On Friday morning, I opened the Harrisonburg newspaper to see a picture of the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Harrisonburg joined by certain former Republican lawmakers - and, in the case of John Chichester and Ross Potts, I do mean former Republican, as it has been about a decade since they have supported any Republican for anything. There are a couple of points that need to be made before pro-business or pro-family voters decide to follow their leadJim Gilmore for Senate
Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, why on earth would we want to help Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, and the rest of their gang by sending Mark Warner to Washington to help them reach a 60 vote Democrat supermajority?
Make no mistake about it: Mark Warner got his political start from Chris Dodd. He actually got his business start from him, too. Leveraging his knowledge as one who helped Dodd craft the rules for the eventual auction of cellular phone franchise licenses, he rounded up investors and built the foundation of his vast financial fortune. Since then, Warner has fallen in line, appearing on the campaign trail with John Kerry and now Barack Obama, and backing his liberal friends in Washington whenever they need him. Those who truly believe that Mark Warner will develop an independent streak once elected will be greatly disappointed.
Not enough? Try this on for size. In a filmed interview with Virginia's AFL-CIO Leadership, Warner promised he would back the so-called "card check" bill, effectively gutting Virginia's right to work laws. Or this: Warner's election will help liberal efforts to restore the "fairness doctrine," which will decimate talk radio in America. The "fairness doctrine" would require radio stations airing conservative talk shows to also air an equal number of liberal talk shows, even if there is no demand for them and they cannot sell any advertising. Their only legal alternative would be to remove all talk radio from the airwaves. Increasingly, for liberals, the First Amendment is a one-way street. Hello Mark Warner -- goodbye Rush Limbaugh!
Don't get me wrong. I like Mark Warner. He's a nice guy. Jim Gilmore, on the other hand, has stepped on plenty of toes and will never win a "Miss Congeniality" award. That may be all it takes to win the votes of some, but not mine. Good grief!
More is at stake here than Mark Warner's career trajectory, and more is on the line than one more Democratic vote in the Senate. The Democrats are pouring tens of millions of dollars into the campaign coffers of their candidates across the country because they believe their party on the verge of achieving a 60-vote supermajority which would strip Senate Republicans of the few parliamentary procedures they have to reign in liberal excesses. With a supermajority, Democrats could cut off debate on controversial bills and put them to an immediate vote, which they would inevitably win, voting along party lines.
The framers of our constitution, in their wisdom, enacted measures to rein the urges and excesses of the legislature and to check the power of the majority. A vote for Mark Warner could quite possibly be a vote for a Democratic supermajority and against any chance of tempering or standing athwart the liberal Democratic agenda.
For Republicans, there is but one choice -- Jim Gilmore. He has made a career of standing on principle, doing that which is the right, not always the popular thing to do. For some, casting a ballot for Gilmore might not be an easy choice, but it is certainly the right choice.
Cross-posted on SixtyFour81.com
Cross-posted on Bloggers 4 Jim Gilmore