Dana, you are correct that I didn t read the article. In truth, I find the level of political discourse at NRO to be pretty low-grade, so I don t typically make a habit of reading them. If your report of the article is correct, this pretty well substantiates my point. This position has been conventional wisdom for some time now, and many people on the left have held that this is why Republicans only pay lip service to the  pro-life crowd. If this is news to you, I recommend you expand your reading list.

But it wasn’t in NRO; it was an article published by The New Republic, a moderate Democratic opinion journal.

Yes, Mr Ponnuru’s article challenged the conventional wisdom, and the author made a reasonable case for why the conventional wisdom is wrong. (Obviously he didn’t prove it wrong, since you can’t prove a future event.)

Here’s the article.

Bush isn’t a Twelve Stepper. Jesus saved him.

Nobody said it made it better. He did apologize but some years later and after he learned (he says) that Huntt was upset.

Dugger (he must have been a mean drunk)

Mine will not include anything from Regnery Press. There are many fine conservative authors, but none would waste their time at Regnery.

Dr. Pedo, I am perfectly happy to read well written and well reasoned opinions. I would include people like von Mises, Strauss or Friedman and if you wanted to have a reasonable argument about these folks, bring it on.

I find it pretty difficult to have a reasoned debate with a fellow who calls my political association,  the Party of Death. Most of these derivative thinkers like Ponnuru and the rest of the Regnery claptrap performers are unworthy of consideration.

I’m guessing here that Mr Adura didn’t read the article.

Well, I did; I get the print edition of The New republic. Mr Ponnuru wrote an article challenging the accepted wisdom that if Roe v Wade is overturned, it will be an electoral disaster for the GOP, and a windfall for the Democrats. While no one can know, in advance, just how such an event would work out, Mr Ponnuru made a reasonable case in challenging the accepted wisdom.

The article he wrote seems to me to definitely fall within the type of thing TNR like to publish: articles bringing forth a new or different point on politics

Mr Adura finds it “pretty difficult to have a reasoned debate” with someone who calls his political affiliation the “party of death.” I wonder if it has ever occurred to him that not listening to what the Republicans have had to say is one reason that the Democrats have been losing elections?

You are correct, but neglected to mention that Bush was drunk – a problem of his past he has openly acknoeledged (its still not right, but should be viewed in that context).

Dugger

Hunt’s transgression was having predicted in the Wall Street Journal that Jack Kemp would win the 1988 Republican nomination instead of Vice President George HW Bush.

So sayeth BabyDoc Putsch.

The debate has been going on for some time. Both sides have lobbed giant shells of over-heated and nasty rhetoric at each other. I say if you have a rule for one, have a rule for the other.

“These guys are the most crooked, you know, lying group of people I ve ever seen.”

So sayeth John Kerry.

Dugger

We are talking about OW who can t deign to rest his eyes upon a contrary opinion.

Which is why he removes all of those comments from you, Frank, Farris, and the rest of the Reich Wing that has been assigned to slag him on a daily basis. Oh – that’s right. He doesn’t.

Maybe you can try something resembling logic one of these days, “Doctor”. Although I won’t hold my breath waiting for it to happen…

frameone Says:

Please debate the idea.

I can find no rational points to refute this argument. All I can do is question some of the assumptions – based on what I read here, I feel extremely sorry for anyone who would utilize that font of medical expertise. Particularly if they were female and/or anything but rabidly loyal to the current crop of Publicans.

Dugger Says:

Dugger

As soon as we can agree that any Reich winger who does the same will be prevented from spewing in those same mid ground political publications. Let me know how soon anyone from your side of the aisle is willing to even talk about that, will ya?

Dugger

Whether or not there are any “ideas” in the book, the title – if it isn’t referring to the party of greed, war, religious extremism and jingo nationalism – is simply ridiculous. It’s ironic that the picture on the cover seems to be a military graveyard, but I’d be surprised if the punk even mentions war as something produced by the “party of death”.

Please debate the idea.

Ad-hominem attacks on the publisher for gods sake….not even willing to address the IDEAS of the book…

Oh yea, you guys are progressive alright…sort of like the Neanderthals were progressive