Saturday, December 31, 2011

Don't forget the "End Game"

Since this is my last Blog of 2011 - "Happy New Year" everyone.

Next week will start the Republican primary season and the gloves are already off with the candidates taking shots at each other. I guess this is expected, but as they attack each other I hope none of them will forget the "end game" - defeat Barack Obama.

The beauty of "Blogging" is you can give your opinion, whether anyone agrees with it or not. Like many of my generation we have been waiting for another Ronald Reagan to come along, but sadly that will not happen in this election cycle. So here are my thoughts about this field of Republican candidates in order of their recent polling:

Mitt Romney ("the Suit") -   Romney at this point looks like the front runner. He has impressive business experience; I do remember when he turned around the Utah Olympics; he has the executive experience of being a Governor; and he seems "Presidential". But Mitt, show us some "fire in the belly"! And what about your "Obama-Lite" insurance program in Massachusetts? He seems to be a competent manager, but I hate the term "moderate", and will someone mess up this guy's hair just once!

Ron Paul ("the crazy uncle") - OK I'm going to catch hell from my youngest son for this comment. But does anyone believe Ron Paul could win this primary, and if he did, beat the Obama machine?
I agree with many of Paul's policies - audit the fed, cut the budget $1 trillion next year no matter how painful it may be, quit giving foreign aid to people that don't like us, quit spending money protecting countries like Germany, Japan, South Korea, and dozens of others that can afford to do it on their own. But his comments about leaving Israel to fend for themselves; or let Iran develop a nuclear bomb; or 911 could have been an "inside job" by the Israeli Mossad makes me wonder if this guy has thought out his foreign policy issues.   Here's my suggestion: Keep Ron Paul on the back burner until after the election and then if the Republicans win, make him Secretary of the Treasury and let him do his thing to get our finances back from the edge of the cliff.

Newt Gingrich ("the bomb thrower") -   I'm not sure about Newt. I do remember when he pulled off one of the great feats in political history leading the takeover of the House in the mid 90's after 40+ years of Democratic rule. But then the power went to his head. He was thrown out due to ethics violations and alienated many of his fellow Representatives along the way.  His personal life has been a bit of a train wreck but he now claims to be "older and wiser", so I guess he deserves the benefit of the doubt. But on this subject I have one nagging question: Cheating on one wife; OK everyone deserves to be forgiven for one serious indiscretion, but twice?
Newt is attractive because he is a "fighter" and would not take it from the liberal press, and could destroy Obama in debates, especially when Obama doesn't have a teleprompter to tell him what to say. But the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac $1.6 million consulting fees, his flip flops on Global Warming, mandated health insurance, and the fact that he is just such a "slick" life-long politician makes me nervous.

Rick Santorum ("the Evangelist") - Don't get me wrong, I am a Christian myself, and I like former Senator Santorum. I agree with him that "restoring the family" in this country is paramount to getting our social climate back on the right track.  A classic example is the black community with 70% of children being born out of wedlock (and in many cases without a father in the household). Without some basic cultural changes, they haven't got a chance to improve their situation in our society.
Santorum is a solid "pro life/pro family" candidate and should have much of the evangelical constituency locked up. But this is not an election about social policies.  This country is in such serious financial and economic trouble that social principals just can't be a determining factor.

Rick Perry ("the Texan") - I was a Rick Perry fan at the beginning, but he blew it in many of the debates.  Not because he wasn't a good debater, he just doesn't seem to be ready to run this country and whether anyone agrees with me or not - giving "illegal" immigrants preferential treatment over out-of-state US citizens for college tuition is something I can never agree with. Governor Perry comes across as a likable politician but just doesn't make it to my short list.

Michelle Bachman ("Sarah wannabe?") - OK that's not fair.  She is a bright, impressive woman and will be a future star in the Republican Party, she is just not there yet. She is a former attorney and strict constitutionalist - how about Attorney General in the next Republican administration?

John Huntsman ( "Slick") - He claims to be holding back for the New Hampshire primary and recently said: " Iowa picks corn, New Hampshire picks Presidents"...we'll see John.

Gary Johnson (the "Libertarian") - Former Governor of New Mexico who has just announced that he will run as a Libertarian candidate. If you listen to this guy he makes a lot of sense and it has been surprising that he never rose above being an "obscure Republican", even to the point of not participating (or being invited) to the debates. But if you are a "Libertarian" (and I have those leanings) this guy is rock solid, even more so than Ron Paul in my opinion. Hopefully the Libertarian candidate will not draw enough Republican votes to give Obama a victory.


So there it is; I am as undecided as anyone at this point, but whoever becomes the Republican candidate we all need to remember the "end game" - we cannot endure four more years of Barack Obama, or this country will never be the same. If something is not done about our massive debt and ridiculous social entitlement policies, the USA as we know it may reach the "point of no return".