Clay Risen of The New Republic recently published an article that argues Bob Corker is the only Republican Senatorial candidate that can defeat Harold Ford Jr. in the general election. Below are some excerpts from Risen’s article, “How Harold Ford Could Win.”
************************************************************************************
If Corker wins [the primary], Ford will face a difficult, and likely losing, battle. Corker has the backing of popular ex-Senator Fred Thompson, as well as the state's business community . . . And if the nominee is Bryant or Hilleary the entire calculus changes in Ford's favor. Both are congenital right-wingers who rode the 1994 Republican revolution into Congress; and, unlike Frist, they can't tack convincingly between moderation and conservatism. Cultural extremism is their political fuel--they simply can't not talk about gay rights and abortion, even when it's to the exclusion of practical concerns like transportation or the deficit. And it's exactly that penchant for immoderation that sank Hilleary's 2002 campaign against Bredesen. (This has been a theme in a number of recent Virginia and North Carolina races as well.)
Ford's best shot would probably be a matchup against Hilleary, who has already lost a statewide general election, has little political achievement to run on, and has a proven record of eschewing policy for demagoguery. And while he talks about being a good ole Tennessee boy, these days he's also a well-connected Washington lobbyist, complete with ties to Jack Abramoff. During his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, he took in $10,000 from two Indian tribes, the Coushutta and the Tigua, who were clients of the indicted lobbyist (Hilleary denies knowing the source of the funds).
************************************************************************************
A note to Tennesseans who want to see a Republican replace Bill Frist - vote for Bob Corker in the primary!
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
This article just proves that Bob Corker is truly the right man to be are next Senator.
Why because the New Republic says so? Yeah right. They're not an accurate predicator of the outcome of this primary.
By not linking to the New Republic article, Mr. Evans has done his readers a great disservice. Unfortunately, misleading headlines and half truths are par for the course at "Conservatives" for Corker.
What C4C doesn't want the uninitiated to see is that even the writer at the left of center New Republic classifies Bob Corker as a moderate. See for yourself:
"The three candidates are a pair of arch-conservative former congressmen--Ed Bryant, who lost the 2002 Senate primary to Alexander, and Van Hilleary, who lost to Bredesen--and moderate former Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker."
Oh, and the best part of the article mysteriously got left out of Mr. Evan's post. You know, the part where it's predicted Corker won't make it out of the primary...
"But given his long record as a moderate--he's donated thousands of dollars to state Democratic candidates, and he recently accepted $5,000 from the electricians' union--he's unlikely to pull in enough of the base to best either of his opponents."
The Corker campaign has taught Mr. Evans well. He's great at giving bits and pieces of the picture to try and paint Bob Corker as a "conservative." Bob Corker can't hide from his record of raising taxes and supporting abortion rights though.
I agree with JB. I read the article and it actually pointed out that Corker doesn't have a very good chance of getting out of the primary. C for C has to spin everything!
The New Republic has some good points to make about Tennessee. The comparison to Virginia and North Carolina illustrates that border states will vote for a Democrat when the Republicans split and are not united. The only way Ford can win is if Republicans split. The warning after warning after warning to the losers in 2002 will be heeded by those Republicans who know that Tennessee is a moderate conservative state and that Bob Corker is the strongest candidate. The New Republic is not an expert on Tennessee politics but extremes on the right and left have lost badly-----Hilleary, Bryant on the right and Ford on the left.
Unlike Mr. Evans, at least Independent will admit that Corker is indeed a moderate. There's nothing wrong with being a moderate, but pretending you're something your not is called hypocrisy. If Corker's moderation is indeed a strength for his candidacy, it seems that it would make sense for Mr. Evans and the Corker campaign to tout his record of balancing the budget in Chattanooga by making the tough choice to raise taxes. They could also point out that, while Corker's personally pro-life, he's moderate enough to support a woman's right to choose. However, contrary to Independent's advice, Corker is running as an extreme right conservative in the Republican primary. What gives?
Bob Corker is a conservative. The hassling from Hilleary/Bryant is how conservative is Bob. This argument is about as silly as which church is the most Christian. There are good people in all churches just like there are hypocrites. I am glad I do not have to divide the pure from the unpure. I will leave that to someone else. If you do not dot every i and cross every t like Hilleary\Bryant then you are liberal. The Bible tells us that there are going to be people who man thinks is saved but is lost and there will be those that man says is lost but is saved. The general public will make their decision and I think Hilleary/Bryant supporters should not be so arrogant and cocky in passing judgment on Bob. You may be wrong. I do not believe from blogs from Hilleary/Bryant supporters you get humbleness, meekness, or empathy for others.
When faced with a budget deficit in Chattanooga, Corker pushed for a tax increase. When running for Senate in '94, Corker said he supported a woman's right to have an abortion. These are facts. Based on Corker's past record, he's a moderate Republican. He's now running as a conservative. Independent says that a moderate Republican is more electable than a conservative in Tennessee. If that's true, why doesn't Corker embrace his moderate record?
Yes a moderate Republican is more electable than a conservative in Tennessee. The record has proved that point over and over again.
The Constitution does not mention abortion by name. You had activist judges interpret privacy to incorporate abortion. Bob like many believed government should not go there. That position is libertarian. Our founding fathers took this position. He has seen the damage and wrong of taking lives of the unborn. Abortion is a controversial issue and is now basically being decided by the courts. Of where the issue is at the current time, all three candidates would vote the same way on abortion issues before Congress. It would be a three way tie with all candidates being rated conservative. JB---Your position is that you believe that Ed Bryant would fight the strongest against abortion. That may or may not be true but is your opinion. You need 51 votes to pass legislation and 60 to defeat filibuster. One senator is not going to pass legislation on his or her own. Your argument to me is a moot point.
Tennessee state government has withheld sales tax from cities and counties and unfunded mandates have caused practically every county and city to raise property taxes. You are stretching to make your point that Bob is a spend and tax liberal. Bob is for low taxes and believes in free enterprise and higher taxes hurts the economic engine of small business.
JB---Your support of Ed Bryant is genuine and sincere but attacks of calling Bob Corker a liberal who supports high taxes and abortion is unfair and untrue.
Post a Comment