With the Iowa Caucus finished, I have been reflecting a great deal on the importance of the decisions that are soon to be upon us in the coming elections. Choosing a candidate may be easy for some people, but the more I learn, the more difficult the decision becomes. I guess some people wait until after all the caucuses are done, and the Republican and Democratic National conventions have chosen their candidates, and then make their choice about which candidate they will support. I can see where that approach would make sense, waiting to see which candidate actually "makes it to the playoffs", but at the same time, it bothers that people treat elections like a spectator sport until the very last minute.
I have a lot of different friends with a lot of different political leanings, and I've tried very hard not to let politics get in the way of our friendship. Personally, I lean towards Mitt Romney as a candidate. Before you assume that I choose to support him for the simple fact that our religious convictions align, I want to point out that the reasons I have for not supporting the other Republican candidates (whose platform I agree with more, in general) have nothing to do with religion.
Several people I know in the local area have a thing for Ron Paul, a congressman from Texas - but after examining his stance on several issues, I find that some of his proposed actions are idealistic, but not very practical. He suggests that we eliminate the IRS (effectively wiping out the income tax nation-wide), and possibly the Federal Reserve - and not replacing either of them with anything. His solution to the SIGNIFICANT drop in revenue? Decrease government spending. Where? He doesn't say, but that could mean dropping government-sponsored student loan programs, decreasing spending on Social Security, decreasing defense spending... things are generally considered to be "good" and a wise investment.
Rudy Giuliani just doesn't do it for me -- his solution for immigration doesn't sound practical to me... issuing an ID card for every foreigner who crosses the border just doesn't seem to do much, and would really only increase the incentive to dodge immigration, and enter illegally. Think about it, why would most people have a strong desire to comply with that sort of legislation? As long as our borders are as porous as they currently are, then it's not going to work out in practice as envisioned in theory.
Mike Huckabee lost a lot of my respect when he started running a negative campaign... and he started doing negative campaigning long before he was open about it. Ordained minister or not, I don't think he has any business bringing up religion to discredit any candidates, doesn't matter which party, or what office is in question. When he attacked (he later apologized for this) the Mormon faith, he lost a lot of points with me. The same thing would have happened had he criticized Senator McCain, or Senator Obama for their religious beliefs. I wouldn't feel confident if such a man were to lead our country, and represent our nation to the world. Though I'm sure his own religious beliefs might make him a moral man, and his willingness to defend the Second Amendment make him a Republican in good standing , I wouldn't vote to give him the Executive Office.
As for the other Republican Candidates, I don't consider most of them viable. Barack Obama seems to be a principled man, and someone who I believe could be trusted with the execution of the duties of the Presidential Office, I'm not entirely confident of his intentions with regard to taxes, how he intends to influence monetary and fiscal policy, what he intends for medical care in this nation, and how he will approach the matter of second amendments. I would vote for Obama for the same reason that I would vote for Romney - simply because I believe him to be trustworthy, and most able to fulfill promises that he makes.
On a side note - this campaign has brought to light a number of critics of the Mormon faith - and I find the amount of disinformation available to be incredible. One of the chief critics is Ed Decker, who I wouldn't trust with a squirt gun. Please read about his past before you believe everything he says. Yes, he was once a Mormon, but he was excommunicated for adultery - I don't think his moral compass "points North." It seems reasonable to me, that if you want to get good information about a faith, ask someone who is a member in good standing of that faith. For example, if you want to find out what a Catholic really believes, would you first turn to a Southern Baptist? If you want to find out what a Muslim believes, would you ask a Jew, a Hindu, or a Sihk? Similarly, if you want to find out if Ford makes a good truck, would you ask the guys at the Toyota dealership? If you want to find out what Mormons really believe, find one and ask, or visit the website set up by the Church to answer common questions -- Mormon.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment