Candidate Rundown

Here is my take on the Presidential Candidates as of today:

Mitt Romney

In a movie, Groucho Marx once said, “Are you going to believe me, or your own eyes?” That’s funny – except when it is the theme of a presidential candidate. The more you hear Mitt Romney, the more you are presented with that choice. Yes he has changed is mind on some important beliefs. Yes he says now that he will be the best conservative candidate with the highest ethical and moral standards. Yes I want to believe him. But what he has done (or not done) in the past show up to be problematic. Perhaps if he were to be faced off with Hillary Clinton, I would vote for Mitt. Why? They both need you to consider Groucho’s question.

Mike Huckabee

Where Mitt hates for people to ask him questions about his religious beliefs, Mike Huckabee loves it. Typically the questions come from people every good Baptist preacher wants to evangelize anyway. In a debate setting, when someone fires up one of those questions to the candidates, where the other candidates stumble over their words, or where they end up sounding sanctimonious, Huckabee clearly nails the moment. He is very good. Yet when it comes to world politics, his joke about sleeping in a Holiday Inn Express last night rings all too true. In this world, there is no time to sit down in the oval office and ask yourself the question about how you think you should handle world politics.

Fred Thompson

No matter who wins the nomination, the first thing he should do is name Fred Thompson as his running mate. Then we could continue his role as Arthur Branch in Law and Order, the TV show. Each candidate has some glaring weaknesses and needs somewhere to go to clear the fog. Walk into Fred’s office, sit down and have him lean back in his chair and explain the choices. Or, in a tough political situation, send him out to the press to explain things in such simple terms that people wonder why they didn’t think of it. From a technical sense, Dick Cheney was probably the best VP a President ever had. If he had a shortcoming, it was simply image. Fred’s appeal IS image. And he is politically savvy, too.

Rudi Gullianni

Rudi Gullianni to me is the anti – Hillary candidate. If she is the Dem’s candidate then Rudi should run against her. He has some past baggage, alright. But she has a whole baggage compartment. So, the reasonable choice there would be for baggage to cease to become an issue for Rudi. Apparently, the militant Palestinians would hate to see Rudi become President. They could stomach anyone else, but Rudi. That is a huge plus for him in my book.

John McCain

John McCain might be the best choice. Conservatives love his military stand. His armor against Democrats in this area is superb. He could even silence John Murtha and John Kerry. The problem that traditional Republicans have is his apparent softness on immigration. However, if he was a bridge-builder on that issue, it might be what saves the Republican Party. The Republican Party needs to address how it will entice Hispanics into it over the next several decades. Its chances of winning future national elections depend on that issue more than any other.

Hillary Clinton

I wrote a post on the question of who you would like to see answer the “Red Phone” in a time of international crisis. Another way to view that question is who would our adversaries hate to see answer the Red Phone? You can believe that our new President is going to be challenged. Other leaders, both allies and adversaries will need to feel out how our new President will handle crises. The scariest to me? Hillary Clinton. Why? No rudder. I think she should have a standard disclaimer. “Whatever she says today, is subject to change tomorrow.” Her “expertise” in politics is the ability to shamelessly contradict herself. She brings to mind another Groucho Marx quote: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others."

Barak Obama

If you are worn out by tradition and want to redefine America, then Barak Obama is your man. He will bring change to America. Where we have debated about whether the words “under God” should be in the Pledge of Allegiance, Barak Obama personally omits every word from “I” to “all”. I believe that if you are mad at America because it hasn’t done enough for you, then Barak is your man. I predict that if he becomes President he will be severely tested on the international front. No one would have gone from being in a State Legislature to being President of the United States is such record time. He represents the dissatisfied people of the country in my opinion. And there are unfortunately many people who are dissatisfied.

John Edwards

John Edwards is a medical malpractice trial lawyer. He is a good one. His training and experience is that through the right amount of logic, emotion, reasoning (his reasoning), and drama he can convince people how they are getting the short end of the stick. This ability is always dependant upon the belief that there is a great check-writer that can pay treble damages. Thus, he is most effective when he is against someone. What would happen if he became that “someone”. Once you become the ruler, it is hard to keep up the fight against the ruler. But my biggest concern about Edwards is his training. I saw it when he was Kerry’s running mate in ’04. He has been trained to say ANYTHING if it will win over the jury or further his cause. He is not believable to me. He cares more about the outcome than the path it takes to get there.

I believe these elections are very important. I believe that the most recent assassination in Pakistan is a grim but important reminder that the most important consideration is our President's outlook of our relationship with the rest of the world.

The War Where Death is the Weapon for One Side and Life is the Weapon for the Other

With the murder of Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, the militant Islamists of the world have confirmed again that the most efficient way to influence the politics of a country is assassination. It worked in Lebanon a couple of years ago when the Syrians eliminated Rafik Hariri also a former Prime Minister. Both Hariri and Bhuto deplored the outside influence of the radical Islamists in their country. Both countries, right now are holding hugely important elections. For the vast majority of people in all these Middle Eastern countries, the desire to live free from the influence of the radically religious fanatics is again being thwarted.

As I prayed this morning about this, I was reminded of another time in this region. The lives of the people were being controlled by the ultra-religious rulers who stifled and controlled their people with burdensome rules. All the while, security of the area was provided by the super-power nation of the time. It was into that scene that God sent a messenger. He didn’t come from the outside, indeed, his father was a high ranking religious official.

I love studying about John the Baptist. And lately I have been praying that God would bring the Muslim people their John the Baptist, their man with the Spirit of Elijah. It seems like the right time to me. What he did for Israel 2000 years ago was phenomenal. For those longing to get closer to God, but knowing that cruel religious control was not the answer, John prepared them. He opened their hearts so they could recognize their salvation when He appeared. I really sense that today’s Muslims are ready for that.

It is easy to forget that they too are sons of Abraham. They have been cruelly misled and controlled for too long. They need our prayers today.

Christmas of Love and Hope

I hope your Christmas was wonderful. Ours was. We traveled to our son and daughter-in-law’s home on Christmas Eve and stayed with them. We got to attend Christmas Eve service at our old church. Every time we make the journey to attend there, I understand more and more how precious that little church and its people are. The attendance was smaller than past Christmas Eve services. But the warmth that we felt from our loved ones there really allowed me to fully engage the Christmas Spirit.

Today, the day after Christmas we received a few more cards from friends. One was from an old college friend who lives in Portland. His family typically constructs a state of the art news letter that is always fun to read. We don’t see them anymore so we look forward to their newsletters. After the typical blah blah blah stuff, Joe summed up his letter by saying, “I won’t close this year with a wish for world peace, because it increasingly seems like a wasted wish and a lost cause. Humans will never get along while there is organized religion to keep us at each other’s throats, and as long as we have a government that is more interested in stirring up trouble than really working for cooperation.”

No sooner did I read that, then an old Christmas Carol popped into my head. I googled it and I knew it was the Holy Spirit who prompted it. The song was written by a man who had just received news that his son was wounded in the Civil War. His wife was killed in a fire two years earlier. But the Spirit of Christmas so profoundly touched him that he wrote this:

I heard the bells on Christmas day

Their old familiar carols play,

And wild and sweet the words repeat

Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And thought how, as the day had come,

The belfries of all Christendom

Had rolled along the unbroken song

Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And in despair I bowed my head

“There is no peace on earth,” I said,

“For hate is strong and mocks the song

Of peace on earth, good will to men.”

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:

“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;

The wrong shall fail, the right prevail

With peace on earth, good will to men.”

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Over 160 years later, the belfries of Christendom still declare that hope of Peace on Earth, Good Will to Men.

Humble Yet Secure

Just a humble stable

But so secure in His mother’s arms.

He came to humble shepherds

And was sent by His Father above.

A humble King, a humble Lord,

Yet so secure when crowned with thorns.

How could He be the two in one,

Unless He was God’s Son?

Just a humble carpenter,

But so secure as Son of Man.

He came for humble people,

And was sent by His Father above.

A humble King, a humble Lord,

Yet so secure when crowned with thorns.

How could He be the two in one?

He must be God’s Son.

Humility, security

Are these the gifts You have for me?

Humility and security,

Only You could give these for me.

A precious,

Helpless baby . . .

But so secure.

Debbie Ausherman, 2003

When the Going Gets Tough for our new President

Of all the campaign issues, I think the most important one (notice I said “most important” not most popular, or most considered) is the one of how our new President will be able to hold up in the international arena. Take a moment and imagine your favorite candidate being confronted by say, the Iran Hostage Crisis, or 9-11 or the Cuban Missile Crisis. Does he or she have what it takes to get our country through it? This is a job where failure is not an option. Repercussion of that failure last for generations.

Take Jimmy Carter and the Iranian affair. He completely froze when a group of students took over our American Embassy in that country. Embassies have a unique status. It is as if those properties are part of the country that the ambassadors represent; not part of the countries where they are located. Attacking a country’s embassy is legally the same as attacking the country. So, for the “students” to attack our embassy with the blessing of the people who just took over their country, a particular response was mandatory. Carter froze. Our people remained in captivity for over 500 days. The details of what transpired over that period of time mark some of the bleakest times in American foreign relations.

The thing to know here is that when elections came, Ronald Reagan defeated Carter. As Reagan was being inaugurated, the Iranians were setting in motion the release of the hostages. Where they tied Jimmy Carter’s crack negotiating teams in knots, they immediately gave up the hostages as Reagan became President. Were there some backdoor deals to make it happen? Yes there were. But the deals were delivered with a clear message; a velvet glove over a rock-hard fist. “Let our people go – right now!” Even though Reagan was immediately successful, the 500 days of allowing the Iranian Islamists to have their way with us took its toll. We pay the price today. Indeed one of the “students” is now their leader. And he has learned well. Have we?

With the whole menu of candidates out there, we have many choices. But if you simply apply the Carter / Reagan filter to the list, then it really sorts out quickly. Would your candidate be a Carter or a Reagan?

Here is my list

Obama - - - Carter

Edwards - - - Carter

Biden - - - Reagan lite

Clinton - - - (which way do the polls show she should go today?)

Giuliani - - - Reagan

Thompson - - - Reagan

Romney - - - Where’s the money in this deal? What are the percentages?

Huckabee - - - Jimmy Carter II

McCain - - - Reagan

Imagine this: Iran announces that it is closing the Straits of Hormuz. All the oil that travels that way is immediately stopped. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Dubai are all on the phone pleading for immediate intervention. Then the red phone rings. It is Iran's new best friend Vladimir Putin. He is about to give our new President a threat. Who do you want to see taking that call?

Answer the Question, Mitt

If you were running for office and someone challenged you with this question, what would you do? “Don’t you Christians believe that Jesus was born of a virgin?”

Would you cry “Foul! You’re just bigoted! What my church believes is none of your business!”

Or would you say, “Yes, Jesus was born of a virgin. Mary conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit. Do I believe that? I absolutely do!”

The other day, Mike Huckabee reflexed an observation “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers?” I was thrilled when I heard that he had thrown that question out there. Is it an appropriate question when considering who will be the best candidate for President of the United States? Perhaps it isn’t for some people. For me – I want to see Romney answer the question.

Now Romney is an interesting guy. When asked the question: "When you were campaigning for Governor of Massachusetts weren’t you for abortions?" He has a great answer. “Yes I was and I was wrong.”

Regarding illegal immigrants, he has also allows himself the right to change his mind, declaring now a much more conservative opinion than he once had.

Perhaps the change of mind was because he has weighed the logic of the arguments and found he was on the wrong side of the issue. Or perhaps he weighed the voter support and found that his stance on these issues was a loser. Politicians tend to do that.

My point is that we know Romney is a politician first. He has the proven ability of letting go of strong positions to gain support. He will also allow himself to reconsider important issues. So, Mitt Romney, here is a question. And all the Christians are watching. Consider it carefully.
Do you believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers? Do you worship Satan’s brother?

If he says “yes” then I don’t think I am going to vote for him. Hey its just me. Yes it is a litmus test. It is the mother of all litmus tests.

If he says he has thought about it and now answers “no, I changed my mind.”, – I am not going to vote for him then either.

Scott Elliot has some further observations about it.

CIA Punked by the Iranians

So did you hear that the CIA has suddenly determined that Iran gave up its quest for a nuclear device way back in 2003? If the CIA’s new epiphany is true, then seriously, Ahmadinejad deserves the Nobel Prize. But on the other hand, if it is true, then he should be committed to an asylum. This is because over the last 4 years he has given tirade after tirade about how he was going to nuke the infidels. Iran has suffered dearly from sanctions and boycotts all the while they could have been the darlings of the entire world. Why would he have unilaterally complied with the IAEA, concealed that fact, and then suffered the wrath of the west? Look at Libya. Qaddafi freely trades with the West. His country has known no better prosperity than since he publicly renounced his nuclear ambitions and opened his doors for verification.

If you check, you will see that no other intelligence agency around the world agrees with this assessment. Just over the weekend, the British stated in this article that the CIA’s ability to assess information in the region is known to be deficient. Its own assessment comes to a much more sinister conclusion. It believes our CIA has become victim to some Iran disinformation. Add that to the extreme pressure of not wanting to be blamed for Bush starting another war and you have a perfect scenario for this off-the-wall- report to suddenly appear.

I also have a very sinister assessment. I believe the CIA’s #1 mission is its own self-preservation. They found it totally unacceptable for Bush to declare another war based on information they had provided. Truth is obviously the casualty here. It ceased to be a consideration. I think that they also feared that the next Republican President could pull the same trigger. This assessment then has a double punch. It not only attempts to prevent Bush from declaring war on Iran, it attempts to take a very important issue out of the whole election campaign, thus giving Democrats a pass on perhaps the most important issue that this country faces.

It has to be very hard for President Bush to maintain his momentum against evil with his own agency cutting his knees out from under him - again.