My look at the candidates for the 2008 presidential race will start with those who are least likely to win their nominations. Let's just get the also-rans out of the way and get to main players. In particular let's examine Ron Paul and John Edwards.
First, let's look at Ron Paul. OK! Who's next? Just kidding!
Ron Paul is a long time Libertarian who was elected to Congress in the party that is most closely aligned with Libertarian ideology, the GOP. On economics, I have to like the guy. He's in favor of lower taxes, fewer regulations etc. But on foreign policy, he will ruin us. Paul is an isolationist. He, like many on the Left, thinks that if we just get out of the Middle East, the Islamo-fascists will suddenly like us again. He confuses military bases in countries such as Saudi Arabia with military occupation. This, in my mind, is not just silly, but is in complete denial of simple facts. Furthermore, it will only embolden our enemies. After all, Ossama bin Ladin himself said that our retreat from Somalia (Thanks, Bill!) was a sign that we can be beaten.
Other than his harebrained foreign policy ideas, he just comes across as a grouchy old man. Worse, he looks like he might be insane. This, of course, is purely superficial, but we are looking for the next president of the United States. Is this what we want? Then again, do we want a president who was endorsed by transvestites and strippers?
Ah! John Edwards! He of the silky locks and $1500 haircuts. What a piece of work this guy is!
John Edwards is campaigning on behalf of that other America. Not those in the neighborhood he lives in, although he did succeed in ridding himself of a poor Republican, gun-toting neighbor who couldn't afford to fix up his property. No, he's out to help the poor, not with his own money but with yours. He gets credit from many on the Left for not being beholden to any special interests. As if trial lawyers weren't one of the most expensive special interests burdening America.
Yes, folks! Trial Lawyers, Those same happy people who brought us the $4 million cup of coffee and the idea that a dry cleaner can be sued out of business for ruining a pair of pants. What has John Edwards done to further the cause? Well, he "worked" his way out of the America he wants to represent into the ranks of the rich America by suing obstetricians for failing to perform C-sections. This was despite the fact that there was no proof that C-sections would prevent cerebral palsy. If that weren't loopy enough, he did it by "channeling" the spirits of these poor kids, in utero no less, giving them "voice" in the court rooms. Not only was he responsible for reducing the number of obstetricians available to pregnant women around the country, he also put those women's lives at risk because those obstetricians still in business performed more C-sections than necessary, all to avoid a lawsuit from the likes of John Edwards.
John Edwards wants, along with the other two Democratic candidates, to nationalize healthcare. Imagine: all the efficiency of the DMV with all the compassion of the IRS. I feel healthier already! If that weren't enough, he has also proposed that folks be mandated for certain tests and procedures. I wonder if that means C-sections for all, whether they need them or not?
Don't forget higher taxes! Not to be out taxed by Obama and Hillary, Edwards is right out there with taxes on anything he can imagine. Naturally, he couches it in the class warfare rhetoric of his "Two Americas". But never doubt that both Americas are going to get C-sections on their wallets. It's the way it's always done by the Left.
Let's recall why, in yesterday's column, I considered him to be one half a candidate: in the 2004 election, he couldn't even carry his own state. Obviously, if the people who know him best don't want him, then he is needed in the White House!
Also from 2004, remember when, in his finest preacher's voice, he declared that Christopher Reeves will walk again if he and Kerry were elected? Who writes his stuff? He could get a job writing for Saturday Night Live -- at least whenever the writers' strike ends.
Not to leave Edwards out of the gratuitous criticism leveled at Ron Paul, let's also mention that, besides his silky hair and his womanly virtues ( Remember when his wife tried to make the case that he was more of a woman than Hillary?) he also blinks continuously. It's annoying. Most people who blink like that are pegged as liars.
Again, purely superficial, I know. But many vote on appearances alone, so I just thought I'd throw that out there.
Essentially, I believe, Edwards is vying for the position of king maker. He's going to drop out sooner or later and see what kind of a deal he can get from either Obama or Hillary. Who ever gives him the most, in policy perks and the vice presidency candidacy, will get John Edwards' pitiful number of supporters.
Honorable mentions also go out to Bill Richardson, for best supporting role to the Hillary campaign; Dennis Kucinich, for representing the terrorists and the UFO community; Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter, for pushing the immigration issue; and a very special mention of Alan Keyes.
Alan Keyes deserves a few words more than the other honorable mentions. He is a man of undeniable faith, both in God and in Constitutional governance. What he brings to the table is profound respect for life, finding in the Constitution one of the most perfect arguments against abortion and euthanasia. I like his stances and his take-no-prisoners style. Had he more time to run a better campaign for the Illinois Senate seat, Barak Obama would have been in this column as an also ran. Unfortunately, he does not resonate with the majority of voters and does not get anywhere near the media attention he deserves. So it is with deep regret that I grant Alan Keyes this place, however special the mention, in this list of the runners up.
We'll talk more about the leading candidates tomorrow.
Copyright January 19th, 2008