This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Monday, February 13, 2012

Our Readers Debate

The Buckley Rule was promulgated by the late conservative icon William F. Buckley, Jr., “Nominate the most conservative candidate who is electable.”   


The Limbaugh Rule.  Limbaugh wants to replace the Buckley Rule with the Limbaugh Rule “In an election year when voters are fed up with liberalism, you vote for the most conservative Republican in the primary — period.”   (Proposing his rule before the 2010 election, Limbaugh said we would have to be clairvoyant to use Buckley’s rule.   Also, using an illustration to strengthen his argument, he said  if we used polling we would not be having Christine O’Donnell--who at the time was down 25 points.)


guy faulkes said...

The most conservative candidate (Santorum) is the most electable. To think other wise is foolish.

Sarkazein said...

I too am for Santorum. A good indication of who is more electable, is who can get more votes in their own Party's Primary. I have yet to see any candidate lose in the primary and go on to win the general. I have yet to see any candidate lose in his Party's primary, start another Party, and go on to win the general.

Johnny Rico said...

Santorum is about as good as it gets. And that's not good enough.

NewGuy said...

I could enthusiastically support Santorum. He has his weaknesses as do all the available candidates, but he is a lot better than what we have now!

Sarkazein said...

Can you imagine? Our candidates may have trouble beating a failed President.

NewGuy said... long as we insist on perfection in a candidate, we are bound to have these little family disagreements. Once the primary season is behind us and we are faced with choosing between the two viable candidates that emerge, things will come into better focus.

But I do agree with you. We are very likely to have trouble beating this "failed president". We have a substantial percentage of voters - perhaps even a majority- who will vote based on the charisma of a candidate and the marketing efforts of his campaign.

Obama has done us great harm in many ways, not the least of which is the spending of money we don't have; the accumulation of more and more debt resulting (for the first time in our history) in the lowering of our credit rating! Even the phony budget he is bragging about today forecasts that in the year 2022 we will spend about a trillion more than we take in! In one year! Ten years from now! When we should be talking about eliminating our annual deficit and reducing our overall debt, he is instead talking about going into debt at a slightly lower pace. Ten years out!

Let's hope that voters will wake up and take this seriously!

Sarkazein said...

NewGuy- We insist on perfection, or close. This reminds me of the 98 year old male virgin holding out for the perfect woman. In life we must compromise. It is a reality. I think we can all agree, even the non-perfect weren't that bad. Reagan included.

Sarkazein said...

Also making this election more difficult is the extreme access to everything the candidate has ever said-- YouTube etc. We have now entered a political era where no one is allowed to change his mind, refine his philosophy, misspeak, or err (Republicans that is). The public changes their minds, but the candidates may not. The Romney abortion YouTube video is telling. But, as anti-abortion as I am (now), I know he will be 99% less likely to appoint Supreme Court Justices who will rule in favor of Planned Parenthood, forced abortion, tax funded government mobile abortion clinics and euthanasia.

guy faulkes said...

I do not insist on perfection. I do insist on a candidate that shows some competence in telling the truth and someone that reflects at least most of my values. Neither Obama nor Romney do this.

I will not support anyone merely because of party. Once again, there is not difference in Obama and Romney. Nominees to the Supreme Court will reflect this.

Limbaugh is right.