America needs, desperately to elect another Republican president in 2008. The reasons are simple and straightforward. We don't need another 1 party government, and Democrats would keep our borders wide open.
First, a Democratic president would yield a one party government again. We just saw how devastating to our national debt, foreign affairs, and domestic infrastructure that was. Little else needs be said on this count.
Second, a Democratic president will refuse to enhance our national security along with the Democratic Congress. They will refuse to close and control our borders. They will grant amnesty to 12 million or more illegals which will simply draw another 12 million over here. Some will argue, "But they will fine employers". Yes, legitimate employers. But, what about the great and vast underground economy which will grow by leaps and bounds, fueled by cheap labor of illegals who will continue to stream across our borders if a Democrat is elected?
If we close off legitimate jobs to illegals while leaving our border open, we will attract a huge number of illegals who will come seeking illegal jobs in our underground economy. And that means a huge influx of criminal types. With crime rates already rising, that is the last thing our country needs.
And lastly, a Democratic president will be unlikely to make the tough and unpopular decisions that must be made to save the Social Security and Medicare safety nets in perpetuity. Saving them will require a mix of all of the following, raising retirement and benefit qualification ages, raise the taxes for them, and trim out certain procedures and medical visits from coverage. I just don't see Democrats in a one party government being able to make those tough choices.
It is difficult to see who would make the right kind of Republican President the country will need and whom a majority of voters would elect. John McCain will keep us in Iraq forever and has backed Bush nearly every inch of the way of the last 6 years. The country does not want another Bush named McCain.
Tom Tancredo would be excellent regarding border security and the illegal immigration problem, but, most of the rest of his policies would be ultra right causing huge social unrest. Also, he would appoint hard right wing judges to the Courts.
Rudy Giuliani would never be elected by Republicans, too liberal on social issues.
Mitt Romney might be the right candidate, if he can dispel concerns about his Mormon faith and overcome his anti-abortion stance. Romney is a more centrist Republican who also has a record of going for practical no-nonsense solutions to problems without many of the conservative ideological barricades, save on abortion.
The old Newt Gingrich may be running. A Huge and Definite Nixay on his assay! The country doesn't need another hyperbolic ideologue in the White House.
Sam Brownback who "is using a network of social conservatives and Christian activists to raise his profile" is definitely not going to cut a majority vote.
John Cox, a Chicago CPA running on replacing the IRS with a sales tax doesn't have a prayer. Especially because he refers to it as a 'fair tax'. He has fully supported GW Bush's foreign policy.
Duncan Hunter wins points for his Border Security issues, but, would overturn Roe v. Wade, if given a chance. He is also a war hawk. These rule him out for a majority of centrist voters.
Some conservatives are trying to draft Jim Gilmore. Gilmore wins campaign points for lowering taxes, reducing government spending while fixing Social Security and Medicare, fighting the war on terrorists, and securing our borders. Gilmore has however, the typical conservative albatross of being anti-abortion and willing to promote strict constructionist judges to the Supreme Court. Plus his position on saving the safety net programs while reducing government spending breaks every calculator I own. It is Reaganesque "voodoo economics" at its worst.
Ron Paul appears to have the greatest potential to reach out to moderate and centrist voters from both sides of the party divide. And Ron Paul is a GOP candidate I would vote for, given what I know of him to date, to keep a one party government of Democrats from taking place. A former Libertarian candidate, Ron Paul has opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. Paul also has the distinction of having opposed George W. Bush and the majority of Republican congressmen on many other issues, including the PATRIOT Act which infringed upon our Constitution's Bill of Rights.
Of course, there is a potential alternative to electing a Republican. If a Democratic candidate could be found who would close our borders and control legal immigration, and show the same or better fiscal responsibility which Clinton did (backed by a Republican Congress), I would be amenable to considering them. So far, I have not seen such a candidate on the horizon, have you?
Anyone else have suggestions for a Republican candidate who could draw sufficient Independent and centrist votes to win? We have to find someone. The alternative of a one party government without national security is not acceptable.