Friday, December 28, 2007

Harris v Pipkin

The folks over at Red Maryland are having a grand ol' time trying to define conservatism, its founders, its leaders past and present and what it has to do with the Republican Party. Some of the comments are just ridiculous and warrant little if any attention. However, in between the bouts of silliness, a debate emerged, here and in other blogs, as to the worthiness of a true conservative representing CD-1.

Bud of Bud's Blog writes: "Harris thinks standing with a certain political party makes him some good conservative. In reality, that proves he's only a lapdog partisan. Go Pipkin!" And again in response to my comment Bud writes: "You're operating under the false assumption that siding with the republicans means you've voted conservative."

Nothing could be further from the truth. I say again, I take a back seat to no one when it comes to trashing my own party for doing and saying things that make being a Republican embarrassing for conservatives. Harris will stand with the Republicans when it is time to vote. Up until then he will make the conservative case.

I expect to read future news items that go something like this: Harris, who vehemently opposed yet another Farm Bill and lectured his Republican colleagues for pandering to a powerful lobby, nonetheless voted with the rest of the GOP delegation to approve the latest reauthorization. "It turns my stomach to have cast this vote," Harris said after the vote. "But this is what I promised to do when I was elected. Voting against the GOP would not have made a difference in the outcome but it would have disappointed my Republican constituents back home."

My comment is case you don't get around to reading the RedMaryland blog.
"No, Pipkin is probably not a liberal, however, his supporters refer to him as a 'moderate.' Gilchrest was a "moderate" when he went to Washington. Do we really want to take a chance on another one?
"No. A Partisan is exactly what we need. Someone who will add to the votes and voices of the minority Party in Congress. You see, in order to hold sway over critical pieces of legislation we need votes. We DON'T need independent thinkers. The time for independent thinking comes during the debate or the hearings. But if and when you've failed to convince the rest of your party that yours is the way to vote, then you DAMN well better vote with the rest of the GOP.
Harris will vote with the rest of the party because the vote agrees with conservative values; or the rest of the party will vote with Harris because he has articulated the conservatism of his position.
"That is what I and his other supporters expect him to do. Why? Because it is what WE would do if we were in his shoes. It's perfectly simple.
"Pipkin? I don't know the guy. He would, I assume, see the conservative values in, say, securities lawmaking. But hey, Warren Buffett would be the same way, wouldn't he? Would you want Warren Buffett representing you in Congress? No. Or how about all the fine upstanding businessmen and women in US Chamber of Commerce, busy helping the ACLU and AFL-CIO bring in illegal aliens? No, I don't think they can be trusted, either, with upholding the principles of liberty, small government and faith in God, unless there's a buck in it for them."

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

All these electrons wasted on was is the 21st century version of arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Gilchrest is going to win again, and we'll forget who both the nobodies were before opening day.