Republicans

Posted on '08 Election, Conservatives, Republicans

the problem with fred

I’m sure Fred Thompson is a good guy.  I’m also sure that there were many persuasive people telling him that he could be the one to save the GOP from Rudy McRomney, and no doubt Thompson is more conservative in some areas than the current top three.  But it’s fair to say that there was no way that Fred Thompson could be the savior of the GOP, or another Ronald Reagan, or the “one true conservative”.  His record in the Senate is mixed, and it resembles John McCain’s on illegal immigration and campaign finance reform, two areas where McCain runs into trouble with the base.

There are many objections I have to James Dobson critiquing possible GOP nominees, but I have to agree with him, and with what Quin Hillyer wrote in the American Spectator, when they suggest that Fred Thompson doesn’t act like he wants to be the nominee or to be President.  It’s an admirable quality in a candidate, I guess, not to look like they were planning their Presidential run for many years before taking the plunge. However, if Fred wants to continue to be taken seriously as a candidate, he has to start doing his homework on the issues of the day.  He can’t go to Florida and not know about the local issues (Terri Schiavo, drilling in the Everglades).  If he’s going to be an advocate for conservatism, he needs to know what he believes and why he believes it.  He can’t get by on Southern charm alone.  Ask Mike Huckabee how much money his campaign gets from his great personality and folksy speeches.

It’s not just the objection to Rudy, Mitt, and McCain that drives conservatives to look for someone else. All three men have flaws I can live with as the GOP nominee.  Conservatives are looking for someone with a vision, a new direction for our party, and a direction for our country.  We need someone who is bold enough to tell us the truth about where the Republican party has failed the people of this country.  We need someone who knows what is wrong and how we can fix the GOP. We want to be inspired with big ideas and someone with the kind of vision for change that Newt Gingrich has (only in a more electable package).   It’s no wonder that all of the candidates don’t quite measure up to those high standards.

Fred Thompson could be the guy who could unite most of the base,  but he can’t just coast through this process if he wants to be the nominee.

Tags: , , ,

Posted on '08 Election, Republicans

enough

I get the frustration with the Republican candidates currently running for President among the social conservative types.  Every single interest group has some bone to pick with the top three – Rudy, Mitt, or Fred — so nobody is happy with those choices.  If only Brownback, or Hunter, or Huckabee only had more money — the social conservatives would rally around one of those candidates and they would be happy. Maybe the situation will change with Huckabee, but I just don’t see it happening for any of the other so-con approved candidates.

As a social conservative myself, I have reservations about Rudy Giuliani as far as what kind of judges he would nominate to the Supreme Court.  I am also concerned that his stormy personal life may become an issue later on in the campaign, although I’m not sure why Hillary would want to start that kind of discussion if she’s the Dem nominee.  What is working in Rudy’s favor is his record in NY, as well as his leadership on 9/11. The latter is the main reason many social conservatives have given him their support.  I haven’t decided to support Rudy yet, although I might change my mind later on.

My concern with Rudy is partially based on the reasons I have already given, and also based on his limited executive experience.  It’s not that successfully managing New York City is a small achievement. He can rightfully boast about his record there.  But what else is there?  What other items on his resume can he point to to show that he has the right stuff to be President?  I hate to say this, but without his remarkable leadership on 9/11, Rudy Giuliani wouldn’t even be in the discussion for President of the United States.

That said…

I am disgusted by the spoiled, whiny, look-at-me-I’m-still-important, leaders in the Christian right community who would support a third party candidate if Rudy is the Republican party nominee. It’s a bad idea. Don’t they realize that if the social conservative vote is further split, Hillary wins?  As long as Rudy doesn’t win…right? They don’t speak for me, and they don’t speak for many social conservatives who share their moral values.  Power doesn’t just corrupt politicians. It corrupts religious leaders as well.  I am concerned that the church has forgotten its mission: to bring the message of Christ to a lost world. It’s not our job to pick presidential candidates.

Like I said, I’m not sold on any of the top three, including Fred, and it’s hard for me to imagine donating money or time to any of these campaigns right now.  But if Rudy is the nominee, he’s still better than Hillary. That will be enough for my vote.

 

2 Comments Posted on Democrats, Republicans

this is not a surprise

So much for “openness and transparency” in the new Democratic-controlled Congress for those earmark requests.

CNN informs us:

Staffers for only 31 of the 435 members of the House contacted by CNN between Wednesday and Friday of last week supplied a list of their earmark requests for fiscal year 2008, which begins on October 1, or pointed callers to Web sites where those earmark requests were posted.

Of the remainder, 68 declined to provide CNN with a list, and 329 either didn’t respond to requests or said they would get back to us, and didn’t.

“As long as we are not required to release them, we’re not going to,” said Dan Turner, an aide to Rep. Jim McCrery, R-Louisiana.

Shouldn’t the Democrats be setting the example by releasing each and every one of their earmark requests and requiring the release of all earmark requests? This is, of course, a bipartisan effort to withhold disclosure of how members of Congress want to waste our money. Republicans are guilty of this as well as Democrats, but the Democrats are in charge now. Seems to me that no significant change will happen if they keep enabling the status quo to protect themselves.

Tags: , ,