Another reason to help Eric Egland
By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (7) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
My friend John reminded me of this John Fund article, which is another reason I'd encourage you to help Eric Egland.
Mr. Doolittle's near-death experience at the polls last November did not prompt a return to his ideological roots. He had already angered voters in Roseville, the largest city in his district, by opposing their ultimately successful efforts to repeal a utility tax through a ballot measure. Then this month, the former antitax champion appeared before the Sacramento Bee's editorial board and delighted them with his apparent surrender on a proposed half-cent sales-tax increase to pay for local transportation projects in the Roseville area.
"My feeling is the people, if they know what the money is going for, are OK with it," he said of the proposed tax hike. "They want better roads and transportation. . . . I don't find any inconsistency between conservative political philosophy and recognizing that we have government there to meet certain needs." This after two decades of Mr. Doolittle assuring audiences in his district that local development was beneficial in part because "it paid for itself" and wouldn't require higher taxes.
Mr. Doolittle's fall from grace will no doubt be used as evidence for how the Republican Congress lost its way during its 12 years in power. And it's true that the onetime reformer has morphed into a symbol of much of what he used to fight against. But Mr. Doolittle started to become seduced by power even before 1994, while he was still in the minority and plotting schemes for new perks with liberal Democrats.
We need your help.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Bless You Democrats — Comments (7) »
Another reason to help Eric Egland 7 Comments (0 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
That's the tail, but the dog here is corruption. That's this year's common theme in primary targets: we're not going after the Chaffees of the world (a lot of them got slaughtered in 2006 anyway), but rather focusing on the incumbents who are a liability to the party as a whole.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
Doolittle is a crook. He worked to disrupt the Republican Study Committee, he threw conservatives under the bus, and he long ago stopped fighting the fight in order to make cause deep pocket cause with the House Democrats.
more obvious and beneficial ways we could try to advance the conservative agenda.
Actually, taking back a safe GOP seat from a guy who went from conservative to corrupt would be a great way to start.
If we can't stock the safe GOP districts with stalwart, good government conservatives, how the heck do we expect to get even moderately conservative Republicans in more closely divided districts?
He's so handsome and charming and seems sooo good natured. I think I started blushing just watching him. LOL. :-)
I do worry that he might not be hard-nosed enough to survive in DC, but I'll take my chances with him over Doolittle.
http://www.modernconservative.com/
Egland's one of the first, but he won't be the last, so...
...for those of you who are feeling nervous about the GOP's short-term prospects, take heart----here's a little piece of optimistic prognostication for you.
While Fund makes a few good points, I still think we're targeting the wrong guy here. Doolittle is not perfect and he undeniably has shifted a little to the left the longer he's been in Congress. But I still think we need more people in Congress with Doolittle's ideology and I think it's fair to say he's more much more conservative than a bunch of Republicans you're not targeting.
Republican's already have enough of a challenge defeating Democrats this election cycle. How about we focus our money and efforts in supporting the Schaffer's and the Sununu's of the world before we start taking out our own? Instead of going after Doolittle, why not try and use RedState's resources to take back a number of the seats we lost to D's last cycle like the Pombo and Hayworth districts?
And in case you're wondering, no, I'm not one of those Republicans who opposes all intra-party challenges. I have and will continue to support challenges to liberal Republicans. I supported the campaigns against Chafee and Specter and will support the campaign against Gilchrest and other RINO's. Doolittle is not a RINO. He's got a 93.8% lifetime rating from the ACU and similarly high ratings from right to life and business groups. You simply can't say that Doolittle is a liberal.
In the end, I'm a little puzzled by your apparent jihad against Doolittle. Especially when there are so many other, and what I'd argue at least, more obvious and beneficial ways we could try to advance the conservative agenda.