(Republican) For President!!

From the Washington Post...

Bartlett Unleashed: On Flip-Flops, a "Dud" and the Guy With the Funny Name

"One of President Bush's closest advisers has a brutally candid analysis of the Republican nomination battle: Fred Thompson is the campaign's "biggest dud," Mitt Romney has "a real problem in the South" because people will not vote for a Mormon, Mike Huckabee's last name is too hick and John McCain could end up repeating 2000 by winning New Hampshire but losing the nomination."

I did not watch the Republican Debate this afternoon. I generally do not watch Party Primary Debates anyway.

Primary Debates are for people who want a "sampler platter" from which they can choose a neat little package for which to vote.

I pay close enough attention to the entire political landscape to know which candidates most nearly represent my views, and from there I rationally determine which of those candidates is the most electable, and the most likely to defeat the Sociali... uhmn, Democrat against whom he or she will be running in the General Election.

So far I like Fred Thompson, Rudy Giulliani, and Mitt Romney all about equally. They each have their strengths and their weaknesses, but any of them (in my mind) would be about as good as the other, and ANY of them would be better than Hillary (who is, without a doubt, going to be the Democrat Candidate for President in '08, regardless of qualifications.)

I will NEVER, NOT EVER vote for John McCain for ANY elected office, not even dog catcher, because (A) I don't think he has ever READ, much less understood the Constitution, (2) He is far too interested in what the Media thinks of him personally, and lastly but not leastly, he is old enough to remember when dirt was new, and has already been in Washington FAR too long.

Go home already. You've done enough damage, Mr. McCain.

Fred Thompson is the candidate that I WANT to like, but so far, he hasn't SAID anything. I like the way he talks, he looks presidential, and if he can handle the job, I believe that he could be a very impressive president. He claims to be conservative enough for me, and I believe that he would be able to effectively handle the attacks from the Left-leaning Media, and would not allow himself to be abused by them the way that George W. Bush has.

But at this point, it appears that he takes this whole situation as some sort of game, or perhaps as a part in a play or a movie for which he is auditioning, and at that against other actors whom he does not take as serious competition for the part.

He needs to tighten up.

I also like Mike Hickabee, on the surface. Still not 100% sure about his electability. He may very well be the best man for the job, but If he can't beat Hillary, we'd be better off to run someone with whom we don't completely agree, who can.

He still has work to do.

The overthinkers who pontificate about the Republican Feild seem to think that since I live in the South, I would never vote for a Mormon. They say that I would never SAY that this is the reason that I would not vote for Romney, but that I would instead claim that I refuse to vote for him because he "flip-flops" on the issues.

The truth is that I would as soon have a Mormon President as a Catholic, or a Methodist, or even a Baptist, and would RATHER have one than a Godless Liberal. (And would MUCH RATHER have a Mormon than a RELIGIOUS LIBERAL.)

Romney has given me no reason to not vote for him.

Of all of the candidates running for the Republican nomination, Rudolph Giulliani has most effectively proven himself qualified for the nation's highest office. When he was Mayor of New York City, he changed the place from a rat-hole by anyone's standards back to a place that people could be proud to say they were from. He presided with authority over the worst tragedy our nation has ever faced, literally from ground zero.

I have no doubt that he would take National Security and the War on Terror seriously.

I'm not too sure about his views about the Second Ammendment.

But, when questioned about Constitutional issues, I've never heard him give a wrong answer. I have no doubt that he knows and understands what is and is not Constitutional, and that he is not afraid to take a stand, even an unpopular one, if he feels that he (and by extension, WE) should.

That's a LEADER.

I like him.

Ron Paul... On some issues, he's dead-on. On others, he's a nut-ball.

If I want a nut-ball (on ANY issue) in the White House, I'll vote Democrat.

My hot-button issues have nothing to do with Religion, Abortion, or Socialized anything. I'll take care of my own Health Insurance, thank you, my Religion is my own business and I will extend to you the same courtesy, and Conservatives do not abort their children. (So, if the other side wants to self-eliminate, I will not stand in their way. They will answer to God for their sins, same as me.)

When it comes time to cast my vote in the primaries, I will vote for the most economically conservative, strongest on National Security and Border Security candidate that I believe can win the National Election.

And when the '08 Presidential Election rolls around, I will vote against the Democrat candidate, and pray for God to bless my Nation.

(Whatever that means.)

And I could not care less what any talking head says about any of the Republican candidates. (Not even a talking head who used to work for the President.)