Over the last few months this blog has addressed the Republican Presidential Candidates from an arm’s length away.  The blog has specifically taken the questions asked at the debates and the author has given his own views on how he would answer the questions if posed to him as a potential Presidential candidates.  This blog for the first time is going to discuss whom this blog officially supports out of the candidates running for the Republican nomination to face Barack Obama in the general election.

Governor Romney has a strong record in politics. He was governor of Massachusetts and saved the Salt Lake City Olympics. But he’s not my candidate. His unfortunate health care policy, enacted in Massachusetts when he was its governor, is his worst feature. President Obama has stated many times that he modeled his signature health care legislation after what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts. While the federal government does not have any expressed authority over medical care or insurance in the Constitution, the states, with the unlimited power they wield, do have that authority. Unfortunately the law is not a good one. It gets more people insured but it break the competition that the free market brings. It has been prove in Massachusetts that the individual mandate does not bring down medical costs in the state. Also the state tells the private business what services they must offer to their customers and at what price they can charge. Neither of these will only help prices in the short-term, until they drive the private companies out of business. It is mainly for this policy that Mitt Romney is not the candidate of choice for this blog.

She is a one trick pony that has run its course. All she ever talks about is repealing Obamacare. She has provided no substantive answers or solutions to the problems we face as a nation. It is the opinion of this blog that the government cannot solve the problems we face; it should get out-of-the-way and let the American people solve the problems, were better, and faster at it.

I was a strong supporter of governor Roemer at the start of his campaign. He makes a strong point of being “free to lead.” By that he means, to effectively lead an elected official must be free from the financial allegiances that they gain during the campaign from fundraising, to effectively lead. He supported his principle on the fact that he would only accept donations of $100 or less from any donor and only from individuals. That is a man who stands behind his principles. Unfortunately the networks and maybe the party has blocked him from participating in any of the debates held over the last few months. If given a chance to speak his views in those forums he would probably be more well know now.

The way Rick Perry has presented himself in the short time he has been on the campaign trail has proven that is not a good candidate. He got blasted early on for what he wrote in his book. He said that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. And honestly, he is right. Unfortunately he did not have the backbone to stand up for what he believes. He back pedals and hems and haws about reforming the system. A candidate needs to stand up for what they believe and tell everyone why they are right, not back down when confronted with a tough issue.

Newt Gingrich led the Republican Revolution of 1992, but this is not his time and no one wants to see him win the Presidency. Never mind that he was drummed out of office for an extramarital affair. That is a sign of an unprincipled and unfaithful man; not worth of our time or vote.

There are three or four more candidates in the race that we know will not win the nomination. Mostly because they have no name recognition. These include Senator Rick Santorum, John Huntsman, Gary Johnson, Fred Karger, Andy Martin, Jimmy “The rent is too damn high” Mcmillian, Tom Miller and Vern Wuensche. Most people have no idea who these men are, that is not to say they do not have great ideas that can serve our nation, but really do they have a snowball’s chance in hell at this point?

There are two remaining candidates that have my full support for the Republican nomination: Herman Cain and Ron Paul. Both are intelligent men of principle who are not afraid to say what they mean, mean what they say and back it up. Ron Paul spoke truth to power when he said our foreign policy is making us more enemies than friends and he defended his belief. He also showed a clear understanding of natural rights philosophy and classic republicanism in his answer in the CNN debate. When addressing the issue of what to do with a 30-year-old with no insurance he hit the nail on the head. In a free society that young man had every right to not buy insurance. Also, it is the responsibility of us as citizens to make sure that when something like that happens that we can take care of them. Ron Paul mentioned that the churches in his town where he was a doctor would serve this purpose, but there is a place for some government help to those who truly need it.

Both of these men also have effective, common sense, constitutional solutions to the problems we face as a nation. Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 tax plan is a genius plan of simplicity, equality, and constitutionality. Very few other candidates can say with any clarity what is their plan to help the U.S. Herman Cain and Ron Paul both have ideas and in the case of Ron Paul, has been touting them for 30 years.

Experience is another key reason. Herman Cain may not have any experience in government, but in today’s day and age that is not a big issue. In the last few years, the tide has turned against life long politicians and incumbents. This could be the time for Cain’s nomination for that reason alone. But he also has lots of experience in the corporate world, taking failing businesses and turning them around (Godfather’s Pizza and many failing franchise locations of Burger King). As a business man Cain has the practical world experience to know what parts of the government are hindering economic and business growth in the nation. Ron Paul on the other hand has lots of experience in politics, serving the last 12 years as a Representative for the state of Texas. He knows about the inefficiencies and problems that exist in our government from the inside. He can bring that experience to help return the government to its true limited role in our lives.

Ron Paul is the man because he understands the Constitution better than anyone else on the floor. He is a man who understands that the Constitution is a ruler and guide for our government even when it gets in the way of what the government or the people want it to do. He may not agree with all the clauses and authority given to the government in the Constitution and its amendments but he will still protect and defend it from all enemies both foreign and domestic. He and Herman Cain will tirelessly defend the Constitution and hold true to their oath of office.

Either one of these men is worth of being nominated by the Republican party and its members. Whoever wins would be dumb not to include the other on the ticket or as part of their administration.

Please feel free to share your own thoughts on the Republican field so far. Who do you like? Who do you dislike? All comments are welcome. Thank you for your reading. Have a nice day.

Questions? Comments? Concerns? Class dismissed!