I’m having what my mom and I refer to as a Jack Bauer moment right now. All I can say is, “Dammit!”
After Pat Robertson endorsed Guiliani last week, my reaction was one of mostly disappointment with a little surprise thrown in. Et tu, Robertson?
Yes, I firmly believe Robertson has betrayed his Christian values and followers by publicly supporting a figure who wants to use taxpayer money to kill innocent unborn children and supports gay marriage, just to name a couple of unbiblical positions.
The National Right to Life Committee’s expected endorsement of Fred Thompson is not a betrayal. I have actually been expecting this announcement for a few months now. I was just hoping it wouldn’t happen. When it all comes down, Fred Thompson is pro-life and will make a strong president. He just isn’t the president I’d choose.
Let me be clear, I don’t hate Fred. At the same time, I don’t love him. It’s actually hard for me to like him. To me, he comes across as an overly-confident, pompous know-it-all. I don’t mean that as harshly as it sounds. I think he is most likely sincere in all of his professed beliefs and policy positions. I’m just not a huge fan.
My ideal candidate is Duncan Hunter. An individual with years of experience in Congress and a voting record without blemish. A candidate who doesn’t have any questionable statements to explain his way out of. A candidate who is down to earth and confident without being cocky. A candidate who actually comes across as an average American rather than a Hollywood starlet.
I have to admit, although I was expecting the NRLC endorsement all along, I had hoped Thompson’s latest comments regarding Terri Schindler Shiavo would take him off their list. After all, as Kathryn Jean Lopez mentions on the Corner at National Review Online, the National Right to Life Committee honored the Schindler family at their Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner.
That said, it’s gonna be Fred. What now? We cannot afford to split the pro-life vote, or more generally, the social conservative vote. If each individual social conservative were to vote for their favorite candidate — between Hunter, Huckabee, and Thompson — the results would be devastating. Guiliani would win the nomination. This is why NRLC has decided to step up and endorse a candidate during the primary.
Again, I say “dammit!” Now I have a lot of thinking to do. I highly respect NRLC, but I adore Duncan Hunter. I’ve made that rookie political mistake of falling in love with my candidate. 
P.S. If you are in a similar position as I am, I would recommend reading Dr. Wanda Franz’s article, “When Common Sense is Lacking”. In some ways, it makes my blood boil. In other ways, I know she is absolutely right. This weekend, when I have more time to write, I’ll explain.
I had the chance to talk to Rep. Hunter at the gas station in Riverton. In fact, it was the Maverick, so it is unfortunate that John McCain wasn’t there too!
Also got to talk to him after the forum. Sept. 29, 2007 was quite a day.
Like you said, he’s a down-to-earth man and he knows where he stands, he’s genuine about it, and does so without apology. To reiterate what Chris Adamo said in his recent column, using the LA Gubernatorial election as an example, the GOP can win more elections (including against Hillary) if they’d choose candidates that are strong conservatives.
I’m not so sure if it is a bad idea to fall in love (or “really deep like” as we said in Bible college
) with your candidate of choice in the primary. That’s all part of the debate. Here in Wyoming, for all intents and purposes, the August Primary is the election, so it stands to reason to “fall in love” with one candidate over the other, even in the Primary.
Sometimes those loves turn to crushes and we have to love someone else heading into November, so for now, we’ll love Rep. Hunter. After convention, who knows. As long as I’m not forced to love Guiliani or McCain, and my teeth still grit at Romney.
No wonder Joshua Harris kissed dating goodbye…
Scott, I guess what Dr. Franz argues is that it is a bad idea to fall in love with your candidate and forget your true goals. In my case, and I would say in the case of all social conservatives, our goal is to elect a president with similar values to ours, namely someone who is pro-life. Fred Thompson is socially conservative. No, he’s not the ideal candidate, but he is very capable of winning a primary and a general election.
I honestly believe Rep. Hunter is the best presidential candidate we could have wished for. Unfortunately, enough people didn’t agree right now. I would love to continue supporting Hunter through the primary, but we have to look at what the results of that could be. If some pro-lifers vote for Thompson, others vote for Hunter, and the rest vote for Huckabee or Romney or even McCain, do you know who will win? Not a pro-life candidate. In other words, we would be handing it over to Guiliani.
It would be different if every candidate in this race was pro-life. Then we could afford to vote for our personal favorite and no matter who won, in the end they’d be pro-life. NRLC wouldn’t have had to endorse anyone. Unfortunately, Guiliani is not pro-life, he’s very pro-abortion. He’s also against a lot of social conservative positions - namely 2nd amendment rights, protection of marriage, lower taxes, etc.
We can’t afford to have Guiliani as the Republican nominee, or worse, as the president.
I think we’re coming from the same point, just different angles.
In a related note, even the pro-choice Park Cty. committee woman I ran into in Riverton seems to have concerns about Guiliani when I’ve talked with her.
The Guiliani’s of the party is precisely why I mentioned Chris Adamo’s article.