I am going to take my time to pick apart what I see as reasons not to vote for certain Republicans contending for the party nomination for the Presidency. This goes out primarily (small pun intended) to the folks in Iowa and New Hampshire, but I offer it to everyone voting in this election. To simplify things, I will utilize the Real Clear Politics average of the polls (dated 12/26/07 – 01/01/08) and only use the top four Republicans, who are the only ones in the double digits: Mike Huckabee (29.0%), Mitt Romney (28.3%), John McCain (12.8%), and Fred Thompson (11.8%). I will also use this order in the analysis.
(Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_republican_caucus-207.html)
Huckabee, who has a narrow lead of 0.7% in this average of the polls, is wrong on the following issues and I will state my reasons for each one. My personal beef with him on his Guantanamo stance: he wants to close it! "I’ve been to Guantanamo… I think the problem with Guantanamo is not in that its facilities are inadequate. It’s the symbol that it represents. It’s clearly become a symbol to the rest of the world as a place that has become problematic for us as a nation. I was quite frankly impressed with the quality of the facilities and even the attention to care that was given to the detainees, but that aside, it doesn’t alter that Guantanamo to the rest of the world is a symbol that is not in our best interests to continue pursuing." This is, by the way, also the official ACLU position as well. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a conservative.
(Source:http://dhgrassrevolt.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/mike-huckabee-stands-with-the-aclu-on-guantanamo/)
This is an extremely bad idea, to say the least. What Huckabee does not say is what he would do with the detainees there. Would he release them to return home, where I’m sure they would merely wind up as recruiters for Al Qaeda and most assuredly resume their nasty habits like, say… trying to kill us again? Would Governor Huckabee bring them here? Has he not yet realized that – as the situation currently stands – in bringing them onto American soil, he will then effectively grant them protection of our Constitution? Sure, Mike, bring them on over. I’m sure that we can afford to give sworn enemies of our country a life in our correctional facilities and their own lawyers as well.
Unbelievably, Mike Huckabee also likes the idea of letting illegal aliens pay in-state rates at Arkansas colleges, as well as giving them voting rights and helping them get public assistance as well, according to a report by the AP in February 2005. He referred to those who opposed the plan as "bigots who think there's a real problem." Somehow, illegal aliens voting is now okay, Mike? And I guess they’ll vote for you if you give them those rights. That smacks of a cheap political stunt like the one he just pulled at the news conference on the topic of “look at what I’m not releasing.” That was not a good move and I think most Iowans agree with me on this one.
Now for Mitt Romney. A lot of you may know that I am a seminarian at Liberty University and am a Baptist as well. Since this is not a blog on religious issues, I will leave our perspectives on theology out of this. Sorry to disappoint those of you who wanted to see that here, though I might address that in my religious blog later. My big problem with Governor Romney is what I can only call flip-flopping. He is now running as a Reaganesque conservative, but he did “not want a return to Reagan-Bush.” (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxHjLx_kCDk)
Then there is the problem of abortion. Where exactly does he stand? I really can’t tell. When he was running for governor and senator, he was pro-choice. But he claimed that every decision he made as governor was to preserve the sanctity of life, regardless of his actions on emergency contraception. But now he has “evolved” (Ah… Mitt, just so you know, this is not really a good choice of words for a conservative Republican.) and is now pro-life. Will he remain pro-life? Only time will tell.
(Source: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/12/mitt_romneys_flip_flop_flip.html)
As if to lead me further into doubt, Mitt has an interesting habit of supporting rather liberal Democrats like Mayor Rocky Anderson, the anti-war nut. Liberal judges were appointed by him to the Massachusetts courts as well. He has also donated to Planned Parenthood. He also voted for Paul Tsongas and has donated to other liberal Democrats. I am left wondering exactly where his ideological stance is on anything.
(Source: http://politicomafioso.blogspot.com/2007/12/romneys-liberal-past-and-his-liberal.html)
Now, I take on my dad’s choice for President, the Lazarus of this campaign season, John McCain. Let me start by saying that I have a great deal of personal regard for him and nothing but the highest respect for his military service and the high price that he himself paid for his defense of our democratic way of life. I personally can only find a problem with him: his attempt at granting what is effectively amnesty to people who do not belong here.
However, he does want to close Guantanamo as well. I give him a pass here, though. This is a war hero was held captive in brutal conditions and personally experienced torture. More than any other Presidential contender – more than most other Americans, for that matter – he can identify with the detainees, but only so far. They are kept in clean cells, given good food and decent covering, their own copy of the Koran, and good medical care. Senator McCain had exactly none of that. I believe that he is just making sure that this is an end to potential torture occurring for someone else. And part of me respects his stance for that reason, but I still can’t get behind closure of Guantanamo. I believe that places like Gitmo make the world a safer place because of the confinement factor. Other than that, I like him. Except for the Bush tax cuts being wrong.
And now onto “my pick”: Senator Fred Thompson. My only question here is: Will the late start kill him? I think he should have announced on July 4th and taken over the reins of the campaign and strongly rode it on to the first phase, where we are at present. But he is a committed conservative and I respect that a great deal. And that whole fire-in-the-belly thing is just a distraction, so far as I’m concerned.
Just please consider all of this carefully as you make your decision, all you New Hampshirites and Iowans. Yours will be the first stage of this race. Let’s give America a strong conservative to support in 2008. I am praying for you all.
No comments:
Post a Comment