« Weekly Re-Cap | October 21 - 27, 2007 | Main | Is Your 401(k) Plan Charging Hidden Fees? »
Mr. J.Q. Public: Which GOP Candidate Will Keep Us Safe Against the Threat of Illegal Aliens?
by Mr. J.Q. Public, III, Conservative | Note: Damozel, one of this blog's administrator's has designated this piece "satire" because, evidently, a load of liberals--as always terrified of the truth---objected to it. I object to this craven attempt to placate the mob. It is not satire and I was entirely sincere. If my fearless truth-telling gets me banned from this blog, I will walk away, a martyr to the cause, and start my own, rival blog. Then we'll see.
Democratic candidate Bill Richardson -- known for his pro-illegal-immigration opposition to the practical solution of building a giant 1,000-mile border fence to protect us from the menace of Mexico -- announced to supporters in Texas that he would get to the bottom of the 60-year-old mystery of the Roswell flying saucers, once again revealing his tendency to put the welfare of aliens who illegally penetrate our atmosphere before the safety and security of the American people.
As you would expect from a Democrat, he implies that the Department of Defense is somehow involved in an ongoing cover-up rather than stepping up with a plan to prevent further alien incursion into US airspace. As Jules Crittenden says, you don't have to wonder what the other Democrats will say on this issue: they will just whine about the human rights of aliens that aren't (as far as we know) even human and wonder why they hate us.
In Truman Lied, Aliens Died, Crittenden reveals that Giuliani is the only Republican so far to acknowledge the necessity of a "strong, extraterrestrial defense."
Will the other Republican candidates take a stand? Sadly, Giuliani is not a candidate whom I as an evangelical Christian can get behind. First, he has worn women's clothing. As every Christian should know, Deuteronomy 22:5 states that "[T]he woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are an abomination unto the LORD thy God." I take the liberal view that this passage does not preclude women from wearing jeans and trousers, such clothing being unknown in Biblical times. But this is an abomination:.
Even if it were not for this, I couldn't vote for Giuliani because of his noncompliance with the Family Values which are the duty of all true Christians to uphold. Focus on the Family's James Dobson, to whom I and others look for guidance, has made it clear that it would be better to let Hillary and Bill become president again than to vote for Giuliani. His three marriages are also a concern, since Jesus said (somewhere or other) that divorce leads to adultery and fornication.
While most people over 40 at my church (me included) have been divorced and remarried at least once, there were special circumstances in each case that don't necessarily apply to Giuliani. Anyway, we're not running for president. If there is one thing we need from the leader of the free world besides strong (terrestrial and extraterrestrial) defense, it is a proper Christian example -- unlike, for example, Bill and Hillary, who don't seem to realize that adultery is the same thing as divorce and who stayed together after the Lewinsky thing, which would have caused every right-thinking Christian to lose sympathy for Hillary if we'd ever had any.
While Frank Rich of the liberal New York Times thinks this won't matter, and that "self promoting values hacks don't speak for the American mainstream." He is sadly out of touch with America's heartland. If he doesn't think James Dobson and FOF have pull with America's mainstream, he's in for a rude awakening. I am Mr. J.Q. Public, and I am America's Main Street.
But what about the other Republican candidates? This remains to be seen.
While President Bush's former adviser Dan Bartlett said that no one, even here in the South, would have the courage to raise the real concern about Mitt Romney, I am prepared to step up, particularly with respect to this issue of extraterrestrial defense.
While Mitt Romney lives an outwardly (even conspicuously) Godly life -- and looks the most like Ronald Reagan -- there are still too many unanswered questions about Mormonism for me to be completely comfortable with him. If it's true, as I hear, that the Mormon God lives on a planet near a star named (I think) "Kolob", then there is grave doubt that Romney could be relied on to mount a strong defense against extraterrestrial incursions.
I doubt that it's true. Nobody who has gotten as far as Romney has in politics could believe something so bizarre. I am inclined to think that Romney -- like every rational, God-fearing Christian -- believes that God lives in Heaven. Still, before I give him my vote, I will need assurance that he is firmly committed to keeping out ETs, even those claiming to be God, at least until such claims are verified.
One definite mark against Romney is all the nonsense about evolution. After hearing over and over that he was a "devout Mormon," which I took to mean that he was at least religious, I was dismayed to learn that he believes in "intelligent design," an argument that a certain kind of Christian uses to try to interject some science into Genesis. Worse, Romney apparently isn't in favor of teaching the Truth about Creation in schools. While I'm somewhat reassured by the willingness of his first choice for Director of Homeland Security to use harsh interrogation techniques or even outright torture (such as a knife in the leg) to protect American lives, Romney will have to answer some hard questions about the alien issue if he wants my vote.
John McCain---who looks nothing like Reagan -- is just as divorced as Giuliani and, though he served our country in Vietnam, has expressed disturbingly liberal views about waterboarding. On the plus side, he did perform a stirring take-off on "Barbara Ann" when asked in South Carolina to comment on the best policy regarding axis-of-evil member Iran.
Furthermore, McCain firmly believes the U.S. is a Christian nation -- no matter what the Founding Fathers thought. (Who cares what they thought?)
As for other Republican candidates, it remains to be seen. Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, and Tommy Tancredo have the right idea about evolution, but Brownback dropped out. I guess it'll have to be Tommy Tancredo for me, since Huckabee (though a Baptist minister) has appeared on Real Time with Bill Maher, showing that he might be secretly liberal. That and our blog administrator Damozel (an acknowledged Democrat) thinks Huckabee's a nice guy.
But will Tancredo take a strong stand on extraterrestrial defense? I think he will. Like Giuliani, he has the right idea about waterboarding.
You might wonder why I haven't mentioned Fred Thompson. At first, I thought that if he entered the race he would be my favorite candidate. For one thing, he was there for Nixon when Nixon was being hounded out of office by conspiracy theorists during Watergate. Before Thompson entered the race, people said he would be another Ronald Reagan, and I believed them because -- even though Romney has the most Reaganesque hair -- Thompson has the most Reaganesque voice and demeanor.
Thompson looks like the perfect man to be the nation's Grandfather (and a grandfather with a hot wife -- who's a lawyer, to boot). Furthermore, we all know from watching "Law and Order" that he would take a tough, but fair (but TOUGH) stand on urban crime. I'm told he also has a lot of sex appeal in his own right, though I personally don't see it and I would like a candidate who doesn't necessarily have more sex appeal than I do but who nevertheless has a hot wife.
Also, as Chris Cizzilla or Cillizza of The Washington Post said, he got off a good line at Romney's expense during the first debate: "And to think I thought I was going to be the best actor on the stage."
But there's been a lot of talk that has made me unsure about Thompson. Though he says he's pro-life now, at some time he might have been pro-choice. Obviously a strict evangelical Christian can't let something like that go (if it's true). Anyway, the safest thing to do is wait till James Dobson or Bill O'Reilly or someone with the right conservative credentials tells me what the right thing to do is.
I'm also bothered by Thompson's attacks on moonshiners as a young prosecutor. As a strict evangelical conservative, I no longer drink, but I grew up in rural Florida and my own grandfather was a dedicated moonshiner. I've never understood why, in a free country, it's illegal for those who wish to make their own whiskey out of corn are prohibited by law from doing so.
Thankfully, Thompson reportedly wasn't all that good at prosecuting moonshiners. "I've seen a lot better lawyers," said Burton Moulder, the former sheriff whom Thompson prosecuted for selling a still from the county jail. "But he was very charming. He had a nice, clear voice." (Fred Thompson vs. the moonshiners) And he does have a nice, clear voice. I don't think that admitting this will seem gay to anyone.
But will Thompson take a strong stand on extraterrestrial defense? This remains to be seen.
You might be wondering why I haven't mentioned Ron Paul. The reason is simple. As the blog RedState announced last week, he isn't really a Republican at all.
To conclude, Republicans of all types need to focus much more closely on the important but under-publicized question of defense against aliens.
Memeorandum blogger round up here and here. and here.
Tags: bill clinton, bill richardson, Bill Richardson, border fence, Democrats, deuteronomy, evangelical christian, focus on the family, Fred Thompson, hillary clinton, james dobson, Jesus, John McCain, jules crittenden, mike huckabee, mitt romney, Reagan, RedState, Republicans, rudy giuliani, sam brownback, tommy tancredo