Pro-life GOP candidate David Jolly won a tight special election for Congress in Florida’s 13th District. He succeeds Republican Bill Young, who died in office after 44 years in Congress. (Yet another poster boy for term limits.) Although Young had no difficulty in his races, the district trended Democrat over the years, only voting once for a Republican for President since 1988. Jolly was the former general counsel for Bill Young, becoming a lobbyist in 2007. This was his first attempt at elective office and he ran a fairly colorless campaign, emphasizing repeal of ObamaCare. The Democrats put up pro-abort Alex Sink who had run unsuccessfully for governor of Florida in 2010. In that race she took the Congressional district. The Democrats flooded in money for the race and were confident of victory, especially with a Libertarian candidate in the race also campaigning against ObamaCare and siphoning off votes from Jolly. It didn’t play out as they anticipated. Sean Sullivan at the Washington Post politics blog gives us the details:
Go here to read the rest. One swallow does not make a spring and it is a long way to November, but this race can only be alarming for the Democrats. They had every possible advantage in this race and still lost. But for the Libertarian candidate, the race would not even have been close. 2014 might, I repeat, might, make the Democrats nostalgic for 2010 by the end of the year.
Defeat the Democrats. No matter what, defeat them.
Jolly Good. Capital. If the Democrats had not aborted all of their voters, they may have won.
[…] Public Discourse Court Strikes Down Anti Crisis Pregnancy Center Law – Matthew Archbold A Jolly Win for the G. O. P. – Donald R. McClarey JD, TACatholic Abortion Rts. Campaign: You Can be Catholic & […]
About half of voters who filled the oval for the Libertarian candidate were Democrats lodging a protest vote. Had there been no Libertarian alternative to the Democrat, those Dems and Dem-identified independents (aka Know-Nothings) would have stayed home and not voted.
In a three-way race, some votes always go to the #3 party’s candidate. Five percent is typical. I believe Republicans who think they’d own those votes “if only” are deeply mistaken.
“I believe Republicans who think they’d own those votes “if only” are deeply mistaken.”
I disagree in this case Micha. The Libertarian in this case campaigned vigorously against ObamaCare, as did Jolly who made it his signature issue. It was opposition to ObamaCare that won this election, and that is the important take away point from this contest.
Ah, yes: based on the idea that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This is the same idea that told us it was a good idea to pour arms into the hands of Muslim fanatics in Afghanistan. After all, the Soviets were our adversaries, if not outright enemies, and what harm could come of arming Muslim fanatics? Surely that would never come back to bite us!
Make no mistake, the Republicans make trustworthy partners in just the same sense the mujahideen did. They tell us that we may not object to contraception as such, as though that were some sort of violation of a natural law that applies to everyone, but rather restrict ourselves to claiming a dispensation under religious freedom to practice what we agree should not be imposed on anyone else: and American Catholics obediently agree. Please don’t tell me that ending abortion is a Republican priority; it is a sin to lie. At the moment they are caving before the latest wind, “gay rights”, specifically “gay marriage”.
Howard, there are two political parties who have any chance of winning in this country: the Party of Abortion and the Republicans. The Party of Abortion views abortion as a sacrament. The Republican Party, by and large, is dedicated to restricting abortion, as the raft of anti-abortion laws at the state level since they took over in many states in 2010 indicates. If pro-lifers took your advice they would find themselves politically impotent and abortion would remain legal in this country until Gabriel sounds the final trump.
@Donald, so what you’re saying is you let someone else choose how you vote. If a bunch of fools vote for repugnant ideas, but at least they “have a chance of winning” and are better than the other party “with a chance of winnin”, you’re all on board with them. You’re willing to support evil with your vote, as long as it is the lesser evil — lesser at least of those you decide “have a chance of winning”. Anyone who follows your advice can be guaranteed to be voting for evil, and they bear responsibilty for the evil they endorse.
Oh, and if you haven’t noticed, the pro-life community IS politically impotent and abortion REMAINS the law of the land. The pro-life community has been doing it your way for the past 40 years and it has not worked.
Finally, don’t be so sure about abortion remaining legal until Gabriel blows his horn. I’m pretty sure the US will be on the scrapheap of history, alongside the British Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and the Austo-Hungarian Empire, long before then.
“The pro-life community has been doing it your way for the past 40 years and it has not worked.”
What do you advocate, Howard? Civil war?
I have stood outside of abortion clinics and I know of no other way to exorcize the demons of hell than to pray and fast.
PS, I will vote Republican while holding my nose until the Constitution Party has a good chance at winning.
“@Donald, so what you’re saying is you let someone else choose how you vote”
No, I vote conservative and the Republican party is by far the most conservative party in the American political spectrum, absent crank no chancer parties.
“You’re willing to support evil with your vote, as long as it is the lesser evil — lesser at least of those you decide “have a chance of winning”.”
Actually I follow Cardinal Ratzinger when it comes to voting:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm
“Oh, and if you haven’t noticed, the pro-life community IS politically impotent”
Rubbish. You really haven’t been paying attention to all the new legislation that is coming along. As clueless as you appear to be, perhaps it is a good thing that you either do not vote or waste your vote on crank no hoper parties.
“I’m pretty sure the US will be on the scrapheap of history,”
You better to pray to God not, because the world will then be a very dark place indeed, with dire consequences likely for you and yours.
@Donald — Uh huh. And your dependable vote gives you zero leverage.
The Whig Party used to be one of the two parties that “had a chance of winning”. Eventually its supporters got fed up with it because it did not do as they liked, and these cranks created the Republican Party (which did, in fact, precipitate a Civil War, but that’s another story). What men have done, men can do. Political parties can be broken apart and reassembled. The failure of American voters to do this on a regular basis is one of the reasons our republic is in such sorry shape.
Donald, you DO let other people determine for whom you vote, because it is THEIR votes that magically make the likes of John McCain a credible candidate and not a crank (in your estimation).
@Paul — Prayer and fasting make more real difference than anything else — especially more than voting for people who take your vote for granted.
Supporting the Republican Party is (1) usually described even by those who advocate it as voting for the lesser evil, which does exactly mean voting for evil, and (2) is voting for a party that is less conservative by the day. Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, but Republicans today are embracing the “inevitability of gay marriage”. Bill Clinton was a liberal when he pushed through “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, but there was scarcely a peep from Republicans when that policy was scrapped in favor of a new rainbow military. When George W. Bush was president, he made a few symbolic or easy acts in favor of the pro-life position, but he didn’t give it anything like the effort he gave his attempt to reform Social Security, which was an utter failure.
What I am calling for is learning from the successes of our enemies. The pro-abortion and gay-rights crowds did not take control of the Democratic Party due to random chance or because of some sort of inevitability, but because they were willing to play hard ball politics. They were willing to let the Demcrats know that if they failed to toe the line, the Democrats would be abandoned and lose. These threats were backed up.
That won’t solve the spiritual problem, which is the most essential problem. It also won’t solve the problem of the entertainment industry or of the liberal domination of education, but it is the only political choice that makes sense.
@Donald — “You better to pray to God not, because the world will then be a very dark place indeed, with dire consequences likely for you and yours.” Yeah, because, as your man George W. Bush said, “This ideal of America is the hope of all mankind… That hope still lights our way. And the light shines in the darkness. And the darkness will not overcome it.” All he did was substitute the “ideal of America” for Jesus Christ — no idolatry there, right? Put not your faith in princes — or in the states they head.
Howard,
Bush was speaking of this world, not the next, and he would be the first to acknowledge that. Further, he was simply suggesting that the civic and economic freedoms offered by America are exemplary by historic and international standards, and in fact the worthy object of aspiration.
Voting for lost causes can have symbolic value, and I have no quarrel with people who choose to do so. But to call into question the Catholicity or intelligence of those who would rather vote for better of two very imperfect practical options is arrogant and stupid. I can take either in a man, but both at once is insufferable.
@Mike — I call into question the judgement, which is not the same thing as intelligence, and even more the RESULTS of those who think the best way to achieve change is to support the status quo. They vote for the status quo; they get the status quo, or rather, a never-ending series of compromises between what had recently been the status quo and the liberal cause of the day.
Also, thanks for volunteering to be the arbiter of who gets to call someone stupid. I see that you have chosen to nominate yourself for that honor.
@Donald — I should also point out a few things. (1) It is not likely that Gabriel will sound his horn anytime soon. If the end of the US comes within either of our natural lifetimes, it will be a violent end that will involve a huge amount of suffering. (2) It remains to be seen how much of that suffering will be due to the US. We are becoming a country of the unbelieving led by the unscrupulous. We are coasting on the faith and accomplishments of previous generations. When things go bad, they can go very bad, very fast, and it is naive to think that the US will always be “a global force for good”, as the Navy calls itself. (3) I don’t want the US to die. I didn’t want John Paul II to die, either, and it was in many ways a dark day for me and mine when he did, but my desires did not slow his death. Likewise, everyone could see the signs that he was dying, even those who wanted him to live. His death was inevitable, but his sainthood was not. In just the same way, the US appears to be facing several crises that will all come to a head about the same time — a spiritual crises, yes, but also a political crisis (in several different ways, including the increasingly dictatorial powers of the presidency as used by presidents of both major parties), an educational crisis, an economic crisis, and arguably one or two more crises. Uncle Sam is very sick and may well die soon; the fact that he has been sick before and recovered is no more of a guarantee for him than it was for John Paul, who had also been sick before but recovered. It is not clear he will die a saint. (4) Some real nations have disappeared altogether and come back; Poland comes to mind. Poland has an ethnic identity, though; it is not defined by a mere political compromise, which is how the US came about. On the other hand, the Roman Empire changed dramatically from its founding under Caesar Augustus to the fall of Constantinople, just as today’s USA looks nothing like what George Washington knew. For centuries after the fall of Constantinople, there were several dubious claims to be be successors of the Roman Empire, such as the Prussian Empire (Kaiser means Caesar) and the Russian Empire (Tsar means Caesar). When the USA does collapse, its successor (maybe or maybe not its immediate successor) will probably call itself the United States of America.
Howard, of course you may question my judgment just as I may question yours. Yet, any remotely knowledgeable person understands the difference between Dems and Republicans on abortion, and those differences are given teeth in countless executive orders, judicial appointments, foreign policy budgeting, and ObamaCare. In GA I know Catholics who are supporting a 100% pro-life Senatorial candidate who is a YouTube buffoon (and probably just checking all the pro-life boxes to get the nomination — since he is on wife # 4 he could use the gig) over a 95% pro-lifer who is sincere in her beliefs and can actually defeat her pro-abort Dem opponent and be effective in office, just because they are not the compromising type. Lunacy, but the Planned Parenthood folks are smiling.
“The Whig Party used to be one of the two parties that “had a chance of winning”.”
Both major parties fractured over the issue of slavery. The Republican party was the old Whig party of the North in a new name with the same political agenda, with the addition of an anti-slavery litmus test. They were joined by enough anti-slavery Democrats to quickly become the dominant party in the North, while the Democrats became the dominant party in the South. This was not a third party coming to the fore, but rather both parties becoming “pure” on the issue of slavery, rather as both parties are almost totally pure today on the issue of abortion.
“Donald, you DO let other people determine for whom you vote, because it is THEIR votes that magically make the likes of John McCain a credible candidate and not a crank (in your estimation).”
I do not cast the controlling vote in all elections, as much as I wish that I had that power. McCain, who I have heavily criticized on this blog, got the nomination because the conservative vote was divided among several candidates, just as happened with Romney in 2012. Either McCain or Romney of course were infinitely preferable to Obama.
“Put not your faith in princes — or in the states they head.”
Do not confuse religion with politics or Earthly well being with Eternal Salvation. I hope to gain Eternal Salvation. That is not in conflict with my belief that America has mainly been a force for good in the world and that the world would be a much darker place without it. As Pope Benedict said of America: “Freedom is not only a gift, but also a summons to personal responsibility. Americans know this from experience – almost every town in this country has its monuments honoring those who sacrificed their lives in defense of freedom, both at home and abroad.”
“We are coasting on the faith and accomplishments of previous generations. When things go bad, they can go very bad, very fast, and it is naive to think that the US will always be “a global force for good”, as the Navy calls itself.”
Agreed, which is why I involve myself in politics and why I also strive to teach others about the history of this country. Time to awake the “better angels of our nature” as Lincoln said. America has a wonderful heritage and it is worth struggling for. My ancestor Major Andrew McClary, New Hampshire militia, died at Bunker Hill helping to give birth to this country and I will not tamely allow the freedom and the nation he fought for to both vanish.
I agree with Donald. Jesus’ Kingdom is not of this world, but we have to live in it responsibly. I spent my time in the US nuclear submarine force doing my part to defend freedom. I will oppose by any reasonable means possible what the Democrats are doing to destroy the Republic I love. If that means holding my nose and voting for a flawed Republican, then so be it. The Republicans may be weak and hypocritical, but the Democrats are demonically evil.
@Mike Petric — We obviously question each other’s judgement. I can live with that. As for your GA situation, you COULD HAVE SAID, “In GA I know a 95% pro-life Senatorial candidate who is sincere in her beliefs and can actually defeat her pro-abort Dem opponent and be effective in office, but she would rather cling to the 5% of her platform that is pro-abortion than make the small changes necessary to prevent Catholics from voting instead for a 100% pro-lifer candidate who is a YouTube buffoon (and probably just checking all the pro-life boxes to get the nomination — since he is on wife # 4 he could use the gig).” You don’t say that. It’s the politician’s job to represent the electorate (yeah, I know this is for the Senate and not the House, but still…); it is not the electorate’s job to change what they will accept to suit the politician. She has chosen to abandon their votes; don’t cry to me that she doesn’t get them.
And regarding your earlier statement, “Bush was speaking of this world, not the next,” that Bible verse talks about Jesus coming into this world to bring it light, not the next one. This world is the one that needs the light so badly! I don’t think that you really mean to imply that Jesus is only about saving our fannies from Hell after we are dead, but that it is the USA that saves our fannies while we are alive — yet you come very close to implying that. Jesus came to save us from our sins, not just the consequences of our sins, and this has real this-world implications. (Likewise, virtue is not only about the next world, as most people seem to think these days. Even if this were the only life we would have, it would be better to be virtuous than vicious.)
@Donald — It was W who confused this world and the next, not only in the “light of the world” speech but in others (like the “wonder-working power” speech) and in his policies. I’m losing interest in this conversation, though, and I won’t pursue that part of it.
Assuming the US is among the “good guys” when it falls, the world will get over that darkness, as it has gotten over many other such falls. It’s pure arrogance to think that we are some sort of secular-messianic nation. It is impossible to be certain that the US will be one of the good guys without some sort of unjustified quasi-religious conviction. The trend is very bad, and there is no sense in pretending that we still live in Norman Rockwell’s America. What worries me is not that the US will probably be destroyed eventually. What worries me is the distinct prospect that we will deserve to be destroyed. What should really bother each of us is a realization of how our own sins contribute to that prospect.
You’ve got some discomfiting truths in there Howard.
Yes the democrats have abortion in their platform, and republicans, so far, don’t.
Republicans may have the best economic ideas, but I am not sure they are up to conserving our Judeo Christian heritage.
Many, many so called conservatives are for abortions in case of rape, health etc etc. If you follow a thread all the way through their thinking process, the repubs as a party seem to be inconsistent and incoherent. Like Belgian/German bishops. Conservatives are starting to waffle on marriage and on end of life. (infected with libertarian ideas on gay marriage and personal freedom to choose death.)
Many Republicans are also for gay marriage if that is the way the crowd is moving. A big tent all right- with no unified focus.
Just think if FOX commentators could have got behind Romney. Instead they perpetuated the idea that the republicans had no good candidate to offer.
And look at those Republicans in Iowa! Counted and recounted and just couldn’t bring themselves to say the people had chosen Santorum, until a week too late. The Dems on the other hand are tightly unified as champions of feel good and instant gratification.
Conservativism has to mean more than economic issues. Personal liberty (in my own bedroom) makes libertarians and democrats strange bedfellows, and helps to divide conservatives. Legislating for gay marriage may be acceptable to conservatives pulled so far right that they find themselves on the left.
The blunt force on the culture is not just in legalization of gay marriage, but forcing, through law, people to approve and participate in effectively promoting gay marriage. That’s where libertarianism falls into disarray.
Gay marriage is wrong, among other reasons, because it leads to social disorder. The problems facing Republicans in the next election will be caused by confusion in the ranks coming from libertarian influence.
“Assuming the US is among the “good guys” when it falls, the world will get over that darkness, as it has gotten over many other such falls.”
And at what cost? I shudder at the thought of a world ruled by the Third Reich or a Soviet Union under Stalin. Only the US prevented such realities from occurring.
“It’s pure arrogance to think that we are some sort of secular-messianic nation.”
Don’t talk to me, talk to Pope Leo XIII who saw divine providence behind the founding of America:
“Nor, perchance did the fact which We now recall take place without some design of divine Providence. Precisely at the epoch when the American colonies, having, with Catholic aid, achieved liberty and independence, coalesced into a constitutional Republic the ecclesiastical hierarchy was happily established amongst you; and at the very time when the popular suffrage placed the great Washington at the helm of the Republic, the first bishop was set by apostolic authority over the American Church. The well-known friendship and familiar intercourse which subsisted between these two men seems to be an evidence that the United States ought to be conjoined in concord and amity with the Catholic Church. And not without cause; for without morality the State cannot endure-a truth which that illustrious citizen of yours, whom We have just mentioned, with a keenness of insight worthy of his genius and statesmanship perceived and proclaimed.”
The want of patriotism among too many Americans today is appalling, and such lack of love of country only aids the enemies of America, both externally and internally. Too many people will take any excuse to sit on their duffs and moan about the state of the country, rather than taking action to help America.
@Paul W Primavera — The strategy I propose is not otherworldly. Politics is a game of compromise, but negotiating the compromise is a lot like playing chicken. If your adversary knows you will turn aside because (1) you’ve spent the past 40 years turning aside and (2) you publicly defend the wisdom of turning aside whenever the topic comes up, you will never win a game of chicken. You have to be willing to risk the collision to have a chance of winning. Given the fact that you will often lose no matter what you do, it makes no sense to stick with a strategy that has no chance of winning.
Howard,
You miss the point entirely. The candidate I support (she is a friend actually) clings to her 5% imperfection precisely because she believes it is correct, not because of any calculus regarding votes. She believes (wrongly in our view of course) that although abortion is always wrong (full stop, period), government interference in the case of rape would just make matters worse until we have been able to achieve a sufficient social consensus such that the interference could be properly understood as beneficial rather than malignant. You would rather her change her position to be inconsistent with her beliefs; in other words lie like so many other pols who select their policy positions to those that will get them elected. Of course, once in office their fidelity to the positions they don’t believe in is predictibly poor. No, you have it backwards. Anyone can run for office, and we should demand that their positions be truthful so that we can vote most appropriately. Jesus isn’t running, so the choice is always between competing imperfections — and that assumes we have an infallible understanding of the perfect, which we do not. Even relying fully on church teaching only informs lawmaking decisions, but does not dispose of them. How to handle evils under the law will always require prudence, even presupposing the evil. And I’m not crying to you or anyone for votes. But don’t you cry to me when the Dem is elected, the Dems therefore keep the Senate, and the Dems continue to have the power to thwart each and every pro-life legislation attempted.
@Donald — Wait, aren’t you the one who was telling me just a moment ago not to confuse religion and politics, but now you’re quoting Leo XIII to show that the US founding was providential, and that means …? Wasn’t the appointment of Judas Iscariot to the Twelve at least “providential”? And no doubt at one point he did good, but he eventually became a thief and had a bad end. A good start does NOT ensure a good end.
But since you now want to mix religion and politics, your faith is very weak if you think God would have been unable to stop Nazi Germany or the Japanese Empire or the Soviet Union without the USA. Against that we have Esther 4:13,14: “Mardochaeus answered, Do not flatter thyself that a royal court will shelter thee in the general massacre of thy countrymen. Keep silence, and the Jews will find some other means of deliverance; on thee and thine destruction shall fall.” There would have been a cost for doing it some other way, yes. There was a cost for doing it the way we did, too, by creating and using atomic bombs.
Look, there was a huge cost when Jerusalem fell. There was a huge cost when Rome fell. There was a huge cost when Constantinople fell. Maybe you don’t give a flip about any of them, because you don’t think they were as cultured or important as you are, or maybe because you don’t care about the cost to anyone other than “you and yours”. The cost was there all the same. I don’t show my love of Constantinople by pretending that it never fell and never could fall; all that would show would be a disconnect with reality. For you to deny the possibility that a democratic republic really CAN deliberately choose evil just as easily as it can choose good does not make you patriotic: it makes you an idiot.
Ugh. Now I’ve finally lost my temper here, so I’ll let you say what you will in this combox without further comment. You will clearly go on voting for liars and cowards and wondering why the situation gets no better. That’s your choice; waste your vote as you will. You are not allowed to waste mine.
“@Donald — Wait, aren’t you the one who was telling me just a moment ago not to confuse religion and politics, but now you’re quoting Leo XIII to show that the US founding was providential, and that means …?”
That I know my history quite a bit better than you do and that you are talking through your hat. God uses everything including men, nations and religions to work His purposes and those who ignore that fact by undervaluing the secular side of life are just as mistaken as materialists who ignore the spiritual aspect of life.
“But since you now want to mix religion and politics, your faith is very weak if you think God would have been unable to stop Nazi Germany or the Japanese Empire or the Soviet Union without the USA.”
Ah, but He didn’t. Instead He used the US. I assume that many of the tens of millions slain by those regimes only wish that God had enabled the US to act with greater swiftness. We are God’s tools on Earth and if we simply assume that He will save us no matter our folly than we will suffer dire consequences indeed.
“There was a huge cost when Rome fell. There was a huge cost when Constantinople fell. Maybe you don’t give a flip about any of them, because you don’t think they were as cultured or important as you are, or maybe because you don’t care about the cost to anyone other than “you and yours”.”
What a truly stupid thing to say. You are the one who was quite blithe about the fall of the US. It is because of my knowledge of history and because of my knowledge of the horrors that await the citizens of a great nation when it falls, that I attacked your truly absurd lack of concern over the fate of the US.
“You will clearly go on voting for liars and cowards and wondering why the situation gets no better. That’s your choice; waste your vote as you will. You are not allowed to waste mine.”
You already do quite job of wasting your vote Howard, I am sure, assuming that you bother to vote at all. The world simply is not worthy of the genius and insight that you bring to the table. You remind me of the abolitionists who opposed Lincoln in 1860 because he was not one hundred percent on the slavery issue. I am sure that whatever no hoper party you vote for will have a massive impact on the forthcoming elections in Utopia.
If pagan Kings Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus can be called God’s servants in Sacred Scripture for their role in the chastisement of God’s wayward Chosen People, then how much more the free Republic of the United States can be called providential for having defeated genocidal Nazi Germany and having brought an end to Soviet communist tyranny.
God’s Providence – His immutable will – always gets done. As Sacred Scripture says, “Before they were born Esau I hated and Jacob I loved…” It is up to us to conform our will with His. That lessens the pain a whole lot. America by and large has done that up to the age of Obama, and even he cannot escape God’s Providence.
May God have mercy on me a sinner.