Saturday, January 19, 2008


My friends, we are at a crossroads in the Reagan Revolution in South Carolina. The "polls" suggest that Sen. John McCain is in first place. There is a new poll out a few hours ago, however, that has Gov. Mike Huckabee in first place by 5-7 points.

I'm not concerned about the polls; I'm concerned about the future of this country. If South Carolina, which has always been a reliable conservative state, goes for McCain, that will be an historic and seismic shift in the South. Let me be clear, that I have tremendous respect for Sen. McCain and am prepared to work for his campaign and vote for him in November, should he be the nominee. My uncle was a POW in Vietnam as well, so like most Americans, I consider Sen. McCain to be an American hero of the highest order.

But South Carolina would not give McCain a victory in the past, and with Huckabee and Fred Thompson on the ballot, it would be a colossal break with history if they did so today. The national media certainly wants South Carolina to start the McCain steamroller. So, apparently, do some of the Republican establishment, some "conservatives," and some on the Religious Right who apparently are more committed to themselves than to the values they claim to represent.

So while I certainly would support McCain, who would be a fine president and Commander-in-Chief, I question why some are backing off supporting Huckabee and Thompson, who stand for the "rainbow package" of conservative beliefs, when they are viable candidates at the moment. (What I mean is, while we might vote for McCain if he is the nominee, we have these other options on the table at this point. So why not go for the whole thing when you have the chance?)

What does this mean? Are those people really committed to the Pro-Life cause? Because only Huckabee and Thompson are solid on the variety of pro-life issues. McCain, for example, is questionable on stem cell research.

Thursday's news on some truly bizarre, freakish human cloning experiments makes that a powerful issue in today's South Carolina primary. While some are conducting and supporting Victor Frankenstein experiments, and we are the verge of man-made creatures that are half human and half animal, this is no time to sit back and relax on pro-life issues.

Supposedly, a scientist has created a human being - an embryo - from a CEO's skin cell and a donated woman's egg. This embryo is touted as a clone of the CEO. You can't tell me this isn't a cause for concern. This type of human experimentation must be prevented. So it is critical that we elect a president who will defend human life.

Which candidate would fundamentally reform or replace our current, unfair tax system?

Furthermore, there is the question of who will really appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court.

South Carolina surely won't fall in line and serve the interests of the few in today's primary, will it? Stay tuned as the results come in. If the Reagan Revolution has lost South Carolina, I'm not sure which is more scary - that, or the Frankenstein story.


Sen. Barack Obama had favorable and honest words regarding one of our greatest presidents, Ronald Reagan, and Republican leadership:

"Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it," Obama said.

"I think it's fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10 to 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom."

Fellow candidate John Edwards then proceeded to give his version of the Reagan legacy, but Edwards failed to base his version on the facts.

For all the talk on the radical left about "revolution" in this country, the irony is that Ronald Reagan led the only successful revolution in the United States since the one that formed the nation: The Reagan Revolution.

This revolution continues today, which is why this election is so important. We've come this far, why do some Republicans want to turn back?

No comments: