Is Brownback Really on the Verge of Backing Giuliani?
October 26, 2007
The Republican party as a home for pro-life Catholics? The charade is in its last throes, as Dick Cheney might say..
22 Comments
Comments are closed.
Catholic perspectives on culture, society, and politics
Blog Associations
Site Counter
Ad Free
Actually, it looks like Brownback is not endorsing Giuliani in the primary. I was worried about the meeting myself, but at least for now, Brownback has not given into the Giuliani machine. H/t: Jay Anderson.
Sorry to disappoint you, MM.
So because politicians disappoint, or may disappoint in this case, the GOP being a home for anti-abortion Catholics is a charade in its “last throes” ???
I don’t think so. It’s a far better vehicle than the Democratic Party, and we’ll keep plugging away inside it.
Paul’s article doesn’t actually say Brownback isn’t endorsing Giuliani… it says he’s playing coy. There’s a difference. Brownback’s rhetoric on Giuliani has clearly changed.
That said, the GOP as a whole is still better than the Democrats as a whole. However, depending on the course of this primary and the willingness of Democrats to run candidates like Brad Ellsworth this could change.
I guess I should have been more clear – he hasn’t expressly stated that he will not be endorsing Giuliani, but a lot of people expected (or feared) that he was going to walk out of the meeting with an endorsement. I guess we’ll see, but I would be pretty shocked if Brownback expressly supported Rudy durign the primary.
It’s a far better vehicle than the Democratic Party, and we’ll keep plugging away inside it.
The deception of the masses. It may be a better vehicle, but it ain’t going the right way.
Aside from federal funding, the big issue is Roe v. Wade. It’s overturn (without any room for argument IMO) will have the largest and most immediate impact on the rate. Immediately, about half the states will impose restrictions, and a few an outright ban. The GOP, for all its many faults, is strongly anti-abortion in these ways (even given Kennedy and O’Connor and Stevens) because the alternative party has sold its soul to the abortion lobby full stop.
My suspicion is that Brownback needs to appear like a Giuliani endorsement is on the table, so he can get more political concessions from the candidate he really plans to endorse.
Perhaps if we would stop rewarding the mediocrity of the Republican party on issues of life and start asking for more consistency from their part we could get something better out of them.
I believe what’s really going on is that Brownback wants to be #2 on the Republican ticket.
You know, you might have a point. From a political POV Brownback would make a good balance for Giuliani ideologically and regionally.
Exactly, Anonymous. It’s a different kind of “integrity.”
Charade?
Good Grief. There is no charade. IT is actually people debating and having a discussion and fighting for principles. No matter what is your position. As shocking as it might be for people the GOP is full of real average American people that have different views on different subjects. We are having a primary right now and fighting for those beliefs. THat is what Primaries are for!!!
The GOP is full of different people. At least we have an avenue where he can’t fight for those views and yes even obtain power.
Is Brownback vying for Rudy’s VP spot? That’d work for Rudy, probably settling most questions about his (lack of) pro-life credentials.
That’d work for Rudy, probably settling most questions about his (lack of) pro-life credentials.
If it did that would only mean pro-lifers are dumb as mud. Rudy doesn’t just lack pro-life credentials, he has very ample pro-abortion credentials.
How could the Democrats ever again become a pro-life party if pro-lifers won’t ally with abortion supporters in election campaigns? If a Dem candidate chose an outspoken pro-lifer for VP, we’d be jumping for joy.
The same rationale for that kind of co-operation would justify Brownback covering for Giuliani.
But in this case a Giuliani candidacy would be such a setback for GOP pro-lifers that I doubt it’s worth the compromise.
There is a different between the Dems and the GOP on the National level. In one Abortion is almost like a Sacrament in the Dem party and the other it is not. I will fight a Rudy nomination but if he gets it you bet Pro-lifers will fight for the VP slot and the right for the VP to vote his convictions in tied Senate votes, That is something. Of course I find all this counterproductive to be talking about now. All it does is giving RUDY free publicity. THe key is for us Pro-lifers to make a pitch for our GUY or GAL.
I am sorry that the PRo-life movement finds itself in this situation. However from the days of Lindy Boggs to John Breaux the national Democrat party has made it pretty
clear a pro-lifer would not be on the Ticket. IT is a problem
Katerina Ivanovna said
“Perhaps if we would stop rewarding the mediocrity of the Republican party on issues of life and start asking for more consistency from their part we could get something better out of them.”
I really don’t know what this means. I keep trying to make the argument that this is the not the 1950′s. Party leadership in this age can’t force issues through like they used too. IN the end a common argument must be made to the American people. Pro-life legislation is introduced all the time by Republicans. It gets no where because non partisan interested parties(SUCH AS CATHOLICS) refuse or show an amazing lack of zeal to go knocking on doors or trying to get public opinion behind it. You can’t blame the GOP for that blame laziness.
George Bush twice tried to open the discussion for something reasonable on immigration reform. Pretty much it appeared to me the Catholic community on the local level was AWOL on the average. While many Republicans that stood up for it got a lot of damage done to them. True the Catholic Bishops would issue some statement but I found a real lack of grassroots action for immigration reform. That is one issue out of many. You can’t expect politicians to go to bat on pro-life issues and other related topics and not take a look at how much backing they will get back home.
On political parties:
JUST SAY NO.
“On political parties: JUST SAY NO.”
Speaking as a recovered Republican, I offer my enthusiastic endorsement of Michael Iafrate’s propostion.
Oh, so we are now blaming Catholics for Republicans’ delusional hypocrisy? Pathetic, really. Man, the post-Nov08 environment will be something wonderful to behold.
The Republicans have nominated pro-life presidential candidates in every election since 1980. The Democrats have nominated pro-abort presidential candidates every election since 1980. Republican pro-lifers have made it known loud and clear that they will not support Guiliani. We are willing to suffer through a Clinton presidency rather than support a pro-abort Republican for President. Would that Tony and other Democrats would spend a tenth of the energy they spend bashing Republicans trying to convince their fellow Democrats that abortion is the taking of innocent human life. Perhaps pro-life Democrats could organize a Stop Clinton, Stop Obama and Stop every other Democrat who will not pledge as President to oppose abortion? I won’t hold my breath.
As I predicted on here some time ago, it will be Guiiani on top with either Brownback, Huckabee or Paul No. 2 as a sop to the “values voters”. I agree with whoever said Brownback is sniffing around for the No. 2 spot but I think Ron Paul has a better chance of getting picked than either B or H at this point in time. Even if the veep doesn’t pick the nominees for the supreme court, I think this arrangement will work for Fr. Frank, Natl Right to Life, etc etc.
Giuliani to pick Ron Paul as veep? That’s even more out there than being confident in a Republican victory in 2008.
Besides, Ron Paul would never accept. He’s nothing if not quixotic and would never compromise his principles for the vice presidency (and being Giuliani’s veep would require Ron Paul to compromise dozens if not hundreds of his principles).