I want something. I want to say yes or no. I want to pick one or the other. GOP voters should have the clear choice based on the records and ideas of two viable candidates. As long as Mike Huckabee stays in the race, we will be denied that choice. While Mitt Romney has been the clear choice of Republican and conservative voters, John McCain continues to win primaries. This is due to two factors. First, several of these early states allow democrats and independents to vote in the GOP primaries. John McCain has been the clear choice among these voters. Mitt Romney has been running a close second. Second, McCain has been winning because many socially conservative voters are voting for Mike Huckabee.
Huckabee remains in the race for reasons I cannot fathom even though he has no realistic chance of winning anymore. He has not won a race since the Iowa caucuses. He came in fourth in Florida. He is not in serious contention in any of the Super Tuesday states. But Huckabee remains in. By doing so, Mike Huckabee is denying me what I want most. I want an up or down vote on John McCain.
So with great respect, I cannot help but ask Mike to Get the Huck Out. Now. Respectfully of course.
February 1, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Only a candidate like McCain will garner enough swing votes and independents to challenge the Dems.
This must be what Gov. Schwartzenegger meant when he referred to Sen. McCain’s ability to reach across the aisle.
OTOH, IMHO Ron Paul has a greater ability to attract independents and Dems dissatisfied with the current regime because, unlike McCain and Romney and Clinton, but like a majority of Americans, he opposes the Iraq War.
February 1, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Hey guys, the thing i fear is that President McCain will reach across the aisle with Supreme Court nominees like the “moderate” Sandra Day O’ Connor.
BTW -Thomas didn’t say he didn’t have an opinion. He said he never recalled discussing it. He said he couldn’t give his opinion because he might have to rule on it someday.
February 2, 2008 at 1:07 pm
On Wednesday, September 11, 1991, Clarence Thomas testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee considering his nomination to the Supreme Court. In response to questioning from Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Thomas insisted that, because of his heavy work schedule and the demands of married life during his years of study at Yale, he did not have or take the opportunity to participate in the debates and discussions of his fellow Yale Law School students over specific laws and cases, including Roe v. Wade.
Leahy then asked Thomas:
LEAHY: “Have you made any decision in your mind whether you feel Roe versus Wade was properly decided, now without stating what that decision is?”
THOMAS: “I have not made, Senator, a decision one way or the other with respect to that important decision.”
When further pressed by Leahy, Thomas said:
THOMAS: “Senator, your question to me was, did I debate the contents of Roe versus Wade, the outcome of Roe versus Wade, do I have this day an opinion, a personal opinion, on the outcome in Roe versus Wade, and my answer to you is that I do not.”
(Source: Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library.)
My final word on this protracted discussion on the qualifications of Thomas is this: When the history of the pro-life movement is written, Thomas will deservedly be recognized as one of the great heroes of the unborn. When the history of the Supreme Court is written, Thomas will be deservedly be recognized as one of the least qualified jurists ever to be nominated to our highest court.
On the larger issue, the point is that there are no guarantees that Republican presidents will nominate jurists to the Supreme Court who are reliably pro-life, regardless of their own pro-life credentials. I see no more reason to fear McCain on this matter than to fear Romney, and some reasons to place more confidence in McCain than Romney.