TWO FANTASY GOP DEBATE ANSWERS
I never dreamt that tuning into the GOP debate tonight would be entertaining. With ten candidates on the stage, it was surely more of a Q&A than a debate. A debate is best between two people - that's the way I like it. How can you go for the jugular of nine other people at the same time??? Actually, the funniest moment was going on CNN's website to see that over half their voters loved Ron Paul's performance. It shows how far out of the mainstream CNN's shrinking audience truly is. Amazing.
The inevitable question of abortion came up to Rudy Guliani. He was giving his standard unsatisfying answer when lightning occurred there in New Hampshire and messed up his mike. All the others backed away from him and he looked up to see if something worse would happen to him. What a great moment. The audience loved it.
My fantasy answer from Rudy Guliani (after all, he was by far the most convincing on the war on terror and most "presidential" if you ask me - you didn't!)
"I know you feel you have to ask me this question. You always ask me this question. I want to say that I learned a lot from Mitt Romney. You know I have always said that I am personally against abortion. A leader of the United States has to have passion to make wise decisions. The kind of passion that I had leading New York through some mighty dark days. I have decided that what I personally feel is very important. What I feel about the war on terror has defined my candidacy. I have long felt personally that the terror experienced by the almost born and yet to be born is every bit as brutal as the Islamofascist killings of our soldiers. The pain of the innocents is crying out for justice. I declare that I will seek to convince women all over our country to forsake abortion for better alternatives. More women are spurning abortion each year, and I will lend my weight to make it as unacceptable to have an abortion as it is to smoke. The unborn will be be born and flourish and we will have a kinder, gentler, and more morally upright society. People will clamor for a law that will enshrine this new respect for life, and I will sign it."
The inevitable question of evolution also came up. Pastor, uh candidate Huckabee made a valiant effort. But he ended up contradicting the Bible. These guys are scared to death to be labelled a Yahoo for believing the Bible. He lost a chance to forever distginguish himself fro the other wannabees. I wish I would have heard:
"I know exactly what you want to hear. I am not a scientist, but in this matter, I believe similarly to hundreds of PhD Scientists (dramatically tosses a fanfold computer printout of the hundreds of scientists who believe the Bible from the Answers in Genesis Website). I believe James Joule, Louis Pasteur, Lord Kelvin, George Washington Carver, and many others should be asked the same question. I would offer the same response. It is God who created us as human beings in his image, and everything good in our civilization has stemmed from those who believe they are to act in a manner consistent with God's character and not in accordance with animal instincts. Frankly I do not understand why everyone here is so quick to say they believe in God but refuse to believe what God gimself wrote on the tablet given to Moses in Exodus 20:1. God wrote For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day... Unlike some of you folks at CNN, I do not view the changing and fallable theories of man as superior to a rather unique occurrance in history when God physically wrote something down. All the scientists on this printout, unlike the atheistic activist Stephen Hawking acknolwedge the Sovereignty of God. If as a country we insist on limiting our children's knowledge to fallable theories which have resulted in untold moral degeneration, perhaps there will be a third occurrence similar to when in the days of Daniel God sent a hand to write on the wall about the downfall of a then great nation. Perhaps a visit to the creation museum in Kentucky would give some balance to the educational monopoly of those who teach concepts which defy the obvious. I believe the Bible above the ideas of man, and we have a nation such as this, by consensus deemed the greatest nation in the world, because we based our society on the ideals of God as described in the Bible. The ideals of freedom, the ideals of liberty, the ideals of moral rightness and the ideals of a nation able to be a light to the world. If we as a nation abandoned those ideals, there is nothing to distinguish us from those parts of the world where exploitation, poverty, disease, and injustice are the order of the day. If you want to live in such a fallen nation, vote for someone without clarity and unashamed loyalty to our Lord. If you still believe in the America so many have died to preserve, vote for someone who is not afraid of a ridiculing press, not afraid of a fickle public, and not afraid to take stands which reflect the truths I know."
If either candidate gave an answer like either of these two fantasies, would not a huge percentage of the voters support them with uncommon energy and devotion? The fact that these candidates still dance around the essentials gives me pause. Who will stand? Who will not be afraid?