Wednesday, November 10, 2004

PLEASE RESPOND YOU BASTARDS

I just saw a couple of interviews on CNN regarding the potential nomination of Arlen Specter for senate judiciary committee chairman. A representative from Christian Science Monitor said that he'd be a good nominee because Specter would be an effective bridge between Republicans and the fillibustering Democrats. She thinks he'd get more court nominees confirmed.

I disagree. First, I'm tired of Republicans being held hostage by the notion that they have to "reach out" to their opposition, or nothing can be done. The attitude seems to be growing that the Right has to compromise to the Left. I hear no appeals to the Left to do the same.

Second, I say it's our job to do our job. The job here is to place judges who strictly interpret the Constitution. That and only that is the task at hand.

In other words, the judicial committee chairmanship does not exist for the purpose of harmony between Dems and Reps.

Arlen Specter has said that he believes the Costitution is a living, breathing thing. That is not conservative. I don't want a non-conservative representing me in a sort of liasonship with those who oppose conservatism.

What say you all?


3 comments:

Endymion said...

Democrats hate anything democratic. They despise capitalism and do not trust the free market. Our founders believed in a free market of ideas. Remember Adam Smith? Each of us acts in our own interest just as our political representative should. The competing interest itself forces the compromise; but this requires competition, i.e., competitors. We need people who differ not people who agree.

Besides, you are right about lefty complaints. They are almost always the ones who fail to "reach out." I watched the judicial hearings for Estrada and the Dems were assholes. They actually have imposed a religous test. Disgusting.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Co...04/ 899rtbfn.asp

Here is an article that offers an opposing or moderating view.

It says that we must be careful let we end up like the Dems. We had pro-choice speakers at our convention and were quite proud of that. Should we nor remain the party fo the big tent, unafraid of debate within our own ranks? If we purge Specter will he and others not just go over to the Dems making them the big tent party and giving them the next elections?

My political strategy goal is to destroy Leftism, not the Democratic party, mind you, but Leftism. If we adopt a strict conservative membership then the moderates may leave the party and join the Dems. This would strengthen that party. If we embrace the big tent and dissenting moderate views -- even pro choicers -- maybe the Dems will go further Left. If so, they will lose every election and their Leftist ideology will die out too. Then the big tent republicans can split into a true Democratic party and a true Conservative party.
Endymion | Homepage | 11.11.04 - 10:51 pm

Endymion said...

Bethany (Late Bloomer) Said:

You make an excellent point, Endymion and I can see were talking about a lot more than Specter. Due to his unscrupulous behavior against Bork, I'd rather nominate a Democrat if he's domonstrated a sense of fair play.

It is a gamble to take a harder right position and risk alienating the moderate Republicans.

I believe though,that the further left we compromise, the further left goes the Left. Are the moderates then relative Rights?

If we press too Right, and lose moderates to the left what does the Left become . . .more moderate? Is it possible they move more right to include the moderates?

What will be the end result for the country? I think that your way will yield a less right Right and a more left Left.

Let us on the Right(while we have the chance) draw the line and invite the Left to come and meet us.
11.12.04 - 2:46 am |

Endymion said...

You win. You're right. I shall do the dance........there.

Even if Specter "failed us" you'd still be right, both as a matter of principle and practically.

You said, "it is our job to do our job." True enough. In fact, what I want is the Dems to do their job too -- why should we do it for them.

Presumably, if they do their job. they will either win or lose, just like us. If they continue to lose, then they will be forced to expunge the losing ideas. That is what I'm after anyway. The same goes for us too. We should let the free market of ideas do its job. It will inform us as to which set of policy ideas is the best. As long as we do our best to fully educate the voters, we will win.

You said, "Let us draw the line and invite them to come and meet us..."

Beautiful. We will not force their hand unless we apply force.

Besides, as Arnold said, "Why would I listen to losers?"
Endymion | Homepage | 11.13.04 - 8:12 pm |