http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:17:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8089 Tue, 13 Nov 2007 06:42:01 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8089 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. 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.

]]> http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8084 Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:07:39 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8084 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. 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.

]]> http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8083 Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:59:50 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8083 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. 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.

]]> http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8074 Mon, 12 Nov 2007 20:49:26 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/12/phoning-it-in/#comment-8074 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. 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.

]]>