13 posts tagged “republican party”
Here is an interesting situation. Former Republican Representative from Georgia Bob Barr has taken on the Libertarian Party nomination for President. Barr is a former Representative because a Democratic Party dominated State Congress pull off some gerrymandering to eliminate Barr’s Republican base. It placed Barr in a position of running against an incumbent Democratic Party Representative with his base gerrymandered to win.
Anyway, the Left Wing MSM is reporting praying that Barr will have just enough appeal to swing a close race away from McCain and into Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s lap.
The GOP is already counter-spinning that an intelligent Republican will understand a vote for now Libertarian Barr is really a vote for Obama.
My fascination with Barr becoming the Libertarian nominee for President is that primarily he is Slanted Right on most issues and was a virulent pursuer of staining the Clinton legacy. Now this fascinates me because the Libertarians have lately evolved into fiscal Conservatives yet nearly to the fringe Left on social issues. For example the Libertarian philosophy of anything goes as long as it does not infringe the beliefs of the individual or cause harm to other individuals has morphed into anti-Christian morality and pro-homosexual activism.
That does not fit the Barr image.
Look today is Super Tuesday. Since Fred Thompson dropped out because of a lack of support from those who should have supported the only true Conservative in the Republican race, I have been in a disappointing funk as to who I should support.
Frankly all the remaining candidates have just as many knocks as plusses and I truly do not know who the best is.
Although McCain has a history of teaming up with Leftists, he does have a decent Senatorial voting record on Conservative causes. The many pundits that are hysterical about McCain being the front runner as of this date are way overboard on the venom if you look at McCain in balance. Some pro-McCain Republicans have called this McCain Derangement Syndrome.
Romney has a solid record as an administrative person in the private sector and in government as the Governor of Massachusetts. However as a politician he has had to comply with a mostly liberal voter constituency in the State of Massachusetts thus he has made some politically social stands that are abhorrent to the social Conservative; viz. on abortion and homosexual rights. Being a politician and seeking to gratify a larger constituency – viz. the entire USA. This has given him the appearance of a flip flopper as Romney has recanted on some of his gubernatorial stands. The issue for me about Romney though is his religious faith. Yeah I know, to the secularist it sounds bigoted; however I am a Bible believing Christian that has always viewed Mormon theology as not even close to Christian basic theology that even Catholics, Protestants and Eastern Orthodox Christians agree on. Saying all that, if Romney was to pull out the Republican nomination, I would vote for him. Any Republican is way better that than the obviously Socially Left moral relativists who continue a Secular Humanist transformation of American society.
Then there is Mike Huckabee. At this stage Huckabee probably does not have enough money to make his case to the American people. Ironically Conservatives criticize Huckabee for being fiscally Leftist and acknowledge his Social Conservatism. Just today I ran into a website that is critical of Huckabee’s potential connection to “Reconstructionist Christianity.” The Reconstructionists (aka Dominionists) believe the Law of the land in America should be closer to that of Old Testament laws (bad news since Christ redeemed Believers from the curse of the Law in the Old Testament) than the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution. That is the knock; however from actual readings of Rushdoony’s (father of Reconstructionism) writings, he appears to be more of an advocate of inserting Christian principles into the Constitution rather than abolishing the Constitution of or the Bill of Rights. One other Huckabee gaffe was a December 30, 2007 interview with Leftist Tim Russert in which Huckabee is caught saying homosexuality is a matter of personal choice. Of course anti-Huckabee people wanted to make the Christian Right aware that Huckabee might not be as Socially Conservative as he proclaims.
I call it a gaffe because what the anti-Huckabee people fail to point out is Huckabee’s explanation of his “homosexual statement.”
Although Huckabee asked Russert to understand that "when a Christian speaks of sin, a Christian says all of us are sinners," he asserted that "the perfection of God is seen in a marriage in which one man, one woman live together as a couple committed to each other as life partners."
So here’s the thing. I am voting Republican in 2008 for whoever wins the nomination. For me there is no clear cut choice. However if I was pinned down on who to vote for today, I would lean toward Christian Social Conservatism and that would be Mike Huckabee.
Here is a good clip for a Christian to vote for Huckabee:
_________________
I owe a hat tip to the information to Jim Phelan.
Dr. Rusty Shackleford writing for The Jawa Report was a fellow Fredhead as was I. Shackleford gets directly into his issue: If you were a Fredhead you should support Mitt Romney for he is the closest thing to a Conservative still running for the Republican nomination.
Shackleford heaps a tremendous amount of disdain upon Huckabee. I too am not certain Huckabee is the man. If he won the nomination the voters may perceive him as the Christian Right’s man God wants in Office. This is an extreme view for a lot of voters. Although I am not one of them, even Republicans might view Huckabee’s Ministerial credentials as a violation of the constitutionally non-existent concept of the “Separation of Church and State.”
Because of this voters may be swayed by whoever fringe Left Candidate the Democrats finally settle on. When it comes to a choice of radicalism, Americans tend to err on the side of the secular rather than the Christian these days.
Shackleford directly says voters that are put off by Romney’s Mormonism are clearly fringe social issue Christians who are not concerned about the Right Stuff that makes a total Conservative. Thus not voting for Romney because of Mormonism is bigotry. After all the new package Romney claims to have transformed his liberal Massachusetts social liberalism back to a Mormon friendly social Conservatism as well as being a fiscal Conservative who gets it about the War on Terror.
The truth is social Conservatism is not in Romney’s track record in Massachusetts. That bothers me!
And as far as bigotry, that is a way out there accusation. It is like the Left accusing Christians of bigotry for preaching or believing the Word of God which is definitely anti-homosexual and warns of cults using the name of Christ but teaching a different Gospel. Also the Left accuses Christians of bigotry toward Muslims when Christians defend their faith against Islamic belief, yet when Muslims call Christians and Jews as either sub-class citizens as being the “People of the Book” or outright call for a Christian’s and Jew’s death for their existence insults their Allah.
Shackleford is using Left Wing thinking to get Fredheads to support Romney.
In the Primary selection process of the Republican Nominee I am not voting for Romney because he is a Mormon and that is not bigoted, it is in line with my Christian faith.
There is a lot about Mormonism that the every day Mormon does not even know about. Mormonism is an elitist driven cult that requires promotion to know certain secrets somewhat like Gnosticism – Christianity’s early competitor in the first couple hundred years after the Resurrection of Christ.
And just so you don’t think I am spouting Conspiracy Theory, there are huge numbers of former Mormons that have come back to Christ that are involved in Christian Ministries that are dedicated to expose the differences between Mormonism and Christianity. Christians should not support Mormons for Public Office because of those differences.
Having said all that, I am extremely uncertain who I will support for the Republican nomination. There are simply too many intangible qualities of likes and dislikes of the remaining Republican Candidates.
So as a Fredhead I am not throwing my lot to Romney; however I am not necessarily throwing my lot to any other Candidate either.
This may surprise you after my dissing of Mormonism. I will throw my lot to whoever wins the Republican nomination; even if that person is Mitt Romney.
The reality of it all is this: the Democrats support godless socially liberal stances that would force me to vote for a self-proclaimed socially Conservative Romney. The other Republicans: McCain, Giuliani and Huckabee have a bit of the RINO liberalism in them but at least they are not fringe Leftists and they each have an aspect that I do like about them.
[NOTE: There is something way fishy about Ron Paul. It is no accident I did not include him Republicans that have aspects that I like.]
Whoever wins the nomination, I pray that Candidate entices Fred Thompson to be their Vice President. That would be an awesome team against the fringe Left Democrats.
The real point of it all is this: VOTE REPUBLICAN.
Rasmussen has published the numbers within the GOP about which candidate is viewed as the most conservative to date.
My Thompson has lost ground and is at a 40% perception as a Conservative. You Thompson supporters had better start reading and sharing why Thompson would make a good President. Have an answer for a couple of black marks:
1. Thompson supported McCain/Feingold, which was a bi-partisan attempt at campaign reform. Unfortunately the reform favored Leftists more than the Slanted Right because the Right dominates grass roots campaigning via Blogs and Talk Radio. The Left controls the Mainstream Media. McCain/Feingold was not good legislation and might even be unconstitutional.
2. When Thompson revamped his staff in preparation for bigger scale Administration and planning for his campaign, he had image problems. At first he hired Spencer Abraham as the Campaign Manager. Oops Abraham is known as Jihad Spence among the Slanted Right anti-Jihadist pundits in America for his support of Arabs in his lobbying days. Thompson moved quickly to diffuse the backlash and Abraham was demoted to third on his Campaign leadership with Bill Lacy becoming the new Campaign Manager.
3. Another campaign “oops” was having friend Phil Martin involved in the campaign. Martin is a guy that has changed his life around and has become a respected businessman; however Martin has a past with drugs and a felony conviction. Once the good ole’ Mainstream Media pointed out that Thompson’s friend was a felon; Martin resigned to prevent mudslinging toward Thompson.
Amazingly Mitt Romney has a 46% rating as a perceived Conservative. Certainly Romney is a Conservative; however from a Christian Right perspective Romney’s faith as a Mormon comes into play. Most on the Christian Right view Mormonism as a cult based on Christianity yet not part of Christianity as say Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox are viewed as Christians.
Mormonism itself has all the moral values of Christianity (except the rogue spin-off Mormons that push polygamy); however the theology is definitely different placing more emphasis on the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible as the Word of God.
Romney as a former Governor of Massachusetts has social Conservative issues that he supported in the past but has changed his line in the present to boost a potential attraction to the Christian Right. The attraction seems to be scoring points for some on the Christian Right are beginning to endorse Romney, most significantly Weyrich and Jones.
Robertson is endorsing Giuliani to win the GOP nomination. Robertson’s endorsement could split the cohesion of the Christian Right because Giuliani is openly pro-abortion, pro-homosexual rights and made New York City a sanctuary city for illegal aliens. Zero of those aspects are amenable to the Christian Right. In fact there are those on the Christian Right which feel vehemently that Robertson and Weyrich are playing the role of Judas in the Republican Candidate selection.
My man Thompson is receiving a Christian Right organization’s endorsement allegedly in the very near future. Unnamed Republican sources are claiming the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) will announce their endorsement for Thompson tomorrow. We will see if that pans out. If indeed that happens that will be nearly as huge an endorsement for a Candidate as Robertson’s endorsement for Giuliani.
The GOP selection process is splintering the group that is responsible for electing President Bush to two terms of Office. My wonder is this: can the Christian Right re-unite when the GOP candidate is crowned as the Republican nominee for the Office of President of the United States? A disunited Christian Right could give a PR election advantage to the evil moral relativism of the Democratic Party which definitely stands for everything the Christian Right despises.
After the Court ruling the Massachusetts Constitution mandates that the legislature formulate a law to legalize or illegalize the Court decision. In Massachusetts the State Supreme cannot create laws, it can only rule on them. The State Legislature then is mandated to formulate the Law, which can in essence go along with the Court or write the Law to nullify the Court ruling.
The Massachusetts Legislation did not and has not to date acted on the Court ruling. Then Governor Romney unilaterally implemented the State Supreme Court’s ruling as statutory Law ordering the State Agencies and Departments under State Executive Branch management to write the documents enabling same-sex marriage to take place.
Mitt Romney could have forced the Legislature to act one way or the other by doing nothing which would not enable same-sex marriage.
Mitt Romney is running his candidacy on a Conservative platform courting the Christian Right.
Romney’s Gubernatorial actions are either overtly against the Christian Right’s view of Christian Morality or he was stupidly misinformed and allowed Massachusetts to be the first (and only State I believe) to allow homosexual marriages.
Is this a politician the Conservative base can trust?
Viguerie is the most paleoist (did I create a new word?) of paleoconservatives. His record as paleocon does not necessarily mean he is a committed Republican. He tends to vote Republican merely of his commitment to being an anti-Leftist and anti-Democratic Party man.
He considers himself in the mold of Barry Goldwater. Viguerie aided Reagan to become President by then innovative “Direct Mail” mail format. Direct Mail was the media combat tool before the rise of the Internet and Blogging.
Although Viguerie was a major player in the Reagan election, he often criticized President Reagan (my Presidential hero of my lifetime to date).
Viguerie has run for political office utilizing Third Party affiliations. Including one founded by deceased Dixiecrat George Wallace: the conservative Democrat from Alabama that overtly stood against the Civil Rights movement extending equal liberty to Black Americans that White Americans enjoyed.
Viguerie has been closely associated with Rev. Sun Myung Moon and Moon’s Unification Church. The Unification Church is a cult founded by Moon that utilizes portions of Christian tenets and mind control to manipulate his adherents. If you are a Seventies child like I was you might remember the “Moonies”. These were young people that sold flowers on the street corner (a practice also used by the Hare Krishna’s) for a donation or looking for a recruit. These Moonie youth gave their income to the Unification Church and their lives were managed by task masters and all were indoctrinated in the Moonie way. Part of that Moonie way is to consider Sun Myung Moon a divine like Messianic figure. The Unification Church is also the owner of the conservative Washington Times of Washington, DC. (I have to admit even I utilize the Washington Times as a source due to their favorable Conservative editorial content.)
I mention the Moon connection for Viguerie because the Unification Church is not the friend of the Christian Right. The Christian Right is the current foundation (for better or worse – depending on your Conservative view) of the Republican Party. Viguerie is so close to Moon that the Unification Church bailed Viguerie out of financial troubles he was experiencing in the mid-1980’s.
I believe Viguerie’s connection to Moon arose to a mutual hatred of Soviet Communism more than religious affiliation, nonetheless there is a bit of hypocrisy on his part when Viguerie criticizes other Conservative Republicans. Viguerie’s critical venom is especially reserved for neocons. Criticizing neocons is in vogue currently because of the unpopularity of the Iraq War. It was neocon adherents that called for Saddam’s removal. I myself am not a “root for the winner” kind of guy; I still think neocon ideas are very valid for America today. (Many enemies of neocons see the undefined group as promoters for American Empire. They are wrong, neocons favor American preeminence globally thus when the National Interests of other nations are counter to American National Interests; neocons favor aggressive confrontation or action to protect American National Interests.)
Now I say all this because Viguerie is highly critical of a man that I think has a great opportunity to connect with American voters due to his charisma. That man is not as perfect as some Conservatives view him, nonetheless he stands for more Conservative values than the other Republicans that are current front winners to win the Republican nomination other than maybe Newt Gingrich (who has his own skeletons). That man is Fred Thompson.
To see what I mean read Viguerie’s criticism of Thompson’s credentials with everything in mind that I have written about Viguerie. In Viguerie’s essay, “Conservatives, Beware of Fred Thompson;” he castigates Fred Thompson on everything Conservative. Then Viguerie places into question Thompson’s work ethic. As I said Reagan is one of the greatest American Presidents that ever lived. Reagan is one of the primary people if not the premier person responsible for the down fall of Soviet Communism. And guess what. Reagan’s work ethic was constantly called into question because he managed his Administration by delegation then considering all information then making the big decisions.
Was President Reagan lazy? I think not. Reagan restored America’s National Honor in a time in which Democrats (i.e. Carter) effectively destroyed self-esteem.
Friends America is again at a period of time in which Americans are unsure of their self-esteem. Americans are again questioned about its direction by its twentieth century post WWII friends. America needs a charismatic person to continue the Conservative agenda while simultaneously reestablishing American dignity abroad and American confidence at home. Does anyone remember the Leftist fear mongering tactic by the Democrats concerning Reagan? Reagan was portrayed as the Red (Communist) hating Conservative that would push THE BUTTON to launch the globe into a nuclear war with then perceived nuclear super power Soviet Union. Did it happen? No. What did happen is that Reagan buried the Soviets with our resources and know-how to build more and superior weapons systems that the Soviets could not afford to keep up with. Basically Communism in the USSR was defeated by with out a shot fired by demonstrating America could build a huge and insurmountable stick. Unable to keep up, the USSR was forced into reforms that led to its demise.
The new threat to global peace and American National Interests is radical Islam and the nations that allow Islamist ideology to be the spokesperson for Mohammedanism. Appeasement and worry about oil will not end that threat. I think Thompson is the man to recalibrate American thinking Reagan style.
I think Fred Thompson is that man.
Viguerie Sources: Wikipedia and Media Transparency.
I am not a Mormon. I believe Mormon beliefs are not Christian beliefs. I believe Mormon beliefs place Mormonism in the realm of a cult that is closer to Gnostic-Christianity rather legitimate Christianity.
Having said that: What about Mitt Romney?
I believe Romney is a good man with morals that many Christians in this day and age fail to live up to. I say that not knowing Romney; however I have known some Mormons (via work etc.) in my time. The Mormons I have known have a moral system that is conducive to the Christian Right.
I consider Mormonism to be a Christian heresy. I believe practicing Mormons to be engaged in a theology that even many of them do not comprehend. Sensitive questions are rarely answered with a straight answer but rather with a defensive deflection move the questioner off the point.
Knowing how I feel about Mormonism, would I vote for Mitt Romney for President?
During the primaries the answer would be NO. If Romney is the Republican nominee, the answer is a diminutive yes. A moral/Conservative Romney would be a better President than a so-called Progressive (oft times godless) Democrat that believes that Christian morality is an archaic belief system.
The Stiletto has some comments on Mitt and Mormonism. You really should read The Stiletto on Mormonism and Mitt’s candidacy.
Naomi Schaefer Riley writes the run down on Evangelical king maker Richard Land, the Southern Baptist Convention’s representative in Washington DC.
Certainly Land is not the only Evangelical influence for the Republican Party; however he does represent the largest Protestant Denomination in America. Thus Land’s opinion does carry some weight on the nomination process.
Read about Land’s concept of who would be the most approved Evangelical nominee for Republican President.
I was reading an article attributed to Dick Morris and Eileen McGann in the Jewish World Review today. The article seemed very supportive of Fred Thompson to commit for a run for the Republican nomination for President. I myself believe that Thompson is an articulate persona as President Reagan was. I believe he will appeal to the Christian Right, right wingers such as the NRA and so forth.
The Morris/McGann article questions Thompson’s reluctance to enter the race early might be a death knell to a later entry. The article reasons a later entrance will imply an image of lack of stick to it-ness which portrays leadership fragility in confronting a wild cat say like Hillary Clinton.
Morris/McGann point out that an early entrance by Obama circumscribed a Gore entry on the Democratic side; thus Thompson entrance NOW could circumscribe a possible Newt Gingrich (who I also like) entrance into Presidential politics.
Then Morris/McGann goes into all the what-ifs the Republicans and Thompson might face as Super Tuesday approaches in February 2008. Morris/McGann accuses Rudy Giuliani as being in the mold of old Rockefeller (pro-business yet center/left). The implication being if Thompson does not enter soon, Giuliani will have nearly unstoppable momentum. Giuliani is quite popular with everyday Joe Republican because of the strength of leadership he demonstrated during 9/11.
I personally think that Giuliani has too many skeletons in his closet to defeat a cagey Clinton gang. Because of Giuliani’s skeletons it would be tough to attack Clinton skeletons. I don’t think Newt Gingrich can defeat the Clinton Gang; he just comes across as too nice of guy for the old wild cat Clinton gang. I do believe Gingrich would make an excellent leader as President; one does not acquire Speaker of the House without skills. Unfortunately those are closed door skills that politicians rarely show publicly. I do not think Newt’s open door election skills can compete with the Clinton gang. I betray my disdain for Mormonism as a cultic off-shoot from Christianity that has the appearance of ancient Gnostics more than the orthodoxy practiced by Christians. Mitt Romney morals may be impeccable, but it would be like voting for an anti-Christian. However I have to tell you, I would vote for Romney before I would for any Left Wing Democrat.
I am sure there are other Republicans I am leaving out; however the ones I have written about are the ones I am thinking about (I guess I could throw Brownback in there and maybe others). It is the idea of a slick speaker and a quick wit like Fred Thompson that I am really drawn to. In that I am like Morris/McGann: RUN FRED, RUN…NOW!
With Rudy Giuliani the current front runner in Republican polls, Conservatives are looking for a candidate that better matches their profile and is electable. Does Fred Thompson (former Senator and Law & Order actor) fit the profile?
The question now becomes: does Thompson want to give up “Law & Order” to run for President? For that matter does Thompson even wish to run for President? It might be Conservative flattery intended to buck up the current candidates.
Look at Fred Thompson’s credentials HERE.
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.