Posted on 11/12/2007 9:24:41 AM PST by daylilly
The media have designated the front-runners for Republican and Democratic nominations for the 2008 presidential election and seem to expect American voters to line up behind one of them right now even though the national nominating conventions won't take place until next summer.
Most Republicans are still shopping, and here are some of the statements they would like hear from a presidential candidate.
Republicans want a president to appoint only judges who will enforce the U.S. Constitution as it was written. They want our president to appoint only judges who publicly reject the liberal notion that the Constitution is "evolving," or that decisions can be based on "emerging awareness" about morals.
Republicans want the president to be a leader in protecting U.S. sovereignty and independence from foreign control over our lives and laws. Republicans want him to reject all United Nations treaties such as the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty, which would make all use of the oceans subject to the International Seabed Authority, the U.N. Treaty on the Rights of the Child, and the U.N. Treaty on Women.
Republicans want their candidate for president to announce that he considers it a presidential duty to prevent illegal entry into the United States. He should praise the American people for successfully getting the U.S. Senate to defeat the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill earlier this year.
Republicans want their presidential candidate to promise that he will never try to bamboozle them with a similar so-called "comprehensive" immigration bill or a so-called "DREAM Act," which includes amnesty for the millions of illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Republicans want their candidate to tell us now exactly what he will do to prevent the entry of the illegal drugs over the U.S.-Mexico border. They want a presidential candidate to say he will pardon Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean who are unjustly imprisoned for intercepting a professional Mexican drug smuggler.
Republicans want their candidate to build the fence on the U.S.-Mexico border legislated by the Secure Fence Law. Republicans want their candidate to promise to enforce the law against employers hiring illegal immigrants.
Republicans want their candidate to explain how he will lift the tax burden that Americans suffer today in providing a net value of $20,000 a year to every illegal immigrant household Republicans want their candidate to stop the entry of Mexican trucks onto U.S. highways and roads. They want their candidate to deep-six the plan called "totalization," which would include illegal immigrants into the U.S. Social Security system.
Republicans want their presidential candidate to protect parents' rights in public schools by repudiating the offensive and impudent 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision ruling that parents' fundamental right to control the upbringing of their children "does not extend beyond the threshold of the school door."
Since the federal government gives about $60 billion a year to public schools, Republicans want their candidate to promise to sign school appropriation bills only if they contain language to protect parents' rights to protect their children against such things as mental health screening; forcing schoolchildren to be put on psychotropic drugs; courses that promote Islam or homosexuality; nosy questionnaires about sex, drugs and suicide; and giving birth control to sixth-grade girls without parents' knowledge or consent.
Smart Republicans want their presidential candidate to reach out to Reagan Democrats by rejecting trade deals that are unfair to American workers and allow foreign countries to discriminate against U.S. producers and products by subsidies and tax-rebates. Republicans want to hear a presidential candidate's plan to get the United States out from under the hostility of the World Trade Organization, which has ruled against the United States in 40 out of 47 cases.
Americans want to hear whether or not their presidential candidate supports the "global economy," which forces Americans to compete against pitifully low wages, slave labor, and discriminatory practices imposed by foreign countries and foreign tribunals. Americans don't want to be patronized by being told that we must be more competitive with Chinese factory workers who are paid 30 cents an hour with no benefits.
Grass-roots Americans want their candidate for president to promise that the Security and Prosperity Partnership will not be a stepping-stone to a North American Union modeled on the European Union. Republicans expect their candidate to announce that he will never allow the United States to be economically integrated with Mexico and Canada, and will never allow the free movement of labor across open borders.
Most Americans want national leadership so that our economy produces good jobs that enable men to buy a home and a car, support their families, live the American dream, and confidently expect their children to have an even better life. We're listening to the candidates and waiting to hear them address these important issues.
You may agree or disagree with her, but she presents a good summary of the issues talked about on FR.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2007/11/12/republicans_know_what_they_want_in_a_presidential_candidate?page=1
Read the comments section, some commenters think she is describing Ron Paul, others think Duncan Hunter. One comment was she left out islamofascism, and was against capitalism/free trade. Food for more comments.
I like Phyllis Schlafly a lot but don't agree with her 100% on this column. It is just a summary of issues.
She means Duncan Hunter.
She isn’t indicating in this piece any endorsement for a particular candidate. She has leaned toward Hunter in the past, but not here and not today.
You could possibly be right.
She has been more of a free trade champion in the past too.
As for trade...yeah, I'm not with either of them on that. I do believe that her position is the same as Hunter's. This is the kind of difference I am willing to overlook.
Thanks for the correction. I shouldn't have implied that she endorses Hunter.
While she doesn’t mention his name in this piece, she has been very encouraging toward Hunter in the piece. And a number of these positions are his positions.
I think she is indicating here, to make your decision based upon good conservative reasons. And Hunter is conservative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.