WE’LL GET THE
PRESIDENT WE DESERVE

By Mary Starrett
January 31, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

Try
this. Ask fellow “conservatives” who our next president should be. After you
hear the candidate’s name ask: “Why?”

Nine
times out of ten, you’ll hear some mutterings like: “He’s really conservative” or
“We need a Christian in the White House” or “He’s the best qualified.” Ask for
some specifics and you’re likely to see eyes shift downward as the subject is
changed.

The
truth of the matter is, most people are woefully uninformed and are buying the
lying of ‘front-runner’ candidates and their media sock puppets.

Last
weekend at a department store, I heard two sales women mention Ron Paul. I
listened to the following comments as I poked through the sweater racks.

Woman
#1: “He’s so creepy, I just kept taking that poll online ‘til it finally showed
I was for someone else.”

Woman
#2:” I know, he’s really a weirdo. It came up for Ron Paul for me, too, but I
would never vote for him.”

For
one moment, I questioned the wisdom of women’s suffrage.

Along
with the media embargo on Congressman Ron Paul’s silver medal showing in the silver state
as well as his unprecedented fund-raising, many Americans refuse to acknowledge
the one, true constitutionalist in the GOP presidential race. Many folks twist
themselves into pretzels trying to defend candidates who do not represent them
at all on the major issues and whose track records should be cause for serious concern.

Take
the recent New York Times Story which details the
ruthlessness with which former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani dispensed with
his those who dared to cross him.

Why
was this information just now revealed? The time for this frightening expose’
of the lengths “America’s Mayor” went to in destroying those who got in his way
was when Rudy was riding high in the polls. It would have served to let people
know just whom they were considering for leader of the free world. The
gutlessness of the New York Times in sitting on this story speaks volumes about
media’s complicity in covering up the crimes of the political “chosen”. Could
it be the NYT was afraid of retribution should this man actually become
president? Was it only when it became apparent he’d soon be dropping out of the
race that they had the guts to expose him? You decide.

Add
to this information the facts that Giuliani covered for a large pharmaceutical
company while its billion dollar selling drug Oxycontin was ravaging lives all across America.

People
who supported Rudy up till the bitter end, apparently weren’t aware of, or
didn’t understand the gravity of his work with a foreign corporation, which is
currently hell-bent on taking over vast portions of America’s countryside for
use as a giant transcontinental toll road. The so-called ‘NAFTA Superhighway’
is designed to make transporting foreign goods easier for Chinese and Mexican
corporations. Mercifully, Giuliani is out of the running, but that doesn’t put
us in the clear by any means.

Some
voters will bemoan the problem of illegal immigration in one breath and in the
next breath tell you they want former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee to be
president.

Obviously,
these people have not done any homework on their candidate of choice or they
would know Huckabee created a veritable sanctuary state in Arkansas. While
governor, he courted a cheap, illegal workforce for corporate cronies at Tyson
Foods and WalMart, thus lowering the pay scale for legal residents of that
state who then found jobs harder than ever to come by.

At
the same time, Huckabee provided taxpayer-funded office space to the Mexican
government, pushed healthcare jackpots for illegals and likened the current
population of illegal aliens to slaves brought here from Africa, all the while
suggesting that those who had a problem with the onslaught might be “racist.”

Huckabee’s
presidential “immigration reform” plan is to have those here illegally go back
to their home countries for one day and then come back lickety- split all
legal-like. The so-called ‘touch-back” program is nothing less than amnesty.
This, Huckabee touts as “tough” immigration policy.

If
your fellow “conservative” should tell you he’s a Mitt Romney supporter, again,
ask him “why?” When he mutters that Mitt has what it takes to lead our country
back to a more constitutional track ask him if he has any fondness for the
provisions of the 2nd amendment. Chances are he will ask what amendment that
is. You can then remind him (or her) that it is the gun one- up there near the
top of the list.

Now
would also be a good time to remind your fellow “conservative” that while he
was governor of Massachusetts Romney presided over a state, which has among the
most restrictive gun control laws in the country. When asked about those
restrictions Romney said “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I
support them. I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”

Or
maybe you’re hearing Romney is a real ‘family values’ candidate. This would be
a good time to mention Romney’s new found ‘family’ values don’t exactly square
up with some items on his ‘to-do’ list while he was governor such as:

1)
Supporting and promoting legalizing homosexual civil unions
2) Opposing the Boy Scouts’ ban on homosexual scoutmasters
3) Refusing to endorse original Massachusetts constitutional amendment defining
marriage as between one man and one woman.

Folks
who heard Romney speak during the Michigan primary heard him say “I’ll work
every day to change Washington and bring us back, because Michigan is personal
to me.”

What
Romney neglected to add was that unconstitutional ‘free-trade’ agreements have
choked the life out of manufacturing, and given unfair advantage to foreign
corporations at the expense of our national economy. In a state beleaguered by
a 7.4% unemployment rate, this is where the ‘free trade’ rubber meets the road.
At no time did Romney discuss working to end those trade agreements.

If
the conversation turns to McCain as a viable candidate, again ask “Why?” They
might point to McCain’s honesty during the Michigan primary when he said auto
jobs weren’t coming back to the state. Sadly, McCain was right, but he didn’t
mention that he has been the only GOP candidate to say the country needs to
fight ‘global warming’ by accepting higher fuel efficiency standards- surely
the final nail in the Motor City’s coffin. Even Romney admits that would be a
bad idea, calling a bill McCain supported to require vehicle manufacturers to
improve fuel efficiency by 40 percent an “anvil” around the neck of a sinking
industry.

Starting
with the First-Amendment-busting McCain-Feingold “campaign finance” bill he
championed, John McCain essentially muzzled advocacy groups like pro-life and
pro-2nd amendment organizations, with legislation that shut down ‘issue ads’ in
the last days of political campaigns. McCain called Pat Robertson and Jerry
Falwell “agents of intolerance” comparing them to Louis
Farrakhan and Al Sharpton.

Now
you can segue into McCain’s votes on taxes. When you’re told the senator is
“fiscally conservative” mention McCain voted against President Bush’s 2001 and
2003 tax cuts.

Maybe
you’d like to throw in that McCain, the “conservative” was behind anti-gun
legislation to restrict sales at gun shows at both federal and state levels.
The pro- 2nd amendment group Gun Owners of America says:

“This year it
appears (McCain) is seeking to ‘come home’ to the pro-gun community, but the
wounds are deep.”

Perhaps
now would be a good time to add that McCain supported amnesty legislation.

Folks
in Arizona and the rest of the country who are worried about the illegal influx
don’t think he’s so “conservative” on the issue. Roy Beck, executive director
of the anti-illegal immigration group NumbersUSA (www.numbersusa.com) had this
to say after John McCain won the New Hampshire primary:

“I
can tell you every single immigration activist and organization is terrified by
the New Hampshire results.”

According
to a recent New York Times/CBS News poll none of the
Republican candidates is viewed favorably by even half the Republican
electorate. By contrast the D’s like their lineup just fine.

Seventy-six
percent of Republicans asked said they might still change their minds on a
candidate compared with 23 percent who say their decision is firm. Among
Democrats, 59 percent said they could change their minds, and 40 percent said
they’re firm on their decision.

These
statistics are another indication of why so many life-long Republicans are
registering dissatisfaction with their party. If they wanted liberal democrats
to vote for they could choose Hillary or Obama or Edwards. Instead, holding
their nose and voting for yet another R who has abandoned the core principles
of the Grand Old Party is frankly, wearing thin.

This
election year’s unparalleled voter dissatisfaction- especially among the
Republicans can’t be ignored. With the release of the study showing the Bush
administration lied over 900 times in justifying the Iraq war, it’s
getting harder for the pro-war set to justify the bloodletting, much less
ignore “Bomb, bomb Iran”-type statements from candidates like McCain.

Voters
who have done their homework know that Congressman Ron Paul is the only
candidate in either “big box” party who is against the unconstitutional war in
Iraq and against pre-emptive strikes against Iran.

Our
Republic will surely not survive another election at the hands of an
ill-informed electorate. That is why it is imperative we get the facts and put
principles above party politics. Should the GOP deliver anyone besides
Congressman Ron Paul, we must be ready to take the initiative and vote for a
third party candidate.

American
poet Paul Goodman summed it all up when he wrote; “The organization of American
society is an interlocking system of…an electorate notoriously unenlightened,
misled by a mass media notoriously phony”

Unenlightened
and phony…a combination that will prove deadly for our future.

For
a comprehensive overview of all the presidential candidates from a
constitutionalist standpoint click here.

©
2008 Mary Starrett – All Rights Reserved

Mary
Starrett was the Constitution Party candidate for Oregon governor in November,
2006, a TV news anchor and talk show host for 25 years and a radio talk show
host for 5 years.

Executive
Director, Oregonians for Life, Board of Directors, Christian Family Adoptions.

She
is currently the Communications Director for the Constitution Party. The Constitution
Party is the fastest-growing minor political party (www.ballot-access.org)
and is made up of Americans who believe a return to constitutional government
is imperative.