Posted by
Playful Walrus on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 3:28:02 PM
Someone in my family said she liked what Senator Hillary Clinton was saying and she asked me what’s wrong with her, as in – why not vote for her? This person is not a partisan and not a staunch conservative.
This is my response.
=== === === === ===
Should Senator Hillary Clinton get the nomination to be the Democrat candidate for President, I will be voting for whomever the Republican candidate is – Mitt Romney, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, or Mike Huckabee.
You mentioned that you liked what Clinton was saying. The problem is, she has demonstrated time and again that you can’t rely on what she says. This is a woman to voted to use force again in dealing with Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, but then turned around and criticized the effort for political gain. I can’t rely on someone who plays such politics when it comes to military matters.
The President has some basic responsibilities. He or she is Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, nominates judges, and signs or vetoes legislation developed by Congress, and thus has some sway in setting the legislative agenda.
There is no bigger threat to Americans right now than terrorists motivated by their Islamofascist ideology. They hate us more than they love their own children. We need a President who is willing to kill these terrorists, disrupt their plans, and keep them from wielding weapons of mass destruction. Any one of the four Republicans is likely to be more aggressive in that area than Senator Clinton.
Part of defending our nation is securing our borders are much as possible. Any one of the four Republicans is more likely to secure our border than Senator Clinton, even John McCain. The public has spoken very clearly on this – we want the border secure before – or whether or not – any kind of amnesty is offered to illegal aliens currently here. Clinton’s base contains people who do not want the border secured. She is less likely to listen to those who have demanded the border be secured.
Since we have many public amenities and tax-supported programs, such as health care, public schools, infrastructure, and various forms of public assistance, border control is also a financial issue. In southern California, our emergency rooms, schools, jails, and roads are crowded with illegal aliens and their children. This lowers the quality of life for citizens and legal immigrants and residents.
Speaking of spending and taxes – each of the four Republican candidates has a strong commitment to slow government spending and to keep taxes down. Senator Clinton is more likely to support tax increases and even more government spending. She is more likely to support centralizing even more power and control in Washington D.C., while the Republican candidates are more likely to allow states more freedom and control.
Judicial appointments are another significant concern. Senator Clinton is more likely to nominate activist judges who cite foreign laws, thereby imposing the laws and judicial decisions of other countries on us against our will. It is the job of legislatures, who are elected by us, to make and repeal laws. Judges who serve for life should stick to interpreting and applying law, not making law.
Finally, if Congress remains, as it is now, in the control of liberal Democrats, it is very important to have a more centrist or conservative President who can issue a veto when they clearly go too far. Senator Clinton, if elected President, is less likely to veto what a liberal Democrat Congress sends her.
Mitt Romney was elected Governor of Massachusetts, and so is clearly not an extreme conservative. He has a proven history of leadership as Governor, in making the 2002 Olympics a success, and in business. I’m no fan of Mormonism as religious truth, but Romney appears to be a sincere Mormon, and sincere Mormons believe they are accountable for their actions, live cleanly, and they are very patriotic about the U.S.A. These are good qualities to have in a President.
John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and Mick Huckabee are far from being my ideal candidates for President, but any of them would be significantly better President than Clinton.