Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Reflections by Dee

I wanted to do another "thoughts for the day" post but decided that title was getting boring ;-). Thus, Reflections by Dee.

--Interesting Democrat endorsements in Missouri:
--Former U.S. Senator Jean Carnahan endorses Barack Obama
--U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill also endorses Barack Obama
--African-American, Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver endorses Hillary Clinton
(So the 2 white women endorse Barack Obama and the African American man supports Hillary)

----KC Star endorses 2 liberals:
--Hillary on the Democrat side and McCain on the Republican side (why am I not surprised)

--Conventional wisdom on the status of the Republican race says that Huckabee and Fred Thompson are done. Rudy will be out if he can't win Florida. Then it comes down to Romney and McCain.

I'm not willing to make any predictions yet because this race has been so fluid and unpredictable. That said, I hope Shane and others are right in their predictions that Huckabee is finished. It will be extremely telling to see what happens in Florida and then on Super Tuesday.

--What is clear is that McCain won in New Hampshire and in South Carolina only because of Independents. So this quote is telling:
"The Jan. 29 contest in Florida will be the first Republican primary closed to independent voters, who have provided McCain with his margins of victory in both New Hampshire and South Carolina."
As many Republican pundits have pointed out, once the majority of the conservative base gets to pick, it is highly unlikely that they will be picking McCain. Even a Democrat pundit finally admitted this weekend on Fox News that there is a huge anti-McCain sentiment among Republicans ,where many want anyone BUT McCain. Include me in that camp with the addition, anyone but McCain or Huckabee.

--Rush made some really good points on yesterday's show. There has been some resistance to those like Rush, me :-) and others who have been critical of McCain. Rush said that was too bad, he was going to continue to be honest. His main point was that Huckabee and McCain are the 2 most liberal Republicans in the race because they want to redefine conservatism. He is exactly right.

He pointed out that while Rudy and Romney are not "perfect conservatives" they are honest about their positions and aren't trying to change conservatism into something it isn't. He said that there are no "perfect" conservatives in this race and that it is a picking of the lesser of evils but the race is what it is. He said that while Thompson is the most consistent conservative even he supported McCain-Feingold which Rush has huge issues with.

It was so encouraging to hear him say all of this because this is exactly where I'm coming from in my own analysis before Rush weighed in on any of this. I like Rudy and Romney for the very reasons he brings up and have issues with Huckabee and McCain because they are trying to make conservatism about something it isn't. Huckabee wants to bring about a "Christian form of socialism" and say that it is the conservatism with compassion. Never mind that it is a form of slavery and I'm not interested in John Edwards lite. McCain is labeled a maverick for a reason. You can never predict what he'll do and he has no "conservative principles" or a conservative world view that guides him.

Say what you will about Rudy, he has core conservative principles and a world view that has been consistent and he proved it when he was Mayor of NYC.

--Dennis Prager makes a very, convincing case for Rudy in this article. Here is an excerpt:
Rudy Giuliani may have made a great mistake by not campaigning in New Hampshire, Nevada, Iowa and South Carolina. But between Rudy Giuliani (and, for that matter, Mitt Romney) on the one hand and John McCain on the other, there is little question as to who more embodies mainstream conservative and Republican principles.

But Giuliani is not merely more of a conservative than John McCain. In fact, if it is Ronald Reagan that Republicans want, Giuliani is extraordinarily close to that venerated man. Ronald Reagan stood for two great beliefs: that big government is a big problem for a free society and that America must be militarily strong and lead the war against global communism.

Substitute "global jihadism" for "global communism" and you have Rudy Giuliani's twin pillars. His one major weakness in appealing to all conservatives is that he is for abortion rights. Let me, then, briefly address all those who, like me, consider nearly all abortions immoral.

Ronald Reagan was pro-life, and it mattered little to the pro-life cause. Concerning abortion, what matters most in a president is the type of judges he appoints to the Supreme Court. As George Will wrote on behalf of Giuliani, "The way to change abortion law is to change courts by means of judicial nominations of the sort Giuliani promises to make." It is extremely unlikely that John McCain would appoint similarly conservative judges. After all, why would he appoint judges like Scalia and Alito who apparently differ with him on the constitutionality of McCain's own "campaign finance reform" laws?

Pro-life Republicans need to ask themselves: Will a Democrat or Giuliani as president render abortion less common in America? The best is the enemy of the better. And Giuliani is far better on abortion than any Democratic nominee.

Giuliani is for school vouchers, against bilingual education, for reducing taxes further, for reducing government spending. And he has well-thought-out positions on how to achieve these things. He also has the experience of cleaning up the most liberal major city in America.

I write this column aware that Giuliani may have lost his chance at getting the Republican nomination. But I could not live with my conscience if I did not articulate one week before the potentially decisive Florida primary why I believe Rudy Giuliani would make an excellent president of the United States.

No comments: