Time for Mitt To Go

Mitt Romney has had his chance. He’s been fighting an uphill battle with tons of cash, outspending his rivals 5-1, 12-1, and other similar ratios, but he hasn’t been able to seal the deal. Mike Huckabee won Iowa spending a tiny fraction of the money Romney poured into the state.

He dumped buckets of money into New Hampshire and Florida, making massive ad buys, achieving similar results. Romney has the highest negatives of the GOP candidates. He has a low ceiling and it appears that he keeps bumping into it. This will become more apparent on Super Tuesday. The only thing keeping him afloat is his money advantage and his huge ego.

But with three candidates left (Huckabee, McCain and Romney), Mitt staying in the race has allowed McCain to rise to the top. Mitt is siphoning off some of Huckabee’s evangelical support, for complicated reasons, and is helping to ensure a McCain nomination that is quite likely to tear party unity in the GOP to shreds. Is it really worth all that?

Brett Passmore over at Race 4 2008 says no, and suggests that Mitt should drop out or at least his supporters should give Huckabee some serious consideration for the good of the Republican party. And he’s absolutely right.

Romney supporters need to get behind Mike now – Mike has the speaking abilities, the friendly demeanor, and the charm to obliterate the democratic nominee. Romney’s negatives are skyhigh and he will get killed in the general – Mike has the ability to connect with the common man. Mitt just turns him off.

Earlier, Brett also posted some interesting analysis of reaction to last night’s debate. It clearly demonstrates the problem that Romney faces. People just don’t trust the guy.

Romney, while seen as professional, failed the personality test. “Arrogant,” “phony,” “Stepford wife-ish” and “a snake” were their choice words for the former Massachusetts governor. (Although they all agreed on his good looks.)

Compare that to what was said about Mike Huckabee:

“Being a woman, [I think] Huckabee overall best understands what women Republicans or voters want, need and expect,” said Christine, a 32-year-old moderate Republican.

“He seemed more classy and more real,” agreed Pam, a 44-year-old undecided voter.

After viewing the debate, four of the women – almost half the group – said they had changed their vote from McCain to Huckabee.

But Mitt Romney and his huge campaign warchest stands in the way. By staying in and taking votes away from the likeable social conservative who connects with everyday people, Mitt is helping to ensure that John McCain runs away with the nomination. Isn’t that just a tad selfish?

Also consider for a moment a debate between the Democrat and Republican nominees.

Hillary Clinton vs…

• Romney: it might be a wash — they’re both detested by folks in both parties.
• McCain: similar results. They’re both cold Senators.
• Huckabee: Huck wins, clearly. He’s a better debater. Charm over smarm.

Barack Obama vs…

• McCain: McCain ends up on the mat, TKO.
• Romney: Mittens comes off more wooden and robotic, more machine than man, against the charismatic and animated Obama, the agent of “change.”
• Huckabee: Fireworks! It’s hard to predict who wins, but Huck has the best shot.

Mittbots must consider the following: if given the choice between only one of the following: John McCain, Mike Huckabee or the Democrat nominee, which do you choose?

If you choose McCain or the Democrat, you’re going to get 4-8 years of Clinton or Obama, a liberal Supreme Court, a ruined economy, and a surrender to the terrorists. The GOP will be in ruins.

If you refuse to choose and lose only because it’s Mitt (who can win neither the nomination nor the general election) or scorched earth, same result. Or it could be worse: President McCain and a centrist Republican Party.

It’s time to get behind Mike Huckabee, unless you want to stay on that sinking ship. Suicide or a genuine shot at victory with a real conservative, Mike Huckabee? It’s up to you. Make the right choice, Mittheads. I’m not so sure that Willard is principled enough to make it for you. So do the right thing, for party and country.

Thanks to Sam Brown for letting me contribute this guest post.

— Psycheout

Mike Huckabee On Abortion

Mike Huckabee states the following on Sep 5, 2007 at a Fox News Presidential debate:

I would love to see us have in this country what I helped lead in our state in Arkansas, and that’s a human life amendment to our state constitution, Amendment 65, that says that we believe life begins at conception, and that we ought to do everything in the world possible to protect it until its natural conclusion. And that means that we truly value and respect, elevate and celebrate every life.

Basically what he’s saying here, is that, not only should life be protected at conception, but that life be cherished even until the day we will ultimately die; and you see, friends, this is where so many across our seas have a misunderstanding of the sanctity of human life. Countless numbers of people in the Middle Eastern countries have taken their own lives, they call them ‘Suicide bombers.’ This is part of what we face in terms of the different Ideologies that exist in the battle for our very own lives and the lives of those whom are dear to us (family, friends and Loved ones).

It’s not just a choice. Yes, we were given a choice in the beginning, but not the kind of choice where we can just go out, and do as we think and please, carelessly and recklessly exploiting other innocent human beings. Which leads me to Mike’s next statement…

Dr. Joycelyn Elders told Christians they needed to “get over their love affair with the fetus”–a phrase that was often repeated after she became Clinton’s surgeon general. The comment particularly offended Christian believers. Clinton asked me how much of a problem it was causing. I told him it was a serious problem. She had deeply offended many people. It was a slap in the face to those who held pro-life convictions. “I wish you would explain to her how people in the evangelical world feel. Would you be willing to talk to her,” asked Clinton.

I said I would be happy to. Clinton set up a meeting. After talking, I recognized she was absolutely sincere in her beliefs. I realized that the reason her positions on these issues so conflicted with mine was that our worldviews were fundamentally at odds. Reaching a consensus was impossible. She had her own idea of what a “dash” of salt was–in this case, a “dash” of human life–and recognized no standard that could show her she was wrong.

As Mike points out, Joycelyn Elders is of the opinion that life to [her] is worthless, and that it is impossible to reason with the likes of her. Those of the Liberal Ideology like Joycelyn Elders, want take control of innocent life for their own sick purposes, for capital gain, to continue funding their Ideologically corrupt administrations, much like the Clinton’s have ran on for the past 12 years, and My, what corrupt and dangerous individuals the Clintons are.

We’re at WAR, folks, a war against the Ideologically insane! The insanity on the left doesn’t just stop at the unborn, if you can remember, back in ’93 when Hillary tried to organize a secret healthcare plan, some of the procedures in that plan sparked litigation in the U.S. Supreme Court due to some of the illegal procedures that were being planned behind closed doors.

What we don’t know about, I think we could say with confidence that had to do with assisted suicide of the elderly. Why? They don’t care, life to them is whatever “they” want it to be; and for the hard working American families, they want to drive them to their graves by taxing them to death, while trying to work and make a living for their families. They’re Communists, folks.

In closing…

There is a solution to this, and Mike makes a good point as to how we can end this barbarism…

Some wonder how a person so pro-life as me could accept the law of a death penalty. But a death sentence is a result of a lengthy and thorough judicial process applied to a person deemed guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s far different from one person singularly deciding to end the life of a totally innocent and helpless unborn child. In that case, there is no process of justice, no evidence of guilt presented, no defense for the condemned child, and no appeal.

There is no means or reason, in which one can justify the destruction of an innocent life, none whatsoever.

God gave us life, for the purpose that we may give it.

Genesis 1:28 Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. We live because Christ lives. Our physical life should likewise be a reflection of our Spiritual.

You know, the very ones who are proponents of Abortion are living people, God chose to give them life, yet, they want to take it away from others. Think about that for just a second, if those folks, who are advocating for Abortion right now, had the same thing done to them, they wouldn’t have a choice right now, would they?

Again, God gave us a choice, and that choice is to Love and serve Him. He wants us to come to Him, you see, our life isn’t like the animals who serve God out of their will. We were given part of God’s Wisdom, we are part of God, made in His image; with a will to comprehend the Divine nature of our existence.

Take for instance, Abraham, highly favored by God for his Faith, who by Faith, was going to sacrifice his son Isaac, and so, Abraham took Isaac up on the mountain, as God commanded him to, and Isaac said, “where is the sacrifice, Father.” Abraham said, ‘The Lord is going to provide one, the Lord will provide.’

And they went to the top of the mountain, they carried wood to the alter, and Abraham put Isaac on the alter, took his knife out of his pocket and as he raised it up, he heard a voice, “Abraham! Abraham! Don’t lay a hand on the boy. Now I know that you fear God.” Abraham looked up, and there caught in the bushes was a ram caught by its horns. He went over, took the ram, and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. And in that place, on that mountain, it was called the ‘Lord will Provide.’

Jehovah Jireh – The Provider – Our Provider!

Whatever we need, whatever problem that may arise, God will be there to help us, if only we will have faith, and put our trust in Him.

Choose life!

God bless!:)

~ Jeremiah
Conservatives United!

Limbaugh or Burke?

“There is but one law for all, namely that law which governs all law, the law of our Creator, the law of humanity, justice, equity – the law of nature and of nations.”

-Edmund Burke

Much has been made on this board of what a “true conservative” is, and is not. Generally, people will either compare a particular person to a laundry list of positions deemed conservative by prevailing sentiment, or worse, will simply defer to what self-appointed sentinels of conservatism profess. Recently, I have suggested in several threads that conservatives would be well served if they spent less time listening to Rush, and more time reading Burke. I would like to briefly make the case why.

Conservatism in modern America has become uprooted. Too often it has become a series of policy proscriptions; big military, lower taxes, less government spending, assertive and unilateral foreign policy, etc…. Sometimes these policies can be good and proper manifestations of conservative principle, but they are not- as is often mistaken- the essence of those conservative principles themselves. The essence of conservatism is not found in a random litany of policies that necessarily vary in time and place. It is not dictated by terms such as “increase, decrease, cut, raise, limit, grow.”

The essence of conservatism is found in the acknowledgment and preservation of transcendent truths. Policies are the seasonal leaves, which come and go as the manifestation of the life of the tree. But they should not be mistaken for the life of the tree itself. Conservatism is a philosophy, even a sensibility. I would offer the following as some of the enduring principles of conservatism:

– Conservatism recognizes a hierarchy of value. Not all goods are equal, and some must be subordinate to others.
– Conservatism has the human condition as it’s ultimate concern, and not the mechanics of political process or economic theory.
– It recognizes that markets exist to serve people, and not people to serve markets.
– It seeks stability and continuity in economic as well as social policy, as these are the prerequisites for passing on traditions and heritage.
– At root, it recognizes that man is created in the image and likeness of God. As such, it is anti-utilitarian. People are not fodder, either for the government, or the economy.
– It is anti-Utopian. Its principles can be manifest in republics or monarchies, under capitalism or manorialism. It can exist in a variety of economic or political systems because……..

True conservatism, in the Western tradition, is rooted in Christianity. Let me say that again. Our culture, traditions, sentiments, and mores in the Western world are rooted in the culture, traditions, sentiments, and mores of Christianity. As such, it is impossible to understand conservatism without a healthy appreciation of how Christian tradition informs our culture. One of the most significant (and radical) among these truths is the inherent dignity of man.

Conservatives believe in teaching a man to fish, so that he may be as self-sufficient as possible, but will, in times of dire need, help unconditionally. Too often, the self-professed guardians of conservatism espouse a law-of-the-jungle mentality that is rooted not in Christianity, but in Social Darwinism, which is completely antithetical to our Christian heritage.

With such an understanding of traditional conservatism, we should fully expect for a true conservative to speak out for the poor. We should expect such a conservative to recognize the inherent dignity and worth of all of God’s children, even those here illegally. We should not reflexively dismiss his calls to preserve and protect the earth our Creator gave us in trust. We should understand that even raising taxes and spending more is not beyond the realm of possibility, if it stabilizes families, protects communities, and helps secure the common good.

I’m not against economic growth, but I am against the notion of economic growth at all costs. I am not against low taxes, in fact I prefer them, but I am not in favor of lower taxes at any cost. A true conservative should recognize that the essence of the good is not defined in relative terms such as raise, lower, increase, decrease, more, less, but rather in the acknowledgement of the transcendent order, created and sustained by the living God.

I would encourage each reader here who is interested in understanding the core principles of conservatism to put down the newspaper, turn off the radio, and set aside the position papers (if just for a moment) and pick up the works of men such as Edmund Burke, Christopher Dawson, GK Chesterton, and Hillaire Belloc. Let us not confuse particular policies for universal truths, seasonal conditions with transcendent realities, or even the fizz and froth of talk radio for the substance it tries to ape- but has long forgotten.

— M. Sanders

Qualities of a Leader

There has been much criticism of Mike Huckabee and how the role his Faith will affect the way he conducts business as President. Given the fact that he’s been quite open about his Faith and generous with the public about the questions they have brought forth to him, there has still been much negativity put forth as attacks on his character and record, but let’s take a look at the facts, the truth…

I wanted to follow up on a question you and the other candidates got at the YouTube debate about whether you believe every word in the Bible. Do you believe the Bible is inerrant?

I believe it is. There are some things in the Bible that were clearly intended to be figurative: “If the eye offends thee, go pluck it out.” Did Jesus mean that we were supposed to take our fingertips, reach deep into our eye and pull it out if we see something we don’t think we should see? Obviously not. “Inerrant” means if you follow the direction of the Bible, it will not lead you into error.

He explained it perfectly. You see, when people ask these questions, they’re not just questioning the man in front of them, they’re questioning our Heavenly Father, and if we seek God’s face in earnest, then He says… He sends…His Holy Spirit as inspirator, and He writes the words on our hearts, so that we may fully understand the context for which He speaks it to us, and we can’t understand it…unless, we accept the plan of Salvation given to us through His Son Jesus Christ who died on the Cross at Calvary…

How did your faith play a role in dealing with pardons and commutations? You’ve said that you have to wear two different hats, but your faith must play some role, right?

It does. It doesn’t mean that I am soft, and that everybody who has a hard-luck story, I’m just going to turn them loose. [But] I truly tried to look at every case, without regard to the respective person. If there were injustices, I tried to do everything I could to correct them, and for example, there were issues where I felt like African-American males were given harsher sentences, especially for drug crimes, than were upper-middle-class white kids who were arrested for the same thing. My faith affected me there because I don’t think you should have two standards of justice—one where upper-middle-class white kids whose fathers can get them an attorney get to go to rehab with no criminal record, and [another where] a poor black kid from a single-parent home gets eight to 10 in the Arkansas Department of Corrections. Now, did my faith affect that? I sure hope so. I’d like to think a person without faith would like to see justice equally meted out.

Right on, Mike!

It makes perfect sense to want equal code of justice carried out for those who’ve committed the same crimes, and this is where I think Mike would be a tremendous help to this Nation; mostly due to the fact that murderers will be given the necessary judgments in the penal code, and the bible backs his position up on this — Romans 2:11 ‘For God does not show favoritism.’ You see, it’s not those that hear the law, but it is those who obey the laws that truly matters in God’s eyes. He loves us each and everyone, and that’s why He doesn’t want us to do bad things, but to serve Him; and He’ll bless us.

On to other more recent news of attacks Mike were by Mitt Romney…

These two ads

Attack 1

Attack 2

Mike responded to the attacks in a Fox interview today, so I’m going to do the best I can to paraphrase what he said…

Here’s what he said…I’m not going to run a negative campaign, if that’s what the voters want, and they want to run negative ads about me, then they can do that..He said. But if they want someone who runs a negative campaign then that’s who they will get as it relates to the way they do business as President…but I’m not that kind of person…we’re responsible for the actions we take not only now, but after we receive the nomination.

Just common sense, folks, Mike shows us that he’s willing to admit past mistakes that he might have made, and that they were entirely out of his control, and that he is willing to accept responsibility for them. More precisely, that he will be honest and forthright in his intentions to lead the American people (you and I) for the best interests of the country.

The most important part about Mike, is that he’s not leading by his own standards, but by example and the guidance of God’s Word; which is the only way one can know they are on the right path. His thoughts and actions are showing it, through the positive message that he is bringing to us.

God bless!

~ Jeremiah

Conservatives United!