HEWITT - there is this e-mail:
"Dear Hugh,
I am an unrepentant left-winger, and also a reader of your site, so you can take those two facts to imply whatever opinion of my intelligence you choose.
I think your views on the Specter situation are spot-on. In particular, certain of your comments ('Majorities are fleeting and have to be nurtured, not disciplined unless the nurturing fails.'; 'Evangelicals have to give the majority coalition in which they are dominant part the opportunity to deliver political accomplishments over a period of time, and they must accept less than perfection on the part of the coalition') display excellent political insight. As a leftie, I strongly hope no one listens!
I would love nothing more than to see Senator Specter thrown from the train by outraged pro-lifers, for the same reason I would love to see the President spend the next month doing nothing but advancing an evangelical agenda (something that has about a 0% chance of happening, unfortunately). The more the party takes a hard-line position, and the more the Right shows disdain for contrary views from the center, the easier it becomes to attract moderate voters back into the Democratic fold in 2006. Please don't discourage the wise folks over at NRO from continuing their noble mission.
Best,
Steven M____"
I am pleasantly surprised by the volume of "I changed my mind on Specter" e-mails, but none would make me happier than a dissenter among the NRO militants. My pal K-Lo posted this: "A friend of NR puts it this way: 'Arlen Specter is the air-traffic controllers for the Bush administration. If nothing happens, signal to everyone out there is 'business as usual.' You don't get to pick your fights.”
Sorry, but that analogy will not fly. The PATCO members were not fired for talking tough or even for saying harsh things about Reagan. They were fired when they acted contrary to law. The PATCO firings would be an appropriate analogy to trot out if and only if Specter violates undertakings he makes to the Senate GOP caucus. Powerline's Hinderaker is right: Senator Specter needs to make those commitments to Senator Frist and his colleagues, and those commitments need to be enforced. BTW: It would not be appropriate to demand a "yes vote" from Specter on nominees in committee or on the floor, only that he would blast through every obstruction thrown up by Democrats to assure that the nominees get their votes, both in committee and on the floor. |
