I know many on this board aren’t big fans of Santorum lately, but there are two must-see videos that the Santorum campaign has released (actually one video two parts) . If for nothing else than to get a tast for good campaign media:
Man I hope the blogs and the conservative commentators quit harping on this pointless “Scalito” term. We’re supposed to be the party who has a sense of humor about these sort of things, and don’t care if people get offended. Scalito is not an anti-Italian perjorative, it is simply an obvious connection between two names of people they want to connect.
Small point, but its been annoying me all day.
ConfirmThem.com and others are suggesting we say “thanks” for Alito to Bush by sending $5 or more to the RNC. What I suggest is also helping out some other conservatives today by sending $5, $10, $15, whatever. We are reunited today around a solid pick, lets throw some gas on the fire by bumping up the warchests of good candidates. My suggestions are below (don’t flame me 
)
1. Stephen Laffey (Senate - RI v. Lincoln Chaffee) - DONATE
2. Rick Santorum (Senate - PA v. Bob “I am not my dad” Casey Jr) - DONATE
3. David “Tom Coburn is the man” McSweeney (House - IL 8 v. Melissa “Boy did I get lucky, but am in deep trouble this time” Bean) - DONATE
4. Mark Harris (State House - PA 42 v. Tom Stevenson) - DONATE
Note: I know that its a bit of a shameless plug for myself also, but if you really want to see the sparks fly nothing better than putting a SaveTheGOPer in elected office
1. Kilgore is trailing - A new Washington Post poll has Kilgore trailing Kaine by three points 47-44. Politics1, a great but increasingly and annoyingly vocal liberal site, says its because of Kilgore’s attack ads. I think they are right but more than anything I think the reason is clear. Kilgore is the ultimate over-polled, over-focus grouped, over-consulted candidate. When you hear him speak you can see the canned phrases and the annoying nuances that he tip toes around to hit the best “buzz words” and themes focus groups respond to. I know the last time I mentioned Kilgore here, I got flamed, but my question at this point is what does he stand for? I have no clue anymore what his core convictions are, well besides, massive money for transportation. (Which may be justified, but that is another discussion)
2. Liddy Dole Recruits In Primary Challenger in MI - Liddy Dole recruited in a moderate Mike Bouchard into the US Senate primary race in Michigan against conservative Keith Butler. Now, admittedly, Bouchard polls better than Butler, but if you look around the state nearly every elected official was already out behind Butler. Why can’t the NRSC stay out of these races? Now I am well aware Butler is not a perfect candidate and I think he may even benefit from a primary in honing his message and building a grassroots network (I am a strong believe in primaries ;-)) But what irks me is the NRSC always micromanaging and then nearly 100% of the time screwing it up big time.
3. Steve Urquhart Shows Weak Numbers - Things are not looking up for Utah primary challegner to Hatch Steve Urquhart raised only $8,000 for the last quarter. Anemic to say the least numbers, granted it is all about getting 60% of delegates to the state convention, but still Urquhart will need to multiply that factor of 500 if he’s going to have a chance.
Check out this must-read article by Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post. It’s a response to a recent piece by the notorious and increasingly irrelevant realist, Brent Scowcroft. Krauthammer’s rebuttal is, quite simply, devastating.
Krauthammer reminds readers why Scowcroft’s outdated realism is (thankfully)dead in most conservative foreign policy circles, and why we cannot simply settle for “stability” at the expense of freedom in the Middle East. He reminds us that President Reagan defeated the Soviet Union with a similar policy of “regime change.” Reagan, like President Bush today, understood that the internal conditions of authoritarian societies directly threaten American national security. America has a duty then to push for reform in such countries. Reagan was right to pursue such a “neorealist” strategy in the Cold War, and we are right to fight for these same principles today.
This is the best part. It doesn’t get any better than this:
“Even today Scowcroft says, ‘I didn’t think that calling the Soviet Union the `evil empire’ got anybody anywhere.’ Tell that to Natan Sharansky and other Soviet dissidents for whom that declaration of moral — beyond geopolitical — purpose was electrifying, and helped galvanize the dissident movements that ultimately brought down the Soviet empire.
It was not brought down by diplomacy and arms control, the preferred realist means for dealing with the Soviet Union. It was brought down by indigenous revolutionaries, encouraged and supported by Ronald Reagan, a president unabashedly dedicated not to detente with evil, but its destruction — i.e., regime change.”
I’ve just watched NRO columnist and AEI scholar, David Frum, on three different news programs tonight: Hardball with Chris Matthews, Nightline and Tucker Carlson’s MSNBC show.
He deserves serious credit for instigating the withdrawal of the Miers nomination. He was a reluctant, yet pressing critic of this decision from the very beginning. He used his tremendous gravitas in Washingon legal circles to start a kind of “grassroots” movement against Harriet Miers (John M. mentioned the website in an earlier post). As Mr. Frum indicated repeatedly tonight, he still considers himself a strong supporter of the Bush Administration: “sometimes you’re friends are wrong.” Still, as a matter of principle, he believed the president made a profound miscalculation with Harriet Miers. I had some contact and correspondence with Mr. Frum when I worked at AEI, and have always considered him an intellectual role model. I think he deserves a big “kudos” from everyone here at Savethegop.com for possibly saving the Supreme Court and the Bush presidency. His e-mail address is DFrum@aei.org. Drop him a line!
I think Frum’s campaign to thwart the Miers nomination proves that so-called “neoconservatives” do care about social issues and the furtherance of the conservative legal agenda. Frum is really the ideal conservative. He supports the Bush Doctrine in the war on terror - strong and aggressive military action in the short-run to destroy terrorist cells and the long-run promotion of freedom in the Middle East so as to undermine the ideological foundation for Islamofascism. But he is also unquestionably solid on social and domestic issues. He is a conservative who has appropriately adopted a neorealist strategy in the war on terror. I would encourage all readers to peruse his book (co-written with another great “neocon,” Richard Perle) entitled An End To Evil.
Mr. Frum made a great point at the end of his Nightline appearance (something to the effect of): “If the president makes the right decision, he’ll have a united party behind him for all of the other problems facing him [i.e., war in Iraq and possible indictments].”
He is absolutely right. President Bush has a golden opportunity - a rare second chance - to rectify this honest error in judgement and make amends with the conservative base. If he comes through with a solid and distinguished conservative jurist, he will be well-positioned to not only confirm this nominee, but also effectively prosecute and win the war in Iraq - the most important challenge facing our nation today. President Bush can’t miss the ball again. If he picks the right judge, all will be forgiven and his presidency will have been given new life.
Investor’s Business Daily slams the Washington Post today in a scathing editorial discussing media coverage of the Wilson affair. As we prepare for possible indictments tomorrow of top White House officials, the media continues to overlook the truth about Joe Wilson - the foreign service officer who investigated the uranium/yellowcake connection between Iraq and Niger in 2002. The media has predictably portrayed Ambassador Wilson as the hapless victim of the Bush White House, a bold analyst who was smeared by Karl Rove and Vice-President Cheney because he dared to tell the “”truth” about Iraq War intelligence.
Don’t believe this for a second. Wilson is the liar. The bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Pre-Iraq War Intelligence and British Intelligence have all confirmed that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger. Case closed… just don’t count on the media to report this any time soon. Will the bias and incompetency ever end?
Miers nomination is on life support or worse at this point, and it should, in fact, must result in some serious soul searching over at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, because this presidency teters on the edge of an abyss. If it continues to push ahead without the base all of the political capitol will be gone, which is sad for all of us conservatives.
The movement is at a crossroads and desperately needs leadership. Someone need to step up to carry the ball, but it looks like the President has checked out, the Senate Majority leader is a squish, and Hastert seems to lack iniative. Tom Coburn and Mike Pence stand as shining examples of what we need, but have issues of their own. Pence lacks the gravitas in his position to really be a leader, and Coburn is hamstrung by the nature of the Senate. Both are doing a fantastic job but we need more voices in the chorus. Ironically, all signs point to one man who has the capability to save this mess, but the question is, will he do it.
Rick Santorum is that man.
Now I know many of you think that this is insane, but Rick has the power, the gravitas, and the cajones (just read up on what he did as a member of the Gang of Seven in the House) to be the leader of the movement and save not only the party but his own re-elect. Recently, he’s shown a concerning leftward drift, and taking up the banner once more could yield immense political benefits. But will he do it? I am inclined to think no, but if there is a hope to salvaging this mess before the ‘06 elections, then the only man in the position to do it is the Junior Senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum.
I tried my best to hold back reactionary criticism of Miers and not get swept up in the mob mentality. As passions have cooled, it is now clear that Miers must be withdrawn or withdraw herself.
Read this article by Edward Whelan on Miers’ 1993 speech which suggests that she affirms Casey v. Planned Parenthood. This is the cinderblock that broke the camel’s back.
If you haven’t yet done so, please sign David Frum’s petition to withdraw the Miers nomination. I did just today. Email this link to our allies: http://frum.nationalreview.com/petition/
Dear all who know, love and hate SaveTheGOP,
I’m tired of participating in and witnessing arguments between people who are afraid of revealing their own true identity. (See the George Allen post below). Is anyone really that afraid of actually putting their true name behind their thoughts?
While a pseudonym at least allows one to keep track of who is saying what, this anonymity contributes toward a tendency of shrill arguments that I think would decline if everyone blogged under his or her true identity.
A campaign to ban private gun ownership in Brazil lost on a refferendum obtaining only about 35% of the vote. This is a crushing blow for Amnesty, OxFam, the UN, and others who were trying to push this legislation on the people of the country. Why people still believe in this myth that banning guns saves lives is just beyond me. Though I have said many times that the way conservatives can tell they’ve won a battle is when your opponents start advertising and fighting for their proposals in Massachusettes. That’s right, I was inBoston and the anti-gun folks had billboards up around town about how “gun laws work in Boston.” Translation: 2nd Amendment folks have won.
According to Townhall, tomorrow (Tuesday) at 12:30 Senators Ensign, McCain, DeMint, Graham, Sununu, COBURN, and Brownback will hold a press conference to announce a budget-cutting plan similar to the House’s “Operation Offset” that initially attracted scorn from leadership at Rep. Mike Pence but is now on the House docket for a vote on Thursday.
This is big. Of course, it may very well go down in flames with Coburn’s previous attempt. However, if it were to get passed by the House and not the Senate, it would definately shake up some cocktails in D.C. and maybe keep this momentum going with the electorate. Or, if both houses rejected it, it would still cause some anxiety in D.C.
You’ll notice that 6 of the 7 Senators listed were with the 13 who sided with Coburn - which begs the question, what’s Brownback’s deal? Was he just waiting until something arose that would have his name attached to it?
I’m glad that some Congressmen are fighting the good fight and trying to keep this ball rolling. Who knows if it will actually produce results given the poor results of last week, but at least some attention is being paid.
Hat tip to Townhall and Instapundit.
Mayor Laffey, Lincoln Chaffee’s primary opponent has boxed Chaffee into a great corner and even raised more money than him last quarter, but could still use your help. Donate to the cause here, we’ve got a RINO on the ropes.
Press Releases
2005-10-21 - Chafee Throws Rhode Island Taxpayers under the Bus
“Folks, I stand here today outraged by Senator Chafee’s vote to continue wasteful pork spending in Washington. Last week, in the Providence Journal, Senator Chafee’s spokesperson said that the Senator has, “been a leader in the fight to curb wasteful federal spending.” Well, yesterday’s vote on the “Bridge to Nowhere” clearly disproves that statement. In Six years in the US Senate and as Mayor of Warwick, Linc. Chafee has not taken on the special interests. He hasn’t, he didn’t yesterday, and he won’t take on the special interests….
Senator Coburn introduced an amendment to the Transportation Appropriations bill to stop the ultimate pork project - $223 million to build a bridge in Ketchikan, Alaska. This bride, now infamously known as the “Bridge to Nowhere” would connect the town of Ketchikan (population 8,900) with its airport on the Island of Gravina (population 50)…yes 50 people….For that money, they could buy each person a helicopter. Currently there is a ferry to get back and forth. Any member of the Senate should have been eager to zero out this project’s funding.
But now, Senator Chafee and his big spending friends will continue to spend $233 million on a bridge as big as the Brooklyn Bridge for 50 people, I’m not kidding about this. Senator Chafee does not take on special interests, and this vote proves that.
Even people in Alaska have spoken up against this “Porker of Pork Projects” and so should have Senator Chafee. But he doesn’t stand up against these pork projects…nor does he stand up for the taxpayers. He didn’t when….
• He was one of only three senators who voted against the Working Families Tax Relief Act
• He was one of only 22 Senators who voted for an amendment to eliminate all tax cuts enacted in 2001
• He was awarded TWICE the dubious distinction of “Porker of the Month”The race is very simple…it’s about one issue….who do you trust to stand up and fight for the taxpayers….Laffey or Chafee…..
Someone go find Linc. Chafee and ask him why he threw the taxpayers under the bus yesterday. No wonder his solution is to always raise taxes…..
What we need in the US Senate is the strongest voice for the smallest state…..and my record on standing up to special interests…..whether it’s firing crossing guards who are abusing the system….and saving taxpayers millions, or standing up to wasteful school spending and saving millions, or making sure all of our city workers are doing their jobs….shows that if you elect me to the US Senate, the smallest state will have the strongest voice. This is a call to action here, Rhode Island taxpayers need to know why Linc. Chafee voted for this national embarrassment!”
Mayor Stephen P. Laffey
Thanks to a visit to Maine , the Dean of the Democrats himself has yet again outdone himself. Some of the more outrageous claims were that he was “tired of the ayatollahs of the right wing,” followed by, “We’re fighting for freedom in Iraq. We’re going to fight for freedom in America.” It simply amazes me that some Democrats can continue to compare this administration to the very dictators that we are trying to rid the Middle East of, and worse get away with it without an utter from rank-and-file Democrats. This was my favorite:
“To deal with the “culture of corruption,” Dean said, there needs to be an ethics code in Congress and stronger campaign finance laws.”
Right, the First Amendment-trampling McCain-Feingold disgrace is exactly what we need more of.
And this one:
“More than 400 party loyalists listened as Dean described Democrats as a party of moral values, while criticizing Republicans as trying to divide Americans over race, sexual orientation and country of origin.”
Charles Schumer, anyone? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? Julian Bond? Those are some divisive race-baiters if I ever heard of one. I guess Dean didn’t get the memo from Hillary that illegal immigration would be in the best interest of the Democrats to capitalize on, rather than lamely accusing the Republicans of dividing Americans based on “country of origin.”
As worried as I am about the 2006 elections, it’s comments like these by the DNC Chair that give me some hope that Americans will see through him and his counterparts. As we saw recently, the current ruling Republicans wouldn’t be a whole lot better, but we certainly have at least a better place to advance from right now than with a Democrat-ruled Congress.
Hattip to Drudge .
You’ve got to read this to believe it.
Well everyone, we’ve reached the end of the line. Last night with just a few procedural votes, Sen. Tom Coburn exposed as a sham the current Republicans in Washington. I suggest reading this article in National Review.
The action that took place on the floor of the senate was disgraceful to our nation and our party. Make no mistake about it, there will be hell to pay in 2006. Coburn ‘08 is the only thing at this point that would assauge how I feel. This was a total abrogation of duty and so I would ask all of you to contact the NRSC:
How to contact us…
NRSC
Ronald Reagan Republican Center
425 2nd Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
202.675.6000
webmaster@gopsenators.com
and let them know how we all feel.
From Today’s WSJ Editorial Page:
On current trends, freshman Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is soon going to need a food taster to accompany him to the Senate dining room. Which is all the more reason for the rest of us to admire his political nerve.
Mr. Coburn yesterday took to the floor not once, but twice, to force his colleagues to defend some of their more egregious “earmarks,” or pork projects they plan to funnel to home states. The Republican dared to use the “p” word (”priorities”) and suggested that taxpayers might be better served if hurricane relief was offset by deleting earmarks for a sculpture garden in Washington state, an art museum in Nebraska, and a Rhode Island animal shelter, among other national necessities.
Washington Democrat Patty Murray escalated immediately to Defcon 1, vowing that if her colleagues so much as blinked at her sculptures she’d personally see to the untimely demise of their own projects. Mr. Coburn lost 86-13. The miracle is he got 13.
Senator Non Grata returned to the floor later in the day, this time to suggest shifting $223 million from the infamous “bridge to nowhere” in Alaska to a bridge over Lake Pontchartrain that was damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Alaska’s alleged Republican Lisa Murkowski responded that the very idea of refusing to spend $4.5 million per each of the 50 residents on Alaska’s Gravina Island — so that they would no longer have to take a seven-minute ferry — was, well, “offensive.” As we went to press last night, the vote on this amendment was still being tallied, but you already know how it turned out.
Rest assured that none of this is making Mr. Coburn popular with his colleagues, Republicans or Democrats. The Senate is a club and one thing that is beyond ideology is “earmarks.” They’re almost considered to be a perquisite of service, like a golf membership for a CEO (at least before Sarbanes-Oxley). Mr. Coburn is risking his dinner invitations by daring to shine a public light on his fellow Senators as they practice their everyday, routine outrages. Good for him, but he’d better hire a bodyguard.
I’m surprised no one has posted about the now-defeated Coburn Amendments. Just goes to show the true decline of sane Senators.
A lame first post, I know, but I’m just getting my feet wet.
Hat tip to RedState.
President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court was the “spark” that instiagted an already brewing conservative backlash. It’s now become quite fashionable to jump on the “Bush is a sellout” bandwagon, and lambast the president’s unconservative, big government ventures such as the prescription drug benefit, lax immigration laws, NCLB and the transportation act. While I am deeply disappointed with Ms. Miers’ potential ascendancy to the Court, as well as Bush’s increased federal spending, I’m not ready to give up on this administration or overlook its historic accomplishments - in domestic and foreign affairs. I believe in adopting an aggregate, “big picture” analysis. I firmly believe that, in the final analysis, President Bush will be remembered as one of America’s greatest conservative presidents. I realize it’s an unpopular position amid these times of crisis, but Bush has demonstrated that he must never be “misunderestimated.”
Fred Barnes and Peggy Noonan support such assertions in the Weekly Standard and today’s Wall Street Journal.
1) Here is Fred Barnes’ recap of Bush’s conservatism. I think its irrefutable:
“Bush, of course, is a conservative, but a different kind of conservative. His tax cuts, support for social issues, hawkish position on national security and terrorism, and rejection of the Kyoto protocols make him so. He’s also killed the ABM and Comprehensive Test Ban treaties, kept the United States out of the international criminal court, defied the United Nations, and advocated a shift in power from Washington to individuals through an “ownership society.” On some issues–partial privatization of Social Security is the best example–he is a bolder conservative than Ronald Reagan, the epitome of a conventional conservative.”
Again, no one claims that Bush has totally held the line on conservatism. His prescription drug bill and the transportation act are just a few examples of his big gvernment tendencies. However, in the final, “big picture’ analysis Bush’s positive conservative accomplishments will overshadow his political mistakes.
2) Peggy Noonan offers hope to all conservatives today to stay the course with President Bush. In the 1980’s Bush overcame lifelong alcoholism. He set aside his pride and took a long and hard look at his alcohol-ridden life. He accepted his faults and shortcomings, and turned to Christianity. In doing so, he drastically changed his life, for he would become President of the United States a mere 14 years later. Noonan argues that President Bush is capable of such a dramatic re-examination and reversal today. While his administration has much to be proud of, President Bush must accept the fact that he has made poor decisions that have rightfully angered his conservative base. He must be willing to start anew - the same way he defeated alcoholism in 1986:
“George W. Bush has guts. He will withstand the disapproval of the world to do what he thinks is right. He’ll do it when he’s wrong, too. He often has too many pots on the stove, but he can stand the heat and he will stay in the kitchen. He is an emotional man, and his emotions are readily accessible . . . In 1986, George W. Bush reached a crisis point in his life and changed what wasn’t working. He dug deep and got serious. He got humble. He questioned himself. He can do it again, and should. ”
I’m not giving up on President Bush. He has already set forth a solid conservative record. With some soul-searching and rethinking of the past 4 years, I believe the president can find his political groove again and regain the trust of conservatives. I believe he will make the necessary course corrections, and solidify his presidency as one for the ages.
It may be easy and popular to attack Bush now, but in the final analysis the president - as always - will have the last laugh.
I just finished the third book in CS Lewis’s Space Trilogy, That Hideous Strength. Wow is all I can say. Some ask what type of conservative I am often and I most often identify with Burke but maybe JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis are more apt. The Space Trilogy is the perfect exposition of my general life and political philosophy. The value of tradition, Christianity, and conservative principles.
It is truly amazing that Lewis could forsee the disaster that modernism and post-modernism would be to the West and the decline true Numenorian West as he refers to it. He picks out the decline of marriage, religion, and the Academy as three dangerous problems that could undermine the entire culture, and sadly he was right.
There is so much in the book to go into but for now I will just touch on his evisceration of what was then the development of modern, ultra-feminist centered marriage. Lewis hits the nail on the head and really illustrates how those type of marriages leave both partners unfulfilled. It is a must read for all interested in the concept of conservatism as more than a political philosophy but rather as a life philosophy built on the rock of Western Christendom.