- We have a practical interest in moving the cause forward — for “good” reason
Is it for purposes of click bait or what that leads The Federalist to feature repetitively — as if it were logical, operable, equivalent, even arguably a superior moral position — to ignore Democrat Doug Jones’ inherent support of evil by being a Democrat, and ethically support him over Roy Moore, in the Alabama Senate race? Allowing a Democrat to win may be an effective way to send a message — but only if the Democrat is demonstrably superior, in policy, in associations or even as a human being. In the exigent case that is not the case as to policy (or politics), associations or moral righteousness. Being a Democrat has a moral component, and it is not good.
The Federalist proceeded today to offer more don’t support Roy Moore nonsense as if it can be a serious position other than in some pointy headed or clerical collared way of thinking. To the publication’s credit it provides much space to vote for Roy Moore articles as well, but the excessive portrayal of equivalence is silly. While printing different views the publication ought to be clear as a publication about where it stands and take official pains to correct nonsense it feels obligated to entertain.
Why It Would Be Better For Conservatives To Ditch Roy Moore
Fortunately, many comments appended to the article ably dismantle it as dangerous nonsense.
The “debate ” is not unusual as it is related to purity arguments as regards politicians and legislation that have confounded real conservative progress and allowed liberals to aggressively advance or inculcate their programs. In the case of both politicians and legislation it is fine to oppose one or the other when viable alternatives are available by advocated standards. In the case of Roy Moore, his conservative opponents irresponsibly offer no viable alternatives given the political exigencies of the situation, while claiming future advancement of a cause depends on a certain purity. The real world does not actually require it.
The place if any for perfection arguments is in the primary. This writer certainly entered into vigorous critiques of candidates including Trump in the presidential nomination process, pointing out flaws and objecting vociferously to criticism of my candidate Cruz. But after the RNC convention the issue was Hillary. Trump had moral flaws as do I (I still do) but policy advocacy is the main issue in politics especially after the primary. I come out of a fairly doctrinaire approach to policy. I did not get or appreciate Trumps “persona” pre-nomination although by May I was getting to understand it better even as I continued to do battle. I played by Trump’s rules as far as punches go. However I always knew I could not in good conscience help elect Hillary by a third party effort post convention, more so as Trump got better, more convincing, more viable with “age”.
I have been proven wrong about Trump. I would appreciate real proof against Roy Moore and or the superiority of his Democrat opponent, politically or spiritually. The burden Moore’s conservative opponents have is that viable Moore’s viable opponent is a card carrying member and champion of the evil party. Moore’s “conservative” opponents have nothing proven to offer, no practical alternative (they never seriously tried), only facilitating the assured “evil” of the election of another Democrat at a critical time in the Senate. The “facilitating evil” or denigrating the brand objection to Moore, used against Trump as well, is not only unsupported it is comparatively ridiculous and harmful.
This is not to say that advancing “Republican” candidates cannot harm the brand. Indeed it can. But not only am I less concerned about harming a brand the anti-Moore clamorers are really not all that concerned about, (really … one man’s effect … with the likes of so many RINOs in office) than I am about the nation, the Constitution and the dicey prospects of Supreme Court nominees advancing. I have more confidence in Roy Moore than I do Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski or Jeff Flake or John McCain.
R Mall
