The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : New York 26: Shades of Richard Vander Veen

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

New York 26: Shades of Richard Vander Veen

By Jeffrey Lord on 5.25.11 @ 1:16PM

So.

Liberals and the media are trumpeting the "victory" of Democrat Kathy Hochul over Republican Jane Corwin.

Big mistake. There was a third candidate masquerading as a Tea Party candidate -- which he was not. But he scooped up 9% of the vote anyway. So the media glosses over this… ahhhh… small fact to proclaim the End of Days for the GOP.

Ahem. Not so fast.

Anyone remember Richard Vander Veen?

In February of 1974 there was a special election in the Michigan congressional district that until the previous fall had been represented since 1948 by then House Republican Leader Gerald R. Ford. This was Grand Rapids, of course, and Ford was now the appointed Vice President of the United States. Selected by President Nixon to replace the resigned Vice President Spiro Agnew.

The liberal media of the day -- unchallenged in those days -- set the election story as a verdict on GOP rule and Nixon. And lo and behold, one Richard Vander Veen -- a perennial losing candidate and Democrat suddenly upset the GOP candidate to win.

Big story? Are you kidding? The media trumpeted this as the beginning of the end for the GOP etc., etc., etc.

Two years later, ironically as now-President Ford was losing to Jimmy Carter, Congressman Vander Veen lost his seat to Republican Harold Sawyer. And -- yes -- from that moment until this moment the seat has been held by Republicans.

Six years after that election the Reagan landslide swept the nation and has, in one form or another, been the dominant or near-dominant player in national politics ever since.

The point?

This election in New York, as our colleague Jim Antle has noted here, is going to be touted by the same liberal media and Democrats for the same reason they celebrated Richard Vander Veen's victory in the Michigan special election of February, 1974. It's over for conservatives, they will say. The end is in sight. Yada yada yada.

Richard Vander Veen died a few years back.

After having served a little over one full term in Congress.

And the Reagan Revolution and conservative movement rolled on.

Don't believe a word of the New York 26 hype. The Democrats have set themselves and Medicare on a collision course -- and the day will come when this New York election will be seen as the moment Democrats flatly refused to save America's seniors, and thus themselves.

View all comments (7) | Leave a comment

sestamibi| 5.25.11 @ 1:21PM

. . . that is, if the district exists in anything like its current configuration after reapportionment, when NY loses two. Let us not forget also that the prior occupant, Chris Lee, was one of only two GOP House members from NY to survive the 2008 Dem landslide.

OLDRAY| 5.25.11 @ 2:12PM

The most important thing NOW is to win the RHouse , Senate and Presidency in 2012. Medicare is toxic. Take it up after the next election. Rep Ryan is great ,but his efforts won't pass the present house or President Obama. Why hand the Democrats the election on a platter. Stick to the economy. Spending cuts (that can pass), drilling for energy, defense, jobs. These are the winning subjects that most concern potential voters at this time.

gearjammer| 5.25.11 @ 7:10PM

Sorry Ray the knotheads lead by General Limbaugh demand we should charge directly into democrat machine gun fire-and don't even duck the bullets-that is a Rino thing.

MarkJ| 5.25.11 @ 7:58PM

You clearly don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, because that's not his position at all.

Anybody tell you lately you're an idiot? If not, pray allow me the honor to do so.

tj| 5.25.11 @ 3:29PM

off topic but more of the same from this admin

The Feds have seriously escalated their attack on the states by issuing a formal threat to the State of Texas. Please share this information widely!

Warning from DC: No Fly Zone for Texas?
Please read and comment - and share this article everywhere: Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice upped the ante in a high-stakes political game of chicken. Lobbying against pending legislation in the Texas legislature which would criminalize any searches conducted without probable cause, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy sent a letter to a few high-ranking members of Texas’ government warning against promoting the bill and threatening a complete closure of all flights to and from the state.

“If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute,” Murphy wrote. “Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.”

No doubt written with the threatening intent one reads into it, Murphy added: “We urge that you consider the ramifications of this bill before casting your vote.”

Previous to the federal government’s threat, the Texas legislature had considered the ramifications of the bill. More importantly, they were responding to a clear need to uphold the Fourth Amendment and ensure that each person enjoys the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” — a right which the U.S. Constitution mandates “shall not be violated.”