Friday, September 14, 2007

Steve Huntley connects the social conservative dots on Giuliani

Huntly in today's Sun Times,
Giuliani promises to appoint strict-constructionist jurists to the U.S. Supreme Court. Even more than the tax cuts, the high court appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito are the crowning domestic achievements of the George W. Bush presidency. The next president surely will get to make one or more high court nominations, and conservatives would like a GOP president to consolidate Bush's transformation of the court.

Social conservatives probably figure a man who won't renounce his positions on abortion, gun control and gay rights to appease them can be counted on to keep his judicial promise. And Giuliani must know that, should he reach the White House, his keeping this pledge would be as crucial to his winning a second term as George H.W. Bush's violation of his "read my lips, no tax increase" promise was to costing him re-election.

Next year looks to be miserable for Republicans. Because poll after poll shows Giuliani matching up against the Democratic contenders in the general election better than any other GOP candidate, social conservatives likely see in Giuliani the best chance to protect traditional values from arbitrary liberal judicial activism.

They know more about what's in their best interest than the Beltway beacons of enlightenment.
Also read Eric Johnson: Anti-Roe and Pro-Rudy

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Gee, Bill. Looks like you finally came out of the closet and stopped pretending you were a Democrat. What happened? Did Bill Krystol read Son of Morning Star and decided that the neo-cons needed a last stand with the GOP?

Bill Baar said...

I like Giuliani. I have for a long time.

The Federalist approach to social issues has a lot of appeal too.

Scalia said judges are no better qualified to decide the moral questions of abortion, marriage, and so on, than any voter; so take them out of the courst and put them before voters.

Makes sense to me and clicks with that paper I wrote in Constitutional History, long before there were neo-Cons, defending FDR's court packing scheme as a very Democratic thing to do.