I confess that I am probably more surprised than most that the National Right to Life Committee is set to endorse Fred Thompson. It’s good news for Thompson, obviously, but a bit remarkable given his Meet the Press appearance that was supposed to alienate so many pro-lifers. It’s also remarkable since the man couldn’t even be bothered to show up at the NRLC annual convention this summer, sending in a video message instead. He was otherwise occupied that week–he was busy giving a bad foreign policy speech in Britain. It seems to me that this endorsement is an announcement that the NRLC finds all of the other leading candidates so unappealing that they will settle for the one who is least objectionable.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 12th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Seamus
I concluded that the NRLC was a bunch of Republican party whores back around 1996, when they endorsed Bob Dole rather than the real pro-life candidate, Howard Phillips. In this case, it’s pretty obvious that Ron Paul’s pro-life credentials are a lot stronger than those of any of the other candidates of either party, but I never had the slightest expectation the NRLC would be endorsing him.
November 12th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
JT
Like Seamus, I soured on the NRLC the more I became aware of its record. The group backed Bush over Buchanan in 1992. That was the turning point for me. Since then, its history has been littered with a trail of notorious instances of expedience over principle. Like Pat Robertson, the NRLC seems to care more about power and money than actually stopping abortion. And with their support for GOP warmongers, the organization’s leaders cannot be accurately described as “pro-life.” Their opposition to abortion is motivated by something other than respect for human life.
November 12th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Daniel Larison
I take your points, and certainly the endorsements for Bush and Dole over Buchanan (or Phillips) in both cases were cynical moves, and one for which they were not rewarded. If that’s the case, though, what is the thinking in endorsing Thompson, whose campaign is now widely ridiculed and regarded as a joke? I’m perfectly willing to see this as a cynical, unprincipled maneuver, but I am having a hard time understanding the goal of the maneuver.
November 12th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
JT
I don’t think the NRLC leaders are politically sophisticated. It’s a bad combination: unprincipled and unsophisticated. It’s the same reason the Religious Right leaders consistently support the WRONG candidates and then get NOTHING in return (perhaps a personal ego-stroke, but little or nothing for the movement as a whole). They think they’re being smart and strategic when in fact they don’t understand the basics of elite politics–namely cynicism and exploitation. I’m guessing the NRLC leaders think Thompson still has a good chance of winning the nomination. He’s the next Reagan. He’s catching on.