Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
In Hypocrisy, There’s Hope
The election of Conor Lamb in Pennsylvania represents the smallest sliver of daylight appearing between the Democratic Party and the footsoldiers for Planned Parenthood.
It isn’t that Lamb is a pro-life Democrat. He isn’t. But he was very willing to be perceived as such. In other words, like Obama pretending to believe that marriage should be limited to the straight to get elected, Lamb is a hypocrite.
True ideologues are not hypocrites. Politicians seldom manage (or even bother) to hide who they truly are, relying on the moderating forces of denial and projected hope to mask unpopular agendas from a credulous and inattentive public. This is why, for example, fears of Trump being a stealth dictator are so absurd — Hitler was wholly and recognizably (and revoltingly) Hitler from the get-go, with Mein Kampf available if anyone wanted to see what he had in mind for the world.
Lamb might not be a hypocrite about everything, but he is a hypocrite about abortion. When it comes to abortion, there are plenty of true believers on the left. Lamb, it appears, is not among them. Though he doesn’t seem to believe that, for example, a 20-week-old fetus is deserving of protection from excruciating pain and death, he doesn’t not believe this either. If the wind-that-carries-cash began blowing a smidge harder in the other direction, he would bend, just as Obama got bent (!) about same-sex marriage. Does anyone doubt that Obama would have failed to “evolve” on this if the public hadn’t?
Lamb’s election demonstrates that the wind could (and perhaps has begun to) shift. People voted for him not only because he allowed them to believe he was more socially conservative than he has explicitly committed to being. He even, consistently, dressed to appear more socially conservative — he looks like a Republican. He also looks to me to be an “evolver” on this issue.
The market for genuinely moderate, pro-life democrats is revealed by the squeaker-election of an ersatz moderate, pro-life Democrat.
Yes, I know. It doesn’t sound all that hopeful. But if a Pennsylvania district that went for Trump in ’16 had elected an open social progressive who enthusiastically endorsed killing unborn babies right up to the moment the cord is cut, if they had elected Pennsylvania’s equivalent of Kamala Harris … things would look very, very rosy for Cecile Richards’ political ambitions, and even lousier for the next generation of unborn kids.
Cheer up! It’s not exactly glass-half-full, but the bottom of the glass is … damp.
Published in Elections
My optimism (such as it is) isn’t that Lamb will actually be pro-life, only that a guy with a D after his name had to at least feint in that direction in order to be elected. This represents a bit of cognitive dissonance for the Democrats, whose vocal abortion proponents don’t want “safe, legal, rare” but “on demand without apology.” The former was the formula under which Biden, Cuomo, Kennedy et al originally declared themselves “personally opposed” to abortion. If everyone claims to want to make abortion safe, legal and rare, it is a smidge more rhetorically defensible.
Lamb’s position would also allow him to pivot should support for, say, a 20-week ban reach a tipping point, exactly as Obama pivoted on same-sex marriage. He has space to “evolve.” Presumably, this means that Democratic voters aren’t sold on Planned Parenthood’s preferred platform.
The only fly in this ointment is that PA and NY are prominent in giving us “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but…” mentality. Mario Cuomo and Bob Casey, Jr, come to mind.
Not unlike saying; “I’m personally opposed to slavery, but who am I to tell others how to live?”
Kate, I think it is just the Democrats being far more pragmatic than the Republicans. There goal is to always move the ball forward, if not. Keep the ground they have won. On the other hand, too many Republicans want perfection in a candidate or legislative bill. Good example is the repeal of Obama Care legislation, or Rand Paul’s Opposition to Pompeo. The Dems vote in lock step, therefore the ball always gets moved. We argue and fumble.
Yep, as they throw Molotov cocktails at us, we let the house burn down around us rather than “sink to their level.” And we burn to death while being so proud that we stuck to our principlez.
And this is what that mentality gets you.
He had to feint in that direction to fool his voters into electing him. I’ve got a US Govt issue picture of Ben Franklin that bets he votes 100% with the left on any and all social issues and on abortion.
Yup. No doubt. But at least he had to fool his voters by that particular feint. See? Very small sliver of daylight…
Do you suppose that Mississippi’s abortion restrictions will end up at the Supreme Court? If Roe is overturned, then the conversation gets real, right?
Rahm Emanuel did the same thing. Recruit Dems willing to run as pro-gun, somewhat pro-life, fool the Dem voter fence-sitters. Ain’t gonna happen this time.
Lamb has to run again in November. Let’s see if this chameleon can hide for the next eight months . . .
Because he is running in a blue district and wants to win. Democrats outnumber Republicans by 39,000 in the PA-18
Liars, hypocrites, or sinners? Pick one — or two.
He’s not a hypocrite on the abortion issue. I’m sure he fully intends never to have one. Ahem.
He’s a damned liar. Just like Obama was on the SSM issue. The Left has little interest in the truth. Their Noble (or Damnable) Lies (False Promises) have one purpose — the acquisition of power. My precioussss.
Republicans call themselves sinners for violating moral standards and, once discovered, are soon shunned. Democrats will admit to none of the above labels (unless confronted with irrefutable blue dresses). They just change the standards and call it (evil) good.
Republicans will continue to lose to these demons unless and until they understand and explain that the enemy of the West — and particularly the American Idea — is the Left. And the Democrats are the party of the Left. Vote for Democrats at your peril.
Until we’re no longer a two-party nation (and, it’s unlikely we will change to a parliamentary system anytime soon), I’m a straight ticket voter. We need to drum the idea of voting for the candidate over the party out of voters’ minds. You cannot be pro-life and vote for a Democrat — not even for dog catcher. You cannot be for faith, family, the natural right to self-defense, freedom of expression… and vote for a Democrat. One party will hold the majority in each of our bicameral chambers, and that will make all the difference. Majorities matter.
Why do Republicans never talk about party over candidate? The last guy I heard on the subject was Mike Rosen, and he’s a libertarian. It’s past time we went on the attack against the Left.
Frustrating. We deserve to lose if we’re not going to fight.
This idea is repugnant to most conservatives. After all, we believe in the individual, not the group.
Most conservatives are wrong in the political context. You may not be interested in the group (Democrats), but Democrats are interested in you. They’re interested in what you’re allowed to drive; they’re interested in how (and if) you speak , in how you run your business, in what insurance coverage you have, in what you use to protect your family and yourself, in what you eat, in what you throw in the garbage…
It never ends, and it never will until some coalition (Republicans, for the moment) of freedom lovers drives them out of power . And even then it will be a renewed fight every generation to retain our improbable and fragile liberties.
I’ve said it before — I wouldn’t vote for Jesus himself if he ran as a Democrat.
I’m safe in saying that, though, because He wouldn’t. God loves liberty more than His own omnipotence. You can’t say the same for Democrats.
I thought this district will disappear because of court-ordered redistricting.