In Pearl Jam’s Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town, front man Eddie Vedder sings “I changed by not changing at all…” Perhaps another time those of us young enough to remember the golden age of grunge can long debate such lyrical brilliance. However, I implore that when it comes to political leadership from the right, anyone with a shred of conservative sensibility ought to take Vedder’s lyrical musings to mind.
Shifting with the political winds of change is never a good thing (why just ask John Kerry). Yet, as loyal Republican voters clamber onboard the Giuliani bandwagon, they’ve apparently fixated so intently on the former mayor’s brightly colored sail that they’ve become all too dismissive of the varied directions the presidential hopeful is sailing in his quest for the party’s nod to lead the country. In Giuliani’s case, as an overwhelming majority of Americans remain insistent on enforcing current immigration laws and tightening border security, the tough on terrorism poster boy is bucking conventional wisdom by riding the tide in a renamed vessel. For, what far too many Rudy supporters don’t know is that Giuliani was at once a strong proponent of illegal immigration, going so far as implementing a policy of preventing city employees from contacting the Immigration and Naturalization Service about immigration violations, on the grounds that illegal aliens must be able to take actions such as to send their children to school or report crime and violations without fear of deportation. As mayor of New York, he ordered city attorneys to defend the policy in federal court (this of course when they weren’t tied up going after gun manufacturers). However, the court ruled that New York City's sanctuary laws were illegal and when the City of New York lost an appeal to the United States Supreme Court, the defiant Giuliani vowed to ignore the law. Furthermore, he went so far as to doubt that the federal government could completely stop illegal immigration. Now, of our Republican voters whom are willing to remain so absolutely insistent that Rudy is “there guy”, I ask that in appropriate fashion you all stand aboard in those, ever so slick bottomed, flip flops and see just how well you fair once the Giuliani camp begins its futile attempt to swab an overwhelmingly dirty deck.
But while his strength in the polls is highly disconcerting, in spite of his number of positions and their striking similarity to sandy footwear preferences, Giuliani is not alone amongst current GOP leaders in the practice. Now, certainly if Giuliani exemplifies the face of a man hell bent on defeating terrorism, then clearly John McCain is the poster boy for “bridging the political divide”. Though while McCain’s military service is unquestionably admirable, and his opposition to “enhanced methods of interrogation” obviously understandable and equally forgiving, considering them together the latter is not a position which resonates with those types of Republicans all too quick in backing Giuliani. For conservatives this of course is a definite positive which proves that when coupled with McCain’s long history of compromising principle (1st with McCain-Feingold & 2nd with McCain-Kennedy) his positions are vastly out of step with what party voters are after. As such McCain’s political dallying[1] has not, up to this point by polling standards, bode well for the Arizona Senator’s presidential aspirations.
Though there is of course between Giuliani and McCain enough issue wavering to infer that two’s company, in keeping true to the timeless adage we ought to look toward Mitt Romney as the third party member crowding the bunch. In a 1994 debate against Senator Edward Kennedy, Romney (then governor of Massachusetts) declared that on the issue of abortion, he supported a woman’s right to choose. Soon after, feeling the heat from conservatives, Romney was all too quick in distancing himself from the comment. But, a mere eight years later when he launched his second campaign, Romney’s pro-choice and embryonic stem cell research positions rang through loud and clear once again. It seemed Romney’s responses to an April 19, 2002 Planned Parenthood questionnaire contained a number of answers which cast doubt on the former governor’s conservative self proclamation. Indeed at the time it was a smart political move for Romney, a Republican running in liberal Massachusetts, where conventional wisdom dictates that success rides on a pro-choice position. However, for a Republican seeking the highest office, courting conservatives of the religious right is a highly sought after aptitude; one which is likely to be compromised unless Romney’s newly polished responses to the contrary reign supreme.
But, with such an allotment of vacillating between the three Republican front runners, it comes as no surprise that mere hearsay of a Fred Thompson run warms the cockles of conservatives hearts though it leaves unanswered Colorado conservative Tom Tancredo’s failure to invoke the same. But, given that the former Tennessee Senator and Law and Order actor has been out of turbulent political waters for the past six years; opting for a life as landlubber, he’s not been subjected to potentially compromising positions to the extent of the other candidates. However, be that as it may, there are a but a couple of items in Thompson’s past which his supporters would do well to question. One can only hope he’s taken to task on either of them in upcoming debates. While the first of which, Thompson’s “not guilty” vote on the perjury article of Clinton’s impeachment trial, likely won’t have much bearing on his popularity amongst conservative voters going forward, the second one might. Following the passage of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill on April 2, 2001, McCain held his press conference at the Capitol with none other than Fred Thompson present. McCain cited Thompson along with a few others as crucial to the bill’s success. Indeed he was as the key negotiator of setting the maximum inflationary adjusted $2,300 individual campaign contribution amount. And now, given that Thompson’s $2,300 limitation forces campaigns to rely on a heavy stream of fundraisers to survive, it bears to mind whether Thompson’s own genius coupled with his late run might not prove to be the very limitation to his potential presidential success.
Perhaps it’s possible I’m over thinking the voter’s “want for change” invocation. Then again, whatever the case being made for a conservative candidate, “change by not changing at all” does have a nice ring to it.
[1] Jamaican Patois: bobbing and weaving from side to side as if on a bike or bicycle
No comments:
Post a Comment