Archive for January, 2008
Wednesday, January 30th, 2008
Contrary to what the mainstream news says, I don’t think it’s a good thing to have arguably the two most liberal politicians in the Republican party endorse you!
If you’re an observer who is late in the game this election season, if you haven’t been following things closely (and many Americans have not) this is an important sign. This is a big red stop sign that reads: Stop John McCain!
Arnold Schwarzenegger is not a Republican, he’s a movie star. Ask just about any Republican voter in California and they’ll tell you so. Where does he part ways with the GOP? He’s supports abortion, he supports gay marriage, he supports hate speech laws, and more. This last position is evident by the insane law that he signed last year that bans pro-family terminology from schools and allows students who are suffering from “gender identity confusion” to use opposite sex bathrooms and locker rooms. Don’t believe me or have any idea what I’m talking about?
Read all about it by clicking here.
As previously addressed, Rudy Giuliani is not a conservative either. Rudy has a terrible family life filled with adulterous affairs, bad relationships with his kids, and a fundamental misunderstanding of how important these moral issues are with the electorate. He’s pro-choice, anti-traditional marriage, and pro embryonic stem cell research.
I don’t think endorsements from either of these two RINO’s (Republicans in Name Only) does anything but hurt John McCain with the party base. I just hope enough people are paying attention to realize this.
“Just because these liberal Republicans endorse him doesn’t mean he’s one of them!”
Oh really? Then why is McCain in favor of these liberal policies on the record?
*John McCain is against a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage. Some people will say this issue is overblown but I’m telling you that there are a lot of Americans, myself included, who see this as a huge problem. The family is the bedrock of civilization and if you won’t stand up for that fundamental principle what does that say about your moral character?
*He supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. This issue is at the heart of the ethical debate over the sanctity of life. Once we start treating some life as more important than other life in our nation we are headed down the road of destruction. This doesn’t seem to bother John McCain.
*McCain is against drilling for oil in Alaska and other off-shore sites. Yet he claims he wants us to be energy independent of foreign oil. Instead he’d rather continue to fund governments that sponsor terrorism.
*He authored McCain-Lieberman which calls for a 50 cent tax increase per gallon of gas on American consumers, and other financial burdens on those who use natural gas to heat their homes. This is a liberal policy to fight “man-made global warming.”
*How can John McCain be considered a leader on national security when he refuses to enforce the laws of the land when it comes to illegal aliens? He supports amnesty for all illegals except those he deems criminals. I say that if anyone breaks the law to come here, they are already criminals. The McCain-Kennedy bill is another example of liberal policy.
*John McCain has trampled on our First Amendment rights by authoring McCain Feingold which has cost conservative voices from being heard.
Click here to read what others are saying about McCain’s bills.
These endorsements are the red flags that conservatives who haven’t been paying attention needed! Take heed to this warning and vote accordingly or this country and the Republican party is doomed.
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
Wednesday, January 30th, 2008
With the news of John McCain winning in Florida, and Rudy Guilliani set to possibly endorse McCain, conservatives should be very concerned. In fact, it may be time for drastic measures for the greater good.
Mike Huckabee might want to realistically think about what’s best for social conservatives.
This is going to sound crazy, but I think the time has come for Mike to seriously consider dropping out of the race and endorsing Mitt Romney.
While that sounds highly improbable, given the fact that the two have had some pretty intense battles dating back to Iowa, Huckabee needs to realize that Romney is the next best thing for social conservatives.
Let’s face it, John McCain will not support traditional marriage and he says he will not protect federal funds from going toward the destruction of human embryos. McCain has even said in the past that he is not in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. This is a BIG problem for conservatives. We are a party that respects life, and a party that stands for family values and we are now in jeopardy of getting a presidential candidate who is weak on both vital areas!
(This says nothing of the fact that McCain is not a proven fiscal conservative, is against enforcing the letter of the law with illegal immigration, and he has authored terrible bills like McCain Feingold which violates our First Amendment rights as Americans!)
Mitt Romney has said he will support a constitutional amendment protecting marriage between one man and one woman. Romney has also said he will continue the Bush administration’s policy of denying federal funds to embryonic stem cell research and that he supports overturning Roe v. Wade.
Hmm… Now let me think here. When it comes down to Mitt Romney and John McCain the choice is very clear. Traditional Americans have got to get behind Mitt Romney.
Now don’t get me wrong, I like Mike Huckabee, and I have from the beginning. And he has an outside shot still considering he is doing very well in the polls in Alabama, Tennessee, Missouri, Georgia, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and even Texas.
I believe Mike Huckabee has two options, and a third improbable one.
First he could throw his support behind Mitt Romney right now in order to assure social conservatives we get a candidate who pledges that he is pro-life, pro-family, and pro-marriage.
Second, he could wait until the convention and then throw his support and possibly his delegates Romney’s way.
Third, he can hang on and hope for a highly improbable outcome that would lead to him getting the nomination or lead to a brokered convention.
This is of course assuming Huckabee doesn’t endorse McCain which would be a travesty.
I’m just laying out the options because I’m getting concerned. I want to be able to vote on election day and I’m afraid that if we get a candidate who is not in support of the social issues that define our nation’s character there will be many conservatives who do not participate in the electoral process this next November. Either that or throw their votes at a third party candidate. I wouldn’t blame them either.
Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments »
Tuesday, January 29th, 2008
Social conservatives, evangelical voters, and traditional Americans everywhere who believe in Judeo-Christian values must take time to learn about the candidates running for president.
I say this emphatically because I’m concerned that not everyone is really doing their homework! Let me do my part and help educate you (as I’m prone to do). I’m listing voter guide links to the four remaining front runners for the Republican nomination for president. You can thank me by sending me a cookie bouquet or something.
Mike Huckabee
Mike aligns perfectly with all of the positions that should concern social conservatives.
Click here for Mike Huckabee’s voters guide.
Mitt Romney
Mitt also seems to aligns perfectly with all of the positions that should concern social conservatives. The only disturbing thing is how recent his conversion has been to some of the values that social conservatives hold in such high esteem. For instance, when running for Governor in 2002 he put out a pro-Gay Pride Festival flier which can be found here. In 1994 when running for the U.S. Senate he was pro-abortion and pro-gay rights. Has he changed? He says he has and our voting guide says so but it does make one a little worried.
Click here for Mitt Romney’s voters guide.
John McCain
John McCain refuses to support traditional marriage and he is OK with the destruction of human embryos. This news should be very disturbing for social conservatives who think McCain aligns with their values. Clearly he does not.
Click here for John McCain’s voters guide.
Rudy Giuliani
Rudy is the worst of the four. He not only won’t support traditional marriage, he advocates for homosexual marriage and hate crimes and hate speech legislation that would make it a crime to speak out against homosexuality. He’s also fine with abortion and stem cell research. I believe any moderate social conservative would have a very difficult time voting for this man.
Click here for Rudy Giuliani’s voters guide.
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Monday, January 28th, 2008
The more I read about John McCain the more I remember who he really is. Let me rephrase that. The more I read about John McCain the more I remember who he is NOT.
John McCain is not a social conservative. John McCain is not a fiscal conservative. John McCain is not a secure our borders and enforce the laws when it comes to illegal aliens conservative. John McCain is not a libertarian. Heck I’m not sure John McCain is really a Republican!
Are you confused? Don’t know what I’m talking about?
Read this scorching article by Ann Coulter who tells us who John McCain is by his record, his words, and who is friends are on the other side of the aisle. She takes him apart piece by piece and has me convinced that the GOP should be very concerned about John McCain being our nominee.
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Sunday, January 27th, 2008
Tough topic - Let’s see if I can address it with grace.
Does character matter in who we’re choosing for president? I think 99% of people would answer with an affirmative. What determines character? Let’s take a look at the definition of “character” from the American Heritage Dictionary:
- Moral or ethical strength.
- A description of a person’s attributes, traits, or abilities.
- A formal written statement as to competency and dependability, given by an employer to a former employee; a recommendation.
- Public estimation of someone; reputation.
Where does one derive moral or ethical strength? One would suppose that they would come from a set of moral or ethical beliefs. Since we use Judeo-Christian values as a foundation for a good deal of our laws in the United States, I think we can safely use them as a basis for determining moral or ethical strength.
One of the great morals standards of the Judeo-Christian faith is the idea of fidelity. Now let’s take a look at the definition of “fidelity”:
- Strict observance of promises, duties, etc.
- Loyalty.
- Conjugal faithfulness.
When you think of the term fidelity it’s easy to think about faithfulness in marriage. Marriage is one of the biggest commitments a person makes in life. It’s more important than buying a house, buying a car, what you’ll do for work, etc.
Unfortunately in America, we’ve got a real problem with fidelity in marriage (and in other things). The divorce rate in the United States is around 50 percent. That’s an astonishing statistic. In fact it’s such an intimidating statistic that a lot of people are just forgoing marriage altogether because they figure, “Hey, I don’t want to be another statistic!”
It might be easy to criticize that kind of disrespect for making a commitment if it weren’t for the fact that half of all the people out there make the same mistake! I’m not here to preach to anybody, and I’m not here to judge anybody, but I want you to think for a minute. I want you to ask yourself something.
Do you find that statistic alarming?
Clearly there are extenuating circumstances, and it’s true that everybody makes mistakes, but 50 percent?! That’s a bit overwhelming isn’t it?
There’s no question that a lot of people have a problem with keeping promises and being loyal.
And just because you’re loyal in one area doesn’t mean you’re not loyal in other areas either. Someone might be loyal as a husband or wife but they might not be loyal with their taxes, loyal in the way they treat their kids, or loyal to their country.
That’s all pretty negative stuff. I’m going to try to be optimistic here for a minute.
The encouraging part about this marriage statistic is that about half of all marriages do work. The good news to me is not that we have 50 percent of Americans that are good people. No, the good news is that it is possible to demonstrate fidelity! We can be faithful. We can be faithful in marriage and we can be faithful in other areas of our lives.
Part of doing the right thing is admitting when you’re wrong and repenting. Sometimes we get so caught up in how bad a mistake is that we judge that and don’t look at whether or not someone has admitted they were wrong, and has changed their ways.
I say all of this to get back to my original question: Should we use character as a means to help us choose who we’re selecting as our next president?
What do we know about the remaining candidates and their character? What about their fidelity in marriage and in other areas? I have to admit I’m a little disturbed by two of the remaining candidates for the Republican nomination.
I’m concerned about Rudy Giuliani because of his lack of fidelity in marriage. He’s on his third wife, and frankly when I read his story I’m not sure I could vote for someone like that (let alone the fact that he’s pro-abortion). There are lots of places that reference his adulterous affairs and strained relationships. If you want to read more about him visit his Wikipedia page here.
Again I’m not doing this to drag Mr. Giuliani’s name through the mud, I’m doing it because I think character matters in who we elect. It’s important that we are informed about such matters and I think what I’m saying has merit.
The other candidate who seems to have a rocky past is John McCain. There are people just drooling over this guy now and calling him the comeback kid. Conservatives are flocking to support John McCain with the veracity of a starving weasel. (Not that I’ve ever witnessed the veracity of a starving weasel, but I can imagine it’s quite the site.)
I hate to spoil the party but when I read about John McCain and his marital history I was both stunned and bothered by it. Apparently John McCain had an affair, ditched his wife who had been in a car accident and gained weight while he was fighting in Vietnam, and then married a rich young woman 17 years his younger. Here’s where I found that interesting tidbit.
On the other hand, you’ve got the other three remaining candidates that should be commended for their ability to maintain fidelity. Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul have all maintained long term marriages, and while we shouldn’t judge their character solely on this, it’s not a bad start!
Now to be fair, I don’t know if Giuliani or McCain have admitted their mistakes with a repentant heart. Maybe they have. We know statistically they wouldn’t be the first men in America to make mistakes like this (although what’s striking about these two men is their stories seem appalling).
Should we take into account these terrible mistakes as we cast our vote for president?
Should one of the most important positions of power in the entire world go to men of the highest character?
I believe so and I believe that we must consider these facts as we weigh who to vote for in the coming election. To not do so would be negligent and irresponsible as citizens of the United States of America.
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Thursday, January 24th, 2008
Can social conservatives and libertarians co-exist? It’s my understanding that libertarians take virtually no position on morality in government which in effect is taking a position.
Recently I’ve found it harder and harder to believe that the two can exist peacefully under the banner of the Republican party.
I chalk some of that sentiment up to personal experiences as a radio talk show host. Often times some of my listening audience (which leans Libertarian) has disagreed with me on the importance of addressing social issues and the moral climate of our nation.
Traditionally the one bond that social conservatives and libertarians (and for that matter pure fiscal conservatives and the strong military & national defense conservatives) can agree upon is the idea that smaller government is better. A common belief that a big bureaucratic centralized federal government does more harm than good.
Now as I point out these various factions within the GOP I’m well aware that there are many crossovers. I myself am both socially conservative and fiscally conservative. I may put greater importance on the social issues but that doesn’t mean I’m against a strong military or lowering taxes.
What concerns me is that the libertarian leaning folks and the country club Republicans who only care about fiscal policy, are done with the social conservatives. They’d like to put us on the shelf and officially retire us from the party.
Folks that’s just not gonna work. We have to work together if we want either of our ideologies to succeed. Otherwise the Democrats are going to walk away with this thing and I’ve yet to see a Democrat at the federal level who is either a social conservative or a fiscal conservative.
I think it’s important that Republicans unite under the banner of tradition. As traditionalists, we can agree with our founding fathers that government run by men is inherently evil. It should be as small as possible and have with it all of the checks and balances for a purpose. We must also agree that this republic was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, as one nation under God. That being the case we must rally around this value system and encourage faith which produces personal virtue and in turn civic virtue necessary to the health of our nation.
These various factions have come together before and have done great things. I hope that isn’t lost, but I fear that the political climate is such that this once great alliance is faltering.
An interesting article by Marvin Olasky talking about uniting libertarians and social conservatives under the concept of smaller government is found below:
Mike Huckabee has not been able to pick up much support beyond his evangelical base, but there’s a way for him to do so. He needs to show that Christian conservative views and small government views logically go together.
The key is realizing that growth in governmental “human services” has come in part through the recognition of real problems. When a guy and a gal shack up, it’s not purely a personal matter. That’s because one result, a certain percentage of the time, is likely to be a child with a single mom, and that child at some point is likely to receive governmental support.
Or look at divorce: When children are involved, a judge’s custody decision determines where they should live, where they should go to school, and sometimes what language they should speak. The kids are at physical risk: the growth of governmental child protection agencies parallels the surge in broken families. Even kidnapping cases usually result not from “stranger danger” but from the decision of the left-out parent to regain rights extra-legally.
Overall, family non-formation or malformation leaves kids more likely to mess up in school or drop out. Teens with an absent parent are more likely to commit crimes or get pregnant. They are more likely to have mental and sometimes physical health problems. All of this leads to bigger government. The drive to expand governmental health care of children owes much to the growth of uninsured children in single-parent homes.
For the rest of the article click here.
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008
Attention social conservatives who supported Fred Thompson:
Check out Mike Huckabee! He’s clearly the only candidate left that strongly supports the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and other family issues.
We know that Rudy flat out admits he doesn’t support these values. Mitt Romney is a somewhat suspicious new convert to these values. Finally John McCain has some holes in his record that raise some serious questions. Just ask Dr. James Dobson from Focus on the Family about John McCain:
“McCain Feingold Bill kept us from telling the truth right before elections … and there are a lot of other things. He’s not in favor of traditional marriage, and I pray that we won’t get stuck with him,” - Dr. Dobson on McCain
Click here for the full article.
I’m not the only one who thinks Mike Huckabee is the best choice left. Just ask former Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter who endorsed Huckabee recently. (Notice you don’t see this endorsement on Fox News or the Drudge Report… I think some establishment, country club conservatives don’t want anything to do with Huckabee which is a huge problem in the Republican Party considering the huge evangelical base.)
WASHINGTON (CNN) — California Rep. Duncan Hunter, a former presidential candidate, announced Wednesday he is endorsing Mike Huckabee’s White House bid.
“I got to know Governor Huckabee well on the campaign trail,” Huckabee said in a statement. “Of the remaining candidates I feel that he is strongly committed to strengthening national defense, constructing the border fence and meeting the challenge of China’s emergence as a military superpower that is taking large portions of America’s industrial base.
“Along with these issues of national security, border enforcement and protecting the U.S. industrial base, I see another quality of Mike Huckabee’s candidacy that compels my endorsement,” he added. “Mike Huckabee is a man of outstanding character and integrity. I saw that character over the last year of campaigning and was greatly impressed. The other Republican candidates have many strengths and I wish them all well.”
Link to the article here.
So give it some thought, I know Mike isn’t perfect and there’s stuff I’m not sure I agree with him on but he’s the best candidate for the most important social issues affecting our nation!
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
