Die-hards and the damage done: Hugh Hewitt likens McClintock recall race, Buchanan bid

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, September 17, 2003 | Hugh Hewitt

[JohnHuang2]

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 put 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?

[CheneyChick]

The President lives here. Your congressman lives here. Your attack along this line is hypocritical and laughable. All it does is show how little substance you have to work with.

Uh, and the CA governor lives here - and so are all the registered voters and the voting booths - they are all here, too. Isn't the topic at hand the CA recall election?

Apply your last line to yourself, EXCEPT, correct the grammar. Let me know if you need help.

Cheers, CC :)

[South40]

So, you have groupies. Big deal.

Not groupies, just observent and perceptive FReepers.

[The Californian]

Well, I'll tell you right now that I am a VERY conservative Republican from Northern California. I AM going to vote for Arnold and I wish McClintock would get out of the race. Better yet, I wish he would go to work for Arnold.

I think McClintock would be a better governor, but right now I bitterly regret my vote for Simon and against Riordan. McClintock is not electable in California at this time. I'll take what I can get, if that is a well managed state budget and some relief from Worker's Comp, well, that is a step in the right direction.

I know that many of you may feel that I am caving on my principles - frankly, we are in the minority and election after election we end up with less and less say. This battle is not going to be won with one election, but someone electable who knows how to say "NO" works for me. I never thought I would long for the days of Pete Wilson, but I am.

Go Arnold. Hire Tom. WIN PLEASE.

[EternalVigilance]

And of course McClintock supporters, as detailed in this outstanding article are JUST LIKE Buchanan, Kucinich and Nader supporters...Political idiots.

115 posted on 09/17/2003 11:46 AM EDT by A Broken Glass Republican

That was your first post on this thread...the one I responded to.

Are you aware that the owner of this site is a McClintock supporter?

[BibChr]

Great, DC. BUMP to a wonderful article.

May the scorched-earthers begin to deal with reality. We could use their help.

Dan

[DoughtyOne]

If Hugh wanted to make a comment about Buchanan almost costing Bush the election in 2000, I'd be all for it. I voted for Pat that year. He did almost cost Bush the election in Florida, and thereby the nation.

Trying to blame a guy for mounting a challenge in a primary is DOA with me. If Bush policy was sound, a challenger should just highlight Bush's stature. It wasn't sound.

Although I agreed with Pat's views in those days, he didn't take my vote away from Bush. I wasn't as politically tuned in back then. I was sick of big government. I actually toyed with voting for Perot when he rocketed to 30% in the polls. Then he self destructed. I sure as hell didn't do this based on Pat Buchanan.

Hugh, this makes for a good sour grapes story, but I've got a wife now and I don't need stupid vapid farytale bedtime stories anymore.

[EternalVigilance]

CC, let me remind you, as I've had to do too many times to count to many since this started, that this is a national forum. What happens to you all out there doesn't happen in a vacuum.

[DoughtyOne]

I am disgusted that I forgot to mention this but I did.

President George Bush ran the worst presidential campaign I've ever seen in 1992. For literally months on end I waited for him to start campaigning in ernest. For months on end I waited in vain. Afterwards I even contemplated whether he was being blackmailed or not, it was so bad.

Can we blame that on Pat too while we're at it?

[BibChr]

Amen. Which "principle" is —

• hatefully trashing and trying to destroy a loyal member of your own party?
• Handing victory to the worst people in the state?
• Forcing more stay-at-home mothers to put their kids in daycare to pay the bills?
• Driving more pro-family conservatives out of the state, leaving it to government-dependent tics and leeches? And therefore...
• Further eroding the pro-life minority within the state by driving them OUT of the state?
• Grading every B+ as if it were an F-?

Not my principles, I'm quite comfortable in saying.

Dan

[EternalVigilance]

But obviously you are quite comfortable blaming conservatives for the implementation of liberalism. You might get away with such sophistry with some, but not with all.

[EternalVigilance]

You compromise away every principle of conservativism, then blame conservatives who hold the line on such issues. Astounding.

[EternalVigilance]

Hugh, this makes for a good sour grapes story, but I've got a wife now and I don't need stupid vapid farytale bedtime stories anymore.

Thanks for your posts.

[tophat9000]

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.

A false assertion ... Pat Buchanan's primary challenge to President George H.W. Bush in 1992 is not what open the door to Perot.

President George H.W. Bush kill himself by supporting the Democrat inspired tax increase.....that sank him in the public eye as untrustworthy and opened the door to Perot..... in other words the party going left to win Democrat votes ..being pragmatic.... killed him.... sound familiar?

Any fool should know if you move your position to one side to gain votes you’re going to loose votes on the other side

If you going to do it you better be sure that the move will gain you more that you loose

Also don’t assume your going to have the old votes trapped with no place to go.

Also don’t assume other will embrace you ... you may be view as unreliably and flaky at best and at worst a backstabbing liar that will sell out their own for power

There are two ways win votes:

1. Persuade other to your position... the up side you don’t lose votes doing it ... the down side ... its hard... you have to work for each one

2. Move you own position.... the up side it’s easy.... the down side not ever one else is going to move with you... your going to loose voters

Bottom line.... blaming others for the troubles cause by your own stupid moves is so..so...Democratic

[b9]

>>>That way everyone knows how low the ...supporters will go <<<

(to the tune of Scottish bagpipes)

You take the high road
and we'll take the low
'cause the goal here's to
BEAT BUSTAMA.A.A.A.NTE

We and our true loves
will live to vote again
in our grand, golden state,
CALIFO.O.O.O.R.N.I.E.E :o)

[BibChr]

You compromise away every principle of conservativism, then blame conservatives who hold the line on such issues.

Oh, you arrogant liar. Shame on you, if you have the capacity.

I am SO glad that I have NEVER felt tempted to lie to support the candidate for whom I will vote.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER: the most conservative candidate who can win

Dan

[DoughtyOne]

My pleasure. Thank you.

[EternalVigilance]

Last year, Gray Davis was the most conservative candidate who could win.

Silly argument.

[South40]

Like I've said...

Our friend EV, or any other "vote-for-mcclintock-even-if-it-means-a-bustamante-win" 'loyalist' has yet to explain in any manner how helping elect bustamante can result in anything positive for the state.

As we very well know, having bustamante as governor will be the worst thing that can happen...worse than Arnold, worse than davis...yet they're true conservatives because they are "standing by their principles".

Of course EV won't have to "enjoy cruz" because he doesn't live here.

[BibChr]

Last year, Gray Davis was the most conservative candidate who could win.

How embarassing it must be for you to have to lie and lie and lie for a hack, petty pol.

Simon could have won. I gave him money. He COULD HAVE WON.

He only lost because he ran a WRETCHED campaign.

Something Schwarzenegger IS NOT doing.

Dan

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]