Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Never Say Never

First, this post by strident pro-life (among other things) blogger The Anchoress, describing the futility of disgruntled, anti-Giuliani conservatives in forming a third party to vote for the "perfect (Christian) candidate". Citing the '92 election, Ross Perot, and Clinton's 42% "victory", here's a key paragraph:
The third-party pipe-dreamers will once again make the Clinton tag team victorious. And with a Supreme Court likely to need three quick replacements in ‘09, the third party folks will watch as the court becomes a permanent 5-4 liberal majority activist court - for decades. Decades, folks. The America you think you’re going to “preserve” with your third party candidate may become unrecognizable in a very short time. The Roe v Wade you think you’re going to reverse with your unelectable third candidate will seem almost quaint when compared with the “compassionate” euthanasia and the “practical, community-serving, environment saving” limitations on life you’ll be watching get handed down as law by an activist court determined to see the Constitution as a “living” and flexible document.

Now, I don't agree with everything she says, particularly in her comparison of Rudy Giuliani to the "sinner" rather than the "saint" in Luke 18:10-14, on which The Anchoress bases much of her blog post: there's a large difference between a repentant sinner and someone who claims to be Christian but lives a life completely counterindicative of that.

Nevertheless, the gist of her message certainly gives me pause. I've heard the message before, however -- that it's "all about the judges" and that, therefore, any Republican president would be preferable to any Democrat. What remains unpersuasive is her tacit assumption that Giuliani would indeed appoint "strict constructionist" judges, favorable to a life-affirming political and social climate, his own lip-service notwithstanding.

In a similar vein, however, is this post at "Slublog". In addition to reiterating the same points about judges, the blogger there has this to say:
Here is a list of people on Giuliani's Justice Advisory Committee. It's a sneak peek into the people that will be appointed to judicial posts in a Giuliani administration. These are strict constructionists, and far from the types of people we're going to see appointed under a Clinton administration.

Now, obviously, one should take that with a grain of salt as well, but if what that blogger says does indeed check out, it certainly gives me pause. Will I now willingly hold my nose and vote for Giuliani if he receives the Republican nomination? It's too early to tell; and besides, I live in a state where it's not liable to make a difference anyhow. Not that I had any plans to vote third-party, but it certainly speaks volumes against that. I've said before, on this blog and elsewhere, that I would "never vote for Rudy Giuliani". I'll certainly continue to oppose him in the primaries (although, for the life of me, I can't find anyone 'round here who actually likes the guy), but I should perhaps be more cautious to "never say never".


Anonymous Marty said...

Your political education is proceeding apace, Benjamin. I will be sending you a box of clothespins.

10:47 AM  
Blogger Benjamin said...

Oh, I've always recognized the expediency of voting for the lesser of two weevils. But like I said, in all likelihood, I'll still stick with my principles, given that I live in a state where I can safely do so.

8:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home