When choosing candidates for office I tend to apply my own conservatarian model of William F. Buckley Jr.’s advice to support the most conservative candidate who can win.
That doesn’t mean that candidates I wouldn’t vote for for various reasons (including electability among non-Republican voters) aren’t correct on some occasions.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee:
President Obama’s national security priorities are dangerous. Two weeks after terrorist attacks rocked Paris, he is visiting France, not to focus on fighting global terrorism, but to tackle the global warming “security imperative.” America needs a commander-in-chief, not a weather-obsessed meteorologist-in-chief.
The federal government cannot control the weather. Period. We can control borders, military assets, critical airspace, and American intelligence. We can also kill Islamic terrorists and radical ISIS murderers. America needs a president focused on what we can control, not fixated on weather patterns which we cannot.
Even if we could control the weather, 95 percent of the world lives outside America, and we cannot control the behavior of seven billion people across the globe. Put another way, other countries refuse to tackle simple, dangerous threats like nuclear weapons proliferation. So how does Obama expect to persuade massive polluters like China, Russia and Pakistan to embrace expensive, job-killing global warming regulations?
Obama’s obsession with global, utopian collaboration and building a personal climate change legacy has made him allergic to common sense. Meanwhile, the real “security imperative” keeps metastasizing.
ISIS keeps swelling in size and power and Obama still has no strategy. In the Syrian city of Raqqa, which serves as the ISIS capital, Islamic radicals have established a treasury department with an elaborate system of taxes, public services and real estate rental agreements. Between oil production, smuggling, antiquity dealing and kidnapping, ISIS is building a comprehensive infrastructure.
What will it take for Obama to wake-up to this menace? Maybe he would take ISIS seriously if he discovered they didn’t recycle. …
Now more than ever, America needs a commander-in-chief focused on the global war on terrorism, instead we have a community organizer focused on global warming. Obama’s blindness is beyond baffling, it’s dangerous. It shouldn’t take another Paris attack for this White House to open its eyes: radical Islamic terrorism is a much greater threat than a sunburn.
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), reported by Real Clear Politics:
In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, Sen. Ted Cruz made some claims that are shocking, if true. “Renewable energy mandates are arbitrary government mandates that distort free markets and artificially raise costs for American taxpayers and businesses. In 2005 Congress passed the Energy Policy Act. One of the provisions in it was the renewable fuel standard, which requires that renewable fuels be mixed into our gasoline supply.”
“One of the mandates included was the ethanol mandate. Over the years, it has been proven there is a demand for ethanol in the market, but ethanol should stand on its own, not on the footstool of government.”
“The ethanol mandate requires 16 billion gallons of biofuels, requiring a plot of farmland roughly equal to the size of the state of Kentucky.”
Editors note: Also, the total energy cost of producing energy actually uses more energy than is produced.
“As a result it has diverted corn from livestock and the food supply, contributing to increased food prices.”
“There are tax credits for almost every form of energy… There’s enhanced oil recover credits for producing oil and gas from marginal wells, there’s an advanced nuclear power generation credit, clean coal inestment credits, and crdit for plug in electric and fuel cell vehicles. and of course, the infamous wind production tax credit.”
“Talking about wind: A two-year extension of wind credits alone costs taxpayers more than $13 billion. Which is enough to pay the monthly electrcitiy bills for 124 million Americans. How about putting that up for a referendum?”
“I don’t think that would be a close vote.”
Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog 
Leave a comment