Posted by
Jackpine Savage on Sunday, January 06, 2008 5:26:37 PM
The Primary here in Michigan is only a few days away, and I'm still undecided.
I know who I won't vote for.
I won't vote for McCain, because I'm still mad at him
over his apparent love affair with Teddy Kennedy.
I won't vote for Mike Huckabee, because he's basically a republican Jimmy Carter.
We don't need 4 more years of "Compassionate Conservatism", and we're not voting for Pastor-in-chief.
If I absolutely had to, I'd vote for Rudy, if I had a gun to my head, maybe.
He's strong on defense which is a major plus in my book, but
I like my right to keep and bear arms, and I want the borders closed.
so Rudy has a long way to go.
Plus he apparently has the morals of a drunken sailor on a 3 day pass.
If this was 1807 I'd vote for Ron Paul in a new york second.
Unfortunately, we have too many people out there that want to kill as many Americans as they can,
and being nice to terrorists, and hiding behind our borders isn't going to keep us safe.
As a libertarian with republican tendencies, a lot of Paul's domestic policies sound great but his foreign policy is plain nutz.
I like Hunter, but let's face it, he's out of his league.
(He'd make a good VP though)
That leaves us with Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson.
I like both because although both have the conservative credentials to do the job.
Both are articulate. (Big plus after 8 years of dubya)
Both can handle themselves under pressure, and are proven problem solvers.
Both know how to "work" the press, which is hugely important in the Information age.
It finally all boils down to Personality.
Romney has the flash, and pizzazz.
He's a cross between a hollywood leading man, and a used car salesman.
Thompson was never a "leading man" but most character actors actually "Play" themselves,
which tells me Mr. Thompson has what it takes to govern.
The most common complaint I hear about Romney is that he "Flip Flopped" on abortion.
Don't forget that Ronaldus the Great was also pro-choice at one time.
I have no problem with someone having an epiphany and changing to the right decision.
My question is, was it Campaign induced?
The problem many seem to have with Thompson is his perceived Laziness.
I get the daily newsletter from his campaign, and from the schedules I've seen, Fred's not Lazy.
I've also heard he doesn't have the "Fire in the belly".
Can anyone actually define this for me?
If Hillary is an example of "Fire in the belly", I'll pass.
What some see as laziness in Fred, I see as a positive.
He doesn't jump to conclusions, he deliberates.
He doesn't sling hyperbole, he speaks with Reason and logic.
Fred is more like an Ashley wood stove, He has the fire,
It's just burning lower to create the same amount of heat as the flashier fireplace.
To too many in the press and punditry, all they want is the flash.
They've gotten so conditioned by the bush/clinton dynasty that
they are addicted to the flash and personal destruction of "Politics as usual".
I have to admit, I'm somewhat conditioned too.
I like the flash too, (just a little) but having heated my house with wood in the past,
I'd much prefer the Ashley to the Fireplace.
Romney has the Fire, and the flash. He also has an amazing record as a businessman.
He's taken failed enterprizes and turned them around, and that isn't easy.
In Thompson I see a man that isn't running just because he wants to be president.
He's a man that sees problems that he believes he can fix, then he wants to go back home.
I'll be closely watching both of them tonight on FOX.
Sorry if this was kind of everywhere, I haven't written an essay in 30 years.
OK now you can tell me how wrong I am :o)