I took a fair amount of heat from folks on the “Right” for my position on the proposed “list” of issues / policies that all Republican candidates would be required to support in order to receive Republican funding. We can save the argument regarding who is really on the “Right” for another day as I clearly think their idea of what conservatism really means is rather delusional, but again, we can save that for another day. Instead, I thought it would be more productive to post this little video here from Sunday’s Face the Nation which featured Former “Republican” candidate Dede Scozzafava debating the list with Former Speaker of the House Dick Armey and Former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie.
Dick Armey says he supports the plan and reminds Gibson that it is not a “litmus test” and is simply a proposal – that requires only 7 of 10 issues rather than 8 out of 10 that many have said it purports to require. If you listen closely, you will hear Scozzafava state that even she could support at least 7 of the 10 on the list. Whether that is true or not will certainly be debated by those who favor this ridiculous list, but the very fact that it could even be debated illustrates how asinine the list is to begin with. Any candidate can say that they support an arbitrary list of issues. The problem arises when you realize that candidates who are chosen based on “lists” run the risk of lacking any legitimate principle or justification to support their positions on said issues.
A Dede Scozzafava, who can emerge as a Republican candidate claiming to support this arbitrary list or one similar to it in its content, should be the only evidence that is needed for explaining the error in relying on this type of measure. With all due respect to Former Speaker Armey, I think he is simply grasping at straws with his arguments here. He tries to make the argument that a list such as this would have prevented Dede from ever being chosen in NY-23, and ignores the fact that she openly states that she would have supported at least 7 of these things. Accordingly, the process would have ended with the same result, except her candidacy would have been granted “legitimacy” in the eyes of those on the “Right” allowing her to continue as the Republican candidate. Her true positions and her core convictions, or lack thereof, would have never been revealed because she could have simply relied upon her pledging allegiance to a stupid list. I was glad to hear that Gillespie was less than enthusiastic about this foolish attempt at creating drone Republicans, but would have preferred to have heard from someone with a bit more clout in the GOP.
RELATED ARTICLE
Stupid Republicans and Their Friggin Lists
[...] there are probably no two words I hate hearing more around election time than “litmus test.” I can’t stand them. I loathe them in fact. I can’t think of anything more [...]