Content by Whitfox
Posted at 4:09pm on Nov. 12, 2007 How Rudy could sway me
By Whitfox
Since it's being asked how Rudy could sway social cons, I'll answer the question for myself: If I believed Rudy would deliver that 5th vote against Roe, I'd vote for him. The Court's not everything, but it's important.
The problem is there's very little reason to believe him. What he's done is make side-stepping promises about his selection committee and his odd definition of strict constructionism. He hasn't committed himself in any way - except in favor of infanticide, when he promised not to be effectively pro-life.
Posted in Archived — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 5:26am on Oct. 16, 2007 When is opposing Rudy a threat?
By Whitfox
To help put this dispute in perspective, I'd like to consider what would happen if MoveOn representatives came to Rudy supporters and said:
"Your candidate's views on the GWOT are absolutely unacceptable to us. We won't vote for him in the general under any circumstance!"
I think the answer would be along the lines of: "Well, duh. We think pursuing the GWOT is a great thing, and that's a big reason why we're supporting the guy. We didn't pick him to please you, and we couldn't care less about your votes."
Posted in 2008 — Comments (128) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 3:51am on Oct. 2, 2007 The Rudy Kerfluffle and Going Forward
By Whitfox
All right, we've had a half-dozen threads on voting for Rudy in the general. Why another one?
Because I'd like to step back, and look at this in perspective. That social-cons and non-social-cons have quarrels over candidates is nothing new. I can't think of an election since Reagan where this hasn't happened, save for 2004 when we had a sitting president. (And even that circumstance didn't stop it in 1992, if you remember Pat Buchanan's primary challenge.)
Posted in Elections — Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:30pm on Sep. 10, 2007 Refighting the Last War
By Whitfox
Many analogies have been made comparing our actions in Iraq to our actions during the Cold War. Some are illuminating; history usually is. But we should be avoiding the military mistake of refighting the last war. Here are two core differences:
1. Our problem is terrorism, not a miltary nation.
2. Our problem is due to a religious movement, not a political one.
Posted in War — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 7:44pm on Jul. 25, 2007 Abandon ship! Senators and Representatives First!
By Whitfox
Those who've read my posts know that I think the White House's Iraq policy is badly misdirected. But Bush looks like Washington and Lincoln rolled up into one compared to the Democrats in Congress. Some recent propsals from the other side of the aisle are given here: (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070725/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq)
"The House voted 399-24 on Wednesday to pass a bill proposed by Lee that would ban permanent bases in Iraq."
Posted in War — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 7:37pm on Nov. 8, 2006 They Looked Like Fools
By Whitfox
I disagree with much of the post-election analysis I see here. I don't think our base left us, considering what Democrats will do with judges and taxes. I don't think independent voters decided to punish the Republican Congress for not pushing small government enough. (Would that they did!) I don't even think we lost much on social values, though I'm sure Republican clumsiness on this issue hurt us with libertarians.