A Ticket to Take on the Left

One half of XEKE.com has weighed in on the presidential contest with a wish-list for the GOP ticket, so I guess it's high time the second half of XEKE.com got off his keister and told the breathless public what he'd like to see on the ballot when he hides himself behind the electoral curtain. Before I dive into the specifics of my choices, I'd like to make two points very clear:

1. I will not spend this column tearing down the Republican candidates with whom I disagree or do not fully support. Now is the time for the Conservative movement to chose the best leaders available and support them against the enemies of the Conservative movement.
   
   
2. It is nothing short of hilarious that we're talking about the GOP ticket in the autumn of 2007. Folks, by the time the nominees are chosen, we're going to then sit around for about 9 months while the candidates waste their money (ours of you've donated) until the actual election. But I digress.

It's clear that none of the candidates is interested in moving Conservatism forward on the American ideological landscape. This is unfortunate, to say the least. Little has changed since I wrote Analysis of the Conservative Movement -- Early 2007. (I encourage you to read this sometime.) But for all the clamoring of the Conservatives for a Conservative candidate, it's time that the base realizes that this election is not about electing a new leader of the Conservative movement. Strike that from the list of goals. This election is about electing the next President of the United States, and hopefully that person is a Conservative. Certainly this election carries ramifications (huge ramifications), such as judicial nominations, tax legislation, major decisions regarding the handling of radical Islam, etc. Just keep in mind, though, that this particular election is not about advancing an agenda, no matter how much some in the Conservative base want it to be.

Now is the time to identify our best leaders to stand for America's future.

Creeping into the Conservative dialogue more and more is the thought (or something like it), "Just beating Hillary isn't enough. We need a candidate that we want to vote for." I have a hard time dealing with this statement. I love the idea of a strong candidate and ticket that motivates me to wake up early on election day and cast my vote, but what if that ticket isn't available to me? I believe it is still incumbent upon me to choose the lesser of two evils, namely, a Republican candidate that doesn't excite me. In the spirit of Sean Hannity, acquiring power is more important than ideological purity. I admit, though, that this is tough to swallow.

But why settle? I believe there is a combination of candidates to be had that would satisfy Conservatives, nay, not just satisfy them, but actually (relatively) excite them. And not only that, I believe this combination could bring down a Clinton ticket. (Remember she's got about 49% of the voting public saying that they will not vote for her.)

Mitt Romney has all of the attributes of a leader. I'm not going to list his resume here, as it is widely available on the web, but suffice it to say that he's been a successful leader in politics. More importantly, though, he's been successful in the real world, both with his work in the private sector and with his work cleaning up the Salt Lake City Olympic mess. Just listening to the guy is inspiring, and I'm not sure that Hillary could hold a candle to him in a one-on-one debate (where she might have to finally answer a tough question). [It's also time to put the Mormon issue to bed. (Has Mormonism been a problem for Harry Reid?) This is a lame excuse to shy away from Romney, and better Mormonism than any "religious" affiliation that the hedonistic Left has to offer. . . it's really not even a discussion worth having.]

"But Ryan! But Ryan! Mitt's no Conservative!"

Really? What is a Conservative? Limited government. Low taxes. Value life, both at the beginning and the end. Strong military. Strict interpretation of the Constitution. Stop me when I get to a point that trips Mitt. Respect and defend America's borders and sovereignty. Strong families. Self-reliance. Fiscal responsibility. I could go on and on. . . do you get my point?

So at this point in the process, Mitt's my guy at the top of the ticket. I am well aware, too, that it's important to balance the ticket. That's where Duncan Hunter comes in. Really, folks, does it get any better for the Conservative movement in this election cycle than Duncan Hunter? He's 100% un-elect-able at the top of the ticket, but his intellect will be a wonderful asset in the next administration, and that's why he's a fantastic choice for Vice President.

There is no candidate available who is more Pro-Military than Duncan Hunter. There is no candidate available who better understands the threat and the complexity of the Illegal Immigration issue (not even Tom Tancredo). There is no candidate available who has a better record on tax policy. Need I go on? And for the skeptics among the Conservatives: If you can't back Hunter, who can you support?

Close your eyes for a minute and picture Hillary lecturing Mitt during a debate about business or leadership or (I can't wait for this one) health care. Now picture Richardson, Obama, or whomever else it may be debating Hunter on military strategy or economics. This is the picture that America needs to see. The dependent Americans who have bought the promises of the Liberals for decades need to be exposed to the opportunity that awaits them with a Mitt/Hunter ticket.

Is a Mitt/Hunter ticket the only pairing I'll support come November 2008? Not in the least. I can vote for Rudy with a clear conscience (his abortion position is very different than anything the Democrat party has to offer, despite what the Libs and the Christian Right claim). While I'm not convinced Huckabee is a fiscal Conservative, I can certainly vote for him as he's solidly socially Conservative (what would be different fiscally from W, anyway?). And as for Huckabee, if he's the V.P., how much of a final say is he going to have on fiscal issues? I think he's very supportable as a Vice Presidential candidate for committed Conservatives.

I say these things to point out that there are clearly options available to the Republicans, and, to a limited degree, to the Conservatives. Rather than bicker internally, though, why not come together as a movement and a party and unite against the forces of socialism, Stalinism and liberalism?

Conservatism is what will lift the poor to the ranks of the middle-class, and the ranks of the middle-class to the upper-class. Conservatism is what will advance a respect for human life across the board. Conservatism is what will properly identify America's enemies and defend our citizens from our enemies' threats. Now is the time to identify our best leaders to stand for America's future. I support Mitt Romney in his bid for the nomination, and will be thrilled if he chooses Duncan Hunter as his running-mate.

Mitt/Hunter 2008!

11/4/2007