Cattle Show

There have been some running debates in the Christian blogosphere over the current crop of possible, prospective, or actual GOP candidates for president, so I might as well add my 2¢, adjusted for inflation.

1.Rudy Giuliani

Rudy’s strength is also his weakness. The upside is that he has the blunt, gregarious, non-nonsense, in-your-face demeanor of the stereotypical NY Italian-American.

He has the right temperament to be a wartime president. An alpha-dog in a kennel of omega dogs.

The downside is that he also exemplifies NY values. And it isn’t limited to his abortion advocacy. He’s a militant, impenitent social liberal across the board:

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2007/05/did-dobson-betray-prolife-cause.html

His social liberalism also undercuts his strong points. He’s generally tough on crime, but his policies on gun control disarm law-abiding citizens, which leaves them defenseless in the face of criminals who, by definition, flout gun-control laws.

Likewise, he’s generally strong on counterterrorism, but his lax immigration policies may have contributed to 9/11:

http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/siegel200506220755.asp

And even now he supports amnesty.

A major problem with Rudy is that he might be too successful. One can easily see him redefining the GOP so that it ceases to be a vehicle for the religious right to sway public policy.

2.Mitt Romney

In my opinion, Romney would make an outstanding president—class president, that is. He’s out of central casting for Harvard class president.

There are two basic problems with Romney:

i) He’s Mormon.

We can debate whether or not this should be a deal breaker, but for evangelical voters, this should at least be a consideration. Electing him would instantly mainstream a religious cult. If Romney were a Moonie rather than a Mormon, I wonder if Richard Land would be coaching him on how to palm himself off as a Christian.

ii) He’s not a credible conservative.

To judge by his gubernatorial performance, Romney has a track-record which Barney Frank or Ted Kennedy would envy:

http://massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/

3.John McCain

McCain’s basic problem is that he has no guiding ideology.

Mark Levin, among others, has documented his many contra-conservative positions on amnesty, taxation, global warming, the right to bear arms, censorship of political speech, and civil rights for terrorists:

http://search.nationalreview.com/?q=mccain&s=MTQ%3D&sdate=&edate=

He’s also a very superstitious man.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-02/19/067r-021900-idx.html

Despite his bellicose rhetoric, he would be weak on counterterrorism:

http://www.nationalreview.com/levin/levin200601231438.asp

He also has a very checkered record on abortion:

http://www.peopleforlife.org/mccainthreatensprolife.html

As well as gun-control:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjIwYjQyOGQ4OWNhN2I0Nzc1MTE4NmVmZWRmMGJjMWE=

McCain has the advantage of being a soldier at a time when only a small percentage of the populace has served in the armed forces.

This means that many voters feel intimidated, self-conscious, or guilty in the presence of a soldier. Who are we, pampered civilians, to criticize a war hero?

But if the electorate consisted of the WWII generation, he’d be a dime a dozen. A midget among the Pattons and MacArthurs.

4.Ron Paul

At one level, there’s no point discussing Ron Paul since he’ll never been the nominee.

In contrast to McCain, Ron Paul has all the strengths and weaknesses of a bona fide ideologue. His positions are only as good or bad as his libertarian outlook.

I’ve been over to his website:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

There’s much that I agree with. He strikes me as a thoughtful, principled, intelligent man. I appreciate the fact that he doesn’t talk down to his audience.

His supporters respect his candor, although there’s a sense in which he can afford to be candid. With a safe Congressional seat, and no prospect of either becoming the nominee or his Veep, Ron Paul has nothing to lose.

His main weakness is on the crucial question of counterterrorism, where he’s a graduate of the Noam Chomsky school of foreign policy. Jonah Goldberg wrote a fine little article exposing some of the fatal flaws in his outlook:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDVlM2M0ODVhNzIxNzk5ODRhNjY4YWE0MDY4ZmJjMGU=

Another problem is that, for all his limited gov’t rhetoric, the only branch he wants to limit is the executive. He’s a big fan of judicial oversight. But who oversees the judiciary? A runaway court system has done more damage to our country than any other institution.

5. Tom Tancredo

I like Tancredo on immigration. Unfortunately, he comes across as a one-trick pony.

6.Fred Thompson

He’s touted as the conservative alternative to the three frontrunners or top tier candidates.

But his philosophy on social issues seems to be very sketchy. So I haven’t formed a considered opinion of Thompson.

As a towering character actor, he commands an imposing stage presence, but at the moment he appears to be playing the role of Hamlet. Will he or won’t he?

7. Mike Huckabee

Huckabee is one of the two candidates I could easily vote for. A solid social conservative and a fine public speaker.

8. Newt Gingrich

Gingrich is the other candidate I could easily vote for. He’s morally flawed, as we all know. But he’s a solid conservative ideologue with a long paper trail and track-record.

He says what he means and means what he says. He’s extreme bright and highly articulate. He knows gov’t inside and out. Given a choice, I’m less concerned with what he is than what he does.

One can also get into a legitimate debate over the lesser of two evils. Wouldn’t Hillary or Obama, or Edwards or Gore be worse than any of the three frontrunners?

My immediate point is not to answer that question, but to clarify the respective evils. We already know what is wrong with the donkeys. But there has been a concerted effort on the part of the three GOP frontrunners and their supporters to whitewash their records and make them out to be more center-right (or even far right) than they really are. Let's not mistake a RINO with an elephant.

9. Duncan Hunter

I like his stated views and military experience. He also has two sons in the military. But the question is whether he can break out of the pack.