With all the silly banter about Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama being the only 2 'serious' potential presidential candidates for the Democratic ticket in '08, I was relieved to see somebody focus on the GOP side of the aisle for a change, if only to stop the banality.
An interesting piece found at MSNBC discussed the 3 front-runners and suggests that they are pandering to social conservatives, since their records have allegedly not been conservative enough, to date.
In a piece by NBC political reporter Mark Murray, former N.Y. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, Sen. John McCain and Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney are accorded the position as front-runners. Murray ends his piece by quoting Steven Forbes' former campaign manager, who predicts that one of these 3 will win.
In the meantime, Murray writes how each of the 3 pols has been at odds with social conservatives in the GOP and what they have done to pander more to that party's base.
I am providing that info below in summary form, for quick reference when the true debates begin. Unlike Murray, I do not use the term 'pro-life,' preferring the more accurate term, 'pro-ban.' Otherwise, this is a distillation of his points.
Mitt Romney
Prior Positions
*Pro-choice
*Pro-stem cell research funding
*Gay-friendly (not in this piece, but his metamorphosis is detailed here)
Pandering
*Pro-ban
*Opposes stem cell research funding
*Seeks a state Constitutional Amendment to overturn gay marriage in Massachusetts, trying to force the issue onto the ballot.
John McCain
Prior Positions
*Pro-ban, but on record as saying he would not repeal Roe v. Wade
*Relatively quiet on his personal pro-ban stance
*In favor of guest-worker progam for illegal immigrants
*In favor of expanded funding for stem cell research
*Referred to Rev. Jerry Falwell as 'evil'
Pandering
*Spoke out in favor of South Dakota's aborion ban (with some 'caveats,' as the article states)
*Received a major pro-ban endorsement, allegedly over his willingness to enact legislation to ban abortions
*Gave commencement address at Falwell's Liberty University
Rudy Giuliani
Prior Positions
*Pro-choice
*Stem-cell Research: In favor of Federal funding
*Pro-civil unions. (Additionally, during marital difficulties, moved out of the Mayoral mansion and shared space with a gay couple he was friends with)
Pandering
*Campaigning for Ralph Reed last May. It may not be enough, as one right-winger is quoted, suggesting that Giuliani run in the Democratic primaries.
Did Somebody Say 'Flip-Flop?'
All I can say is, the party that exploited the term flip-flop is going to have a whale of a time defending the integrity of their positions come '08 if one of these 3 gets the nomination.
To read the original Mark Murray article, point your browser here.
4 comments:
Hmmm...
Sounds like the GOPhers are worried about their lackluster slate, so far. I like that!
Thanks for the flips and the flops, Scoot. It'll come in handy. But, jeez-louise, it's still two years away! Can't we shorten this, please? I get so effing bored by this goofy process!
(Shhh! I'm worred myself about the Dems. I don't like Obama--too much blank slate/not enough history or strong action on anything. I don't like "Triangulation-Junction Hillary"/not enough consistency on issues. I'm waiting for more on Vilsack, so I'll just say that it's "Stewart/Colbert-08" until I know more.)
I plan to expose Romney's sacred drawers every chance I get...
Naomi
"Stewart/Colbert-08"
At least it would be truthy and funny!
The 2 face McCain phot is great.
I posted on another blog today how annoying it was that we have somehow annointed Barack and Clinton as the only potential Democratic candidates..
And the media repeatedly drones on about it, creating some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.
Can't we see what happens over the next several months and start checking out the candidates positions as they emerge?
I find it amazing that 2 politicians with so little time in office are the only 2 who seem to merit attention.
What's wrong with this picture?
As for Stewart/Colbert, I would prefer it to Barack/Clinton, or vice versa.
Too bad Russ Feingold isn't running. He may not have won, but he would have forced some important dialogue.
Easy, Scoot, just joking about using Stewart/Colbert as a place-marker until the real thing comes along...
I'm leaning toward Bill Richardson and waiting for him to say "yes".
However, there is a great danger in letting the media play it like a fait accompli. And for the same reason that we won't let them call elections before the last polls are closed--the lazy public has come to depend on the media to formulate their opinions for them!
Again, this is too soon for starting the 2008 campaign! I got bored every other January, when the insanity swung into action. We're exactly 47 months away and already debating the winners!
STOP IT, for god's sake!!!
Naomi
Post a Comment