I have obstained from posting for a number of reasons, mainly my heart hasn’t been in it, but recently I find myself energized as the election draw nearer. My mind wanders down many paths as I ponder the direction of the nation in coming years. What has been on my mind the most is the vast divisiveness that is befowling mainstream conservatives.
I don’t turn to the pundits to get my knowledge on the different candidates, I seek it out through many sources, collect that knowledge and review. However, I do include the various pundits out there in my research because I am curious what they are thinking about different candidates and issues and how they came to their conclusions. Recently all I hear from the mainstream conservatives is denouncing Huckabee and McCain and backing Mitt Romney. I am not upset they would back Romney, but I am upset that they would vote for a democrat before they would vote for McCain. Huckabee, unfortunately, seems to be a non-issue, although I would be elated if that changed today.
All this talk about McCain got me thinking what was so terrible about him, so I looked some stuff up about him and listed to what all the pundits had to say. I came to the conclusion that McCain isn’t that bad a guy (he certainly isn’t conservative) and that if the people select him as the republican nominee then so be it, I will vote for him.
Michael Medved has made some very good points about McCain. A caller called into his show and said something along the lines, “Well McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts.” That is a line that alot of the other pundits have used to denounce McCain, but none of them elaborate on the issue. Medved retorts, “Well, true he did do that, but did you bother to see why?” usually the response is stuttering, but Medved continues, “McCain said that he voted against the tax cuts because they weren’t coupled with cuts in spending. Furthermore, if you are so worried about what happen 6 years ago, why are you not denouncing Romney for 6 years ago being Pro-Abortion, Anti-gun, and endorsing nationalized health care?”
Medved also has a great response about McCain shortcomings on the Illegal-Immigration issues. A caller will say they can’t support McCain because of “Amnesty” and the Medved will ask the caller if they supported Ronald Raegan. The caller will reply “of course” and then Medved will slam them with the fact that Raegan granted amnesty to millions of illegals in ‘86. The calle shuts up pretty quick.
Now then, my point isn’t to go issue by issue and expound on why one candidate is betther than the other and why you should vote for X over Y because of Z. My point is that a lot of people out there aren’t seeking the facts about the issues and they are reacting very rashly to McCain by saying they won’t vote for him.
If they don’t want to vote for him in the primary, that is great, I hope they vote for Huckabee. I can’t vote for Romney because he will sign another assault weapons ban and given that I still have other choices I will vote for Huckabee in the primary in March if he is still in it and McCain over Romney if not.
But what if the general election comes down to McCain VS Obama or Hllary? Alot of conservatives out there have said they would vote for democrats before they voted for McCain. To think that any rational thinking person would put their party before they put America is sickening.
If the conservatives wanted a better candidate, why weren’t they talking up Fred Thompson a whole hell of a lot more? George W Bush has done a great number of un-conservative things for the past 7 years, McCain would surely be more of the same with a few differences, but mainstream conservatives wait till now to get pissed about not having a candidate that represents their ideology? Get real!
My solution, unfortunately, suck it up and vote for McCain. Given the possibility that some supreme court judges could retire I would rather have the judges that McCain picks over the ones that Hillary or Obama picks. Those picks could shape the nation for 20 years or more and we would best be served by a greater chance of having conservatives judges up there.
I respect McCain for what he did and went through in Nam, but I mistrust him. He is just not predictable enough for me. My one great hope is that he will prosecute the war as it should be.
My philosophy has always been to vote my conscience in the primary and the lesser of two evils in the general election.
It’s no secret that I’ve been a Huckabeeliever since last July; I was actually attracted to his campaign even earlier than that, when I saw him on the Imus Show over a year ago. I’m particularly supportive of his positions on abortion, the Second Amendment, the Fair Tax, education and health care. His “tax and spend” reputation as Governor of Arkansas is greatly exaggerated IMHO, and even though foreign policy isn’t his strongest suit, his intuition in this area is impressive. Back last September in his speech to the CSIS, long before the Bhutto assassination, he stressed the centrality of Pakistan in the War on Terror.
The results of Super Duper Tuesday encouraged me greatly that I’ll still be able to vote my conscience on March 4.
That being said, I’m enough of a realist to admit that the chances of Huckabee getting the nomination are pretty slim. However, the better he does between now and the convention, the better his chances of being McCain’s running mate. Huckabee got his start as the Lieutenant Governor of Arkansas and ascended to the governorship when Jim Guy Tucker was forced to resign. He grew into the job, just as I believe that as VP, he could grow into the presidency. At 52 (turning 53 this summer), he’d be only 57 at the end of McCain’s first (and final?) term (McCain would be 76). Huckabee has a sharp mind and is a quick study. Whatever his perceived shortcomings in foreign policy may be now, after serving on the National Security Council, he’d have much better credentials by 2012 (or 2016).
I recently watched the movie “Bobby,” about the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968. On that night in June of 1968, the junior senator from New York was the presumtive Democratic presidential nominee. And whereas I wouldn’t wish his fate on any candidate (Democrat or Republican), we live in a dangerous and unpredictable world where violence or even disease can change the political landscape in an instant. I often wonder if Rudy Giuliani hadn’t been diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2000 if Hillary Clinton would have been elected to the Senate.
McCain and Huckabee represent two of the three branches of the old Reagan conservative coalition – national defense and social conservatism. It would be nice if there were a world class fiscal conservative on the ticket, but the Constitution doesn’t allow for a second vice president. Huckabee has shown that he can deliver the Southern States, and that will be critical for a GOP win come November. Not only did he win Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, West Virginia, and his native Arkansas, but he narrowly lost South Carolina, and even more narrowly Missouri and Oklahoma.
McCain-Huckabee? It’s not exactly Reagan-Bush, but given the alternative (Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton), I can live with it.
Here’s a great opinion piece from newsmax.com entitled “Huckabee Rises” by presidential historian Doug Wead. He gets it:
http://www.newsmax.com/politics/huckabee_rises/2008/02/06/70525.html