The Website home of Karl Bullock

October 26, 2011

I've made no secret of my deeply-held belief that Barack Obama is the worst president in our nation's history, and that's saying a lot! The election of 2012 will decide, literally, whether our country survives in any form the Founders established, or whether we join the rest of the failed societies of history that failed, and if we do, we'll fail miserably. Few things are more important in our lifetime. My profession of faith in Christ is the one thing that cannot be affected by what happens to our country. However, everything else will be: My family, my livelihood, everything I own, and what I have to do to survive - all are up for grabs in the coming months, and so it is with you, whether you've realized it or not. It is literally that serious.

I've looked at all the candidates, and here's where I see them (careful - I pull no punches):

Mitt Romney. No, no, no. If he's the nominee, I'll support him over Obama (that's a no-brainer), but his core values seem to be up for grabs, and he's too willing to compromise his beliefs to do what he thinks he needs to do to get elected.

Rick Perry. No. He's a mediocre speaker, and now more than ever we need someone who can articulate his position well. He's off base on immigration issues, and he's been too willing to use top-down power to force families to do things that should be totally their decision.

Ron Paul. No. He thinks we're still in the 18th century, and he's way too focused on the FED (though the FED needs some focusing). He's a one-issue candidate at at time when we're surrounded by multiple problems. His stand on the military and foreign policy gives me some heartburn as well, and he's a lousy public speaker.

Michelle Bachmann. I like her on the issues, but I'm afraid she's just not up to the job. She'd make a good Vice-President or senior advisor or cabinet member, but I can see her having some problems in a debate with Obama. Also, I don't know if it's just me, but her voice seems to grate on me a bit. I had some of the problem with Palin, but that was offset by her tenacity.

John Huntsman. No. I'd rather have Romney! He believes in evolution and global warming, and flip-flopped on Cap and Trade. I'm basically concerned about how he'd handle the problems we have, and I'm afraid he'd not debate well with Obama.

Gary Johnson. No stinkin' way. He's for legalizing marijuana, and admits using recreational drugs in college. He's soft on illegal immigration, homosexuality, and he's pro-choice. He'd probably be the worst of the current GOP crop.

Rick Santorum. I like Santorum. He seems to be right on all the issues, and I would not hold my nose to vote for him like I'd have to do with Paul, Romney, Huntsman, and particularly Johnson. However, I'm not sure he's the best candidate to put toe-to-toe with Obama. He bears watching, though.

Herman Cain. I was an early Cain supporter, and I still like a lot of what he has to say. However, he recently stumbled on the abortion issue (I could have knocked that question out of the park, and I'm concerned as to why he flubbed it). His 9-9-9 plan has merit, and he was an early supporter of the Fair Tax (which I heavily support). He has good oratory skills, though he might not be able to completely knock Obama out in a debate (though it would be fun). I'm still watching him close, and time will tell if he peaked too early.

Newt Gingrich. Now, Newt has some baggage that we're all aware of, and that concerned me early on. However, after researching his life since his mistakes, he's admitted them, sought forgiveness, and his subsequent actions have been spot on as far as his faith and espoused values are. Additionally, whenever he's in the room with the rest of the candidates, he's the smartest one in the room. Watching him speak is mesmerizing, and I can't help but applaud when he speaks. He has imaginative solutions, understands the problems, and is certainly forceful in his policies. Additionally, he'd destroy Obama in a debate, which I'd pay to go see (and that's big!). His experience, his Reaganesque distrust of the federal government, his uncanny ability to speak without notes (or a teleprompter, Barry), and his general oratory skills are unmatched in any candidate running today. His biggest liability is that the press just hates him, and even those more "fair and balanced" don't give him much, so he'd be an uphill-battle candidate. However, view a couple of youtube videos of his speeches, and it's hard to turn away.

So, of all the current crop, right now here's my preferences: Gingrich, followed by Cain, with Santorum and Bachmann tied for third. It'd be find with me if the rest of the crop just dropped out.

Now, I'm a lousy prognosticator, but if I had to guess, Here's what I'd say: Cain is on top now, but he may have peaked to early, and is starting to trip over his own shoestrings. Perry and Romney will probably eat each other up, Paul and Johnson are a bit too la-la for me, and Huntsman just won't gain much. All this means the race, at least in my mind, will be between Cain, Gingrich, Bachmann, and Santorum, with Romney showing strong, but never getting above the ceiling he's always been unable to penetrate. Since Gingrich and Cain are both from Georgia, they can't constitutionally be on the same ticket, so a choice will have to be made there. But take either one, and put one of the other top remainders on the ticket with them, and Obama gets defeated, though if Gingrich is on top, I think Obama gets destroyed. I'm good either way. All this, of course, is subject to change

Things may change between now and 11/12, but whoever is the nominee will get my support, even if I have to hold my nose and vote for Johnson (ugh, the thought of another "President Johnson" just hit me!). Either way, Obama has to go, and the more lopsided the victory, the easier it will be for House and Senate candidates with the right values to ride those coattails.

There's lots of work, and lots of prayin' to do in the next 12 months, and we have a greater need for Providential direction in this election than in any since 1776 or 1860.

Karl