Oh, by the way, I think you were very clear in your earlier comments. I, however, was clearly not as attentive to your comments as you were mine. My sincere apologies, sir.

It is also my favorite Narnia book but I doubt we’ll see it made into a movie - too politically incorrect!

Romney still comes across to me as more a Stepford candidate than a statesman. If Rudy is sunk in Fla, I’m leaning toward Fred as my next choice on 2/5.

Go Pack!

One possible scenario I think the Republicans should steel themselves for is a scenario where no one candidate is the clear winner after Super Tuesday. Dick Morris said in a recent interview after Mitt Romney’s Michigan win is, “Chaos has descended on the Republican Party.”

What if there is no clear winner all the way up to the Republican Convention? What if, McCain wins a few here, Romney a few there, and Huckabee a few elsewhere? It would be a REAL convention, something I was told that hadn’t happened in America for over a hundred years, even before Teddy Roosevelt.

If that happens, the Republican Party is gonna be in deep trouble. You put your finger right on it, I think. If the Republicans actually face an eventuality of an open convention, I have doubts that they’ll do well in the general election.

Look at the primary elections so far. Republicans and Democrats are fighting tooth and nail for the nomination so vociferously that you could almost mistake the energy coming out of them as the general election rather than the primaries, and they’re starting to knock each other pretty hard.

I personally think the coalition that Reagan created is gone, fragmented. I think a new one ought to be forged. I also think it is a mistake for Republicans to constantly reference Reagan and look back longingly to his years as President. I think the Republicans should try to move on with laud the ideals that they do, in fact, have.

Personally, I think the mood of the American people is changing and they want something done to protect their way of life and their culture from disintegration. That’s what Huckabee tapped into in Iowa. I think a new coalition is doable, but we really do need the candidates to articulate their positions better.

When Mitt Romney lost New Hampshire and when he won Michigan, his speeches after the election were like he was on fire. He spoke from the heart and expounded his ideas. I think if he began that way from the start of this primary season, it would be pretty much wrapped up in his favor by now.

I think this is the kind of thing we need. Ideals coupled to concrete actions. Obama has a bunch of empty platitudes without any concretes. I think both Mitt and Rudy are in a position to propound concrete actions while appealing to American ideals.

I probably wasn’t too clear. I did mean that it didn’t seem that his religion had interfered in the way he did his job. I’m with you on the fluidity of the race. We have to figure out the candidates values, personal character, priorities, and winabilty. It aint easy. I think Mike’s last sentence summed it up pretty well. I just hope the primary battle doesn’t chew up the candidates too much before November. We all have to keep the Dem alternatives in mind.

He hasn’t convinced me that he can stand up to the withering assault of new-socialist liberalism that the Democrats throw at our nation. In other words, I’m still unsure how deep his conservative philosophy is. When the going gets tough - and it will get intensely difficult - how will he react?

All I can say is, I’m glad this primary cycle appears that it will go beyond February 5th until a candidate on the Republican side is selected. We all need to keep kicking the tires, taking these vehicles out for test drives.

Boy howdy, blogs are a funny thing sometimes. I read your remark inverse to its meaning. I get what you’re saying. Michigan, indeed, isn’t a Mormon state and Mitt’s father worked well there. Neither is Massachusetts and Mitt worked well there as well.

Going from governor of a state to President of the United States is a big leap and the powers he would wield would be exponentially greater…

… I just don’t know. I’m beginning to lean in Mitt’s direction a bit, but this election is just silly season. I know I’m not alone in feeling as though he’s being drawn and quartered by many of the candidates. Right now, I view Romney favorably, but like everything else in this crazy election, that can change.

I know hard line Democrats considering Republicans, and hardcore Republicans considering Democrats. It’s all just so darn fluid.

I still remember the campaigns that Reagan ran — he was excoriated for being a lightweight, who didn’t have a grasp of all the details. But Reagan had what every great President needs - core principles and the will and determination to stick to them in deciding the great questions, regardless of the details. The differences between him and James Earl Carter, who obsessed over everything and made a real success of nothing, mark Reagan as on or our great Presidents, while Jimmy will be remembered to history mostly for his shameful post-Presidential activities.

The little I can learn of Fred Thompson makes me think that he could be the hedgehog in this race….the man who would doggedly lead our nation where it needs to go, regardless of the sniping and abuse from the left and everyone else who hates America.

I just don’t know….but there’s time, and there’s prayer. And I’m using my time to both study and pray because this is going to be a VERY important election.

P.S. Bookworm, The Last Battle is my favorite of the series — and the scene you remember is why. God calls ALL of us — the still small voice that reminds us of what is right and urges us to do it. He will welcome all who listen and respond….. And never forget the corallary…..regardless of whose name you claim, if you do evil, you are serving Tasch.

Well, … huh? I don’t suppose you read what I wrote…

Michigan is not a Mormon state and apparently Mitt’s father was OK with the voters there. And it doesn’t look like Mitt’s religion affected his ability to work with business leaders. I’d say you are safe in basing your decision on what you see.

My Bible says that if Christ is not reveal to someone, I am to demonstration Christ’s love and let them live according to the light of their own conscience. I don’t know enough about Romney to know if his fruits are good or bad or in between, but I quite agree with you that Romney’s theology should be left up between him and his Creator.

Romney, unlike Huckabee , has not made his faith central to his campaign for the Presidency. Huckabee keeps on flashing his evangelical credentials like a government issued badge, and in that case, his stances there are fair game. Romney tried to play his Mormon belief down, not up.

Here’s the bottom line for me for a candidate for President. Will he have the wherewithal to preserve our Republic when the natural disasters and the terrorists hit us again? The temptation in any democracy is to aggregate more power to a central location.

Bush has resolutely refused to do it when 9/11 hit even as our Legislative Branch hollered for it (hardly the fascism everyone on the Left accused him of). One of the by products of their hollering is that bloated monstrosity called Homeland Security. Bush and the Joint Chiefs begged Congress not to hoist this on the country.

If we get hit again, I would want someone steady in office who is steady and whose load stone is the preservation of our Republic. I want someone who isn’t going to do the expedient thing and appease the mob-ocracy in many quarters of our nation.

I have a feeling we’re passing through perilous times and we’re probably going to hit some kind of crisis in the near term, terrorists strike or not; and when that crisis hits, I want a President who would rally the people and preserve our Republic rather than dissolve into a American style dictatorship, benign though it might appear at first.

History buffs must remember that when Rome dissolved from a Republic to an empire Rome kept all the outward forms of a Republic, including elections and a Senate.

With all this said, no matter who is in office, I think we’re reaching a state of fundamental choice as a nation, of who we ultimately are. This election is only but one expression of this choice. It’s an important choice, but it’s only one of thousands.

In a way, I think the manner in which we’ll conduct this election is strangely more important than who is ultimately elected. Will we, the people, listen to accusation? Will we stampede into fascism and dissolve our Republic? Will we allow envy and victimology and entitlement determine how we conduct ourselves? … and thousands of more questions.

I believe Britain underwent a similar choice after Maggie Thatcher. The British went with their politics of envy and they elected Tony Blair, who when the smoke cleared was more the executioner of Britain than the savior he proclaimed himself to be. Through Blair and his policies, Britain vanished into the belly of the EU. We have a very similar choice as a people, to remain ourselves or be swallowed up in the Global Government behemoth we see rising.

In electing our President, it will matter very much who sits in the Oval Office when we finally confront the reality of a global world government. But like you referenced in your statement above, Mrs. Bookworm, “by their fruits you will know them.” The surface results we’ll see from this election will be but the overflow of the heart of the American people, and even with that we won’t see the result for some time until after the dust has settled.

For instance, we’re in the longest war since the Revolutionary War and we’ve re-elected the President and backed the surge as a people. Who knew this was possible from where we stood in the election of 2006? Who knew we were as steadfast as that?