I like to hear Ron Paul talk. He has some really odd ideas as well as some that we should think about — and I love his Texas drawl. To me, however, the deal breaker, the reason that I could never vote for him for president is because of a law that he proposed a few years ago in the House of Representatives. Here it is:
The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court– (1) shall not adjudicate– (A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion; (B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or (C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and (2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).
This would allow the states to establish official religions.
It would reverse Griswold v. Connecticut. There was a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives. The Supreme Court said that you had a right to decide what goes on in your bedroom without the government interfering. Surely we can all agree with that.
This law would reverse Roe v. Wade (right to an abortion). We know all about that law.
It would reverse Lawrence v. Texas. The Supreme Court ruling invalidated sodomy laws passed in Texas and thirteen other states. Once more, this was a privacy issue — what you do in your bedroom is your business.
This man claims to be a libertarian yet he proposed the above law. Makes no sense!
There are other things that really would stop me: he has made it clear that he does not believe in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. I have personal experiences (and I’ll bet a lot of us do) of loved ones living in dignity because of these very successful federal programs. It would take a heartless person to want to eliminate them.
Rick Perry: I think that I can be pretty safe in my prediction that Rick Perry will NOT be the next president of the United States. However, that certainly doesn’t mean that he is not good at something. After observing him, I truly believe that of all the men in the race he is the most perfect of gentlemen. Why do I say that? Well, surely you have noticed that every time he is finished speaking he makes Michelle Bachman look like a real genius. Good going, Rick! Everyone needs to be good at something.
Michele Bachmann: It is frightening to realize that there are people in the United States who actually take her seriously and think that she would make a good president. I am amused at the comment that she made in August where she said, “I don’t know how much God has to do to get the attention of the politicians. We’ve had an earthquake, we’ve had a hurricane. He said, “Are you going to start listening to me here?….” So this zealot thinks that her version of god caused all that damage and loss of lives to get a couple of politicians to listen. This lady is absolutely nuts. Any time you want to know what sheer blasphemy is, just listen to some of Michele’s pontifications.
Michelle Bachman stated in Des Moines that, “I will be the first president of the United States who has willingly participated with the Lord our God Almighty in bringing forth human life.” I wonder if her husband knows about this.
Michele Bachmann: Giver of Life. Fire breathing fertility goddess. Putting all those woman parts to good use 24/7. Were they virgin births? Since she participated in all this with “the Lord Almighty” I would have to believe that they were. This is something to consider when Iowans go to vote. I guess that she is admitting to having SEX OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE. I am gobsmacked!
Newt Gingrich: This man is, or should be, an embarrassment to the Republicans as well as the American political process in general. His immoral, unethical, and just plain slimy activities that he has been accused as well as convicted of are well documented. George Will, a respected Conservative Republican writer had this to say about his fellow Republican: “Gingrich’s is an amazingly efficient candidacy in that it embodies everything that is disagreeable about modern Washington. He’s the classic rental politician.” Enough said.
Rick Santorum: It appears to me that he is mostly associated with the morality, family values faction. This should work well in Iowa. Looking at his web-site. He does address the economic issues but there is really nothing new or creative. Cut taxes, smaller government, etc. It appears that he took his ideas out of the Herbert Hoover 1932 playbook. Additionally, as with most of the Republican candidates, he is in favor of further eroding the separation of church and state.
In Des Moines, Rick has taken credit for every single anti-abortion bill every passed in the Senate. He has aged well. The Hyde Amendment denying federal funds to low income women for abortions was passed in 1976 − approximately 36 years ago.
Importance of Iowa: In the big picture, Iowa doesn’t really count for much. I am sure that there are plenty of nice people in Iowa but I think a lot of their issues don’t really resonate with most of the United States, and Iowa really doesn’t have any history of picking the next president. Naturally, it will be a psychological boost for the winner, but, it doesn’t really matter who wins. It doesn’t matter who loses. It will decide nothing. I can’t help but think that all of those people who are running around campaigning in Iowa are wasting their time — and by the way, it is really cold out there! Immediately after the Iowa voting, everyone has to concentrate on New Hampshire – which happens next week. This is a hell of a way to run an election.
So, here is my prediction: Drum rolls, please! When you ask the winner if Iowa counted, he (or she) will be effusive in their praise for the Iowa voters and use superlatives yet to be invented to describe how much Iowa counted. If you ask the loser, she (or he) will say, “Mmmm, not so much”. But I guess you’ve heard all that before. So, who will win? Well, as I just said, it doesn’t matter.
My thoughts are that, within the group of current candidates, there are two who are qualified to be president: John Huntsman (left, below) and Mitt Romney (right, below). As far as I know, they have not said anything that would open them up to attacks by middle-of-the-road types. Either should be able to run a tough campaign against President Obama. They both have plenty of government experience and do not seem to be particularly ideological. The others scare me. If you are frightened at the way the wall between church and state has been falling, they should scare you, too.