— Abraham Lincoln
I’ve been silent on the Republican primaries. Mainly because I have had little to say. Even now I am one of the undecided. However, as I watched the debates and listened to the political pundits, I have come to a few conclusions. Opinions are like… well you know, and I am just sharing mine. I’d love to get feedback on this before the election. Like I said I’m undecided but leaning.
First a preface, in 2008 I declared, “I am a man without a party.” The Republicans lost their spines sometime during Bush’s first term and the party nominated a spineless old man to oppose a vigorous and energetic Socialist. Conservatism was on the defense even from its traditional allies. As far back as 2006, I could see the storm coming and why? Conservatives had lost their ideals and their will. The rest is history. Or is it?
The lady doth protest too much
Any President presiding over an economy in shambles, unstimulated and guided by an unseen but decidedly anti-capitalistic hand, should not (and under normal circumstances would not) be re-elected. Such a presidency would not deserve re-election. The principles which guide it clearly do not work. Failure is indisputable to the reasonable mind. This should be further evident by the excuses and finger-pointing. To quote Shakespeare, “the [administration] doth protest too much, methinks.”
2012 should be 1980 all over again. We have a Jimmy Carter analog in the White House, wringing his hands, declaring it’s all the fault of lazy Americans, greedy rich people, his predecessor, the other party, he didn’t know how bad it was, ect. But this isn’t 1980, its 2012.
Thirty years of re-education camps for young people, (aka public schools), hypocritical socialist media, and the wimpification of Republicans, have created an environment where a failed Presidency just might seem successful in the eyes of the young and dumb class and preferable to the masses of sheeple stumbling around in the dark listening to the constant drone of the propagandizing media.
Am I angry? Hell yeah. Angry that my government can’t stop spending double its income, angry my kids will live in a third-world country after the unavoidable financial collapse that spending will bring, angry Republicans have no backbone, angry Republicans are just as addicted to spending as Democrats, angry the party wants to nominate someone nice rather than someone smart.
Who gets my vote? Again, I’m not sure, but I have impressions of each of these guys.
Romney: A wimp. He stumbles. He won’t fight Newt, how can we expect he’ll suddenly grow a pair of testicles and fight Obama? Yes I saw the news today, so we get some testy words against Newt but come on. This was too little, too late and not at all convincing. I was of voting age during the 90s and Romney’s accusations are not how I remember it.
Romney reminds me of John Kerry in 2004. He is too smooth and his finger seems moist and steadily held in the wind. Someone described him as plastic and I agree. You know the Obama campaign is going to hit him hard as a flip-flopper.
Oh, I heard he’s Mormon, I say with a sarcastic glance. Who cares?! This nation’s problems are too big to be fighting over his fringe religion. I’d care if he were a devotee of some personality cult or religion of hate. What I know of Mormons is they may have some odd beliefs but they are certainly not dangerous. Haven’t seen any of them blowing up civilians or crashing planes in the name of God.
Newt: Certainly no wimp, but he is a man of questionable moral character. Isn’t it funny how Democrats argued “its just sex” when President Clinton enjoyed a little extra-marital oral bliss in the oval office at tax-payer expense — no matter that the President lied about it under oath. However, today, it is unthinkable that Newt cheated on two of his wives and may have asked one for an open relationship. If you supported Clinton but are now offended by Newt please destroy your voter ID card, you are not qualified to vote.
However, I opposed Clinton for obstructing a sexual harassment case, demonizing a victim of sexual harassment, and lying under oath. The sex was offensive and demeaning of the office but hardly impeachable. Now, what of Newt? Newt is a political opportunist. His marital behavior demonstrates a level of selfishness that frankly, gives me great pause. Can I forgive him? Yes but do I trust him?
Newt is a difficult choice because while I do not trust him, I believe he is a true genius. He might be the only person running with ideas that can work. But then I am drawn to another point, will he have the political clout to accomplish what he needs to accomplish?
At the end of the day, I have to think ex-wives will say anything to hurt the one who scorned them, furthermore, I think our problems are serious enough to overlook this. I have to think there is merit in the Lincoln quote above as applied to Gingrich.
Paul: Crazy. On economics I find nothing too troubling but when it comes to foreign policy, he scares me. I’ve been following Ron Paul since he was running as a Libertarian 20 years ago. It was then I first became aware that he is very anti-Semitic.
We already have an anti-Semitic pro-Arab President and that sort of weakness is not what I think we need.
Santorum: I like him. I think he is clean and a very likable guy but is he tough enough to stand up against Obama? They say nice guys finish last and Senator Santorum is a nice guy. He’s my moral pick but I just can’t get excited about him. But if the vote were today I believe I’d have to go with Rick.
The debt bomb
President Obama campaigned on a strong condemnation of high national debt. In 2006 he declared:
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”
At the time that speech was given the national debt was under $8 trillion and Senator Obama was feigning outrage at it being raised to $9 trillion. Today it has exceeded $15 trillion. (I keep spelling out TRILLION on purpose. You need to see it to understand it. $15,250,967,476,800.00 that is the estimated amount as of this writing.)
Senator Barack Obama was right to be outraged but his outrage was insincere and political. President G.W. Bush increased the national debt by about $4.4 trillion over an 8 year period of time – nearly doubling it. That’s terrible, however, President B.H. Obama increased the debt by about $5.2 trillion over a 3.5 year period. At the current rate of increase the debt will top $21 trillion by 2016 — that is more than double!
For me this is what this election should be about. $21 trillion of debt and officially 8% unemployment and barely any growth. And why has the unemployment number fallen at all? Because people have given up, accepted part-time jobs, or taken low paying unemployment positions.
The over-spending needs to stop. Hiring needs to be encouraged not punished. The market should pick the winners and losers not the government. I’m tired of protecting bad managers/investments and union workers at the expense of national solvency.
If a mildly weak economy was enough to make G.H.W. Bush a one-termer a deep recession/depression should make Obama a one-termer. To quote James Carville, “It’s the economy stupid!”