THE FOUNDATION: POLITICS AND PARTIES

“In politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.” —Alexander Hamilton

GOVERNMENT

“Right now, half the states have decided that some kind of ID should be required to vote. It makes sense for the Supreme Court to allow federalism to work its will state-by-state. In 2006, the court unanimously overturned a Ninth Circuit ruling that had blocked an Arizona voter ID law. In doing so, the court noted that anyone without an ID is by federal law always allowed to cast a provisional ballot that can be verified later. The court also noted that fraud ‘drives honest citizens out of the democratic process and breeds distrust of our government. Voters who fear their legitimate votes will be outweighed by fraudulent ones will feel disenfranchised.’ So the high court itself has already defined the nub of the case it is hearing [now]. On one side are those who claim photo IDs will block some voters from casting ballots, but offer scant evidence. On the other side are those who believe photo ID laws can act as a deterrent to irregularities the public increasingly views as undermining election integrity. Given the obvious political nature of the argument, here’s hoping a clear Supreme Court majority reprises its 2006 finding and holds that such questions are best resolved by the elected branches of government and not by unaccountable courts.” —John Fund

POLITICAL FUTURES

“Having five more-or-less viable candidates as the process proceeds is, no matter how counterintuitive it sounds, good for party unity. If I am a fan of Fred Thompson… and my guy doesn’t make it out of South Carolina I will still have three or four other choices. As the process continues and the field winnows, there is a feeling that my candidate had a fair shot and I’ll get in behind the eventual nominee. The danger for the Democrats is this: When there are only two major contenders and they both stay in the race for a long time, support for each sets in and hardens into a very, very difficult bloc to crack apart. The 1976 Reagan and Ford factions on the GOP side have never reconciled. If you were in Iowa last week, you would still have seen evidence of the rift between the Ford moderates and the Reagan conservatives like geologic scars on the political landscape.” —Rich Galen

INSIGHT

“It is a greater honor to be right than to be president—or popular, for statesmanship consists rather in removing causes than in punishing or evading results—thus, it is the rarest of qualities.” —James Garfield

IChThUS IMPRIMIS

“With all the attention the atheist agenda is receiving, doesn’t it seem strange that most Americans find heroes among those who reflect a biblical worldview?… Atheism has no explanation for… acts of self-giving and even self-sacrificing charity… Darwinian evolution cannot explain this kind of altruism: How does one who willingly dies for another pass on his or her genetic traits for the improvement of the species? No, defenders of atheism and Darwinism, if true to their convictions, should sneer at this kind of self-sacrifice as weak and pointless. But we know better. Why? Because we… are made in the image of God. His very character is stamped into our beings… This is the same God who tells us ‘to lay down our lives’ for our friends, ‘to let the little children come,’ and ‘to act justly and love mercy.’ Tragically, many people, including many Christians, are practical atheists, living our lives in a way that ignores God’s existence. But in the final analysis, we are all still wired to find heroes in those who live life as though God does exist.” —Mark Earley

THE GIPPER

“If America is to remain what God in his wisdom intended for it to be—a refuge, a safe haven for those seeking human rights—then we must once again extend the most basic human right to the most vulnerable members of the human family. We must commit ourselves to a future in which the right to life for every human being—no matter how weak, no matter how small, no matter how defenseless—is protected by our laws and public policy.” —Ronald Reagan

FAMILY

“Barack Obama is the most pro-abortion presidential candidate ever. He is so pro-abortion he refused as an Illinois state senator to support legislation to protect babies who survived late-term abortions because he did not want to concede—as he explained in a cold-blooded speech on the Illinois Senate floor—that these babies, fully outside their mothers’ wombs, with their hearts beating and lungs heaving, were in fact ‘persons.’ ‘Persons,’ of course, are guaranteed equal protection of the law under the 14th Amendment. In 2004, U.S. Senate-candidate Obama mischaracterized his opposition to this legislation. Now, as a presidential frontrunner, he should be held accountable for what he actually said and did about the Born Alive Infants Bill… State and federal versions of this bill became an issue earlier this decade because of ‘induced labor abortion.’ This is usually performed on a baby with Down’s Syndrome or another problem discovered on the cusp of viability. A doctor medicates the mother to cause premature labor. Babies surviving labor are left untreated to die.” —Terence Jeffrey

LIBERTY

“Democracy is not the first step toward a free people, it is the last step. The first step toward a free society is the incremental establishment of basic liberty. Let’s face it; a benevolent king who bequeaths liberty to his kingdom’s subjects is better than a democratically elected Hamas who keep their people living in squalor only to advance a totalitarian ideology on a region of the world. By advancing the cause of liberty around the world instead of democracy, we provide people who have no experience with the personal responsibilities associated with maintaining a democracy the ability to cultivate an understanding of the value of freedom. Once a society embraces the responsibilities needed to maintain freedom, having formulated a firm understanding that it must be cherished and maintained through knowledgeable, thoughtful, educated and sometimes resolute engagement rather than by abdicating those responsibilities to political opportunists and totalitarian charlatans, the natural next step, the natural progression, is a thirst for self-rule; democracy.” —Frank Salvato

OPINION IN BRIEF

“The greatest difference between conservatives and liberals, a difference yet to be effectively aired out in the young presidential campaign, are attitudes toward foreign policy and national security. Asked to name their top foreign-policy concerns, conservatives invariably say, ‘destroying al-Qa’ida.’ Liberals almost unanimously say withdrawing from Iraq trumps everything else. Only the surge, and the improving situation in Iraq that is now clear to nearly everybody, blunted the liberal attempt to make national security the overwhelming issue of the day. The mangled early conduct of the war in Iraq cost Republicans their historical advantage with the national security issue and made it difficult for George W. Bush to get due credit for the fact that we’ve gone six years without a major terrorist attack on American soil. The President can take a bit of consolation that the good news from Iraq is making the election in November about who would make the best commander in chief. Now that the surge in Iraq is working, the most important issue for voters in November should be about who would make the best commander in chief. That beats endless bickering. Somebody should tell the candidates.” —Suzanne Fields

RE: THE LEFT

“The spin masters may think illegal immigration is an issue that pits conservative Republicans against liberal Democrats. But it doesn’t always. Nowadays, worry about illegal immigration is just as likely to mean that African Americans are terrified of racist alien gangs in Los Angeles. Asian Americans are frustrated that their relatives with college degrees wait years to emigrate legally, while thousands without high-school diplomas to the south simply break the law to enter the United States. And many Mexican Americans are probably tired of being expected to defend the indefensible of foreign nationals breaking immigration laws simply because they may share an ethnic heritage with illegal aliens. To the extent Democratic candidates ignore illegal immigration, or demonize those who worry over hundreds of thousands of new illegal aliens each year, or talk of guest workers and amnesty before they mention closing the borders, it is a losing issue that could alienate millions of voters. Democratic candidates can’t really claim that redneck racists are rushing to the border to clash with poor campesinos just crossing to better their lives, because many poor Democrats also resent how illegal labor drives down their own wages. It is mostly the American poor and middle class who worry about the sudden influx of thousands who don’t speak English and often need public assistance.” —Victor Davis Hanson

CAMPAIGN WATCH

“Each candidate should come forth now and tell us he really doesn’t want federal law to outlaw this industry or that (which he found politically useful to attack a few years ago). Heaven save us if any of the candidates really want to enact the Kyoto treaty requirements (returning America to energy levels used during the 1990s). It would cause a crushing depression. The winning candidate is about to represent and govern all the people, not a mere faction. As an electorate, we should have the maturity to let the candidates get serious about things now. (And the candidates should stop and pause before lurching forward with fresh commitment. It is easier to drop it now than after you are president.) This is not a matter of flip-flopping in order to pander to a constituency. This is about permitting the next president to shed youthful and factional excesses in preparation for governing the greatest country on the planet.” —Tony Blankley

FOR THE RECORD

“Like the ghetto riots, campus riots flourished [during 1968] where the authorities failed to use their authority to preserve order. Instead, academics sought to cleverly finesse the issues with negotiations, concessions and mealy-mouthed expressions of ‘understanding’ of the concerns raised by campus rioters. Many academics congratulated themselves on the eventual restoration of calm to campuses in the 1970s. But it was the calm of surrender. The terms of surrender included creation of whole departments devoted to ideological indoctrination. Members of such departments spearheaded the campus lynch mob atmosphere during the Duke University ‘rape’ case, as they have poisoned other campuses in other ways, all across the country. 1968 indeed left a legacy.” —Thomas Sowell

SELECT READER COMMENTS

(Our servers automatically delete “Reply” messages to this e-mail. To submit or to view reader comments visit our Reader Comments page. Join the debate at the Patriot Blog.)

“Thanks for all you and your staff do; a breath of fresh air (with an occasional sly aside) in the whirlwind of half-baked news and commentary found in the MSM. I look forward to each and every issue, especially as my unit prepares to deploy to Iraq. May God continue to bless you and your work for the valuable service you provide to the country and its patriots.” —Lt Col, USAF

“I received your thanks for my recent donation, but I thank you for your outstanding publication. I quote The Patriot regularly and I have a family member who is a proud Marine and piloting Super Cobras. He loves The Patriot! Pray for his safety.” —Dallas, Texas

“It is our pleasure to support The Patriot Post. I only wish I could do more, but living on a fixed retirement income limits us. I value The Patriot more than any other Internet-based website, and look forward to seeing who you endorse for president. Thanks again for such a great publication.” Barnesville, Minnesota

Editor’s Reply: For our endorsement of Fred Thompson, and analysis of the other candidates, see the 2008 Presidential Candidate Profiles.

“Thank you for your letter regarding the 2007 Patriot Fund status. I have great confidence in the worth of my contribution to The Patriot Post. Also, I am pleased to know that you are going to ‘surge’ in response to the upcoming election—doing everything possible within the limits of your budget promote the conservative cause. You may not want to give advice on my question, but I wonder if you have questioned the wisdom of providing financial support to either the Republican Senate Committee or to the Republican Congressional Committee, or for that matter to the Republican National Committee?” —Chicago, Illinois

Editor’s Reply: Don’t support the committees, support those candidates around the nation who are constitutional constructionists!