Once upon a time, voting was simpler. Through the late '40's and early '60's, the choices for president seemed easier.
President Truman was a logical choice for his time, direct, honest and unafraid. Eisenhower, a national hero, liked and respected, a calm and astute leader. Kennedy, a breath of fresh air, representative of a new generation, ready to lead.
Consider the situation today. Our current president seeks fundamental changes as to how we are governed. His policies both implemented and contemplated are in sharp contradiction to constitutional principles and history. We need to change direction---we are at a critical crossroad. For those of us who oppose Obama, it is critically important to nominate a candidate that will soundly defeat him.
There is no question as to the complexity of the problems we face. The nominating process, however, does not provide much clarity. We now have a climate of charge and counter charge, a biased media in pursuit of trivia 24/7, sensationalist and irresponsible and secretive super pacs financing misleading ads. Add to this, the public's low opinion of politicians. It is no wonder that voters may be skeptical and conflicted!
We select candidates on factors such as their policy positions, credibility, leadership and character. But we need to be realistic and discerning in our judgement. Remember when a candidate is criticized for "flip-flopping" that Ronald Reagan, a man of principle, changed his views from that of a registered Democrat to a conservative Republican. As to personal behavior, if a person sincerely states that he is at peace with God, who are we to question?
For me, a candidate's outlook and character are key. Is he a person of integrity, says what he honestly believes, stands by his principles and is clear on where he wants to lead the country? Does he look to the future, optimistic and confident but also pragmatic? We have in the end only our own common sense, principles and judgement to choose a candidate seeking to be our president.
President Truman was a logical choice for his time, direct, honest and unafraid. Eisenhower, a national hero, liked and respected, a calm and astute leader. Kennedy, a breath of fresh air, representative of a new generation, ready to lead.
Consider the situation today. Our current president seeks fundamental changes as to how we are governed. His policies both implemented and contemplated are in sharp contradiction to constitutional principles and history. We need to change direction---we are at a critical crossroad. For those of us who oppose Obama, it is critically important to nominate a candidate that will soundly defeat him.
There is no question as to the complexity of the problems we face. The nominating process, however, does not provide much clarity. We now have a climate of charge and counter charge, a biased media in pursuit of trivia 24/7, sensationalist and irresponsible and secretive super pacs financing misleading ads. Add to this, the public's low opinion of politicians. It is no wonder that voters may be skeptical and conflicted!
We select candidates on factors such as their policy positions, credibility, leadership and character. But we need to be realistic and discerning in our judgement. Remember when a candidate is criticized for "flip-flopping" that Ronald Reagan, a man of principle, changed his views from that of a registered Democrat to a conservative Republican. As to personal behavior, if a person sincerely states that he is at peace with God, who are we to question?
For me, a candidate's outlook and character are key. Is he a person of integrity, says what he honestly believes, stands by his principles and is clear on where he wants to lead the country? Does he look to the future, optimistic and confident but also pragmatic? We have in the end only our own common sense, principles and judgement to choose a candidate seeking to be our president.
I'd just note two things here:
ReplyDelete1) JFK is not a great example of a "breath of fresh air" unless by "fresh air" you mean having a father rich and powerful enough to buy Illinois through the use of ballot-box stuffing at the hands of the corrupt Daly machine. Why Nixon didn't fight this in the courts we'll never know.
2) Ronald Reagan had a great response for leaving the Democrats when he said "I didn't leave the Democratic Party. It left me."
But, based on your description, Rick Santorum is the man that best fits it. He has consistently laid out a conservative vision for the country that is founded on the principles you'd actually find in the U.S. Constitution. He is also pleading the media to leave Romney's wealth and Newt's history as Speaker out of the campaign as if to say "WE KNOW! MOVE ON!" I also find his personal story inspiring if somewhat sad.
It's just too bad Mr. Santorum is trailing so far behind.
Anonymous is correct in saying JFK had a "rich and powerful" father and that ballot stuffing almost certainly occurred in Chicago. But that doesn't negate the fact that he was very popular with the general public; his assassination was deeply felt by most people at the time.
DeleteRonald Reagan's response was a clever retort to disarm his critics. There is a grain of truth in that the Democratic Party did become more liberal after the 1960's. However, the fact of the matter is the Party's positions on many issues did not square with conservative philosophy even before the Reagan switch. I would not fault Reagan for a change in positions--most of us do at some point especially as we get older and a little bit wiser.
I agree that Rick Santorum would make a fitting conservative candidate. But he is far behind, probably hasn't enough money and hasn't captured the public's imagination. Realistically, the race is down to Romney/Gingrich.
Grandma got run over by a Romney
ReplyDeleteWalking home from Naples on election eve
You can say there’s no such thing as RINOs
But as for me and Grandpa, we believe
She’d been drinking too much koolaid
And we begged her not to read what Ann Coulter wrote
But she’d left behind her medication
And she stumbled out the door to go and vote
When they found her that November morning
At the scene of the attack
She found out RINOs don’t win elections
And we’ve got another term of Barack
LOL on this one-- clever and entertaining.
Delete