HughHewitt.com: “Rick argues that I underestimate the impact of Specter’s first comments on the issue. I read them, and thought them inappropriate in both substance and in light of the president’s huge effort on Specter’s behalf. Ingratitude does rankle, especially among evangelicals. But I think the senator has made his apology. Time to focus on winning –on changing the nomination rules, especially ‘blue slips’– and not on paybacks for ill-considered remarks. I do agree that The Corner has performed a huge service in sending the message that the center-right has zero patience with obstruction. This is a message that needs to be heard all across The Hill. “I am actually persuaded by the Hewitt argument. My main objection to Specter was that we were rewarding:1. his intemperate remarks2. his potential obstruction with a job that carried a sense of approval with it, being chair is an honor.However, one must not burn down La Mirada in order to gain the light to read Plato, and Hewitt has persuaded me that the potential of a “mad” Specter outside the party organization is worse than a happy Specter within it. For now.Neither argument entails I am fond of Specter, but I have changed my mind on the wisdom of making him chair.I think Hewitt is right and I was wrong.
Essay / Politics