Yeah, those liberal Republicans are big team players, if it weren’t for those crazy “non-team” player conservatives Republicans would never lose. They just do a hit piece on Rick Santorum… jeez.

Ok so check otu the latest stunt by Republican [IN NAME ONLY] Majority For Choice

Yeah… the same people who screwed Ollie North and countless other conservatives, helping to get Dems elected, who brought you the Kerry/Specter yard signs, well

They’re back….

…to reach out to social conservatives.

I went to his website for the first time today and checked out how I could become a member of his “Special Teams.” (aka be a volunteer) The interesting thing is that Allen asks for specific areas of interest. Taxes, Medicare, Social Security… even “Internet” (whatever that is) and Environment are there. Notably missing, however, is anything related to traditional values. Sounds suspicious for someone who’s “the great conservative hope.”

(10,000 points to whoever can guess the obscure pop culture reference in the post’s title.)

A great post at the Election Law blog details today’s supreme court hearing on the Vermont campaign finance law that included very low contribution limits and also maximum expenditure limitations, which the court has ruled unconstitutional in the past.

The post points out that judging from the way thhe judges questions flowed, the law could be in grave danger of being ruled unconstitutional which would be a major victory for free speech campaign advocates that have suffered a series of set backs since McCain-Feingold

Those are words I never expected to type, but this post at On Call is revealing…

WH Press Secretary Scott McClellan says Pres. Bush would not support the bill unless it contained exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother. Of the three potential ‘08 GOP candidates below, Sen. John McCain’s view is closest to Bush’s.

Sen. George Allen’sCoS, Dick Wadhams, tells the Hotline that “Sen. Allen has consistently supported the rights of the people in their states to pass laws which reflect their views and values.”

MA Gov. Mitt Romney has yet to be asked about the SD ban. Spokesperson Julie Teer: “If Governor Romney were the Governor of South Dakota he would sign it. The Governor believes that states should have the right to be pro-life if that is the will of the people.”

According to a spokesperson, McCain “would have signed the legislation, but would also take the appropriate steps under state law — in whatever state — to ensure that the exceptions of rape, incest or life of the mother were included.”

If I read this right, it means that Bush would not sign the bill, Allen wouldn’t although he’d let someone else (at least that seems the implicit conclusion of saying what others can do but not what he would), McCain would try to water it down, and Romney is the only one that would sign it as is.

While I can understand and would support including a life of the mother clause I walk away from the post with this:
1. Bush errs on the side of abortion. (Sure the legislature passed a tough law, but I’d rather have a weaker law.)
2. Allen errs on the side of getting elected. (Fine for you to do this, just don’t try to get me saying yes or no.)
3. McCain is most at odds with himself. (Yes I’d sign and support this, but then I’d try to water it down.)
4. Romney is most responsive of an elected official’s constituents, and honest about its consequences. (Fine for you to do this, and I’ll say what it means for me to think its fine for you to do this.)

Feel free to unload.