Cheat-Seeking Missles

Friday, February 25, 2005


McClellan or Grant? How about Sherman?

I only suggest this because the display of brutal power into the heart of the beast -- make that the Beast, because this is a moral battle -- is called for in the name of the 6 million unborn who are lost because of liberal revisionist judges, and the untold millions to follow, unless the courts are turned around.

This is a battle that is being played out on many specious fields. Senate rules. Tradition. The right of the small state Senator to be heard. The right of the minority party to not be inconsequential. They are all a charade. The single issue is the Democratic Party's undying defense of the culture of death and its rock-solid refusal to accept any weakening of abortion laws.

Contrast this to the Dems' clumsy efforts to adapt a language of morality. We hear that fighting poverty is moral, that maintaining the Social Security status quo is moral, probably that subsidizing public transit is moral. They aren't. They are policies. Whether the created will be allowed to be born or not -- that is morality, not policy.

For the GOP response to be somewhere between Grant and Sherman, it will require not only forcing the rules change, but also dominating the language of the debate: This must be about the Dems' litmus tests on abortion, not procedures and traditions. Frist must say he's moving the nuclear option because it's the option that stops the abortion litmus test in its tracks and forces the Senate to look at the complete CV, not just the D&C.