Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dr. Dobson and Justice Bork
The American Spectator ^ | 10/22/07 | Jeffrey Lord

Posted on 10/23/2007 7:59:41 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6

Conservatives were upset.

It was October 1986. Ronald Reagan...was giving the fall mid-term election campaign everything he had. The objective: saving the seats of twelve Republican first-term senators who had been swept into the first GOP Senate majority since 1954 with Reagan's 1980 election.

These twelve had helped provide the margin that controlled the Senate and thus enabled the passage of the Reagan agenda. In addition to supporting the new president's tax and budget cuts, they were key in one other area...Roe v. Wade.

(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dobson; justsaynotorinos
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
The author claims conservatives' 1986 failure to back several less-than-perfect Republican Senators enabled Democrats to retake the Senate and save Roe v. Wade by borking Bork. He likens that situation as a cautionary tale to the current Presidential race, wherein Dr. Dobson (and others, such as many here on FR) may surrender next year's election by, essentially, letting the perfect destroy the good.
1 posted on 10/23/2007 7:59:42 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

Don’t flame me—I didn’t claim to agree with the author. But his point is certainly worth considering before deciding. It is a well-written article.


2 posted on 10/23/2007 8:01:22 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6 (Do you REALLY believe that (1) God is, and (2) God is good?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

So - because some didn’t support RINO senators - we are at fault for Roe v Wade?


3 posted on 10/23/2007 8:07:47 AM PDT by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

Not only was Spector against Bork, but so was the bumbling fool John Warner as I recall.

And Reagan didn’t exactly come out guns blazing in his support for Bork while he was being crucified as I recall.


4 posted on 10/23/2007 8:07:55 AM PDT by Badeye ('Ron Paul joined 88 Democrats.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Yes


5 posted on 10/23/2007 8:10:41 AM PDT by fireforeffect (A kind word and a 2x4, gets you more than just a kind word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
To elaborate.

In the primaries vote against the RINO or nonconservative.

In the general vote against the more evil candidate. ONE of them is going to win. Failing to vote for the lesser of to evils means you are accepting the greater evil.

Do not let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

The only thing that evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

6 posted on 10/23/2007 8:16:30 AM PDT by fireforeffect (A kind word and a 2x4, gets you more than just a kind word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

effete elites trying to save Hillary Giuliani.


7 posted on 10/23/2007 8:22:09 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fireforeffect

No Giuliani, NO PROBLEM.


8 posted on 10/23/2007 8:23:43 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_author.asp?author_id=403


9 posted on 10/23/2007 8:24:31 AM PDT by pookie18 (I'm voting for the Republican nominee!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: fireforeffect

Well said, fireforeffect.

The realization that (this side of the grave) “the perfect should not be the enemy of the good” is perhaps the central tenet of conservatism.


10 posted on 10/23/2007 8:30:23 AM PDT by mjolnir (rs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

BSBSBSBSBSBS! Sounds like more Rooty tootin’ bulljive.

My decision has been made. It isn’t Rooty OR Hillary.

I will also say, if the best the GOP can do is Rooty. I will let one of those new voters he thinks he can get take my place.


11 posted on 10/23/2007 8:34:46 AM PDT by dforest (Duncan Hunter is the best hope we have on both fronts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

In the 2003 special election, many California conservatives were persuaded to forsake Tom McClintock, a solid conservative with a proven track record, in favor of the more “electable” Arnold Schwarzenegger. Four years later, California’s Republican conservatives find themselves in an impotent faction of a moribund party.


12 posted on 10/23/2007 8:34:54 AM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fireforeffect
The primaries are the time and place to vote for the person you want. After that, it is time to pull together and elect the GOP candidate. I am voting for Duncan Hunter because he is right on all of the issues I am concerned about.

I know Hunter does not have a chance to win the nomination, but I am not going to get all upset and sit out the election because he did not win. I will vote for the GOP nominee and gladly do so. Anything would be better than Hillary.

Look at what happened with Perot in 92. Because of him we got Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Steven Breyer. YUCK!! The Supreme Court is THE issue and I am not about to give Hillary a free reign with courts.

13 posted on 10/23/2007 8:36:48 AM PDT by lone star annie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

He’s also saying, we may not get another chance for a long time to overturn. Clarence Thomas is one justice who is willing to overturn a bad decision, and he has been able to persuade Kennedy on some cases to vote more conservatively. With Roberts and Alito there is a big chance to OVERTURN Roe v. Wade. Another chance. The author is saying that Roe would not currently be the law of the land if conservatives had listened to Reagan.

We’ve got another chance, a real chance now. If we can keep our eyes on the goal.

The big problem in the past few years was that Rehnquist and O’Connor and Kennedy have not been willing to try to overturn a bad law, stare decisis. If this author is correct they were willing in 1986, but not afterward. Now Rehnquist and O’Connor are gone from the court and it is possible to persuade Kennedy. One or two justices like Roberts and Thomas and Alito would make a huge difference.


14 posted on 10/23/2007 8:45:37 AM PDT by daylilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

I would not advocate a vote for Guiliani at this point, we need to be working hard for other candidates so that will not happen. It is too early to come down too firmly on that. There are chances for other candidates. But Dobson has come down against Fred too. And with his viewpoint on Harriet Miers, Dobson doesn’t seem to have much in the way of good judgment.


15 posted on 10/23/2007 8:48:59 AM PDT by daylilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6
Somewhere, the late Justice Harry Blackmun must be smiling.

Wy do I doubt that?

16 posted on 10/23/2007 8:50:06 AM PDT by Clump (Your family may not be safe, but at least their library records will be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

It is never “principled” to act or not act in a fashion that gives victory to the enemy.

Pragmatism and the longer view have a place in our decision making.

Nothing in the article said “we are at fault for Roe v Wade”. The article correctly asserts that those who vote only for the “pure” may often hasten defeat of that which they wish to protect. Bork would have upheld the Constitution... an opportunity lost, perhaps because purist did not back less than perfect senators.

Do not misunderstand me, I loath RINOS, and being 100% pro-life would find it VERY hard to vote for Guliani (for example), but if witholding my vote results in the election of Hillary, along with a Dem Congress who will stack the courts at all levels with anti-Constitionists, I am assuring the continuance of Roe v Wade without any possible end in sight (life time judicial appointments).


17 posted on 10/23/2007 8:51:43 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fireforeffect
Well Said!
To bad some here don't seem to get it.
"I support the rightward most viable candidate."
W F Buckley

"I hate Rudy because he will force women to have abortions and will steal my guns."
Some slacked jawed mouth breathing moron

18 posted on 10/23/2007 8:53:51 AM PDT by Valin (History takes time. It is not an instant thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1915111/posts

Posted here.


19 posted on 10/23/2007 8:54:05 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: daylilly

“With Roberts and Alito there is a big chance to OVERTURN Roe v. Wade.”

Not with Hillary sitting in the Oval Office.

If Dr. Dobson has his way that’s exactly what will happen.


20 posted on 10/23/2007 8:57:33 AM PDT by Valin (History takes time. It is not an instant thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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