As the Iowa Caucus approaches in a little more than a day the most widely asked question regarding the 2008 Republican presidential race is whether or not the conservative movement remains. It seems that the surfacing candidates have lost touch with the GOP's grassroots. How else can it be explained that according to mainstream media polls Rudy Giuliani, essentially a social liberal, is the front-runner and possible heir to the party that Reagan led?
Economically, Rudy Giuliani is essentially a fiscal conservative, a committed tax cutter, and strong on national security in the sense of the war on the Islamic Jihad. However, Rudy is far from being what I would call a "social conservative." Though he has made it clear he is not fond of abortion, he supports the pro-choice side of the issue. He eliminated a lot of crime in New York as the city's mayor, but is also a gun control supporter.
Is there a conservative choice remaining?
Duncan Hunter and Tancredo have been nothing more than bookends throughout the entire race, and though they are obviously the most conservative of all the candidates, they have no chance, and are dropping out of the race. Tancredo later directed his endorsement in the direction of Mitt Romney.
John McCain, though a war hero with a good attitude toward the war, has moderate positions on issues that conservatives find to be important, such as his pro-amnesty position when it comes to illegal aliens.
One of my biggest complaints about Bush, aside from his blatant globalism, is that Bush is a big spender. I have never understood why whenever there is a problem, Liberals and some Republicans resort to throwing money at the problem - money, I am compelled to remind you, that does not belong to them, but was entrusted to them by the American taxpayer. Mitt Romney is touch on spending, perhaps even rivaling Ronald Reagan, and has pledged that he will chop away at big government with the consistent use of the veto pen. His tax-cut agenda is the tops of the entire Republican field, and it promises to take the tax-cut agenda to the next level. But I wonder if Romney can be trusted. After all, he has changed his opinion on a large number of issues. If he is being honest, he may be the right choice for the GOP, but for some reason, I don't believe him when he says, "I was wrong, now I believe. . . "
Huckabee is the most socially conservative, but it turns out he's a big spender, has too big of a hangup regarding illegals, and thinks that we "broke Iraq." Mike, Iraq was already broken before we got there.
Fred Thompson is that "conservative blogger" favorite that used to be a Tennessee senator. However, his voting record makes me think he may lean toward the socialized medicine idea, and backing the pro-incumbent campaign finance law which was despised by the conservatives wasn't a good move in my eyes either.
I don't even think I need to go into the freakiness that is Ron Paul.
As I see it, if he is being honest, Mitt Romney is the best bet for a Red November in 2008. However, if Mitt is the slimy, lying piece of lard I think he is, then Fred Thompson, even with his lackadaisical attitude, is the best choice.
Iowa is the first stop. Perhaps something will surface to change my mind on Thursday.
One thing is for sure, however. The true conservative continues to elude the Republican Party.
No comments:
Post a Comment