Back to Archived blog posts.
In a column for the American Spectator, John Tabin says of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay: "whether or not he's actually dirty, Republicans should let hang him out to dry."
Tabin's main point is that DeLay has not been politically valuable. Whether or not DeLay's leadership has been beneficial to the Republican Party is an issue I will not get into here. But for the sake of argument, let's accept Tabin's point that DeLay is political albatross. If that is the case, then he should be replaced with a more effective leader to advance the conservative agenda.
But Tabin's strategy has nothing to do with the indictment against DeLay. If we "hang him out to dry", it will only encourage Democrats to launch further attacks on the Republican leadership. Were Democrats satisfied when Republicans hung Newt Gingrich out to dry? Were Democrats satisfied when Republicans hung Trent Lott out to dry? Did the Democrats lessen the intensity of their attacks on Republicans when both men were abandoned by their party? Since the answer to all of those questions is "no", what makes anyone think that offering DeLay as a sacrifice would be of any benefit at all?
Republicans would do well to have some historical perspective. When Nazi Germany took the Sudetenland, Neville Chamberlain orchestrated an agreement to appease Germany. Chamberlain proclaimed this appeasement would result in "peace in our time". We all know that failed: Nazi Germany's imperialistic ambitions were not satisfied. Instead, they saw the Allied appeasement as weakness and continued their aggressive behavior, resulting in the most horrific war in human history. Had Chamberlain showed backbone and stopped Hitler then, would World war II have happened? Would the intensity of the conflict been reduced?
More recently, the terrorist group Hamas declared that it would continue "armed resistance" (indiscriminately slaughtering women and children) because they believe Israel's pullout from the Gaza Strip shows their tactics were effective. Israel's capitulation to terrorists and murderers only put them (and the United States) in more danger.
Now, does this mean that Democrats are Nazis or terrorists? No, that's not what I am saying, What I am trying to do is use historical examples to illustrate that when you give your enemies (and like it or not, politics is a conflict between opposing sides) a display of weakness in response to an attack, you encourage more attacks. The only thing hanging DeLay out to dry will do is encourage more aggressive attacks by Democrats on the Republican leadership. The spineless "moderates" in the GOP, of course, will not understand why the attacks are not stopping.
If DeLay is guilty of a crime (which I do not believe to be the case at this point) then he should be hung out to dry. Sacrificing a loyal Republican to appease a bunch of Leftist kooks on a jihad is a not only politically stupid, it is suicidal.