By Scott Tibbs, May 30, 2007
Dennis Prager is right when he says that "campaign finance reform" disqualifies John McCain from consideration as a candidate for President of the United States. the limits that McCain-Feingold (M-F for short) places on campaign money have actually served to increase the influence of money in politics. Wealthy people can pour huge sums of money into so-called "527" groups, expanding special-interest influence while weakening political parties.
In fact, the limits on "soft money" in M-F was one of the factors that contributed to John Hostettler losing his seat last year after six consecutive victories. A candidate like Hostettler, who refuses to take special interest PAC money, cannot raise the kind of money needed to compete in the M-F era.
But the most egregious part of M-F was not the limits on contributions; it is the fact that M-F actually regulates the content of political speech. M-F makes it illegal for certain groups to mention a candidate for federal office by name in an issue advertisement, even if those advertisements do not encourage people to vote one way or the other. By protecting incumbents with such a brazenly unconstitutional restriction on free speech, M-F might be better known as the Incumbent Protection Act.
Where Prager is wrong, however, is his contention that "campaign finance reform" disqualifies John McCain while Rudy Giuliani's position on abortion does not disqualify him. I do not understand how someone who claims to be pro-life could argue that M-F disqualifies John McCain while someone who believes that killing unborn children should be legal is worthy of consideration. M-F was a true abomination and a betrayal of everything this country stands for, but 46 million lives lost to America's abortion industry is exponentially worse.
How can Prager consider M-F to be more immoral or destructive than the murder of 46 million human beings, with those murders protected by federal and state law? M-F may be an infringement on our Constitutional rights, but no one has died as a result of the errant Supreme Court decision that upheld the horrible law. The death toll from Roe v. Wade, however, dwarfs even the Nazi Holocaust.
In addition to being just plain wrong, Republicans compromise on abortion at their own peril. There is a good reason that Democrats went out and recruited pro-life candidates like Brad Ellsworth and Joe Donnely. Democrats knew that "values voters" hurt them in 2004, and sought to neutralize the effect that those voters had by peeling some of them off. If Democrats are starting to get it, why would Republicans turn their backs on one of their most loyal constituencies.
If a political party does not stand for a set of core values, then there is no reason for that party to exist. Without a shared set of values, a political party becomes little more than a clique trying to gain political power, money and fame. Hillary Clinton might be the most easily beaten Democrat candidate since McGovern, but Republicans will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory if Rudy Giuliani is the GOP candidate for President.
Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say, "But we knew nothing about this," does not He who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not He who guards your life know it? Will He not repay each person according to what he has done? -- Proverbs 24:11-12