more electable.
I’m ten years younger than you and I got off the sinking ship three years ago.
Add Lamar! to that list. We are looking for a good alternative for the primaries.
Does Lamar! still have a house in Maryville, or has he outgrown that area?
Most of these same defeatist republicans also voted for amnesty.
I voted my RINO Senator out some years ago. He was replaced by a ‘rat. This ‘rat at least voted against the amnesty bill (though perhaps after it became clear that it was going down). The previous occupant would’a voted with W for sure.
I’m no longer sure where Lamar! resides when not with his buds in DC.
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.