Rhyme and Reason in 2008

I couldn't agree more with Peggy Noonan's assessment of the 2008 presidential candidates.

If anything, let's please just elect a reasonable person this coming year.

Clinton? NOT REASONABLE. As Noonan states:

Hillary Clinton? No, not reasonable. I concede her sturdy mind, deep sophistication, and seriousness of intent. I see her as a triangulator like her husband, not a radical but a maneuverer in the direction of a vague, half-forgotten but always remembered, leftism.

My central problem is that the next American president will very likely face another big bad thing, a terrible day, or days, and in that time it will be crucial--crucial--that our nation be led by a man or woman who can be, at least for the moment and at least in general, trusted. Mrs. Clinton is the most dramatically polarizing, the most instinctively distrusted, political figure of my lifetime. Yes, I include Nixon. Would she be able to speak the nation through the trauma? I do not think so. And if I am right, that simple fact would do as much damage to America as the terrible thing itself.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Now, I wasn't alive during Watergate--but Noonan was. More distrusted than Nixon? Mull that over, folks.

Edwards? NOT REASONABLE. This career ambulance chaser who spews misplaced populism is a terrible expression of the contorted, contrived "reason" our society has imagined for itself.

Obama? REASONABLE--sort of. A young buck for sure and even pretty likable for all but the most racially bigoted among us, Barack Hussein Obama on the ticket would certainly show that

This is an opportunity to assert freshly what his victory means, and will mean, for America. This is a break with the past, a break with the tired old argument, a break with the idea of dynasty, the idea of the machine, the idea that there are forces in motion that cannot be resisted . . .

He would then have to prove to the American electorate his seizing upon such an opportunity.

McCain? REASONABLE. As a war hero and a veteran senator, he makes us proud (even if we do cringe at his Cretaceous Era looks and mannerisms).

Romney? REASONABLE. Just why does the whole flip-flop argument wear thin, Peggy?

...everyone in politics gets to change his mind once. That is, you can be pro-life and then pro-choice but you can't go back to pro-life again, because if you do you'll look like a flake. The positions Mr. Romney espouses now are the positions he will stick with. He has no choice.

He'll maintain his current positions. Anything else would be political suicide. Romney is a master executive manager--not a label oft attributed to anyone in the current administration. Because of those two words, executive management, I support Romney. I wish to to restore the presidency as the zenith office of compelling executive political leadership.

Huckabee? Sorry, NOT REASONABLE. Faux-conservatism and über-Christianity gave him a spike of support, but the new man from Hope has made one gaffe too many whilst becoming a transparent political character around the national dinner table.

Yes, Giuliani is reasonable. But a socially liberal candidate for the Republicans means a bloodbath at the polls for the GOP. Only another 9/11 could garner the votes he needs to become a presidential candidate (knock on wood).

2008 will very much reflect upon the presence or absence of reason in this country.