Tracinski asks the right question..The War or Abortion?
The religious right as a motive organization to change party politics for its own reasons has not helped this nation, conservatism (the force it wants to help), or the family, as should be evident today.
For decades, the Republican Party has subjected its presidential candidates to an abortion "litmus test." Now one of its presidential candidates is subjecting the Republican Party to a new kind of abortion litmus test.
The party's reaction to Rudy Giuliani is a test of its priorities. What do Republicans care about more: winning the War on Terrorism, or achieving the agenda of the religious right?
Any gain the forces of 'conservatism' have made as a resultof winning elections based on the support of this group has cost it dearly.
If the 'religious right' (the moniker has always seemed strange to me) want abortion to be murder, then have they funded any university with research programs which might aid that cause? Oh that's right, it's faith, not science. Well if they can prove sentience, they'd have MY support for their cause as early as they can prove it in pregnancy. Yet very little of this is present.
But we only have to go as far as the hole in the ground in Manhattan to distinguish THE pressing issue.
The most interesting reflection of the way Republicans are reacting to Giuliani is the fact that, despite numerous questions grilling him on his position on abortion, there is only one Giuliani moment that most people remember: the moment when he broke the format of the debate to challenge Ron Paul for blaming September 11 on America.
Demonstrating why Ayn Rand was right to dismiss Libertarians as "hippies of the right," Representative Paul picked up the basic anti-war argument of the far left. The terrorists, he said, "attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years.... We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us."
Giuliani fixed Paul with a withering look and replied:
That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that.This moment won the biggest applause of the night, and it was the moment most repeated on the evening news.
But the general attitude of the Republican Party was stated most clearly Tuesday night by John McCain: "What this is really all about is: who's most prepared to lead in this...central challenge that we face called radical Islamic extremism?"
The War (we have to live)
The Border (we have to have a nation to live in)
Illegal Immigration (we need REAL immigrants)
Health Care Costs (are you kidding?)
Taxes and Spending/Govt Intrusion (Go away)
Education (It sucks)
But if you are Republican, Conservative, Independent or Democrat don't listen to me... listen to....well, you know he's RIGHT
Categories
The ONE WarNo TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/mt-tb.cgi/4002
That Republicans jumped Ron Paul BIG TIME for speaking heresy puts a smile on my face. That Republicans have difficulty imaging how our having installed, funded and armed Saddam Hussein for years (including supplying the gas he allegedly used on the Kurds), the close and continuing relationship between the Bush family thugs and the criminal ibn Saud 'royal family', and how the more than 10 years of sanctions and bombing of Iraq MIGHT, just might get Arabs - in general - pissed off enough to want revenge suggests they are a.)liars, or b.)living in another dimension, or c.)stupid. Which is it? The TRUTH will make you free.
_______________________________________
If you have a viable url which demonstrates the USA "installed" Hussein, DISPLAY IT, otherwise it's not only DUMB, anti-american lies and propaganda, it's in the realm of 'fire can't destroy steel'.
If Iraq DID want revenge (for what, being penalized for invading Kuwait and being halted from attempting MORE genocide on marsh arabs and Kurds?) then that gives viability to the majority of americans who STILL believe that an absence of evidence that Hussein was involved with 9/11 doesn't mean he was not. Of course, WERE THEY involved, that would justify every single little thing we did, and make us look like THAT invasion was mother Theresa rather than Billy T moving past Atlanta
So see if you can rectify the huge inconsistencies in your views, meinschaft uber alles
Epaminondas
Greetings,
With respect to all, why cannot we have both. We do not have to choose between the war and abortion. Both may remain as key issues of the Republican Party faithful. Should Fred Thompson decide to run, or Newt Gingrich, both are oppossed to abortion, and want to win the war and then withdraw. I believe most Americans want to win the war before we withdraw, as all prominate polls show.
Thank you.
Richard
Actually, Jeff, YOUR statement is factually incorrect. Mr Paul argued that we were bombing 'Iraq' for 10 years, and tried to link american policy to 9-11 as a justifiable blowback, both to that and Mossadegh. The historical facts contradict this.
1) 1979 would be a response to 1953
2) In guarding the Kurds AND the marsh arabs, both of whom were the targets of UNARGUABLE GENOCIDAL TACTICS by Saddam, when our planes were targeted or shot at, we attacked those radar and missile sites which engaged the planes gurading those peoples areas.
Neither of these can arguably be construed as policies which result in 19 egyptians, yemenis and saudis, OR in 1993 actions which triggered that attack, which, like that of El Sayid Nosair spring from an entirely different enmity, as my arab friends are very happy to tell me.
Just read your Qutb. If Ron Paul has discussed that gentleman, and how he had an idea which would defuse those ideas, I would have happily listened. But Mr, Paul, like McDonald, Baldwin, and Chamberlain, is a FOOL.
Sorry Fluffy,
Neither the Viet Minh, the Viet Cong nor the NVA ever posed a threat intended or frank to americans, or the american way of life.
Al Qaeda does. All you have to do is read the news from NJ, or Salt Lake, or....
How do people like deny facts that are staring you right in the face? Everything that Ron Paul said is true and it is documented in the 911 COMMISION REPORT. Giuliani is running his campaign on national security and he hasnt even read the 911 commision report! LOL.
Rand may not have loved the libertarian party, but it's crazy to think she would have supported the war in Iraq. She opposed the Viet Nam war, and that war was against Communists. If a war against Communists in a far land was too altruistic for her, I find it hard to believe she would have favored war against a bunch of Sunni tribesmen.