From and NRO Article, Jester hat tip Jay Anderson.
“Murder and graffiti are two vastly different crimes,” Rudy Giuliani once said. “But they are part of the same continuum, and a climate that tolerates one is more likely to tolerate the other.”
Good point, Rudy.
Now, what about a climate — not to mention a Republican presidential candidate — that not only tolerates, but allows unelected judges to legalize the practice of delivering a child until only its head remains within its mothers womb so the child can be killed by sucking out its brains?
What about a climate where same-sex couples are given the same legal status as married couples, whether the resulting arrangements are candidly called “same-sex marriages,” or are semantically papered-over with terms such as “civil unions” or “domestic partnerships”?
Apply the Giuliani Continuum to fundamental issues such as marriage and the right to life, and where does it lead?
Not where conservatives want America to be.
Rudy Giuliani’s observation about the “continuum” running from graffiti to murder was quoted in a piece in the winter edition of City Journal by Steven Malanga. The title of Malanga’s piece neatly encapsulates his argument: “Yes, Rudy is a Conservative — and an electable one at that.”
I believe Malanga is wrong on both counts. Rudy is neither conservative, nor electable — at least, not as a Republican presidential candidate.
I certainly hope that is true. But for many so-called conservatives by using the magic words "National Security" you can get them to buy off on a lot. The Guliani apologists fresh off their jobs of putting wings on pigs are now trying to do a conservative makeover on Giuliani. Just as long as he says he will elect the type of judges that could overturn Roe v. Wade we are suppose to be calmed. As if having moral beliefs that put you firmly in the culture of death will have no bearing on the type of president he would be.
Now as for me – at least in the Primaries – I am firmly in the Sam Brownback camp. Brownback is this years Alan Keyes – someone I really like but has about zero chance of being elected. Next time around a firm Catholic candidate should just go ahead and change their name legally to Don Quixote. Though just having someone like Brownback in the race does at least keep social conservative issues within the debates.
I do wonder if there are many Firefly fans that also like Sen. Browback. I think Browncoats for Brownback would make an awesome group.
16 comments
I think that the Priests For Life organization’s endorsement of Sam Brownback was extremely stupid. Do they want to show how politically naive they are by endorsing an unelectable candidate and marginalise themselves by doing so? Go ahead and endorse Romney. That way, there would be a chance that the pro-life cause could actually get anywhere sometime soon.
Quite possibly, and I could always be wrong, but it appears that voting FOR the electable candidate is not naive? Afterall, over two terms of a Republican president and just as much majority Congress didn’t seem to do it….why should we believe that will change now?
In my opinion, and I admit I am unimportant in the grand scale of things, once the Republicans find that pro-abortion candidate…maybe once that happens, and believe me it will….maybe then Catholics will finally wake up to a third party.
Curt Jester, with all due respect, and this comment isn’t just aimed at you but plenty of good folks… the only people I hear saying Brownback is unelectable are PEOPLE WHO SHOULD BE HIS BIGGEST SUPPORTERS. All over the Catholic blogsphere I see bloggers saying basicaly, “Brownback is the total package, I really like him, but he has no chance.” Read some of the liberal blogs (or the Rolling Stone article on him) once in a while, he isn’t as much on their radar as he is on ours but from what I see on the left there is FEAR, a lot of these people are honestly afraid that Brownback will win and impose a “theocracy,” on them. They don’t mockingly fear him the way as if he was Pat Robertson, they FEAR Brownback as a man who can very well become President and take away their precious right to choose with a good court appointment or two.
The greatest thing holding Brownback back at this point is appathy among us Catholics (and our Pro-life friends of other denominations.) Are we so accustomed to disopointment and apathay that it has become our default possition? For the first time in a long time a Catholic who isn’t a scandalous embarresment (Rudy, Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, etc) is about to burst onto the national political stage, we ought to be praying for him!
As for Fr. Pavrone’s endorsement, even if he is backing a lost cause (which I doubt it is) so what? Electabillity is very low on the list of items Catholic voters should consider.
Why all the Mitt Romney buzz? The only thing he has going for him over Rudy and McCain is that he doesn’t have some messy divorces in his closet. Besides Romney only just recently became a “conservative” as far as I am concerend he is just slightly more socialy conservative candidate than McCain, who is just a few inches to the right of Rudy, who is basicaly a progressive democrat.
With three choices like that to split the votes of the RINOS, Rockefeller Republicans, and National Defense above all types, I’d be amazed if any of them can pull a pluarilty of votes.
IF IF IF Brownback can get the “religious right,” behind him, the nomination is within reach (assuming that old school fundemtalist anti-Catholicism doesn’t rear it’s ugly head, though Romney would face a similar issue with his Mormanism.)
A huge chunk of the republican primary voters simply WILL NOT vote for a pro-choicer, remember that as well.
I don’t think Priests for Life endorsed Brownback. Fr. Pavone did it in his individual capacity.
Melody– do you have any specific examples in mind of McCain “going out on a limb” for Pro-Life??? Maybe I’ve missed something, but I don’t tend to think of him as a stalwart…
Fidei Defensor, thanks for saying that about Brownback, I very much agree. Brownback is not a perfect man nor a perfect Catholic, and of course we should be wary of any kind of idealization of him. I see this “he’s perfect, but he stands no chance” thing as being a kind of idealization. He could win. He could, anyway, win the Republican primary. He could advertise himself, appeal to the voters, do the proper political moves, and become the nominee. Perhaps he won’t, but he could. Furthermore, if he did become president, he would undoubtably be good on many issues. He perhaps would disappoint us in some ways. Nevertheless, I intend to vote for him, and try to do what I can to get him nominated and elected.
I do wonder if there are many Firefly fans that also like Sen. Browback. I think Browncoats for Brownback would make an awesome group.
I’m a Firefly fan, and definitely like Brownback better than anyone else in the GOP crowd hands down. So sign me up as a Browncoat for Brownback.
I’d like to get on the Brownback bandwagon but his stance on the War on Terror (he’s not tough enough) is not encouraging nor is his stand on immigration (he’s too lenient).
McCain co-authored Campaign Finance Reform which restricted our freedom of speech, he’s one of the Keating 5 and one of the 14 Senators who blinked in the face of Democrat obstructionism with judicial appointments.
Romney is as much a conservative as Chris Shays, Olympia Snow and Susan Collins. Yes, they all have Rs after their names but they are NOT conservatives. Check out http://www.eyeon08.com for more info on Romney.
Duncan Hunter from California is pro-life and is on the right side of the immigration and war on terror issues.
Sen. Brownback really is the best out of the candidates (so far) from a Catholic perspective if not from a staunch conservative one.
I’m probably the only one of you who has met Senator Brownback in person. He IS the real article! He has always been an advocate for their right to be born. He generated tremendous enthusiasm at the March, getting a huge cheer when he spoke, so much so that he worried People for the American Way, who mentioned both of his speeches that day on their blog.
I was bold enough to tell him what some of you are saying, that we love him, but he’s at best candidate #4, after the CODs(Culture of Death politicians, thanks for introducing this to my lexicon, Curt Jester!) He took it like a gentleman, but later, in his speeches convinced me otherwise.
Brownback was the Secretary of Agriculture in Kansas, being a former soybean farmer, when Bob Dole vacated his seat in the Senate to challenge Bill Clinton for the presidency. The Governor, a pro-abort Republican woman, appointed another pro-abort Republican woman to the seat. Brownback challenged her as an incumbent, 26 points down, and beat her with 16 points to spare, (for those of you in Rio Lindo,that’s a 42 point gain!)
He won re-election handily, and this is his plan for the primaries. . .he said that the Iowans who brave the snow to show up for an all-day caucus tend to be hard-core pro-lifers; RINOS don’t sit well with them. That’s how Alan Keyes actually won in Iowa against Bush.
But what Keyes doesn’t have,(and I supported him in 2000) is electablity. Brownback has proven his, twice. He said, “if I have enough time, I can connect with the voters”. He has a year, let him do what he does best; he had the March for Life in the palm of his hand.
We faithful Catholics are enough of a political force to be courted specially by the Bush campaign 6 years ago. Think how the blogosphere has exploded since then. Bush staffers check Technorati and Truth Laid Bare daily for blogging trends. Lets put our blogs in the service of the best man out there, since we are 1 year out from the primaries, and let the CODs embarrass themselves by their lack of conviction. Stop the negativity, and talk it up.
Pray, hope, and BLOG for BROWNBACK!
Thanks for posting that comment, Leticia. It has certainly inspired me.
I have been pushing Sen. Brownback’s candidacy hard over at my blog. I was pretty disgusted to see that Rush Limbaugh had described Brownback as “not a thoroughbred conservative”. Putting aside the question of who made Rush the arbiter of one’s conservative pedigree, if Rush is an example of what it means to be a “thoroughbred conservative”, we can all be thankful that Brownback is not one.
Sen. Brownback is a Catholic who appears to be serious about his faith and seems to be quite sincere in having his faith – as opposed to his party or what some radio host considers “conservatism” – guide his political principles.
Sam Brpwnback is not quite the long shot I originally thought he’d be. No, he’s not a front-runner, and he’s not extremely likely to win, but he’s getting more than passing support. It is possible for him to gain momentum and emerge as the quiet, rising star. In fact, as an underdog he doesn’t even need to win the first few primaries in order to get a boost – if he does well enough to surprise the establishment, that alone might be sufficient to give him a lot of momentum.
But there really is no perfect candidate. Actually, there is, but unfortunately he shares the same last name as our current president. We’ll have to accept that no one will be completely satisfied no matter who the nominee. But America has survived for two centuries plus while only a handful of men have been truly great presidents. Perfection shouldn’t be the goal, though it would be nice if something approaching it was on the radar.
Great comment, FD!
Perhaps a pro-abort like Giuliani would be more “electable”. But such was not our experience in 2006 in Illinois when the GOP nominated pro-abortion candidate Judy Baar-Topinka for Governor.
A woman with a long history of open contempt for social conservatives, she attracted even fewer votes than out-of-stater Alan Keyes had done two years earlier when running against Barack Obama for the U.S. Senate. Which is as it should be.
Any pro-abortion GOP nominee should and must go down in flames.
On the day when the GOP gets it into its head that pro-lifers will support a pro-abortion GOP candidate, that day will mark the last time the GOP will seriously consider nominating a pro-lifer.
I’ve blogged about this at greater length.
But the point is, why should the GOP run a pro-life candidate, if by nominating a pro-abortion candidate they can get pro-life as well as pro-abortion voters?
For this reason, we pro-lifers must never support a pro-abortion politician, even if our party nominates one. If we do, there will never be another pro-life nominee.
Browncoats for Brownback? I’d re-think that one if I were you. If it is true that people feel threatened by Brownback and a possible “theocracy” or any form of dicatorship,then ‘Browncoats” will become ‘Brownshirts’ in no time! The supporters of Brownback will be portrayed as Nazis.
I love firefly! 🙂
My hope and prayer is that those Republican primary voters who are not die-hard conservatives and/or die-hard pro-lifers will split their votes roughly evenly among Giuliani, Romney, and McCain, while at the same time die-hard conservatives and die-hard pro-lifers will line up firmly behind Brownback, thus pushing him above the other three and into the nomination. Then if Brownback runs against Hillary Rodham Rodham in the general election, her huge negatives and his obvious sincerity might be enough to get him elected. This is all a long-shot, and it might require divine intervention, but I’m certainly planning to do what little I can to make it happen.