November 29, 2007

Huckabee Shines at YouTube Debate

By Stan Dyer

If you've been watching the various Presidential Debates, you've probably noticed how difficult it is to choose a clear winner. Whether it is the Democrats or the Republicans exchanging words, it is sometimes difficult to imagine the candidates represent the same respective parties. One advantage is that, while the front-runners spar, the lesser-known candidates have the opportunity to shine. In Wednesday's YouTube debate in Florida, more than one candidate took advantage of that opportunity.

Candidates Giuliani and Romney started the evening with a rousing discussion on immigration that resolved nothing. It is clear everyone agrees there is a problem, but not everyone agrees on the magnitude of the situation or an equitable solution. Other subjects of the night included abortion, war, sexual orientation, taxes and Social Security. The Republicans demonstrated that they are no closer to agreeing on issues than the Democrats are. This debate was similar to the Democrat debate in that the focus was on the opinions of the leading candidates and the leading candidates received the lion's share of attention. Yet, while the front-runners were ignoring time limits and elbowing for attention like body builders in a pose off, there were some interesting observations and poignant comments from many.

Highlights of the evening included Tom Tancredo of Colorado. He did not get much opportunity to speak, but his comment, "We can't be everything to everyone" was well said as he questioned why the country was spending so much money to go to Mars. He made the best of his brief opportunity to present himself. Duncan Hunter of California also made a good, quick point that China is "cheating" in respect to trade with America and it needs to stop. Rudy Giuliani made a stand on the Second Amendment stating he believed not everyone should own a gun. Ron Paul of Texas, on the other hand, was disappointing.

He has garnered a great deal of press recently due to his appeal to the younger voters. I was anxious to see him work and hear what he had to say. Yet, when he spoke of conspiracy, a North American Union and National Sovereignty, he just sounded odd. It made viewers wonder if all his talk on cutting spending and cutting government waste was more to entice young voters than to outline a platform.

As the evening progressed, Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, was impressive. While Romney and Giuliani fumbled with answers, repeatedly wanted to talk about what they did in the past, and ignored time constraints, Huckabee provided quick, concise answers to every question posed. Now, I'm not saying I agreed with him 100% on everything, but, in a presidential debate, it is good to see candidates who have answers, who are not afraid to make a stand, and who are willing to say, "This is who I am and this is what I will do". Huckabee did that. He knew the issues, he knew where he stood, and he gave his reply to each question without hesitation. That is a sign of good, effective leadership ability. It's called "decisiveness". John McCain of Arizona was another candidate who excelled in this area, especially when it came to the issue of trimming government "pork".

In the end, Huckabee shined, as did McCain. Romney, Giuliani and Thompson were too indecisive, spent too much time poking each other, and spent too much time on past deeds. Hunter and Tancredo both made good points with their brief opportunities, and I'm not even sure Sam Brownback was there. The real winners in this as in every other debate were the American people.

The debates do not entirely represent a candidate's ability to lead, but they do give a chance for the voters to get a better "feel" for the types of people they are electing. It is up to the voters to know the issues important to them, to do the research and to decide on the candidate most likely to best represent their interests in the White House. Whether you watched the debates or not, there is still a lot of time before the elections and a lot more time for research.

You can investigate these candidates as well as their opposition on the Democrat side by visiting www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/. If you want information on voting records, unbiased historical information or information on any of the other 300 candidates vying for the White House, visit www.votesmart.org. If you take the time to discover all the candidates and make the best choice, the clear winner will be you, me, and the American public.