|
|
May 22, 2008Sobering Gut Check IIBack in January I offered the opportunity for all of us to do a gut check on the then-candidates running in both GOP and Democrat primaries. I meant to do it several times before November, but then forgot because I often forget what I’ve written, but I stumbled upon the thing last night and thought…let’s take another gut check. It’s worth noting that Fred Dalton Thompson dropped out of the race within days of the last “gut-check,” and that seemed to suckerpunch many who have never quite gotten over it. I’ve long suggested that the GOP’s refusal to get behind none but the “perfect” candidate until it was too late was mostly their own doing, and they’re only in more disarray, today. A lot has changed in 5 months, but not that. I perused my January archives a bit and I’d forgotten all about how badly Hillary screwed up, there, with the “no woman is illegal” nonsense and the NH crying. Barack seemed much more sure-footed back then, too, rather than seriously gaffe-proned, under-coached and ill-informed, which is how he appears (to me, at least) today. John McCain is the only one of the candidates who seems the same today as he did in January. I’m not sure that’s a good or bad thing, but stability may be a plus, in these roiling times. A few things to bear in mind:
The question is not who do you like, or who do you desire, but who do you TRUST with all that power? There are three major candidates left. Take a look at each; see what they say to you. I’m using the same pictures as last time, pulled from their sites, and am not resizing or changing them in any way. Randomly, in no particular order:
Check your gut and see what it’s telling you, today. And if you’re still not sure - read this NY Times report on the SCOTUS and note that the reporter seems appalled that rulings are being based on the “facts of the case.” Quel Dommage! The court appointments coming up within the next year are crucial. http://theanchoressonline.com/2008/05/22/sobering-gut-check-ii/trackback/ 18 Responses to “Sobering Gut Check II” |
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Let’s pray that American voters choose the adult in this competition come November. The stakes are so high! God bless America! Padre Steve
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
My gut can’t even stand to look at Barack Obama; that man’s a fraud, and he’s setting new lows in political cynicism. Or rather, he would be setting new lows, if it weren’t for the second photo in the list.
That leaves only one option, and while it’s not a great one, it’s infinitely better than the other two.
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Want a real gut check? Look at those three people again and think of this:
When one of them is President of the United States he/she will only be considered powerful because as CIC he/she will control the devastatingly accurate military on he face of the planet. Of course, that is completely negated if one has no interest in using it for the advancement of the national interest.
If you want to look at three pictures for a >i<real gut check then post ones of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, Kim Jong-il and maybe a fourth in Hugo Chavez. They are more powerful than any US President because any one of them can control the agenda. They are the ones that will make decisions that will cost American lives. How many lives will depend on the first set of pictures and your original gut check.
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Should read, “…on THE face of the planet.”
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Just looked at that picture of Barack Obama.
My husband was just offered a high-paying job with the biggest standards society in the world, which is London-based. They want someone local who could handle a move to the UK.
I’m so tempted to tell him, “Hon, take the job. I’d rather be in London for the next four years!” The husband is now wondering why I want to apply for a passport for both baby and I so badly.
That picture is reason enough.
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Of the three, the one who would be best for the country as a whole is McCain, in my opinion.
May 22nd, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Someone who has been tortured and can smile, is better that someone whose smile looks tortured.
May 22nd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I’m just waiting impatiently for my “McCain-Jindal” or “McCain-Palin” or McCain-Crist” 08 bumper sticker to slap on the ol’ SUV.
May 22nd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Sadly, today my gut tells me I must choose the candidate who I distrust the least.
May 22nd, 2008 at 4:16 pm
My gut has been telling me for some time that none of these three deserves to be the chief executive of the federal government of these United States. Further, my gut has been telling me that the Republican Party has been allowed to talk freedom whils steadily imposing statism upon us for far too long. It must be made to pay a high price for its duplicity, at least if we want it to be a force for freedom and Constitutional government ever again.
Yes, that means suffering at least four years of Democrat rule. But Americans already know that the Democrats stand for massive statism, effectively social-fascism, so by boycotting the election we won’t be giving them any new cards to play — and their policies will be judged according to the fruit they bear. They can’t credibly talk about freedom while robbing us blind and strangling us with legislation and regulation.
Here’s a gut check for you: Would you be willing to suffer four years of higher taxes and more intrusive legislation and regulation, if that were the price at which we could restore Constitutional limits on the federal Leviathan in the aftermath? Do conservatives and libertarians have enough faith in their fellow men to believe that we’d recoil from what Obama and Mrs. Clinton have in mind for us, or do we have so little courage of our convictions that we’d rather encourage the GOP to continue to slide leftward, by voting mechanically for the candidates of the party we trusted, but that’s consistently betrayed its nominal principles when given power?
Do we really, truly believe that Americans, once they’ve experienced Democrat social-fascism undisguised, will prefer it to freedom and vote to keep it? Were Ronald Reagan and the Republican Revolution of 1994 mere fantasies? Did voters flock to their banners because of the principles they espoused, or because they’re just stupid?
May 22nd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
It’s an easy “gut-check for me. I am a fairly traditional Catholic who tries to live within the framework of God’s Holy Scriptures, my Church (to include it’s leadership), my conscience and my experiences (a helicopter pilot in Vietnam and the “secret” wars in Central America. John McCain is less than perfect but he is usually a good, honest man and I trust him….Not to always be a perfect man but he’ll put America first.
May 22nd, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Francis, my gut says NO, I will not simply concede this election to “teach a lesson” because when as many as three or four SCOTUS justices are about to be named by the new president, we could end up in 4 years with a country we don’t even recognise. I think this election is too important to “give away.” It’s not about “higher taxes” and “more intrustive” legislation; it’s about the survival of our constitution - I completely reject the idea that “losing” this time will make things better for anyone in the long run…I’m not thinking “save the conservative movement,” I’m thinking “save the constitution.”
See my post above. This latest incompetency by the Dems can give the GOP a chance to save themselves - and by extension the nation - if they dare.
May 22nd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
One man running for the office thinks that there are 57+ states, that we can’t just “drive our SUVs, eat what we want, and have our houses at 72 degrees and expect the rest of the world to just say okay.”
One woman running for the office thinks that Gore actually did win in 2000, that the US Supreme court took the case away from the FL Supreme court, and wants to change the primary rules because at this point it would help her case. If she had clearly been the presumptive nominee in February or March, Florida and Michigan would not be an issue for her. If the Dems had done what the Republicans did and just reduce the delegations instead of eliminating them, there wouldn’t be an issue for anyone now…
The other man running for the office is not my first choice, but he is who I will vote for. Voting for a third party or just sitting out the election is what got us Clinton 42…
May 22nd, 2008 at 6:04 pm
I can’t not vote for McCain - if we get a Dem, it’s more than four years. We’re still suffering from Jimmy Carter’s incompetence (think about Iran). The thought of the SCOTUS choices alone makes me want to vote for and support McCain.
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Anchoress you are right on!!!
I have watched as various conservative pundit have turned on Bush the last few months. How he was the death to conservativsm etc etc. What they do not realize that by his Court appointments not only on the Supreme Court but on the district and Appeals level he very well might have saved it. Many times Conservatives fail to even to remember to give lip service to this because
(1)Pundits are not lawyers;
(2)Their Understanding of the Judical Issues are Sophmoric at best
and
(3) Because Judges do not appear on Hannity and Hardball
THey often forget how important this Third Branch of Govt is. It is amazing but if Bush had lost Ohio Kerry would have appointed replacements for O’Conner, the Chief Justice and I am willing to bet Stevens if not GInsburg. Conservatism would have been sent back decades!!!
Conservatives still have not realized the profound effect of the Altio and Roberts appointments. Needless to say we are to use a baseball term in desperate need of some insurance runs aka another seat on the court at the very least.
If people wnat to see what is at stake they need to look at Obama Jusicial viewpoint and McCains. It is night and day!!! We are truly at the point of significant victory here or at the point ofsnatching major defeat from the jaws of victory. Just McCain’s Appeal and District COurt appointments would really do major long lasting things for conservativism.
Oh and let me add one other thing for all people that want to lose to win. We are about to have this Census thing. We do not want to be out of power wehen that goes down for obvious reasons.
One last thought on the COurts as a sort of a final plea for those considering we need to lose to win
Professor Kerr nails it at the Volokh Conspiracy. He states:
“Let me paint with a very broad brush and offer my best explanation. The primary reason, I think, is the nature of the Supreme Court’s docket in the last fifty years. During that period, most high profile Supreme Court constitutional law decisions have considered whether to ban practices embraced by conservatives rather than whether to ban practices embraced by liberals. For conservatives — especially social conservatives, and especially religious conservatives — the question has been whether the courts will allow their views, not whether the courts will mandate them.
Think about abortion, school prayer, gay rights, flag burning, the death penalty — you know, the real ‘hot button’ issues. In each of these areas, a victory for the conservative side means that the political process is left unaltered. On the other hand, a victory for the liberal side means that the court intervenes and mandates that the majority preference — the generally conservative view — is out of bounds . . . .
I think this trend helps explain why conservatives today are more focused on the courts than are liberals. Being told that the courts won’t let your views be law is a lot more painful and upsetting than being told the courts alone won’t win it for you. It’s partly loss aversion, I suspect, and partly the fact that constitutional decisions are much harder to reverse than legislative ones. Whatever the precise reasons, the cumulative experience of this happening year after year, Term after Term, starts to really hurt. It becomes a sore point, a raw wound. I think that goes a long way towards explaining why conservatives care significantly more about the courts.”
http://volokh.com/posts/1202232563.shtml
I hope people contemplate that. In the end I wonder why the Legal and Political analyst Jeff Toobin seems to get what a McCain White House would mean (see his latest New Yorker article) as to the COurts and thus conservatism and many of us conservatives do not
May 23rd, 2008 at 5:54 am
Francis:
I am fed up with self deluded perfectionists claiming that we should lose elections to win them. That will not happen, you will just have more programs, more people dependent on those programs and an opposition that is more interested in self flagellation than it is in winning. I am going to vote for McCain and if the libertarians do not like it, they can go suck their thumbs.
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Neither Party is perfect. But given the stakes, only a fool would vote for either Obama or Clinton. We live in a highly dangerous world and only one of the three is willing and possessed of the strength to do what he pledges to do on inauguration day “Preserve, protect and DEFEND” this country.
Obama’s grasp of geography is, to say the least, troubling - since he seemingly believes we have 57 or 58 or 48 states. Nor can he quite grasp that ILLINOIS (the state he represents) is CLOSER to Kentucky than is Arkansas. On that basis alone, it is safe to say that he is a dangerous cretin who might bomb Puerto Rico when he meant to hit Kabul! Mrs. Clinton is half of a duo who permitted the Islamofascists to attack us repeatedly with impunity and I don’t care which Commission says what - I still hold the Clintons morally responsible for 9/11. As an American, I am entitled to have my own opinion and by golly, I do!
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:21 pm
I might also add that I am now keeping an Excel spreadsheet on my home computer in order to keep accurate account of Obama’s gaffes. I’m running out of fingers and toes!