A libertarian curmudgeon tries to figure out where
the major presidential candidates stand on the issues
by Steven Greenhut
Candidates from both parties have been braying the same old
line we hear during every presidential election: This is the most
important election of a generation, or perhaps even a century.
So much is at stake that you, the harried voter, need to hang on
every word every candidate utters during the televised debates.
Do you want the candidate who is "standing up for regular
families," or the one "who speaks the truth and who will restore
America's moral leadership," or the one who understands that
our nation "embodies the belief that tomorrow can be better
than today"? Such big issues and tough choices!
Certainly, whoever becomes president gains an enormous
amount of power for good or for ill. Someone (thankfully) has
to replace President George W. Bush, who has specialized in
the "for ill" category. Last week, for instance, U.S. intelligence
agencies released a report rebuking the administration's
rationale for increased belligerence toward Iran.
The report showed that Iran had abandoned its nuclear
weapons program in 2003, yet the president declared that
the new information would in no way change U.S. policy.
Hey, why let new facts get in the way of a policy?
No wonder so many Americans are ready for a new
administration. But the new boss can be just as bad, or
even worse, than the old boss, so proceed with fear and
trepidation.
Yes, this is an important election. But even when the
candidates do talk about things that are real issues (the
Iraq war, abortion, health care, Social Security), they
dish out pabulum designed not to offend any particular
interest group.
The race isn't just about public policy, but about the
deepest issues of "faith." Mitt Romney is trying to
defuse concerns about his Mormon religion. Mike
Huckabee has told Iowa voters that he is the
"Christian" candidate. It's hard enough figuring
out what these candidates believe about taxes and
the Constitution, let alone about their theological
thinking.
American voters have to be a hardy bunch to sort
through the information and pick the right candidate.
The weak field of candidates, by the way, should be
reassuring to those who cling to that old adage that
"anyone can grow up to be president in America."
Nevertheless, someone eventually will win the race.
Here are some quick thoughts about the 17
Democratic and Republican candidates vying for
their respective parties' nominations. Consider it
help in picking your poison.
Bring on the Nanny State
Should the federal government vastly expand its
reach into our private lives? If you believe that,
then no candidate would express your views better
than Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. "We need a new
beginning on health care," she said. "We need to
stand up to the drug companies and the insurance
companies and provide health care for every single
man, woman and child, at a price that people
can afford, and we're going to give them the help
to do that."
Reagan without the principles
If you like the Reagan look (with a lot more hair gel)
and the Reagan-like conservative platitudes, but
aren't concerned that the candidate probably doesn't
believe much of his own rhetoric given his incessant
flip-flopping, then former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt
Romney is your clear choice.
Pat Robertson meets Hillary Clinton
For those who like the Nanny State, but prefer that
it be served up in the cadence of a preacher, then
I'd suggest Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas
governor and a Baptist minister. Writes National
Review's Jonah Goldberg: "Huckabee is a populist
on economics, a fad-follower on the environment
and an all-around do-gooder who believes that
the biblical obligation to do 'good works' extends
to using government – and your tax dollars – to
bring us closer to the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth."
Give class warfare a chance
Do you think your biggest problems are the result
of Evil Corporations and think that America is a land
dominated by irreconcilable differences between the
haves and the have-nots? You ought to start walking
precincts for former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C. "In
today's Two Americas," he said, "it is no coincidence
that most families are working harder for stagnating
wages when there are nearly 60 lobbyists for every
member of Congress." Edwards has a solution to that
non sequitur – more government.
Authoritarianism with a not-so-friendly face
If you want the trains to run on time, and aren't too
worried about minor issues such as civil liberties, then
Rudy Giuliani should be a top choice. The Republican
former New York mayor once summarized his views
this way: "Freedom i s about authority. Freedom is
about the willingness of every single human being to
cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion
about what you do."
'Wilsonianism' with a friendly face
Those who like grand big-government crusades will
love Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. Obama said recently
at a South Carolina church that "we can create a
kingdom right here on Earth," thus reflecting his
belief in Great Society-type programs. But he's not
hesitant to use U.S. military might, either. In 2004,
he told the Chicago Tribune that he would be willing
to attack vIran if it obtains n uclear capabilities. And
he promises to use U.S. might to fix problems in Africa.
Follow the Constitution
Those who truly believe in limited government and
noninterventionism will have only one choice, U.S.
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas. As he rises in the polls
(7 percent) and raises millions of dollars, the long
knives have come out for him from "mainstream"
Republicans trying to portray him as a kook. But as
the self-effacing Paul recently said to Salon magazine,
"The message is so powerful, in spite of my shortcomings."
Less is more
The best choice for those who believe that a president
should have limited ambitions is former Sen. Fred
Thompson, R-Tenn. Michael Crowley wrote in the
New Republic: "If Fred Thompson is as lazy as reputed…
he'd have stuck a Post-it note to his wall back in 2002,
reading 'Saddam?' and then never quite gotten around to
invading. Which, in retrospect, may not have been such
a bad thing."
Follow the shiny object
U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, is the right choice if
you are yearning for old-fashioned socialism with a
conspiracy-theory twist. Kucinich's Web site includes a
section on "saving capitalism." As "Share Guide: The
Holistic Health Magazine" explains, Kucinich "is a
dynamic, visionary leader who combines a powerful
activism with a spiritual sense of the essential
interconnectedness of all living things."
Straight-talking warmonger
If you like the idea of cutting through all the
Washington BS, but don't mind a candidate who
in many ways epitomizes that same BS, then you
might want to hop on Arizona Republican Sen.
John McCain's straight-talk express.
McCain, after all, is best known for his campaign
to erode the First Amendment by strictly limiting
political speech (and protecting incumbents) in
the name of campaign-finance reform, and for his
constant push for more war.
The real Bill Clinton Clone
Some voters still pine for Bill Clinton, yet are
getting the sinking feeling that his wife is a
different sort of politician. The choice for them
is New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, the former
Clinton appointee who embodies Clinton's focus
on small initiatives (i.e., a Green Jobs program)
combined with the embrace of a handful of
conservative policies (i.e., support for the
Second Amendment) designed to win over
centrist voters.
The Mexicans are coming!
Voters who are solely concerned about the
issue of illegal immigration should look no
further than U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo.
The Chinese are coming, too!
Those who worry about the "invasion" of
Mexicans AND also stay up at night,
fantasizing about a trade war with China
should put U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter,
R-San Diego, at the top of the list.
Opting for an also-ran
If you want to support a candidate who offers no
new ideas, little money to seriously compete in
the primaries and no chance of winning, then
you have four clear choices: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.,
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., lecturer Mike Gravel
(a Democrat) and professional candidate-for-any-
office Alan Keyes (Republican).
And you think third-party candidates are ridiculous?
December 12, 2007
Steven Greenhut is a senior editorial writer and
columnist for the Orange County Register.
He is the author of the book, Abuse of Power.
Copyright © 2007 Orange County Register
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment