Comments on: My Choice for the Next President of These United States http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/ A conservative voice crying in the liberal wilderness of Greater Binghamton, NY Mon, 08 Nov 2010 12:19:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: My New Choice for the Next President : RSSBinghamton.com http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-214 My New Choice for the Next President : RSSBinghamton.com Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:16:21 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-214 [...] Mitt Romney is now the candidate I will vote for on February 5th. He’s the only conservative left in the primary race. That’s not to say he doesn’t have drawbacks as a candidate (he does). In particular, he has changed his positions on some key social issues over the years. However, he has changed them to be more conservative, not less, which is the opposite of the others who have changed their once conservative positions to be more liberal, or perhaps never held a conservative position on certain key issues (like immigration and global warming) in the first place. Romney is, in my opinion, the only candidate in the field who has consistently shown he lines up with core conservative principles as I previously outlined them. [...] [...] Mitt Romney is now the candidate I will vote for on February 5th. He’s the only conservative left in the primary race. That’s not to say he doesn’t have drawbacks as a candidate (he does). In particular, he has changed his positions on some key social issues over the years. However, he has changed them to be more conservative, not less, which is the opposite of the others who have changed their once conservative positions to be more liberal, or perhaps never held a conservative position on certain key issues (like immigration and global warming) in the first place. Romney is, in my opinion, the only candidate in the field who has consistently shown he lines up with core conservative principles as I previously outlined them. [...]

]]> By: Jim Willis http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-196 Jim Willis Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:25:54 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-196 WHB - Thanks for the info on Mark. I had been listening to him pretty regularly but haven't for a while. I'll do just that! Funny thing... I used to work with Mark in the Reagan White House once upon a time. Not that he would remember me (I was a young intern/later staffer at the time). But I'm sure he remembers my boss at The White House: Becky Norton Dunlop - a truly great lady and true conservative. Both Mark and Becky later worked for Ed Meese when he was Attorney General. Becky is now a VP at the Heritage Foundation. WHB – Thanks for the info on Mark. I had been listening to him pretty regularly but haven’t for a while. I’ll do just that!

Funny thing… I used to work with Mark in the Reagan White House once upon a time. Not that he would remember me (I was a young intern/later staffer at the time). But I’m sure he remembers my boss at The White House: Becky Norton Dunlop – a truly great lady and true conservative. Both Mark and Becky later worked for Ed Meese when he was Attorney General. Becky is now a VP at the Heritage Foundation.

]]> By: WHB http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-195 WHB Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:19:27 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-195 Jim, You (and all others) should go to itunes and listen to Mark Levin's podcast from 1/7/08. He does a fantastic job of exposing the evil liberalism of Mccain and Huckabee WHB Jim,
You (and all others) should go to itunes and listen to Mark Levin’s podcast from 1/7/08. He does a fantastic job of exposing the evil liberalism of Mccain and Huckabee WHB

]]> By: Jim Willis http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-192 Jim Willis Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:57:20 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-192 Thanks for that WHB. Now I understand! One of the problems with a text-based forum like a blog...sometimes you miss the intent/nuances. Absolutely right...we would be in better shape as a nation right now if we followed the Constitution and actually declared war and Congress "signed on the dotted line" so they could not renege later when the political winds change, as they've tried to do. Well said. Thanks for that WHB. Now I understand! One of the problems with a text-based forum like a blog…sometimes you miss the intent/nuances. Absolutely right…we would be in better shape as a nation right now if we followed the Constitution and actually declared war and Congress “signed on the dotted line” so they could not renege later when the political winds change, as they’ve tried to do. Well said.

]]> By: WHB http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-191 WHB Wed, 09 Jan 2008 03:01:07 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-191 Jim, For clarification purposes (not to engage in an extended discussion of Bush and the Constitution)I do not recall Congress declaring war on Iraq, nor Afghanistan for that matter. They (Congress) gave Bush the authorization to invade. I have and for the most part still do support these conflicts "in theory." My problem is that I see Constitutional negligence out of both branches of government. Nor am I currently convinced that preemption is an issue in either of these cases. WHB Jim,
For clarification purposes (not to engage in an extended discussion of Bush and the Constitution)I do not recall Congress declaring war on Iraq, nor Afghanistan for that matter. They (Congress) gave Bush the authorization to invade. I have and for the most part still do support these conflicts “in theory.” My problem is that I see Constitutional negligence out of both branches of government. Nor am I currently convinced that preemption is an issue in either of these cases. WHB

]]> By: Jim Willis http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-190 Jim Willis Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:33:44 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-190 Thanks for commenting WHB! I agree with your sentiments. We do abuse the Constitution--way too much. And about the best we can hope for is a slow-down in the abuses. Not so sure Bush has overstepped his bounds...but we can always debate that one. Preemption as a policy must be seriously considered in a world where even one nuke going off in one of our cities is too much. We walk a fine line between being the world's policeman and being isolationist. We often make errors on both sides of that line. But overall, I agree with you. Less action, less government, is what we need. Not more. And certainly not in the name of faith. I also agree on the electability of Thompson, unfortunately. P.S. Loved the Survivorman bit on Sunday! Thanks for commenting WHB! I agree with your sentiments. We do abuse the Constitution–way too much. And about the best we can hope for is a slow-down in the abuses. Not so sure Bush has overstepped his bounds…but we can always debate that one. Preemption as a policy must be seriously considered in a world where even one nuke going off in one of our cities is too much. We walk a fine line between being the world’s policeman and being isolationist. We often make errors on both sides of that line.

But overall, I agree with you. Less action, less government, is what we need. Not more. And certainly not in the name of faith.

I also agree on the electability of Thompson, unfortunately.

P.S. Loved the Survivorman bit on Sunday!

]]> By: WHB http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-188 WHB Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:58:38 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-188 Jim (and others who bother to read), I agree with your assessment of Fred Thompson. He is the only traditional (classic) conservative in the field. A true advocate of small government and people responsibility. In my mind he is the only legitimate choice. The rest are all neo-conservatives who will spend more of our money, raise taxes (even if they say they won't), and get us lost in fringe battles. The simplest way to express why I support Fred Thompson is that I think he would be a president who did nothing. Which is exactly what we need. A do nothing president. Not raise taxes, not get us into another war, not fight lost causes. Ideally there is a lot Thompson stands for that I agree with (immigration and abortion are 2 examples). But realistically I doubt he would do anything about roe vs. wade and have to compromise on immigration. But at least he is to the right enough that any compromise would be far more to my liking. As much as we (liberal and conservative) talk about the constitution. Both sides grossly abuse it. Thompson is the only candidate who I see living more in the realms of constitutional presidential authority. Bush has grossly overstepped his bounds and Hillary or Obama will be even worse. Huckabee with his activist/socialist (supposedly christian)idealism would run the constitution into the ground in the name of faith. The last thing we need is an activist. We need a president. Go THOMPSON! (so much for my idealism, we are doomed as Thompson is unelectable) WHB Jim (and others who bother to read),
I agree with your assessment of Fred Thompson. He is the only traditional (classic) conservative in the field. A true advocate of small government and people responsibility. In my mind he is the only legitimate choice. The rest are all neo-conservatives who will spend more of our money, raise taxes (even if they say they won’t), and get us lost in fringe battles.
The simplest way to express why I support Fred Thompson is that I think he would be a president who did nothing. Which is exactly what we need. A do nothing president. Not raise taxes, not get us into another war, not fight lost causes.
Ideally there is a lot Thompson stands for that I agree with (immigration and abortion are 2 examples). But realistically I doubt he would do anything about roe vs. wade and have to compromise on immigration. But at least he is to the right enough that any compromise would be far more to my liking.
As much as we (liberal and conservative) talk about the constitution. Both sides grossly abuse it. Thompson is the only candidate who I see living more in the realms of constitutional presidential authority. Bush has grossly overstepped his bounds and Hillary or Obama will be even worse. Huckabee with his activist/socialist (supposedly christian)idealism would run the constitution into the ground in the name of faith. The last thing we need is an activist. We need a president. Go THOMPSON! (so much for my idealism, we are doomed as Thompson is unelectable) WHB

]]> By: Justin http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-186 Justin Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:35:26 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-186 I definitely understand your position Jim, and I agree with your principles wholeheartedly. The government's job needs to be greatly limited. If gov't were to go back within the confines of the constitution, there would be so much less of D.C. and its pork! It always amazes me what they can categorize under "regulate interstate commerce"! Huckabee is the most appealing candidate to me for many reasons, but I doubt he is viable in the long-term. Sometimes these packed primaries produce a strong leader who fought to the front of the pack. Other times, all the in-fighting just weakens the eventual winner. Unfortunately, it looks like the latter is happening. That being said, there are many issues that are important to me in an election. Some issues are "trump issues" - such as abortion. Because of my conscience, I could not support a pro-choice Republican like Giuliani, even if that means Hillary is our next commander in chief. I am praying that the eventually Republican nominee is a person I could vote for with a clear conscience! I definitely understand your position Jim, and I agree with your principles wholeheartedly. The government’s job needs to be greatly limited. If gov’t were to go back within the confines of the constitution, there would be so much less of D.C. and its pork! It always amazes me what they can categorize under “regulate interstate commerce”!
Huckabee is the most appealing candidate to me for many reasons, but I doubt he is viable in the long-term. Sometimes these packed primaries produce a strong leader who fought to the front of the pack. Other times, all the in-fighting just weakens the eventual winner. Unfortunately, it looks like the latter is happening.
That being said, there are many issues that are important to me in an election. Some issues are “trump issues” – such as abortion. Because of my conscience, I could not support a pro-choice Republican like Giuliani, even if that means Hillary is our next commander in chief. I am praying that the eventually Republican nominee is a person I could vote for with a clear conscience!

]]> By: Jim Willis http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-182 Jim Willis Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:30:28 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-182 Hi Justin. See my newest post analyzing the Iowa results. In it I list some of my objections to Mike Huckabee. It's not the whole list, but it gives you an idea. My biggest fear with many of the candidates on both the left and right is the ongoing expansion of government. Let me sum it up this way...whenever our leaders give money to various causes--even good causes--it means some citizens (taxpayers) have had to give up their money for their neighbors--involuntarily. I believe that to be immoral and unjust. One can argue for a safety net and some basic level of support for those who are destitute. What we have today is robbery of some citizens and a mass transfer of wealth--giving those who do the transferring incredible power. And it's not just the rich who get fleeced. We do not need to fund Pre-K programs (good though they may be), or food stamps or welfare of various kinds. We don't need to pay for pills for old people or young people. Or give those who don't work better medical care than I can give my own family because I choose to work. I'm afraid Mike Huckabee wants to use our money in the same way those on the left do...to fund "good" causes. There is no doubt it's with the best of intentions. Americans are big-hearted people. But it's wrong--plain and simple. The size of government needs to shrink--drastically. Taxes need to go down. Charity needs to be performed by individuals and groups like churches. People must re-learn to take responsibility for themselves and not depend on the government to force their neighbors to give up their money. I'm afraid Mike does not "get it" when it comes to these very important issues. He increased taxes and the size of government in Arkansas, and I believe he would do the same nationally. I may be wrong! Please correct me if you think I am. We must not yield to the enviro-nuts who want to control our economy and limit capitalism by using back-door methods like caps on carbon emissions (Mike is for it). We must not grant those who are here illegally, getting massive government transfers of money and free health care in our emergency rooms, to stay here by giving them a "path to citizenship" (Mike is for it). Again, I don't question his good intentions. I question his judgment on how to handle such issues. By the way, so I am an equal opportunity offender--I have problems with McCain for the same reasons. For some, secure borders and environmentalist activism are not major concerns--that's fine! They are for me...which is how I will judge this contest (in part). Just trying to give you a bit of insight into how I think about these things. I am not the least offended that you support Mike, or that Roger Thornhill supports John McCain. You're both people whose opinions I respect. I'll likely end up voting for someone other than Fred Thompson (expecting him to drop out)...so I'm giving them all a close look. I don't rule out any of them, but Huckabee will have a lot of convincing to do for me to vote for him. He is socially conservative and that's great, but on other issues I have a problem with his positions. Hi Justin. See my newest post analyzing the Iowa results. In it I list some of my objections to Mike Huckabee. It’s not the whole list, but it gives you an idea. My biggest fear with many of the candidates on both the left and right is the ongoing expansion of government.

Let me sum it up this way…whenever our leaders give money to various causes–even good causes–it means some citizens (taxpayers) have had to give up their money for their neighbors–involuntarily. I believe that to be immoral and unjust. One can argue for a safety net and some basic level of support for those who are destitute. What we have today is robbery of some citizens and a mass transfer of wealth–giving those who do the transferring incredible power. And it’s not just the rich who get fleeced.

We do not need to fund Pre-K programs (good though they may be), or food stamps or welfare of various kinds. We don’t need to pay for pills for old people or young people. Or give those who don’t work better medical care than I can give my own family because I choose to work.

I’m afraid Mike Huckabee wants to use our money in the same way those on the left do…to fund “good” causes. There is no doubt it’s with the best of intentions. Americans are big-hearted people. But it’s wrong–plain and simple. The size of government needs to shrink–drastically. Taxes need to go down. Charity needs to be performed by individuals and groups like churches. People must re-learn to take responsibility for themselves and not depend on the government to force their neighbors to give up their money. I’m afraid Mike does not “get it” when it comes to these very important issues. He increased taxes and the size of government in Arkansas, and I believe he would do the same nationally. I may be wrong! Please correct me if you think I am.

We must not yield to the enviro-nuts who want to control our economy and limit capitalism by using back-door methods like caps on carbon emissions (Mike is for it). We must not grant those who are here illegally, getting massive government transfers of money and free health care in our emergency rooms, to stay here by giving them a “path to citizenship” (Mike is for it). Again, I don’t question his good intentions. I question his judgment on how to handle such issues.

By the way, so I am an equal opportunity offender–I have problems with McCain for the same reasons. For some, secure borders and environmentalist activism are not major concerns–that’s fine! They are for me…which is how I will judge this contest (in part).

Just trying to give you a bit of insight into how I think about these things. I am not the least offended that you support Mike, or that Roger Thornhill supports John McCain. You’re both people whose opinions I respect. I’ll likely end up voting for someone other than Fred Thompson (expecting him to drop out)…so I’m giving them all a close look. I don’t rule out any of them, but Huckabee will have a lot of convincing to do for me to vote for him. He is socially conservative and that’s great, but on other issues I have a problem with his positions.

]]> By: Justin http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-181 Justin Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:55:40 +0000 http://rssbinghamton.com/my-choice-for-the-next-president-of-these-united-states/#comment-181 Just out of curiosity, why do you find Huckabee the least attractive Republican candidate? It seems more and more conservatives are lining up against him, but I am still waiting to hear the reasons. Thanks! Just out of curiosity, why do you find Huckabee the least attractive Republican candidate? It seems more and more conservatives are lining up against him, but I am still waiting to hear the reasons. Thanks!

]]>