THE WANDERER, MARCH 1, 2007
JOSEPH SOBRAN'S
WASHINGTON WATCH
Birth Pangs
Back when I was "a roaring anti-Semite" (and long
before Jimmy Carter was accused of being one, though his
brother Billy was), I was afraid the neoconservatives
would get us into a war with the Arabs. That was the easy
part. What I didn't expect -- because I just couldn't
even imagine it -- was our getting stuck in a Muslim
civil war. What president, of either party, could ever be
that dumb? Or that smart? (In the sense of knowing how to
accomplish such an impossible thing.)
I suppose you could regard civil war, where people
kill each other spontaneously, without being ordered to
by government, as a form of democracy. In that respect,
maybe democracy really is spreading in the Middle East,
just as President Bush promised. And Condoleezza Rice
suggests that the apparent turmoil should be understood
as "the birth pangs of a new Middle East."
Once upon a time, people who wanted limitless
government and made trouble around the globe were called
Communists. Today, of course, they're known as
conservatives. If that's just semantics, call me
anti-semantic.
Well, as Billy Carter once observed, "There's a heck
of lot more Arabians than there is Jews." And a lot of
them are even madder at us than they are at each other.
The Magic Presidency
Whatever is left of the famous, or alleged,
Republican "base" got some crumbs of good news this week.
Each of the two leading GOP presidential hopefuls took a
moment to express unsuspected reservations about legal
abortion!
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani let it be
known that though he still favors "choice," he actually
disapproves and even "hate[s]" abortion and, as
president, would appoint justices who would overturn
Roe v. Wade. We didn't know you felt so strongly, Rudy!
Please don't let it torment your conscience.
Of course one could absolutely love abortion, as
many of Giuliani's liberal supporters do, and still think
Roe was a gross usurpation of state power and violation
of constitutional law. One may even suspect his
sincerity, given the timing and suddenness of this
revelation. Would he, in the Oval Office, really follow
through on this? Would he use the "bully pulpit" to
promote moral passion against killing the unborn? And
will he make this a major theme of his campaign in 2008
if he runs against Hillary Clinton, who thinks abortion
(though an unfortunate, immoral, and difficult decision)
should be "safe, legal, and rare"?
Personally, if it comes to a choice between Hillary
and Rudy, I prefer Hillary.
Those who are old enough to remember the year 2000,
when Giuliani was going to run against her for the New
York Senate seat she now holds until marital scandal,
prostate cancer, and (as I seem to recall, though I am
told otherwise by a less senile informant) ominous polls
caused him to pull out of the race, may also recall that
he wasn't making a big issue of abortion at the time.
Well, at least we have a chance to elect another
Catholic president next year. (Which is why I prefer
Hillary to Rudy, as in 2004 I slightly preferred
George W. Bush to the Catholic John Kerry. The last thing
I want to see is a Catholic president, given the kind of
Catholics in politics today.)
Not to be outdone, John McCain, trailing Giuliani in
the polls and sinking fast, paused from defending the
Iraq war to announce that he too wants to overturn Roe.
Or at least believes that someone should overturn it. Or
something. Anyway, he opposes "legislating from the
bench" -- not that anyone would admit favoring it. And
then there is Mitt the Massachusetts Mormon, who, after
whirling around a few times, also hates abortion. Moral
leadership is just busting out all over. It sounds as if
we are being overrun with pro-life candidates.
If not, if these candidates should turn out to be
overstating their loathing for feticide in time for the
primaries (it has been known to happen), will
conservatives finally split with the Republican Party
next year? How many of them will repair to the
Constitution Party, which, whatever may be said against
it, has never waffled on abortion -- in contrast to all
the Republicans who want to be judged on their promises
instead of their records?
What hasn't changed, and shows no sign of changing,
is the American idolatry of the Executive Branch -- the
sure and certain faith that a new president can come to
the rescue and solve all our problems, even with
Democrats controlling both houses of the U.S. Congress.
After all, this is the same country that still
thinks Abraham Lincoln did away with slavery with a
stroke of the pen and, according to polls, ranks John
Kennedy among its greatest presidents. As Robert Higgs of
The Independent Institute has written in an article
titled "No More 'Great Presidents,'" Americans now expect
their presidents to perform "supernatural feats." Who
says this is an age of skepticism?
The Future of Ill-Bay
By the way, if Hillary is elected president next
year, someone will have to be appointed to fill that
Senate seat. Guess who is being mentioned as her
replacement? Yes -- don't tell the kids! -- good old
Ill-bay Inton-clay.
As you may already know, I'm not joking, though I
admit I can hardly believe I'm serious. I think this
would be the first time a senator lived in the White
House. I have to confess it does appeal to my sense of
humor, like a favorite sitcom returning to the airwaves
after a long absence. One more reason to vote for
Hillary. But can the sequel ever match the original?
The Edwards Question
Another Oval Office aspirant, John Edwards, has
refused to fire two staffers with long records of
anti-Christian and anti-Catholic writings on their blogs.
In this Age of Sensitivity, these harpies' coarse cracks
about Catholics, the Virgin Birth, and George Bush's
"Christofascist base" seem a little over the top, but
Edwards is satisfied that "it was never their intention
to malign anyone's faith." George Will, who has his own
record of anti-Catholic venom (not for nothing is he the
liberals' favorite conservative), remarks on Edwards's
"smarmy insincerity."
Let's skip the etiquette and get to the point: What
truths is John Edwards willing to affirm? If he doesn't
believe in God, Christ, the Virgin Birth, or the Catholic
Church, or if he thinks they don't really matter, his
behavior makes sense.
+ + +
If you have not seen SOBRAN'S, my monthly newsletter,
yet, give my office a call at 800-513-5053 and request a
free sample, or better yet, subscribe for two years for
just $85. New subscribers get two gifts with their
subscription. More details can be found at the
Subscription page of my website, www.sobran.com.
Already a subscriber? Consider a gift subscription
for a priest, friend, or relative.
--- Joseph Sobran
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read this column on-line at
"http://www.sobran.com/wanderer/w2007/w070301.shtml".
This column copyright (c) 2007 by THE WANDERER, the
National Catholic Weekly founded in 1867,
www.thewandererpress.com. Reprinted with permission.
This column may not be published in print or Internet
publications without express permission of THE WANDERER.
You may forward it to interested individuals if you use
this entire page, including the following disclaimer:
"THE WANDERER is available by subscription. Write
subscription@thewandererpress.com for information.
Subscription price: $50 per year; $30 for six months.
Checks can be sent to The WANDERER, 201 Ohio Street,
Dept. JS, St. Paul, MN 55107.
"SOBRAN'S and Joe Sobran's syndicated columns are
available by e-mail subscription. For details and
samples, see http://www.sobran.com/e-mail.shtml, write
PR@griffnews.com, or call 800-513-5053."
This page copyright (c) 2007 by THE VERE COMPANY.