Kowabunga

Now that 2008 is finally here and we are officially into the election cycle, it's time I get off the bench and be serious about who I like and don't like for President.

As can be easily guessed, there isn't anyone on the Democrat side that I would support. Not because they are Democrats but because of where they stand on the issues: Surrender in Iraq; amnesty and citizenship for illegal aliens; tax increases and bigger government; socialized health care (crikey, that one I really don't understand how people who say they don't trust the government are willing to put it in charge of their medical decisions!); unwillingness to reform and privatize Social Security; gun control; abortion; and the list can go on and on and on.

So that leaves the GOP, and who have we got there?

McCain, who was part of the gang of 14 that, with the Democrats, helped to subvert the judicial nomination process and pushed to silence free speech during the election cycle. Those are probably the two biggest strikes against him. At least he won't surrender Iraq to Iranian supported terrorist groups. He is also solid on national defense. so, all though he has some negatives, he also has some positives.

Huckabee, who pushed hard to get a convicted rapist released on parole, then that felon proceeded to brutally murder a woman in Missouri. This is compounded by his record of numerous tax hikes and increased government spending in Arkansas. On other issues, it is a mixed bag of tricks.

Romney has been on my top three short list of candidates. He's a bit mixed on the economy, taxes and spending, but coming from the extremely liberal Massachusetts, its an improvement.

Giuliani supports sanctuary cities, as noted by his time as Mayor of New York City and his decisions to keep "sanctuary laws" in place there. He was also a strong supporter of the McCain-Feingold silence free speech act. He may have a good understanding of tax cuts (record reflects this), but should that outweigh free speech concerns?

Duncan Hunter is also on my short list. He's strong on National Defense, supports the liberation of Iraq, and securing our borders. Seems to be a bit mixed on taxation and spending. Hunter also gained the support of Chuck Yeager, which speaks volumes for his credibility as a candidate. As much as I like him, though, I think he would be better positioned to carry the bottom half of the ticket and would make one heckuva great V.P. Which is more than I can say about a lot of other folks. With California being so far left, he may have a bit of a struggle to carry his home state, but given the right combination, it could be done.

Ron Paul? Okay, what can I say? He's the "Dennis Kucinich" of the Republican Party. Although he is strong on taxation and Federal spending (meaning: big on cutting taxes and reducing spending), he is way off base when it comes to Iraq. In fact, he sounds like Barack Obama and Dennis Kucinich rolled into one when it comes to Iraq. He is also anti-free trade, which is problematic.

Fred Thompson, the third person on my short list. Solid record on taxation and spending with the exception of "earmarks" (also known as pork barrel spending). Solid supportor of Iraq as an ally rather than letting it succumb to Islamic Extremists (the typical democrat position).

The next few weeks will be interesting indeed as we should start to see some of the second tier candidates drop from the race (goodbye Ron Paul!) and begin to see how the campaign shapes up going forward.

Hopefully we'll see either Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney at the top of the ticket with Duncan Hunter carrying the bottom half.

For an interesting perspective on candidate records, go to the Club for Growth website. They have reports on most of the candidates there.

Tags:

Presidential Election Republican Democrat Romney Hunter Thompson Ron Paul