Posted on 08/20/2007 6:26:08 AM PDT by John Galt 72
Giuliani? Thompson? No President Will Lead a Moral Revival
By Dan Calabrese
August 20, 2007
A friend recently indicated his strong preference for Fred Thompson over Rudy Giuliani in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. The issue, he said, is morality. Giuliani’s past marital infidelity, fractured relationships with his children and support for abortion rights and gay rights call his moral judgment into question.
That, say this friend and many other social conservatives, is not the kind of man we want to elect to lead a moral nation.
Any defense of Giuliani on these points can wait for another day. But a look at statistical indicators of Americans’ morality over the past 30 years shows an interesting lack of correlation between moral trends and the moral character of the person sitting in the White House.
Read the entire column here: http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc102.htm
No, but character does matter. I believed that in 2000 and I believe it today.
I don't want our President 'lowering standard' for acceptable personal conduct in our country. For example, I'm sorry, but I don't think our Oval Office (nation's highest office) should be turned into a President's PERSONAL MASSAGE PARLOR (i.e. Bill Clinton).
ping!
The Presidents of the United States played no particular role in the great moral revival that swept the United States in the period 1815-1835. That event, which sparked the missionary movement, was dominated by church leaders and by the people themselves. I can’t think of a president who led a moral revival, but I can think of presidents who by their upright example set the tone for a nation. If anything, there is a need for a moral revival in the Church.
Charles Barkley once said he was NOT a role model, but we all knew he was, because of his status and celebrity. We get down on those guys when our culture elevates them and then they act like trash. How much more so then, should the President of the United States be a role model? More than a role model, they are moral barometers of the state of this nation. This is so because we as a people must choose if we care about the moral integrity of the person we choose to lead us.
Many on this board discussed how terrible it was that Bill Clinton was such a poor moral role model. Are so of those same ones now taking the opposite position when the fellow THEY want to build a “Cult of Personality” around has led a less than wholesome life?
I don’t trust Mitt Romney, but I know his wife can trust him, and I respect that. If a man’s wife can’t trust him, how can I?
There are candidates in this race whose personal lives are exemplary and models of virtue. I suggest we direct our support toward them.
Neither will be elected president.
I consider all the candidates to be placeholders until a strong conservative leader can emerge. The fact that conservatives didn't have a strong candidate in waiting for 2008 suggests great disarray in our ranks.
I know some people will respond with "what about Fred Thompson?" I like Fred's views and will probably vote for him in the primaries and definitely in the general election, if he gets the nomination. But when I review his Senate record, I come away unimpressed. I still maintain if he weren't an actor, he would get about as much attention as the other Thompson who had a much more impressive political record. If Fred is the best we can do, then conservatives are in trouble.
I'm sorry, but CHARACTER DOES MATTER!!!! Not only does it matter--it matters MORE 'at the top'.
Regardless of moral leadership issues (on which Thompson beats Guliani hands down, IMO), Thompson is by far the better choice to lead the country.
Fred Thompson ‘08!
“There are candidates in this race whose personal lives are exemplary and models of virtue. I suggest we direct our support toward them.”
How a candidate handles himself personally is one part of the equation. Certainly there are lines over which they shouldn’t cross. In my mind, Fred Thompson’s personal credentials are just fine, and I expect he’ll make a great President. He has my vote and campaign contribution once he declares.
Romney, Hunter and other wannabes simply have no chance of winning the primary. Sorry.
Ohh Ohh! Can President Hunter please appoint them as ambassadors to Reality??? Pwetty Pweese?
He was single. Unmarried.
In other words, so what? Is an unmarried man not allowed to date in your world?
How adult of you.
“It is time we stopped thinking of our nearest neighbors as foreigners. I would immediately seek the views and ideas of Canadian and Mexican leaders. I would be willing to invite each of our neighbors to send a special representative to our government to sit in on high level planning sessions with us, as partners, mutually concerned about the future of our continent.”
You mean Reagan?
;-)
Well, he IS a pretty good actor, and as long as he has some good script writers of staff to get him to say all the right things, the American people will follow and I think he'll go all the way..
Rudy, Romney, and Fred may not be the conservative dream team that we all would like to see in the top three - but would we place our beloved Ronald Reagan there based on his pre-Presidential record alone? probably not. Yet look what he did as President.
For now we can stand behind our favorite, but when it comes down the final vote we all better stand united behind the one running against Hillary.
His Full Quote:
“We live on a continent whose three countries possess the assets to make it the strongest, most prosperous and self-sufficient area on Earth. Within the borders of this North American continent are the food, resources, technology and undeveloped territory which, properly managed, could dramatically improve the quality of life of all its inhabitants.
It is no accident that this unmatched potential for progress and prosperity exists in three countries with such long-standing heritages of free government. A developing closeness among Canada, Mexico and the United States—a North American accord—would permit achievement of that potential in each country beyond that which I believe any of them—strong as they are—could accomplish in the absence of such cooperation. In fact, the key to our own future security may lie in both Mexico and Canada becoming much stronger countries than they are today.
No one can say at this point precisely what form future cooperation among our three countries will take. But if I am elected President, I would be willing to invite each of our neighbors to send a special representative to our government to sit in on high level planning sessions with us, as partners, mutually concerned about the future of our continent. First, I would immediately seek the views and ideas of Canadian and Mexican leaders on this issue, and work tirelessly with them to develop closer ties among our peoples. It is time we stopped thinking of our nearest neighbors as foreigners”.
Ronald Reagan said the words above November 13, 1979
The president should be a moral leader. The character of the national leader has great impact on the moral life and destiny of the nation.
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.