With Halloween looming, I thought it might be a good time to take a look at the truly scary things going on in the Presidential race. Tell me...
Who is most frightening to you?
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Huckabee
Duncan Hunter
Alan Keyes
John McCain
Ron Paul
Mitt Romney
Tom Tancredo
Fred Thompson
For me it's a toss-up between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, because I'm a religion wonk and both Mormons and Baptists are creepy. In all seriousness, Huckabee is doing well - we all laughed when Pat Robertson ran, but this guy could actually get the Republican nomination.
How bad could that be?
Well, Huckabee is in favor of:
-Repealing Roe v. Wade
-The death penalty
-Displaying the Ten Commandments in public schools
-Giving Israel access to our best weapons and military technology
-Supporting the Iraqi government militarily and financially
He is against:
-Funding for organizations that provide abortions
-Embryonic Stem Cell Research
-Gay marriage, civil unions, and even Gay adoptions
-Evolution (doesn't believe in it)
-Gun Control
-Amnesty for undocumented workers
-Troop withdrawal from Iraq
That's how bad it could be.
Romney's positions are similar, although he is somewhat less rigid about LGBT issues and stem cell research. Before you start thinking that he's the lesser of the evils, remember that he is in favor of abstinence only education, and opposed to medical marijuana. And here is the kicker - he publicly said, "We ought to double Guantanamo. I want them in Guantanamo where they don't get the access to lawyers they get when they're on our soil. I don't want them in our prisons. I want them there."
Are you scared yet?
I'm Skeered
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
I don't think I can really pick one who is most frightening. Almost all of them are truly scary.
I think Ron Paul is the least frightening, though.
I've been frightened for a long time now.
out of curiosity, do you think the government should fund organizations that provide abortions?
And before anyone jumps down my throat, keep in mind I am basically pro-choice.
I still have a feeling someone will find a reason to jump down my throat, so might as well give you an excuse: I think Ron Paul is less scary that Ms. Clinton
I think that cutting funding to those organizations is a mistake because it is being done by the Right in an attempt to shut down anyone who offers education or services that go beyond the abstinence-only platform.
As for Ron Paul, he is a Libertarian in disguise. He opposed the Iraq war, which I can totally get behind, but he is so committed to the removal of governmental influence in the lives of ordinary citizens that he wants to do away with the IRS, the Departments of Education and Energy, as well as FEMA. Hard to imagine dealing with major disasters without an organization like FEMA...
He also opposes belonging to organizations like the UN, NATO and the WTO. That kind of position might have worked in the time of Washington and Jefferson, but I can't see it now.
Hardest to swallow by far is his advocacy for letters of marque and reprisal against 9-11 terrorists. I'm not so sure we really want to go with a "license to kill" approach to international terror. It seems a bit like the English and French monarchs issuing Privateers licenses... It's bad international citenship at the least.
First and foremost...Hillary scares me just as much as many of the repubs. And if she doesn't have the same effect on the rest of you, you simply aren't looking closely enough, in my opinion. She's in that "they" group that many believe are controlling everything. She also buys into the same type of world policy when it comes to the middle east. The Clintons are also known to take money from the same groups as the Bush's. They represent two very, powerful, very "sketchy" political families. You want to give power back to the people? Please don't support Hillary.
Is it too much to ask for some new blood in the Oval Office? Or at least a new LAST NAME!?!
Ron Paul has some good ideas, and some radical, misguided ones as well. I can see his appeal amongst disillusioned conservaties and young adults. However, after a close glance at his views on certain issues, he reminds me a lot of Perot back in '92. He's got good ideas, but radical ones as well. The country NEEDS an intelligent, practical, problem solver for president. Anything else simply won't cut it when it comes to the problems that need fixing.
Hillary is putting on the facade that she is a "centrist" or a "pragmatist", and she very well may be, but my gut has just never liked her. She is the consummate politician.
Since Gore seems to not be entering the race, and barring Stephen Colbert winning the South Carolina primaries, I'm left without a candidate to fully support. I would be happy with Edwards or Obama getting the nomination. But NONE of the candidates, save Kucinich, have managed to cut through all the political bullshit on the issues I care about, i.e. Civil/Gay rights, and the War. If he didn't resemble a leprechaun, he might have a chance in getting elected.
I don't see why you are frightened of Hillary, but a retarded chipmonk with a heroin problem would get my vote before ANY of the current Republican hopefuls... riders of the apocalypse, all of them.
Yes, sex education is important, I agree! I think TV should pick up the slack some there; after-school specials need to make a comeback!
Yeah, Ron Paul has some radical ideas, but I feel the congress would balance him out, and he'd let them cause he believes in checks and balances.
I'm a little depressed. This is the second presidential election I can vote in, and, really, I'm using my vote to try to kill somebody else's bid. Sad state of affairs, I think.
Post a Comment