After Specter

I have to say I've been exasperated over the years by Sen. Specter, but really, who could not fail to be impressed by the inventiveness of one of his versions of voting present--the time he cited Scottish law, which he, predictably, waffled on later. So I do with agree with Kimberley Strassel that the feckless Senator is not a good example of anything.

But the GOP will never win running as a less enthusiastic version of big-government Democrats. Washington votes are the only way for congressional Republicans to actually demonstrate a philosophy to voters, and it is here the party must reclaim its mantle of the party of limited government and entrepreneurship.

This is different from a message of outreach, which the party also desperately needs, but is accomplished primarily in the field. It involves members explaining to younger constituents why old-fashioned principles of choice and freedom still work for modern problems like health care.

Good advice.Not to mention old-fashioned principles like honesty. That might distinguish us in Illinois.

And perhaps, after all, we conservatives may have the last laugh, or at least allow ourselves a small smile, at the tangle Souter's resignation has created in the Judiciary Committee--there are some minority rights there:)

Oh, yes--David Souter is a moderate, remember--he was appointed by the first President Bush--so we need another one, right? No, not you Sen. Specter.

P.S. Time for another cup of tea.