Alabama for Mitt Romney

The concept of a Republican governor in a Democratic state is not lost on most Alabamians.

In 2002, Alabama elected a Republican governor despite having a Democratic legislature in hopes of bringing fiscal responsibility and lower taxes to a state government plagued by the corruption of a previous administration.

That same year, the Democratic stronghold of Massachusetts elected Republican Mitt Romney to be its governor with similar hopes of fiscal discipline for a state that faced a $3 billion deficit. In spite of such a daunting predicament, he managed to balance the budget in every year of his term without raising taxes.

For the past six years, Alabamians have been able to witness the progress that a Republican governor can achieve. This, among several reasons, is why Alabama should select Governor Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee for President of the United States.

Despite being the governor of a northern state, Mitt Romney shares the same values that Alabamians hold dear. These values can be reflected in three major areas, which comprise what Romney calls the three legs of the Republican stool: a strong military, a strong economy, and strong families.

Since 9/11, most Americans understand the need to address Islamic terrorism on a global scale. Mitt Romney believes in achieving a safer country by increasing the size of our military and by confronting radical jihadists in the Middle East. In a state that houses the likes of Redstone Arsenal and Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabamians, like Mitt Romney understand the importance of a strong military.

There’s not a single candidate in the field this year, Republican or Democrat that has more experience in the economy than Mitt Romney. From his career as CEO of Bain Capital in Boston to his tremendous success in turning around the embattled 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics, Romney knows the ins and outs of the American economy.

In Montgomery, we need only look to our own backyard for proof that Asian markets are becoming a force to be reckoned with on a global scale. While the Hyundai plant has had a positive presence in our state, it’s important to remember that it represents a growing influence on the global economy in competition with American goods and services. Mitt Romney understands that and as President, he will work to make sure America can continue to compete with Asian markets in the greater global economy.

If there’s one thing Alabamians crave, it’s lower taxes. This makes Governor Romney a perfect fit for us. His domestic agenda includes eliminating taxes on savings for middle class families, making the Bush tax cuts permanent, permanently eliminating the death tax, and making healthcare expenses tax deductible, all of which are initiatives that Alabamians long for.

As citizens of Alabama, we are known for our strong family values. Having been married for nearly forty years to his wife Ann, with whom he raised their five sons, Mitt Romney is also known for his family values. He supports a constitutional amendment to the United States Constitution that would define marriage as the institution of one man and one woman. He also believes that Roe v. Wade should be overturned in order to let the American people decide the issue of abortion. In his career as governor of Massachusetts, he fought to ban cloning, to ban embryo farming, and to define life as beginning at conception. The Massachusetts Citizens for Life even gave Governor Romney the leadership award for his efforts in the fight to protect human life.

In a state where our motto is “We Dare Defend Our Rights,” we firmly believe in the rights enumerated in the Second Amendment. Mitt Romney strongly supports those rights as well. As a member of the National Rifle Association, he believes in the distinction between law abiding gun owners and the individuals who use firearms to commit crimes.

Based on these reasons stated above, I believe Mitt Romney would be the ideal choice for the citizens of Alabama, as well as the United States of America. I urge all conservative Alabamians to vote for Governor Romney on February 5th.

Why We Look to Reagan

It’s virtually undeniable that Ronald Reagan is the most popular Republican president since Abraham Lincoln. Barely 20 years from his final year in office, we as Republicans now look to him as an icon of what we want in a President today. Just why is that the case?

Despite the overarching greatness we remember him for, Ronald Reagan did make mistakes. Now to some within our party, that previous statement would be considered heresy or treason. But according to our principles as a party, there were times, though few, when Reagan fell short. He granted amnesty to illegal aliens which has played a part in the immigration debacle we face today. The national debt increased greatly under his administration, which seemed to validate the “voodooeconomics” charge by Reagan’s future Vice President George H.W. Bush. And as Governor of California, Reagan was pro-choice.

But that’s not what we think of when we think of Reagan.

Reagan represents to us a time when people were proud to be Americans, not Republicans, Democrats, Independents, but Americans. He symbolizes a love for God and country that is almost forgotten in the current fray of partisan politics. He exuded an idealistic optimism that was unmatched among any other politician at the time. It’s no wonder Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale couldn’t compete with him.

But in 2008, I wonder if Republicans, let alone Americans, would elect Ronald Reagan today. We’d call him a flip-flopper. We’d say he was too old. We’d skewer him for his lack of foreign policy experience. It’s almost as if we wouldn’t even know Reagan if he was running today.

The thing about Reagan is that when he was faced with the challenges and opportunities to make America better, he succeeded. He played a major role in ending communism in the U.S.S.R. He led us out of the disaster that was the Carter administration. He was compassionate, but he was firm. After America had lost faith in its leaders after Vietnam and Watergate, Reagan restored some of that faith and optimism we once had in America.

And while we’ve had a Republican president for 12 of the past 20 years, both have paled in comparison to Reagan.

But while I think it’s important to look to Reagan by assembling the coalition of conservatives that he was able to, we need a President that will make his own mark on America. We need a new touchstone for future generations to look to for inspiration, not for imitation.

I know many of you out there are already affiliated with some candidate in one way or another, but if any of you out there are on the fence and are looking for a candidate to throw your support behind, I’d urge you to look for one who will make his own mark on America like Reagan did.

While we should learn from Reagan, we need to remember to look forward instead of backward.

New Hampshire: The Last Hope for Conservatism in 2008

Needless to say, I was dismayed at the results of Iowa last night. I think when it really came down to it, evangelicals felt like they had to vote for someone who shared their exact religious beliefs. After all, who wants to vote against a “pastor” who claims to be a “Christian Leader?”

Mike Huckabee is not a well-rounded conservative. Many people in Arkansas believe that as governor, he ruined the conservative movement. And now, many across the nation feel that Huckabee’s victory in Iowa has been a major step backward for conservatism nationwide. He’s a fiscal liberal. When it comes to foreign policy, he is utterly clueless. Besides social issues, there’s little difference between him and most Democrats. He must not win this nomination.

 If John McCain wins Iowa, it will help Huckabee in South Carolina and in other states. It could even help Rudy Giuliani in Florida. McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts. He wants to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. He must not be allowed take New Hampshire.

Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mike Huckabee are what I like to call fracture candidates. They are not well-rounded conservatives. Instead they have pieces of conservativism that fracture the wide conservative base of Defense Conservatives (DefCons), Social Conservatives (SoCons), Evangelicals, Fiscal Conservatives (FisCons) and Moderates. Rudy appeals to fiscal conservatives and defense conservatives. McCain appeals to moderates and independents. Mike Huckabee appeals to social conservatives and evangelicals.

 There are only two whole conservatives in this race: Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson. Both appeal to the entire base, capturing what is known as the Reagan Coalition. They appeal to the variety of conservatives across the base. Keeping this base intact is the only way to win in 2008.

A stand must be made in New Hampshire for conservativism. There, voters must choose a candidate that reflects the wide range of principles the Republican party stands for. If not, I fear that we are headed towards defeat in 2008.

Iowa Must Choose: Mitt Romney or Chaos

Today is the big day. Iowa Republicans have a choice to make between Mitt Romney and unpredictable chaos for the Republican party.

Am I saying this because I support Mitt Romney? Actually no.

The problem is that this race has become so intensely divided that it’s virtually impossible to define a clear frontrunner. Romney is ahead or tied in Iowa and New Hampshire. He leads Michigan. He is competitive in various other states. But if he loses Iowa, his chances of winning the nomination could evaporate.

Now, if you think that this is simply bad news for Romney, think again. Huckabee is the main challenger to Romney in Iowa. But McCain is Romney’s main challenger in New Hampshire. A Huckabee victory in Iowa could cause McCain to win Iowa, shaking the race up even more. Romney could still win Michigan. Rudy could win Florida. Without one specific candidate leading any of the states, the race could become even more divided than it already is.

The Politico is reporting that if Thompson gets third in Iowa, which is extremely likely, there’s a chance he could drop out and endorse McCain. This could possibly lead to a McCain victory nationwide, a situation I greatly fear. I’m not sure who would be worse as our nominee: John McCain or Mike Huckabee. Both are terrible on immigration. Both received scathing reviews from Club for Growth. Both would fracture our base. Oh the havoc that would wreak.

The most realistic positive circumstance I could foresee is a Romney victory, with Thompson finishing third and still staying in the race. I hope that this kind of situation would demoralize the Huckabee camp in order to destroy his momentum nationwide.  

Republicans in Iowa must see the bigger picture. If Romney loses Iowa, we are in trouble. We cannot afford to end up with a candidate that opposes the Bush tax cuts and will grant amnesty to illegal aliens. We can’t afford to have a fiscal liberal as our nominee. We must nominate Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson, because they are the only two candidates that can keep our base intact. Anyone else would spell utter chaos for the Republican party in 2008.