Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: 68 grunt; ALOHA RONNIE
Here's the article I linked to Maelstrom, MrLeroy, and exmarine........

It may indeed be too late, but perhaps these 'purists' can START to see the forest instead of the trees, and do what's best for California is the long run..... (bold emphasis mine)

Die-hards and the Damage Done
Posted: September 17, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Hugh Hewitt

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

A picture hangs on my office wall that reminds of the glory years of the Reagan Revolution. It shows the White House team entry in the D.C. Nike Challenge from 1985. The six participants include Dick Hauser, then Deputy Counsel in the White House; John Roberts – newly confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and then a young White House lawyer; and me, also a young White House lawyer. The captain of the "White House V-toes" was Pat Buchanan, at the time the Gipper's communications director.

Whenever a visitor's eye turns to the picture, I point to Pat and say, there's the man who put Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer on the U.S. Supreme Court. Only the politically inclined get it: Pat Buchanan's primary challenge to President George H.W. Bush in 1992 bled the incumbent and opened the door to Perot. Perot, of course, put Clinton in the White House, and Clinton put those justices on the highest court.

Buchanan fans sputter a lot when they hear this recounting of history, and many splendid arguments follow. They protest too much, the Pat people do, because of the impulse to disguise guilt with vigorous and emphatic denunciations. Facts, to quote Reagan quoting Lenin, however, are stubborn things. Buchanan wrought what he wrought, and honest accounting requires that the two Clinton appointees be credited to Pat's legacy ledger. So much for the pro-life platform upon which Pat has long stood. There is no doubt that he sincerely believes in the platform – but there is overwhelming evidence that the unborn would have been far better off had Pat never launched a public career.

This history becomes relevant as the California recall vote draws near. Like Pat, Tom McClintock is a smart, talented and principled public man. Like Pat, Tom is supported by a legion of dedicated, energetic activists. Like the Buchanan campaign of 1992, the McClintock campaign of 2003 thinks it has momentum, a mirage created wholly by an elite media eager to wound a Republican front-runner. A decade ago, that front-runner was President Bush; these days it is Arnold.

And like the Buchanan campaign of 1992, the McClintock campaign of 2003 is playing the role of unwitting pawn of the Democrats to a perfection.

It will not be clear for some years what the real costs of the McClintock candidacy will be. The GOP is already damaged in California, but the real disaster will arrive only if Cruz Bustamante replaces Gray Davis, winning the second part of the California recall with a margin less than the total number of votes garnered by McClintock.

The die-hards ought to think about Breyer and Ginsburg as they launch rhetorical salvo after rhetorical salvo at Arnold. These attacks are very similar in tone and detail to those hurled by the Buchananites against the elder Bush in 1992. Whether they will result in the declaration as unconstitutional of such laws as a ban on partial-birth abortion remains to be seen, but Pat Buchanan clearly didn't set out to destroy such protections with his candidacy of 1992.

But he did. What will the McClintock ledger show a decade hence?

639 posted on 09/17/2003 6:49:24 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Have you prayed for your President today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 632 | View Replies ]


To: redlipstick; Vets_Husband_and_Wife; Tamsey; Hillary's Lovely Legs
An article you might be interested in posted above......
641 posted on 09/17/2003 6:52:32 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Have you prayed for your President today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies ]

To: ohioWfan
They are guilty! The die-hards, brigaders, neo-puritans, whack-jobs all! Their guilt is already mighty. And still they spew their drivel, and still alienate the middle, and still the wedge the right and threaten and poot and have their pathetic collective temper tantrums. They need to find a mountaintop to be the head of their pin. If they are not disruptors they are zealots, and we know the fate of the zealots. Let us not be taken down with them!

VOTE FOR CALIFORNIA CHANGE - VOTE SCHWARZENEGGER

642 posted on 09/17/2003 6:59:05 AM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies ]

To: ohioWfan
When conservatives desire liberal policies enacted, they'll vote for Arnold.

It's very simple.

Bush enacted liberal policies and he lost conservatives.

Also very simple and understandable.

Now...why don't you just choose to elect someone who can be relied upon to enact a few conservative policies so that conservatives can vote for them?
673 posted on 09/17/2003 8:53:49 AM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies ]

To: ohioWfan
Thanks. Sadly, I don't think ANYTHING is going to get through to some of these folks. They don't understand that if Bustamante or Davis wins, that it is a LOSS for us. Amazing isn't it? I just keep shaking my head. Losing for a third time is un-acceptable. It will be a sad day for this state,. but we will survive it somehow. We always do.

822 posted on 09/17/2003 9:18:35 PM PDT by Vets_Husband_and_Wife (CNN: Where " WE report what WE decide!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson