Mmmm...nationwide smoking bans and government-ordained fitness programs... In a lot of ways I like him, but his tendency seems to be 'let the government handle it.' That's not my tendency.
I will have to wait for Steve Maxon to run to find a candidate that I agree with fully, but for now I believe can get behind Huckabee. The only candidates relatively untainted by the belief in Government to fix problems which are best left to the individual or private sector are Tancredo and Ron Paul, both of whom I have weighed and found wanting. Huckabee is no big government leftist or anything. I think he is as true a conservative (fiscal and social) as others in the race.
I do still back Romney, who I believe is the only pro-life candidate with a legitimate chance to win the nomination, other than John "Campaign Finance Reform and Immigration Amnesty" McCain.
Huckabee is just too populist for my tastes. He's like Edwards in that way, he wants to do a bunch of stuff that I don't want a president to touch. Fitness and health care. "Fair" trade that requires other nations to raise their environmental standards. And he did raise taxes a few times.
One writer said that "he seems to combine some of Pat Buchanan's bad ideas with some of George W. Bush's. He's the protectionist compassionate conservative." I wouldn't go that far -- he's still my third choice right now -- but I have enough doubt to hold back.
I definately don't like all of his talk about American self-sufficiency. It smacks too much of isolationism, and I don't feel that interdependence between the nations of the world is a bad thing at all. I also agree with you that he has an imperfect view of the role of the presidency in relationship to the private citizen and foregin trade, but in the primary I think I should vote for that candidate that best represents me. My favorite candidate to listen to in the debates and such is Tancredo. It seems to me that he has a clear and well thought out philosophy of governance. I think he rightly understands what the role of the executive branch in our nation should be, but he is just such a nut and I do disagree with him on some matters of substance. He is just way too border-obsessed, bordering on xenophobic. I can think of a few other areas as well where I am at odds with him. I wish that Huckabee was a more pure conservative, but for that matter Romney is unapologetic about an undeniably liberal health care program that he was largely responsible for creating in Massachussetts. I will support the Republican nominee unless it is giulliani, but in the primary Huckabee looks most like me and he has my vote.
I just received my voter registration card in the mail today. For the first time ever I am a registered Republican. Also for the first time ever, I will cast a vote for president and feel 100% good about it when I vote for Ron Paul.
Steve, you haven't joined the Ron Paul revolution?
I think I could vote for him if he got the nomination, but he and I disagree on a host of issues, and, as my dear friend Chad knows, he is pretty low on my list as well.
I am sick even nauseous from all the talk of Reagan. I liked Reagan too, but enough already. I can't put my finger on why it bothers me, but I think it's unhealthy and only serves to underscore how inadequate this batch of candidates is. It's like when contestants on American Idol sing a Whitney Houston song. It only serves to show what an amateur hack they are. I knew Reagan. Reagan was a friend of mine and you sir are no Ronald Reagan. If your ugly standing next to the hot chick will not make you more attractive. Get an identity of your own. Grow a pair... and shut up about Reagan.
I think several of Ron Paul's ideas, perhaps like the man himself, are genuinely unhinged from reality. Because of his views on US foreign policy and the Patriot Act, to name only a few issues, a Paul presidency would actually endanger this nation a good deal more than a Clinton presidency.
I don't have a very high opinion of libertarianism in general. I plan to write about it next week. Would have done it today, but I had to hit the Westboro story.
13 comments:
Mmmm...nationwide smoking bans and government-ordained fitness programs... In a lot of ways I like him, but his tendency seems to be 'let the government handle it.' That's not my tendency.
I agree with you Josh - I think it's Huckabee or checkmate.
I will have to wait for Steve Maxon to run to find a candidate that I agree with fully, but for now I believe can get behind Huckabee. The only candidates relatively untainted by the belief in Government to fix problems which are best left to the individual or private sector are Tancredo and Ron Paul, both of whom I have weighed and found wanting. Huckabee is no big government leftist or anything. I think he is as true a conservative (fiscal and social) as others in the race.
Steve- who are you backing these days? Still Romney?
I do still back Romney, who I believe is the only pro-life candidate with a legitimate chance to win the nomination, other than John "Campaign Finance Reform and Immigration Amnesty" McCain.
Huckabee is just too populist for my tastes. He's like Edwards in that way, he wants to do a bunch of stuff that I don't want a president to touch. Fitness and health care. "Fair" trade that requires other nations to raise their environmental standards. And he did raise taxes a few times.
One writer said that "he seems to combine some of Pat Buchanan's bad ideas with some of George W. Bush's. He's the protectionist compassionate conservative." I wouldn't go that far -- he's still my third choice right now -- but I have enough doubt to hold back.
I definately don't like all of his talk about American self-sufficiency. It smacks too much of isolationism, and I don't feel that interdependence between the nations of the world is a bad thing at all. I also agree with you that he has an imperfect view of the role of the presidency in relationship to the private citizen and foregin trade, but in the primary I think I should vote for that candidate that best represents me. My favorite candidate to listen to in the debates and such is Tancredo. It seems to me that he has a clear and well thought out philosophy of governance. I think he rightly understands what the role of the executive branch in our nation should be, but he is just such a nut and I do disagree with him on some matters of substance. He is just way too border-obsessed, bordering on xenophobic. I can think of a few other areas as well where I am at odds with him. I wish that Huckabee was a more pure conservative, but for that matter Romney is unapologetic about an undeniably liberal health care program that he was largely responsible for creating in Massachussetts. I will support the Republican nominee unless it is giulliani, but in the primary Huckabee looks most like me and he has my vote.
I just received my voter registration card in the mail today. For the first time ever I am a registered Republican. Also for the first time ever, I will cast a vote for president and feel 100% good about it when I vote for Ron Paul.
I will never, and would never, vote for Ron Paul.
Steve, you haven't joined the Ron Paul revolution?
I think I could vote for him if he got the nomination, but he and I disagree on a host of issues, and, as my dear friend Chad knows, he is pretty low on my list as well.
I am sick even nauseous from all the talk of Reagan. I liked Reagan too, but enough already. I can't put my finger on why it bothers me, but I think it's unhealthy and only serves to underscore how inadequate this batch of candidates is. It's like when contestants on American Idol sing a Whitney Houston song. It only serves to show what an amateur hack they are. I knew Reagan. Reagan was a friend of mine and you sir are no Ronald Reagan. If your ugly standing next to the hot chick will not make you more attractive. Get an identity of your own. Grow a pair... and shut up about Reagan.
Anybody with me?
wow. trickle THAT!
Wow, I agree on Reagan, Josh. Nicely put!
I think several of Ron Paul's ideas, perhaps like the man himself, are genuinely unhinged from reality. Because of his views on US foreign policy and the Patriot Act, to name only a few issues, a Paul presidency would actually endanger this nation a good deal more than a Clinton presidency.
I don't have a very high opinion of libertarianism in general. I plan to write about it next week. Would have done it today, but I had to hit the Westboro story.
Looking forward to it.
Post a Comment