First we had Cain, Perry, & Bachmann, all of whom struck me at times as sounding illiterate and/or just not presidential material. I was relieved when Gingrich dropped out early on. I have issues with the gross hypocricy of his past (i.e. which one of his 3 wives is the "one" wife according to his definition of marriage? Not to mention allegations of non-payment of child support); his $1.6 million "connection" with Fannie Mae; but most of all, with his abuse of his power as speaker of the house, closing down the Federal Government -- allegedly because he didn't get the seat he wanted on a trip with Clinton on Air Force One. Is that the attitude we want in a president? Should taxpayers suffer because of an individual's egotistical temper tantrum?
I do have a lot of respect for Romney. I think he is grounded in financial reality. Which, IMHO, is probably the crux of today's civilization. But, when it comes to financial reality, ETHICS are critical. I was terribly disappointed to discover that he knowingly approved a smarmy TV ad that deliberately mis-quoted Obama, who was really quoting McCain in the last election. Only the ad took it out of context. I thought that was a new low in political advertising. Otherwise, I have a lot of respect for Romney. I have trouble understanding why his obviously tongue-in-cheek gesture of challenging Gingrich to a "bet" was somehow much more groteque than Gingrich's ties with Fannie Mae, and his 1995 snit over his seating position on Air Force One.
Huntsman seems to be fairly well spoken and intelligent. But he doesn't seem to draw any attention from the press. A former ambassador to China, he must have a more global view of our country's economy than, say, Bachmann, Perry or Cain. But he doesn't seem to have much of a following. Perhaps it is because he, like Romney, is a member of what many of the religious right call "the Cult?"
I have a lot of respect for Ron Paul. He is an admirable Libertarian. I like his honesty and consistency. I LOVE much of his hands off thinking! But I'm just not sure how realistic some this thinking is, in this day and age of global economy and global terrorism.
Meanwhile, there is a 500 pound gorilla being totally ignored in the GOP debates. The bankruptcy of MF Global exposes missing of $2.6 BILLION that was just plain stolen from their investors. While the GOP debates remain focused on issues such as medicare, social security, and "Obama-care", the criminals that were the primary cause of the REAL global economic crisis remain unpunished and, to an extent, unregulated. I have not heard anyone from the GOP address the need to identify, punish and provide restitution to those victimized by the sub-prime lending scandal and the resulting credit default swaps of the derivatives industry. Unless I missed something, the "Occupy Wall Street" movement has been ignored or even dismissed as rabble rowsers by the GOP candidates. The "kids" may not be well informed. But the basis for the movement is -- IMHO -- a very legitimate one.
In 1999, as a registered Democrat in MA, I cross registered to vote in the Republican primary. Bradley was one of my all time favorite politicians, but I knew he didnt' stand a chance against the incumbant, Gore. Between the GOP candidates, I much preferred McCain over GW Bush. I'm just pragmatic by nature. Better to have the best two candidates in the final vote, because one will end up in the White House. Obviously, there are fundamental differences between the two parties. But the intelligence of the individual is important. As is the founding fathers' insistence on a separation of Church and State.
Well, speaking of separation of Church and State, I guess I'll just have to leave it up to God to pick the best GOP candidate. Because, at least at this point in time, the GOP, along with the media, cannot seem to decide on much of anything or anyone.