NO TRUCERS – An Open Letter to Mitch Daniels Apologists
*Some terms in this post are militaristic in nature, words that could be used to describe actual physical battle with soldiers, but can also be used metaphorically in reference to battles that are not actual physical battles, but are merely political battles without the intent of physical harm. Except where the actual US Military is being discussed, these terms should be understood as the non-physical metaphorical type. If you have been, are now, or may become at any time in the future, a crazy person, please interpret these words as a call to engage in non-threatening letter campaign to your elected officials written on the inside cover of Hallmark Cards that feature puppies on front cover.
Reading Aces take on the 2012 field Here; I was pleased that it seems, while still very early, a type of Redstate consensus or majority forming around Mike Pence as a unifying conservative with the major bases covered, despite some weaknesses.
But then I got into the long thread of the Mitch Daniels supporters and a reply turned into a diary. I like Mitch Daniels. He has accomplished much in Indiana. In some ways, I wish things could be different. But they can’t.
So I make this plea to the Daniel’s supporters that they do two things 1) do not ask pro-lifers to believe that Daniels is 100% pro-life, and 2) think long and hard about putting the party and the conservative movement in the position of asking pro-lifers to sacrifice for the greater good just one more time. I don’t vilify Daniels; I don’t vilify those who support Daniels, and I don’t assume that Mike Pence is the only answer merely because I think he could be one answer. It’s not about Pence or Daniels or any other candidate. It’s about what I believe pro-lifers can tolerate, and what they cannot. And it’s about the absolute necessity for the all hands on deck trend to continue into 2012.
It’s really very simple. 100% pro-lifers know that a 100% pro-lifer does not make the statement that Daniels made. To be 100% pro-life is to know the tactics of the abortion lobby. It is to understand that abortion is not legal because it was ever fairly and honestly debated. It is legal because of lies, fake statistics, emotivism, and Orwellian twists of phrase.
But more importantly, abortion is legal because most of us simply don’t think about it. “It’s just tissue”, “I am personally pro-life but …” “Safe, legal, and rare”, “It’s such a divisive issue, let’s have a truce.” These words don’t mean “truce” they mean surrender – they are the language of the abortion lobby. They are words crafted by professional marketing firms to get you to not think about the facts on abortion.
And most importantly, a 100% pro-lifer does not forget that a “Truce” for our side means 3000 innocent Americans are destroyed every day. Does anyone imagine a 100% pro-national defense conservative would OK a truce if 3000 troops were lost every day of the truce? Or a fiscal conservative would agree to a truce if it involved daily 1% tax increases during the period of “truce”.
Ultimately, It is much easier to believe that Romney (not that I do) has converted to being 100% pro-life than it is to believe Daniels is 100% pro-life. He is either a closeted pro-abort, or he is a squish who didn’t understand enough about being pro-life to understand the import of his statement. Either way, he has disqualified himself from my vote unless no viable option remains. And to argue the import of his statement is consistent with being 100% pro-life just makes him looks dishonest to boot. Perhaps you can argue that circumstances force a 100% fiscal conservative to still have to raise taxes occasionally. But in this arena, the act of spinning this statement just digs the hole deeper. A true conversion is the only thing that would even remotely have a chance to rehabilitate Daniels in the eyes of pro-lifers, and not in time for 2012.
Don’t assume that makes us any less conservative on issues of fiscal responsibility, small/local government, and strong national defense. It certainly does not in the case of most of the pro-lifers’ I know. Nor is it reasonable to assume we sacrifice the good for the perfect and are incapable of biding our time, of being incremental when necessary, of not leading with the chin, of supporting the Rudi’s when in NY or the Scott Brown’s when in Mass. But it does mean we will not support a pro-abortion candidate, or someone who talks like one, in a national election unless there is no other viable option. And it is the worst of times to even come close to putting us in that position.
For a whole bunch of us, we are done buying into the squish’s abortion lite argument that only “moderates” can win in national elections, and that doing nothing is the “moderate” position when it comes to abortion.
We were the ones making the argument in 2008 that the party’s leftward slide might only be corrected by defeat and by a good dose of a socialist like Obama to re-awaken the conservative heart of our nation. Thinking hard about sitting it out, much like a stern parent might let their child spend that night in jail, even though it’s unpleasant for all involved, and even though it’s risky. We didn’t know that re-awakening would be called the tea party, but that’s what it ended up being.
Pro-lifers’ weren’t the only ones. And pro-life wasn’t the only issue either. After all, McCain is a squish with a pretty decent pro-life record. It was not his weakest point by far. But perhaps it was easier to endure the thought of present loss for future gain for us because we have been doing it for so long, and because we knew that we were being misled. And because we knew that words like moderate, and truce, really mean surrender. We also had a lot of traitors to the movement that year. The establishment’s shameless Rudi promotion, supposed “pro-life Catholics” like Sean Humanity jumping on the bandwagon, Rick Warren hoping to trade his integrity for a seat at Obama’s table, Pat Robertson, etc. In other words the pro-aborts were sinking their claws deep into our territory all the while we were being asked to maintain the truce.
To settle again, to appease, to buy the lie one more time – that we must accept the incremental fusion of the two party’s as a slow, steady, two man march off the left cliff, with only the justification that we must not be the first one off the cliff? It was simply too much to ask.
Many of us didn’t follow through with sitting it out, in large part because we acknowledged the gesture of Sarah Palin. In the end, most of us did what we could with a few weeks to go. Sarah Palin reminded us that a conservative can in fact talk like a conservative without fear of not sounding like a moderate, and her part in what came next is no small thing. Barak Obama overstepped more than any of us could have imagined. He overstepped enough to bring, of all things, a CNBC moderator at the Chicago Board of Trade to boil over into a rant and call for a Boston tea party, Chicago style. It was a rant heard round the world, and the tea party was born.
Of course the tea party was and is centered on issues of freedom, fiscal responsibility, and small government. But that is not due to an absence of pro-lifers in the tea party, it is because government action under Obama was to those issues as China’s one-child policy is to pro-life policy. But that circumstantial focus on other issues cannot translate into pro-lifers declaring a truce on pro-life issues. To assume as much is absurd, and will cause problems 1000 times the size of CPAC’s rescinding of the don’t ask don’t tell policy.
Again it is very simple. WE KNOW THAT A 3000 BABIES ARE DESTROYED EVERY DAY THAT A “TRUCE” EXISTS. But it way beyond that. We sit in the aftermath of the biggest midterm election gains since WWII. A true grassroots conservative movement has grown from zero to influencing nearly every election in the country in less than 2 years. Majorities are once again identifying themselves as Republicans, as conservatives, and yes – as pro-life. The press has lost much of its power, and is imploding with ever more desperate and deranged attacks on conservatives, and of course Sarah Palin. Somehow mistakenly imaging her as the snakes head and hoping that if they can kill the head the snake will fall. All that is needed for further gains is for those in our party to maintain their principles, their integrity, try to do what they said they are going to do, and for God’s sake keep the heat on as true conservatives. The 3 legged kind. Not the 2 legged kind or the 1 legged kind.
So really, this is the time – right now – when we should be pressing hard – this is the time when pro-life squishes want to tell the biggest and most dedicated group of “single issue” voters, to settle for a truce on their issue?
Are you $#!@& kidding me!