The Pendragon's Hall

Why do I support Mitt Romney's presidential bid? I do not share his faith so I obviously am not involved in some kind of Latter-Day Saints takeover of the world. Those who fear the idea of a Mormon President would be advised to look to the past. We've had two Quakers, two Unitarians, and at least three Freemasons as President. But look at the issues. I am one who tends to prize reality over names. "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." And what I see is a man unashamed of his Mormon faith who is staunchly pro-life, pro-family and pro-America. He has a stellar record of working hard with liberal Democrats in the northeast (as opposed to George Bush who really hadn't met too many liberal Democrats before he came to Washington), of championing conservative values in the face of unbelievable pressure to conform. It's not often we get a candidate with unimpeachable conservative Republican credentials who has a shot at taking some blue states out of the Democratic column. With a southern Republican on the ticket, he could easily hold the traditional red states while knocking out some blue ones. His moral integrity is beyond question. Now let's take a look at the others, shall we? Sam Brownback is great, but I don't think senators have what it takes to be president--most of them don't make great ones. Plus nobody knows who he is. John McCain...enough said. George Pataki...the snake abandoned his state to advance his own agenda. Rudy Giuliani...same thing. Plus the "faith" these three profess has absolutely no bearing on their positions. I refuse to vote for someone who calls himself a Catholic and votes like John Kerry. If McCain or Pataki have any religious faith at all, I surely don't see them professing it. The faith difference doesn't bother me. Romney is the best Republican candidate on the issues (by extension, the best in the field) and so he is my unequivocal choice for 44th President of the United States.

But for me it is always exciting to see the various Presidents get honored--even ones that I might not see as all that great. I actually got interested in history by learning about the different people on the money and I am hoping that perhaps my daughter might follow in my footsteps. It's an interesting story to learn.

Michael Reagan had an interesting piece in the local paper today telling Republicans, in essence, to just shut up and support their Party unless they want to lose in '08 as well. He could be charged with not thinking for himself, but he noted that even his father would vote the Party line regardless of his opinion beforehand. Any of the Republicans on tap (well, at least Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani for his money) are just as good as Ronald Reagan. The Pendragon has long wished for more party loyalty from Republicans. After all, in New York, Governor Spitzer is now ordering major cuts to services--shutting down hospitals, trimming back Medicaid, closing up nursing homes, all ostensibly to balance the budget. When someone like Ronald Reagan, or George W. Bush, who have an R after their names on the ballot suggests cutting funding for school lunches or trimming Medicaid, the liberals get all bent out of shape screaming about how Republicans are trying to stiff the poor and abandon the children. Along comes Mr. Spitzer, with the nice fat "D" after his name, and he can cut anything he wants without a peep from the liberal sector. If they can show such solidarity, so can we. Hillary is the one to beat and if her name appears on the ballot in '08, Republicans need to unite like never before--even if the candidate is one of the lame New Yorkers or the inept former Speaker of the House. So if the Democrats are smart, they will nominate one of the other candidates, who has a shot at siphoning moderates away from the Republican nominee.

Happy Birthday, Mr. Lincoln! It really is amazing what being assassinated can do for your PR. Lincoln was not a widely-recognized President until his life was snuffed out following his greatest victory. Today he is ranked #1 by most historians (not the Pendragon, however). Nevertheless, he was a great man--learning on the job, he made the best of a very bad situation and somehow managed to maneuver a hostile press, battlefield enemies and his own restless Cabinet. I think President Bush would be well advised to put down any biographies of TR he has been reading and pick up some Lincoln works. He is in much the same position.

President's Month is always fun for the Pendragon as it includes my annual re-ranking of the Presidents based on what I have learned of them in the previous year. This year, I even included year-long president Zachary Taylor in the Top Ten because my reading of Ante-Bellum history has shown me that almost exclusively of the presidents between Jackson and Lincoln, Taylor tried to take a strong stand against the divisive issues of his day. And to forestall objections (mainly from my brother), my higher ranking of Clinton this year has less to do with more regard for him as a president (something that will never happen) and more for my growing revulsion for those I this year ranked below him. FDR may rise in next year's ranking now that I'm doing extensive research into the New Deal. William Henry Harrison is still excluded because a month is just too short a time to get a feel for a person's presidency. Feel free to discuss this ranking with me. I love a challenge!

1. George Washington
2. James Madison
3. Abraham Lincoln
4. Theodore Roosevelt
5. James Monroe
6. Andrew Jackson
7. Thomas Jefferson
8. Ronald Reagan
9. Woodrow Wilson
10. Zachary Taylor
11. William McKinley
12. Dwight D. Eisenhower
13. John Adams
14. Harry S. Truman
15. George W. Bush
16. FDR
17. JFK
18. James K. Polk
19. Martin Van Buren
20. Grover Cleveland
21. U.S. Grant
22. Chester A. Arthur
23. Richard Nixon
24. George H.W. Bush
25. Gerald R. Ford
26. Calvin Coolidge
27. John Quincy Adams
28. William Howard Taft
29. LBJ
30. Bill Clinton
31. James Garfield
32. Rutherford B. Hayes
33. Herbert Hoover
34. Benjamin Harrison
35. John Tyler
36. Franklin Pierce
37. Millard Fillmore
38. Andrew Johnson
39. Jimmy Carter
40. Warren G. Harding
41. James Buchanan

In British Columbia, a Jehovah's Witness family is suing the province over its seizure of three of their four surviving sextuplets to give them a life-saving blood transfusion. The parents believe that blood transfusions interfere with the will of God and even though their babies were returned to them following the transfusions, they are trying to get money from the province. The Pendragon is sympathetic to parents' wishes being followed as regards their own offspring, but give me a break? First of all, you don't get sextuplets naturally so I think some interference with the will of God has already taken place. Secondly, isn't it refreshing to see a government interfering to save life, instead of to take it? British Columbia is to be commended and I only hope to see these religious nutjobs slapped down. As a parent-to-be myself, I cannot fathom what would possess a parent to basically say they would rather have their children die than "interfere" with God's will and save them. Since God is at bottom the creator and protector of life, and any true religion would celebrate that, it would seem that any action to save human life could not be taken in violation of his will. But that's just me--mainstream, not extreme Christianity.