Can You Afford the Obama Gas Hike?

Over the past 4 years, gas prices have risen to absurd levels across the nation. Granted, we generally have cheaper prices than the U.K. does, but it hasn’t been too long since most of us in the USA felt like 2.00 for a gallon of gas was ridiculously expensive. Many would like to attribute this to the Bush administration. Some want to point the finger at oil companies, claiming that their profits have been going up. Still, others would say that catastrophic events like 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina are the ones to blame.

While certainly some of those factors may have played a part in why our gas prices are so high, most would agree that a large part of our problem is our dependence on foreign sources of oil. This is terribly troubling when you consider that the USA as a nation consumes 25.2% of the world’s oil. But before we start hugging trees and throwing cinder blocks at gas-guzzling SUV’s, we have to keep in mind that there are several other products that are made from petroleum including: ink, crayons, bubble gum, dishwashing liquids, deodorant, eyeglasses, records, tires, ammonia, and heart valves. Needless to say, oil is important for making many different things we make in this country, not just gasoline.

We must understand that while it is very important to reduce our oil consumption and aggressively pursue alternative sources of energy, we still need oil. But instead of getting it from countries that hate us like Iran and Venezuela, we need to have our own, which is why we need to drill for it domestically.

So where does Senator Barack Obama fit into all of this?

Obama claims that the problem is not that gas prices are so high, but it’s that the American people should have had a more gradual adjustment to them. In a way, I could give him the benefit of the doubt in pointing this out. However, when you consider that gas prices have risen faster in the past 6 years than they have in the past 30, I believe that Senator Obama is largely understating the problem.

It is no secret that Senator Obama wants to increase taxes on oil companies. Fair enough. But who really pays for that increase in taxes? Do the oil companies generously agree to pay those taxes without raising the price of gas for the average consumer? Hardly! An increase in taxes on oil companies will definitely increase the price at the pump for you and I.

What about drilling? As I said earlier, we must reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil. In addition to pursuing alternative sources of energy, one of the ways we can acheive energy independence is by drilling here in America. No wonder 67% of Americans support offshore drilling and 64% believe it will reduce gas prices. Besides, basic economic principles teach us that if the supply of oil increases, demand goes down, and therefore the price goes down.

But does Obama support offshore drilling here in America? No.

Sure, it’d be nice to immediately have all hydrogen-powered cars and 100% eco-friendly homes that run on clean energy. And of course, this is definitely the ultimate goal that we all strive towards. But until we are comfortably able to make that transition, we need to keep gas prices low by drilling domestically. We can also pursue alternative sources of energy that are readily available like nuclear power. We simply cannot afford the high gas prices that will result from Senator Obama’s energy plan.

Barack Obama is Pro-Abortion

Contrary to what some may believe about Barack Obama, it is a known fact that he is pro-choice. His record and his platform clearly demonstrate that. There is no sense of ambiguity. There should be no doubt. Barack Obama is a staunch supporter of a woman’s right to take the life of her unborn child.

But in an effort to remove all misconception or any form of doubt you may have, allow me to address Senator Obama’s stance on this topic.

Direct Quotes

This is a direct quote from his website: “[Senator Obama] has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in that case.” From this statement, it’s very clear that Obama stands by Roe v. Wade and does not want it to be overturned.

When speaking about the importance of sex education, he said “look, I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” I’ll try not to interject too much into this statement, but it seems obvious to me that he considers unplanned pregnancies to be some type of punishment to the mother of the child.

Infanticide in Illinois

I personally find this part of Senator Obama’s record to be extremely troubling. As a State Senator in Illinois, a bill known as the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) was first introduced in 2001. This legislation was designed to protect the lives of infants who were born alive after failed abortions. Obama opposed this measure in 2001 and in 2002, claiming that the language used in the bill could have the potential to overturn Roe v. Wade.

However in 2003, the bill was proposed again, with language that addressed the concern that many pro-abortion groups had about it potentially overturning Roe v. Wade. Obama voted against it again, even after NARAL had dropped their opposition to it. A federal version of this bill containing much of the exact same language passed through the U.S. Senate 98-0 in 2002. Obama claims he would have supported the federal bill, but if actually he stood against the same bill at a state level, can you really trust that statement?

When aborted babies were being born alive and left to die alone in soiled utility rooms and there was legislation proposed in Illinois which would have stopped it, Barack Obama opposed it three times in a row. Fortunately, the bill passed through the Illinois Congress in 2005, after Obama had left to become a U.S. Senator.

The Freedom of Choice Act

Barack Obama has voiced ardent support of the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). In fact, he has said that one of the first things he’ll do in office is to sign it into law as soon as it passes through Congress.

Pro-Choice Organizations complain that after Roe v. Wade, many of the federal and state laws that have passed since then have “eroded” the “fundamental right” to abortion. However, they firmly believe that FOCA will ensure abortion rights in spite of the possibility that Roe v. Wade could be reversed. It has been estimated that FOCA would result in 125,000 more abortions per year due to the nullification of certain state and federal abortion laws caused by its passage.

On top of all that, FOCA would allow for taxpayer-funded abortions at any stage of pregnancy. Just imagine our taxes actually paying for virtually every kind of abortion at any time during the pregnancy. If that’s not contrary to the nature of American values, I don’t know what is.

Conclusion

Speaking for myself as a Christian and as a pro-life conservative, I cannot morally condone voting for anyone who supports abortion. But throughout Senator Barack Obama’s career, he has adamantly, by his own admission, supported abortion rights. Not only that, he has supported the right to abortion at practically every stage of a pregnancy. I cannot fathom how anyone who considers themselves pro-life could support a candidate like Senator Obama. If you believe in the sanctity of human life, I strongly urge you to consider this information when you vote on November 4th.

The Eagles, Sheryl Crow and Indy 4

What a week. This will mostly be a departure from the heavily political stuff I usually talk about. Where shall we begin?

On Tuesday, I saw the Eagles in Alpharetta, GA. Despite the rain, hail, thunder, lightning, and tornado sirens that plagued my arrival, I had a wonderful evening with one of the bands I admire most. A lot of people may think that bands like the Eagles should hang it up since they’re in their 50’s and 60’s, but from what I saw, they haven’t lost any steam. These guys rocked and nailed every single song perfectly.

I have immense respect for artists that can do what they do for so long and still do it well. While they didn’t play some of the ones I had hoped for like “Seven Bridges Road,” “Already Gone,” “Those Shoes,” “Heart of the Matter” (even though it’s technically a Don Henley song), and “Get Over It,” they still played some of my all-time favorites like “Hotel California,” “Life’s Been Good (Joe Walsh),” “Heartache Tonight,” “Boys of Summer (Henley),” and a large host of others.

The only real qualm I had with the show was when they played “Dirty Laundry” (amazing Don Henley song) with a backdrop video of clips from Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, Rush Limbaugh, the Drudge Report, and other prominent conservative journalists. Virtually nothing from CNN, Matt Lauer, or Katie Couric could be seen in it, possibly because CNN is based in Atlanta, but more likely due to the political views of the Eagles. I understand if you don’t like Fox News, but at least be a little “fair and balanced,” if you’re going to slam the media.

But despite all of that, I have to say that if you think bands like the Eagles are outdated and irrelevant, you’re probably a hater with poor musical taste in my humble opinion. That’s right, I said hater. 

On Friday night, I saw Sheryl Crow in Birmingham, AL. I’ve always been a fan of her music, which is why I went to her show despite the fear of being assaulted with a barrage of mindless uber-environmentalist liberal nonsense. I have to say, she wasn’t that bad when it came to pushing her political agenda on us. She did say “I’m going to vote for Obama and I don’t want to hear about it,” to which I thought to myself “I’m…….not going to vote for Obama and…….I don’t want to talk about it.” I mean, what am I going to say? “Well, I’m voting for McCain!” No, for several reasons. First, McCain makes me nauseous. Second, if I do decide to vote for him, it’s not something I’d be all that proud of and/or enthusiastic about. Anyway…

Sheryl played a lot of stuff from her new album including “God Bless This Mess,” “Love is Free,” “Gasoline,” and “Out of Our Heads” (which is ironically stuck in my head). And she played some older stuff like “Strong Enough,” “Can’t Cry Anymore,” “A Change Would Do You Good,” “All I Wanna Do,” and “If it Makes You Happy.” She rocks. And she’s gorgeous. She’s in her mid-forties and she could be supermodel. My hat is off to her. She got dumped by Lance Armstrong (what was he thinking?), beat breast cancer, adopted a baby, and can still rock like she’s 25. I don’t care what her political views are. I’d go see her again in a heartbeat. 

Saturday night I went to see “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” I had heard mostly negative reviews from my friends and family that had seen it, but I always want to make a judgment for myself when it comes to movies. I have to say that even though I liked a lot of it, it was generally disappointing. Spielberg needs to move out of a certain genre (those of you who’ve seen it know what I’m talking about). The acting was great, as can be expected considering the cast, but the story was just…silly?It’s hard to put into words. It just wasn’t good.

What a week! I’m tired and I’m off tomorrow for Memorial Day. Being the nerd I am, I’m still hopelessly pining for “The Dark Knight.” Not because I want to see Heath Ledger’s last role, but because Christopher Nolan is an amazing director with an incredible cast. Let’s just hope he doesn’t pull an Indy 4 and waste it all with a poor script, which I highly doubt would happen considering the tangible awesomeness that is “Batman Begins.” Wow, I’m past nerd….I think I’m headed to dork territory. I’d better stop. 

I’m Frustrated with John McCain

O John McCain, how you torture me. After a bitter and tumultuous primary season that ended in a heartbreaking victory for the one candidate I liked the least, I was beginning to think I could stomach McCain. His pro-life credentials appeared legit (even though he specifically said that he did not care about “social issues”). He supports the war on terror, almost to a fault that could be considered hawkish at best, if not neoconic (is that a word, if not I’m claiming it). He is opposed to raising taxes, even though he voted against the Bush tax cuts. And well, he’s not as bad as Obama or Hillary, right?

It was bad enough that his success in the primaries was due to a split among real conservatives between Romney and Huckabee, along with some fortunate winner-take-all victories and open primaries that allowed Democrats to vote for him.

And sure, I’ll readily admit that John McCain is the lesser of the 3 evils currently left in this race. However, while that may be the case, I find myself wondering how great (or small) the margin of evil is between McCain and his future opponent.

As I’m thoroughly enjoying the mudwrestling match that is Hillary v. Obama, hoping that their infighting will result in a Republican victory in November, I can’t clear out of the back of my mind that I still don’t even like our nominee. I hate to paint a gloom and doom picture, but to me it seems that America is just going to have to take one for the team for the next four years.

On top of all that, I can’t even enjoy opposing Barack Obama the way I want to, not with John McCain’s blessing anyway. He found the following ad offensive:

First of all, the only thing offensive in that ad is Jeremiah Wright. It shouldn’t offend Obama, since Wright is his spiritual adviser. It shouldn’t offend McCain because it doesn’t mention him anywhere in the ad. Second, why does John McCain feel like he has to denounce this kind of ad? He had no problem with viciously attacking Mitt Romney, a fellow Republican, in the primaries. So why can’t he let someone else attack Barack Obama?

This year, I feel as if my hands are tied. John McCain has made this a miserable voting year for many Republicans, including myself. I’m tempted to stay at home or write in a candidate that won’t nauseate me or leave me with a guilty conscience. Maybe I should do a little more research on Bob Barr.

If McCain doesn’t pick a good running mate, I mean like really good (i.e. Mitt Romney, possibly Mike Huckabee, or Newt Gingrich) I may find myself going to the polls with a vomit bag and clothes pin over my nose.

It’s Okay, Obama’s not a Muslim; He’s a Racist!

I’m sure you’ve all heard the rumors spread by the Christian right….and the Clinton campaign: Obama’s a Muslim. His father was a Muslim! He had a buddy in high school that was Muslim. And on and on we go. Actually I made up that part about the buddy in high school. See? That’s how rumors get started!

But if there’s ever a time in Obama’s campaign when the people he’s associated with have got him in trouble, it’s now. His pastor, Jeremiah Wright has made some statements that have put him at odds with much of America. Examine exhibit A:

First of all, Mr. Wright, you’re wrong in so many ways. But one thing in particular: Jesus was a Jew that was delivered to Romans and killed by Romans. He wasn’t black. He was Jewish. And the Jewish Pharisees were the ones that were ultimately responsible for His death. So if you compared Him to Barack Obama, the story would have to be that black people formed an angry mob and delivered him to the “white people.” Wait, maybe that does make sense: Wright, a black man, delivering Obama up for political crucifixion… Ah, I can’t make this stuff up. The irony is almost unbelievable.

Exhibit B:

I apologize. Some of that was repeated from the previous video. Notice his words, and I quote “God d*** America!” Thank you, Mr. Wright. I can tell that you’re just oozing with patriotism. By the way, did anyone know about the U.S. inventing the HIV virus as a form of genocide for minorities? That’s amazing! I guess white people don’t get AIDS. I must say though, a slow-killing though incurable virus like HIV seems to be a little less effective than say…Ebola? I’m sure our uber-Aryan scientists have got something better cooking in the labs, just waiting for a chance to be released. Side note: correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t HIV originate in Africa?

Now, it’s not that Mr. Wright is Obama’s pastor. I could excuse that. I mean, I don’t agree with everything my preacher says. But we have to consider the fact that Wright was Obama’s spiritual adviser, which seems to be a bit more significant than just a mere pastor. He’s the one that performed Obama’s wedding. One of his sermons inspired the title for Obama’s book Audacity of Hope. He’s a close friend to Obama. He’s not just some guy that happens to preach at Obama’s church. It’s much deeper than that.

And in spite of all this, I was still willing to give Obama a bit of a pass. That is, until I found out that Obama was endorsed by the New Black Panther party:

 

Remember the black panthers? The militant group that hate whites and Jews, you know the one. And you know it’s pretty bad when a group of African-Americans is considered to be an extremist hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Obama was so proud of this endorsement that it was featured on his website. However, all of a sudden, it was taken down. I guess someone got offended…

Obama can talk of racial equality, progress and change all he wants but how can he possibly be taken serious when he is surrounding himself with the very people that are fanning the flames of hatred in America?

As you can see, Barack Husayn Obama considers his company to be people who hate America, who cause division, who support extremism, and believe insane lies like the ones his pastor tells from the pulpit. If elected President, I believe that the harm he would do to our country would be almost irreparable. America cannot afford a President like him.

Why I Oppose Barack Obama

At the rate things are going in this election year, I believe there are two eventual nominees: Barack Obama for the Democratic Party and John McCain for the Republican Party. While certainly this primary season didn’t go nearly as well as I would’ve liked, there comes a point where you have to evaluate the candidates left standing. John McCain wasn’t really even in my top 3 candidates of interest this year, but unfortunately he has prevailed as the nominee for the Republican party, which forces me to at least consider voting for him.

But then there’s Barack Obama. He’s sharp, articulate, smart, amiable, hip and overall likable. I’d even go as far as to say that he’s definitely got a leg up on McCain in the likable and hip categories. However, that’s just a matter of opinion (albeit an overall consensus opinion). Nonetheless, he’s a very high-profile figure in America right now. In fact, I’d say he’s the most popular Presidential candidate since JFK.

So when I look at Barack Obama, those qualities stand out. They stand out a lot. And if it were about those qualities alone, I’d probably find myself considering him. Unfortunately, if you examine his record, all the glitz of his personality seems to fade away to reveal a man who stands for nearly everything I oppose.

As a Christian American, there are certain issues that are central to my decision concerning a political candidate. I’m talking about social issues, namely abortion and gay marriage.

Abortion/Life Issues

On abortion, Barack Obama is staunchly pro-choice. He was given a 100% rating by the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL). In many pro-choice circles, that’s definitely a badge of honor. Conversely, he was giving a 0% rating by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).

In 2007, he voted against the banning of partial-birth abortion. Now partial-birth abortion isn’t a typical abortion. It involves partially removing the living fetus (baby) from the mother’s womb and killing it. This procedure is typically performed in the late stages of the pregnancy.

He also supports embryonic stem cell research, which often results in the destruction of human embryos. To me, this is a form of abortion on a premature scale. Stem cell reserach in and of itself is an undeniably good thing. But there are other sources of stem cells besides human embryos. So as a Christian, I believe we should avoid using human embryos for stem cell research.

Gay Rights/Marriage

On the issue of gay rights, Barack Obama is also quite liberal. He has stated that homosexuality is not a choice and is no more immoral than heterosexuality. While he does oppose gay marriage, he believes that it is a matter that should be left up to the states. Therefore, he opposes any federal amendment that would outlaw gay marriage.

While a federal amendment to the Constitution might be open to interpretation, Obama’s core beliefs on homosexuality seem to be in direct contrast to the Word of God (note Romans 1:18-32, 1st Corinthians 6:9). As a Christian, I personally cannot in good conscience, vote for someone who supports these things.

Other Issues

There are some issues that are mostly political in nature, which don’t typically lend themselves to any form of religious debate. However, I also disagree with Obama on a great deal of these issues as well.

As a supporter of the Second Amendment, I find very little comfort in Obama’s positions on gun control. I believe that our Social Security system is headed for bankruptcy. Therefore, I think we should have the option to privatize it at our own discretion. Obama opposes that. On illegal immigration, I believe we should enforce the rule of law by not rewarding undocumented immigrants who are here illegally with any form of amnesty or indefinite citizenship. Obama, along with John McCain, supported a bill that would grant a form of amnesty to illegal immigrants. He supported giving driver’s licenses to them as well.

As a pro-life, pro-family, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-growth, small government, law-abiding conservative Christian American, I find Barack Obama to be the political epitome of virtually everything I oppose.

It’s not about his religion (which is Christianity not Islam). It’s not about his race. It’s not about his charm, flair, charisma, gravitas, personality or whatever you call it. It’s about his policies. I disagree with Barack Obama on policy. And that’s what democracy should be about, voting for someone based on their policies and values, not their religion, ethnicity, or background. It is policy and policy alone why I oppose Barack Obama as President of the United States.

For more on Barack Obama’s record and policies, check out OnTheIssues.org.

Why I’m Voting For Mitt Romney and You Should Too

Back in March of last year, I announced my support for Governor Mitt Romney as President of the United States. I did not come to this decision lightly. I researched the records and platforms of all that were involved at the time including Senator John McCain, Governor Jim Gilmore, Governor Mike Huckabee, Senator Sam Brownback, Congressman Tom Tancredo, Congressman Ron Paul, Congressman Duncan Hunter, Governor Tommy Thompson, Senator Fred Thompson, and Governor Romney.

Despite what many felt was a lackluster field, I found hope in Mitt Romney. His turnaround experience as CEO at Bain Capital, CEO of the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, and as Governor of Massachusetts, the most liberal state in the union, impressed me. And unlike many who felt like his conversion to the pro-life position was less than genuine, I was proud to see a man who had the conviction to reverse course and stand up for the cause of life.

I admired the fact that Mitt Romney had championed the cause of families as governor of Massachusetts. Throughout his career, he fought against gay marriage, cloning and embryo farming. He even fought to define life as beginning at conception. As a result, the Massachusetts Citizens for Life gave Governor Romney the leadership award for his efforts in the fight to protect human life.

I’ve always been a fan of lower taxes and effective managment. I was pleased to find out that in the face of a multi-billion dollar deficit, Governor Romney managed to balance the budget in Massachusetts for every single year of his term without raising taxes.

As a member of the NRA, Governor Romney fought for the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. Having spent a lifetime around guns, I considered Governor Romney’s support of the 2nd Amendment to be quite reassuring.

Unfortunately, most Republicans seem to ignore the problems that Americans are facing in healthcare. Mitt Romney is the only candidate in this race, Republican or Democrat, who has successfully introduced an effective market-driven healthcare program based on private companies, not government control.

As I watched the GOP Presidential debates throughout the course of the past year, I was continually amazed by the well-researched knowledge that Governor Romney had in foreign affairs. I believe his wisdom will keep America safe while exhausting every form of diplomacy necessary in order to avoid future conflicts abroad.

Out of the candidates left in this race, Mitt Romney is the clear viable conservative. He’s unquestionably the best candidate for President in 2008.

Other candidates:
If you’d like to know why I oppose Senator McCain, Congressman Paul, or Governor Huckabee, just click on the links provided. But for a quick note on each, I oppose McCain for a variety of reasons, but he has recently stated that he does not care about social issues. Congressman Paul has some wild votes in his career and he is unelectable. Governor Huckabee’s FairTax policy is unrealistic and he is no longer electable at this point.

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.