Posted by
on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 7:41:00 PM
Fact: There is no Ronald Reagan this time around.
Fact #2: There are many Anti-Reagan candidates vying for the Republican nomination.
Core principles.
That is what every Republican voter should be thinking about when they head to the polls this primary season. That being said, can anyone tell me what Mitt Romney's Core Principles are? I think I know, yet I am sure that I cannot be sure. And if I cannot figure out what the Governor/ CEO/ Savior of the Olympics' core values are. Then too, I get the sinking feeling the Democrats will ask the very same question again and, again and, again in a general election campaign. Let's face the hard cold facts...the Democrats will repeatedly club Romney over the head with his very recent transition to conservative values AND, they would be correct about it too! Not only as a tactic or strategy to defeat him but on the finer points of the issue as well. There is no denying that Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan!
Though I wouldn't expect the Vegas oddsmakers to have an over/under on how many times we will hear "Flip-Flop" in one form or another starting the morning after the Republican convention (but it would be interesting to set up a 'play for fun pool' should Mitt get the nod)!
Now we can all agree Mike Huckabee is a likeable, affable, pious and, very smart man. But there aren't many who agree with the Governor (or his supporters) contention that he is a Conservative. No how. No way. Could it be that Huckabee is in the race only to siphon off a large percentage of one of the largest parts of the Republican base, Evangelical Christians and, with that support attempt to posit himself as a VP candidate?
This begs the question - "What are we to believe of the Huckabee's supporters?" We can be sure from all of the recent polling data that the newest man from Hope has pretty much cornered the majority of the Evangelical vote. But are these Evangelicals for Huckabee conservatives? Some mind find the question odd given the history of the GOP base and, some might even take personal umbrage with a total stranger questioning their conservative credentials, though I believe in this election cycle, one that quite possibly could be the most important elections of our lives, the question posed is a legitimate one.
Can and/or will the Evangelical Christian voter dismiss Mike Huckabee's obviously liberal record, deciding instead to cast a vote for religion ahead of their core conservative values? How else to explain this man's rising popularity within the Party of Conservatism? Many of these voters have already lined up in droves to cast votes for Huckabee and more are at least planning to do so in upcoming primaries (South Carolina?).
So I must ask - "How is it the average Republican voter, many Evangelical Christians among them, will neither accept nor vote for the RINO Senator from Arizona, John McCain, because he is so obviously NOT a Conservative. Yet at least for many of the Christian voters there seems to be a clear double standard when it comes to the Tax Increasing Governor from Arkansas.
McCain has been accurately labeled a Republican In Name Only for his voting record (against the Bush Tax Cuts, Kennedy/McCain, McCain/Feingold etc.) and, rightly so. But where or what is the difference between him and Likeable Mike? Both men seem to harbor the same soft spot for Illegal Aliens as evidenced by Huckabee's Tuition for illegals incentives plan and John's McShamnasty bill. So is it just a coincidence that the two men have a genuine mutual admiration for each other? Some even see a conspiratorial game plan to bring down another candidate, true or not the question lingers and, in this case can anyone honestly say "opposites attract"?
Does the Religious Right evaluate Mike Huckabee differently and, if so why? Are they cutting him some slack because he is after all, a Minister and one of them? Can they be so blinded by the glow of piety that they cannot see the similarities of the two would-be leaders of the free world?
It is my own opinion but I see Mike Huckabee as a younger John McCain who is even MORE dangerous and, corrosive for the Republican Party than the aging 'maverick' (not the word I wanted to use exactly). How else to explain his often repeated point that he "got re-elected in a Democrat state..." mantra? If Huckabee continues to fracture the voting base with large numbers of God fearing Christians throwing their principles by the wayside and their support his way based solely on the fact that he IS one of them then we CANNOT and WILL NOT win in November (or maybe anytime again in the near future) because then the Christian Right will be sending the message to the Conservative Wing that they are not who we thought they were (apologies to Dennis Green). They will be telling us they are not true Conservatives.
Sadly a worse nightmare awaits if Huckabee's pal John McCain somehow inexplicably becomes the standard bearer for the Republican party this Fall. Not only will we have Comprehensive Immigration Reform foisted upon us but we will also have to live through a Democratic party massacre of the Republican candidates for Senate and House seats as true Conservatives stay home in protest. The result? Liberal Judges will be appointed across the land. The 1st Amendment (already a McCain target) could suffer further, the 2nd Amendment forget it, it will be gone (just as it would be with a Rudy Giuliani presidency), as will Social Security for you & your children when it gets handed over to John McCain's and, the future Democratic juggernaut of a party's newly minted constituency, Illegal-Legals!!!
So, by all means if you want a Liberal Democrat in the White House, vote for McCain (you'll get one win or lose) AND you might just get Huckabee as your VP as well because the liberal Evangelical voters can put the Republicans over the top!!! THAT friends is the only way a McCain ticket will beat Barak Hussein Obama and, is something the Arkansas Governor appears to be angling for anyway.
However...
If you wish for the Republican Party to remain an alternative, sometimes even sane voice of opposition to the Liberal agenda and, you yearn for Strict Constructionist judges to fill vacant seats on the bench, then neither McCain nor Huckabee should even be on your radar.
What of the remainder of the Republican candidates?
Certainly the former Mayor of New York is no Reagan either. Rudy Giuliani's aforementioned personal vendetta against the 2nd Amendment and, his Pro-Choice stance are two strikes against Rudy with the Conservative base of the party yet there is more. How can we honestly take the Mayor's word that he would nominate and appoint judges in the mold of Scalia, Thomas, Aleto or Chief Justice Roberts (who by the way was shepperded through the process by another Republican Presidential candidate, Former Senator Fred Thompson)?
It is my own humble opinion but I tend to think of Rudy as a "compromise" type of guy and, not in a good way. If a liberal Supreme Court Justice were to retire during the next presidents term of office and, that somehow Rudy were sitting in the Oval Office I can see him naming a liberal replacement to "maintain the status quo" (where have I heard that before?). Sorry, but I don't even see, if given the chance, Rudy straightening out the Ninth Circuit Curt of Appeals.
But even more troubling to me is the idea that Mayor Giuliani ran New York City as a Sanctuary City (!!) while professing in debate after debate during this election season he "deported the lawbreakers", a claim I hear all too often from too many of the GOP hopefuls as part of their immigration plans. "Deport the 2 million lawbreakers"! What part of ALL 12 or 15 Million of them ARE LAWBREAKERS by virtue of entering the country ILLEGALLY in the first place don't these men understand?
In another time, like the 19th century, the one trick Isolationist Congressman that is Ron Paul, bless his heart, would probably have been my choice. But in these dangerous days and, years ahead the country needs a President with a strong foreign policy, a man with a firm belief that we are indeed in danger from many foreign enemies, not the least of which is Al Qaeda on the battlefields or China in the boardrooms of the world. Anything less and we invite more trouble on a broader front. Conciliatory and, apologetic is not the right approach and that is all that Ron Paul offers on the foreign policy front. 'Nuff said?
Not quite...
The esteemed Texan has certainly energized the Libertarians that for the time being we find amongst us but unlike years past, this time if the Libertarians don't get their way they will most likely show up in November to punish all of us who weren't as smart as they were during the primary battles. When one considers they are a virulent anti-Iraq crowd, this time they may just turn out to vote for Barak Hussein Obama.
Unfortunately, Duncan Hunter never got any traction but it shouldn't be an ignominious end for the California Conservative bulwark. Hunter should be offered a cabinet post, Secretary of Defense or Homeland Security, then at least we can be sure the border will get that fence we are all screaming for even if nobody in Washington seems to be listening. Tancredo would also make sure the fence got built freeing up Congressman Hunter for the Pentagon.
If Fred Thompson is also employing the media coined 'Rudy Strategy' of writing off Iowa & New Hampshire to concentrate on Super Duper Tuesday and, the southern Conservative vote (which by the way is a strange tactic for Rudy to be employing while it makes perfect sense for a candidate with Thompson's Conservative credentials to use) why are we not being told what a "brilliant strategy" it is for him moreso than it seems to be for Giuliani? Recently there was even talk by those very same talking heads about Mrs Bill being "forced" to employ the Rudy Strategy but mums the word for Thompson from these same media know-it-alls. Wuzzup wit dat?
Is it too late for full disclosure? Or have you already figured out that Fred Thompson is my personal preference for POTUS, the most powerful position in the world. Thompson, I am sure will see that it stays that way! Thompson would surely nominate and appoint Federalist style Justices to populate SCOTUS when the seats open up.
Fred could also bring out enough Conservatives to make gains in Congress and, once more show the pundits they wouldn't know a ground-swell if it rolled over them. People, THIS doesn't have to be a "Dem Year" as we are being told it will be and, I think a Conservative Fred Thompson can bring out the vote if everyone takes a deep breath and, thinks about the decision they are making when they step into the pols to vote.
The FoxNews Forum Sunday night - I thought it was funny as I watched the rest of the field chime in on their Social Security plans (and I use the term loosely) only after Fred brought the topic into the discussion with a REAL PLAN to reform the system. Mitt sounded like the typical CEO about to steal a great idea from the company CFO and claim it for his own. In fact, most of those who had anything at all to say about Social Security's problems did little more than echo Fred's idea...with tweaks of course! It was even funnier when the Luntz focus group asked a woman about Thompson and her answer went - "he talked only about Foreign Policy." Then her companion seated next to her opined he wanted to "shake Fred and wake him up". A question for all - Was that Luntz group being served food or alcohol during the forum?
Later, Chris Wallace admitted he focussed on "the three front-runners"...so glad you were there Chris or I might not otherwise have known who the front-runners were. NOT. Are we going to allow the media, the pollsters and, pundits to dictate who we should vote for or even so much as consider a viable candidate. Am I the only one getting sick of this or what? Granted, there have been some candidates who never had a chance, but just look at Duncan Hunter for both the good and, the bad sides of the effect media can have. Between not inviting him and, ignoring him or cutting him off in mid thought when he was on the stage the man never got a chance to build any kind of momentum. The media then became further emboldened to exclude the Congressman when his polling numbers didn't meet THEIR criteria. Maybe if we could have heard more from him or at the very least give his supporters the opportunity to voice their opinions and, concerns things would have been different. A different top three? We'll never know. Thanks again Chris Wallace and, all the rest of you media geniuses.
Fact #3: The delegate system is not a "winner take all" in all but a few states. Delegates are apportioned by the number of voters a candidate gets and, in the end at the convention if (like this year's is likely to be) is brokered without a clear winner those delegates could possibly get your man a cabinet post or at the very least make sure your issues are addressed. How many ways can you say "Secure The Border" Duncan Hunter devotees? Do it with your vote. Vote the way your principles tell you, not the way the media 'advises'.
W/O=