Someone who believes in the Constitution as it was set forth. A person who believes in a strong military, who is a person of faith and family. A person who believes in the future of our country. A person who believes in cutting the corporate tax and expanding drilling, and building refineries, desalination plants as water is becoming an issue. Someone who believes in state rights, a smaller central government who believes the central government main role is to protect it's citizens and defend our freedom.

It is regrettable that your ideal candidate be "a man of strong faith." Aside from the fact that the candidate need not be a male, strong faith in supernatural spirits, ghouls, gods, demons, and the like should be a red flag warning against a lack-of-touch with reality, and is particularly repugnant if said candidate believes he should use his office to impose his irrational beliefs on the rest of the nation.

Marc is an obvious Atheist however his point of man versus woman is accurate enough. I am not sure we are not ready for a woman President. Might do us some good. Arguing the point of faith is not worth the effort and I encourage everyone to NOT respond to his attempt to inflame the readers. Ignore him an move on.

Tough question when the country is so polarized. If the candidate is too right or too left one side or the other is going to scream. The press will attack anyone who is too right or even leans to the right. Overall, I want the candidate to be President for everyone. Give this nation a sense of purpose, a feeling of confidence, and a desire to work through the problems. A leader. A REAL leader. Sure, Id love to have a heavy handed right wing conservative who makes hard decisions. Id love to have a "me". But in fairness to all, this person should lead intelligently, with compassion, and have a iron spine. Is it not a shame we are looking at "electability" rather than qualified?

"He" should be self made, not Harvard Law.."He" must be physically attractive, have a good record as a Governor, be articulate and fearless, be intelligent and a hard worker, be loved by the common people, command a huge following, command the loyalty of millions of fanatics who will send umptedd dolars to "his" campaign and believe in America the Beautiful and be devout patriot and Christian.

"He" is Sarah Palin!

While extremely important to defeat the criminal community organizing marxist, it is more so to take back the Congress, both houses, and return those bodies to enforcing the rule of law through legitimate legislation, to overthrow the executive orders and regulations imposed by uncontitutional Government agencies tyranny. Stop the illegal decrees that are stifling busness from the Depts of Interior, Energy, Environment, and Education. Quit subsidizing laziness and cutting our Defense Department. Get rid of all Czars.

From a previous Alexander Essay: One of the candidates responded accordingly. Though already written off as unelectable by the media, in my opinion he would eviscerate Obama in "mano y mano" debate.

I won't mention him by name, because there isn't a GOP contestant whom I consider the "ideal candidate," and I don't want it to be inferred that I believe any of the current candidates fit that bill. (I believe Ronald Reagan was the most outstanding conservative president of the past century, but I certainly don't think he was flawless -- and neither did he.)

I will say it. He is Ron Paul, and you all know it. By the way, "strong faith" in this context on this forum is implicitly meant to mean faith in God, the Creator, without which, all sentiments expressed here regarding the Constitution are moot points.

I think Marc is reading way too much into the "faith" requirement and is probably NOT a Conservative?

That much aside...My ideal ticket at this time would be Jim DeMint and Marco Rubio. Since Sen. DeMint has chosen not to run then I would like to see him as the leader in the Senate when/if we take over control. He is thoughtful, Conservative, strong willed and smart. I honestly think he is one of the few in Washington that cares more about his country then his job. Sen. Rubio gives me hope every time I hear him or read something he has said.

What an incredible pair they would make.

Not too sure about the turnip but even Huntsman or Paul would be better than what we have...especially if we control both houses.

He/she must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and support all biblical values. Like our Founding Fathers he/she must seek His wisdom in all his/her decision making.

At first glance, the email subject line was perceived by me as "Alexander the Best GOP Candidate". The second look was disappointing. Would that it were possible!

As well as clearly identifying the ideal candidate, we must reform our selection processes. It makes no sense to permit DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS to participate in the candidate selection process. Can't Republicans alone (or whatever party) select their candidate? It is this false "big tent" that erroneously rewards non-conservative candidates based upon various narrow issues. I daresay that Barack Obama would not be the Democrat candidate were we to (a) stop voter fraud and (b) permit Republicans to vote in their primaries. If we can cross over in the primaries, what's the point of the general election?

Bill, ignore me like you ignore reality. My intent is not to inflame, but to try and get otherwise intelligent folks to try and see the irrational folly of religious faith. The brainwashed are the last to recognize their plight.

Excellent point on Marc's email, Bill. I was going to ask Marc how something could be 'repugnant' since, in his world, there simply can not be such a thing as 'repugnant', nor any other kind of good/bad/other judgment. It simply can not exist in his world.

Let's move on....

One attribute you missed was honesty. We have heard nothing but lies and half truths from the current resident of the people's house. Of course, when he said he would "fundamentally transform" our country, what he meant was destroy the republic as it was intended to be by the founders, and turn it into a third world country, where he and others like him could rule with an iron fist and dictate to the peons. I, for one, am tired of seeing his face and hearing his voice. He sickens me.

Marc - I will not debate you. You are simply misguided and I feel sorry for you.

tinkabell, you are mistaken, I am quite conservative. I don't think I am reading too much into the faith thing. The otherwise-reasonable Patriot Post consistently turns a self-serving blind eye to the Constitution in matters of religious faith, particularly in support of their faith and against those with other beliefs

I must have missed something... I thought I recalled you being supportive of Huntsman. Perhaps my reading comprehension is failing.

-J

I don't believe that Jesus Christ is running this time.

You say conservatives are not taking this election serious. You say they are not happy with the candidates. I beg to differ with you. The reason they are so particular is because they want the best person to defeat Obama and to fix the damage he has done. They are taking this election very, very seriously.

The optimum candidate you describe sounds a lot like Governor Perry of Texas. Other than a real grasp of foreign affairs, he meets your criteria. There are many candidates that don't have a grasp of foreign affairs. It is a tough subject and ever changing.

I don't think attacking Romney from the left is bad. They should test his convictions on moral issues. You can bet the Dems aren't going to get all over him about his favoring abortion in the past. The Dems want meat about his right leanings, not his left ones. If you think the GOP candidates are hard on Romney, imagine what Obama will be doing with his millions. No comparison.

So you do absolutely no good by beating around the bushes & telling everybody to ignore the results of Iowa & New Hampshire yet not saying who you would support as the most closely resembling Ronald Reagan.

If the real goal is to defeat Obama this year, then shouldn't we all get behind the candidate who holds the best chance of winning the election, namely Mitt Romney?

I do not believe there are enough Tea Party Americans to get who we might really want. Sometimes for the good of the country, we have to take the lesser of two evils (not that Mitt is evil, he is a good man & would serve us well as President). Four years of Mitt will be a thousand times better than for more of Obama, Hillary, or Gore!

Just for grins, wouldn't it be nice to have a candidate whose record showed him/her to be so conservative that the title wouldn't need an epithet....like: Compassionate Conservative = socialist; Fiscal Conservative = lier; etc....How about somebody who has READ the Constitution and says point blank that his/her goal is to disband EVERY FEDERAL AGENCY AND POST NOT FOUND THEREIN....that ought to clear out the 202 Area Code!

I don't know if you have been watching but, Donald Trump has resigned from the Republican Party and has said that he will run as an Independent if the wrong Republican candidate is chosen in the primary. When I first heard this I thought: "Oh, God, we are screwed. He will split the election and get Obama elected" Now, however, I think he might be onto something. I have just finished his new book and his ideas for the country make more sense than any other I have heard about. He is a conservative who would put this country ahead of any agenda put forth by right or left. Most people are hungry for a President who will get the Country back to where it was 17-20 years ago, a country that was a leader around the world, not the pitiful excuse that it is today. Just my thoughts.

Bill, there can be no debate with those blind with faith in supernatural spirits. No need to feel sorry for me; the evidence suggests that I'm probably correct in my beliefs. On the contrary, I pity you for wasting time and resources worshipping medieval myths.

I prefer that my President is a citzen and one who has not only read The Bible, The Constitution and "On War" by von Clausewitz, but understands and follow that which is limned inside. This would, of course, disqualify the current "rezident".

Really, should there not be some kind of written test for the job?

Most of the presidential candidates, including Obama, have the same goal in mind – bigger government. They are all moving in the same direction and only disagree on the speed. When they talk about "change" they mean velocity, not direction. Our “guidance system” is set and locked on socialism.

Only one candidate wants to go in a different direction – toward smaller government and individual liberty – that is Ron Paul. Notice how the main stream media marginalizes Paul. In truth, Americans don't really want "change" – too many have come to see government as a combination of Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy and Mother Teresa.

Well, looks like the majority can relax. It's going to be between Romney and Obama – so, not to worry. Nothing changes except our ETA at socialism. And even if Obama wins a second term, look at the bright side – maybe things have to get worse before they can get better.

You are entitled to your opinion, but you err in assuming the best candidate must be a man. Recast your thinking into the best PERSON for the role. I desire a person of strong faith in nature's God, but moral character is not the purview of Christians only. But transparency is required. Your elimination of Huntsman as sharing a modicum of the traits listed is puzzling. He certainly appears as conservative as Romney and others in the group. On what basis do you disqualify only him?

Mark would you consider running for President? What we have in the GOP field is really sad.

First, I want a president who is an American citizen and who LOVES AMERICA!!!! I want that person to be a strong conservative in that they firmly and consistently stand(in the face of the liberal media, Hollywood, and others)for the America, its family, its unborn children, its Constitution, and morality. I want someone who is not afraid to PRAY (publicly or privately to JESUS CHRIST and ask HIS guidance. I want someone who is 100% in love with all the ideals and concepts that make America unique. I want someone with a backbone who can weather the storm, encourage those entrusted in his care, and stand in the face of the enemy and make those difficult decisions based on what is BEST for America--not his/her party, his/her personal beliefs, or lobbyists. I guess who I really want doesn't exist as a candidate, so I choose to support the next best thing--Rick Santorum.

I'll take the turnip over Obama any day! Whoever gets the nomination, imperfect as he may be, will get my vote.

Like Rick Perry, the next President should be someone with a proven record of economic success in his state as well as being someone who will protect and preserve our historically held stand in defense of the one democracy in the middle east, Israel. That person needs to respect the pro-life plank in the Republican party platform, and be for a strong national defense in light of recent developments in Iran. I therefore vote to see Rick Perry nominated to the Republican ticket for the Presidency to beat Obama this November.

He must be an individual with vision for the future and by that statement, I don't mean a Socialist's vision for the future. A vision that is tried and true in the convictions of Constitutional Law. He has to be a man of integrity and honor and impervious to greedy temptations of self serving politicians that we CURRENTLY have SO many of. He or She must believe in the American Dream and in the Old Work Ethic that was fostered and held dear by the last Great Generation of men and women(my fathers -WWII), for those great people knew what honor and responsibilty was all about and endured much. Finally, that person should be high on both Education and Defense of this country not necessarily in that order.

Our next president should be someone who cherishes the Constitution and will not trample on it and defy it, which has been done from the days of Lincoln to present day. Ron Paul is the only one who seems to care about the Constitution and wants to rectify our financial problem. A nonconformist is what we need; someone who will not conform to and go along with the staus quo.

Our next president should be strong on defense, and adhere to the Constitution AS IT IS WRITTEN.

Both my sons are Marines (one in Afghanistan as I write) and their children deserve to grow up in an America like I grew up in. My father was a WWII Marine and I was a Marine from 68-70. All this debt and compulsive healthcare should not be their problem.

2nd Amendment should be granted to ALL citizens. I believe this is one thing that has kept us from being attacked again (and we KNOW it's coming.)

Semper fidelis,

David H. Swaffield, former Corporal of Marines

Retired Cleveland SWAT officer, rifle #C6710245

Mark, again you are right-on in your analysis. No single candidate particularily ignites my passion overall, each having their own strong points.

I was leaning toward Newt, but not after this "movie" that could have been made by the DNC. Really shameless in my opinion.

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mark: If your point is that none of the current field of Republican candidates is ideal, but once the primaries are over we "anybody but Obama" voters should put our philosophical differences aside and rally behind whomever becomes the Republican nominee, you are 100% correct. During the primaries, we have the luxury of disagreeing vocally on minor points of political ideology. However, when it comes to the general election, we need to all cooperate with each other and support whomever gets the Republican nomination. I'm for Ron Paul, myself, but if I have to vote for Mitt Romney to get Obama out of office, that's what I'll do. If Conservatives vote for third-party candidates just to make their voices heard in the general election, then they are essentially helping Obama stay in office.

Faith?

If a person does not have a set of values he is no doubt a liberal. If he has a set a values and we consevatives argue about which values. We conservatives should stop our bicking. We should (and the candidates) should be pointing out the good stuff, like values. The Democraps will do well enough on their own to point point the bad stuff.I recommend we vote in the primaries for the person we chose and fully support the person that wins.

As voters it is our duty to subject each candidate to the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. If a candidate's position comports with all three, then he may be deserving of the vote. If he does not, then his campaign must not be given serious consideration.

This election is about whether we will keep the county our forbears bequeathed to us and our posterity. Do we have the honor to pass an intact Constitution on to our children?

Mark's list of traits is comprehensive and well chosen. I would also add that the ideal Candidate knows a useful advisor from a yes man. George Washington said as much when the Presidency began: "Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company."

We must have a President that isn't disconnected from the American people that he SERVES, not RULES.

An attribute that may be helpful would be a commintment to save social security, medicare, and the V.A. medical and benefit system. Social security must be removed from gumMINT access to these "pension" funds and SSA and Medicare must be administered by an accountable private entity with severe consequences (PRISON) for mismanagement. I am convinced that with proper management and fraud protection these are the only "social progams" needed. If any proposed law runs counter to the Constitution the Candidate must (if elected) veto that proposed law no matter who fails to get the "earmarked" money. Illegal immigrants must be exited from the country. The border must be protected and American liberty must be protected and the poltically correct "profiling ban" nonesense must end. Perverse lifestyles must no longer be promoted as "normal" when the evidence is blatantly contrary. The "EVIL IS GOOD AND GOOD IS EVIL ERA must stop for the good of this "...one nation under God."

crispus attucks, your unintelligible gibberish is repugnant.

There is no candidate that more closely fits the definition of what is needed...adherence to the Constitution...than Dr. Ron Paul. His support from current combatants in the US military is TEN FOLD that of his nearest competitor. That speaks volumes. Whether one believes we should be 'the world's policeman' or not is irrelevant. We simply cannot afford it. The century-old policies of the privately-owned Federal Reserve Bank have nearly bankrupted the country and stolen from the pockets of savers by depreciating the currency to a shadow of its former self. Please do not be deceived by those that say Romney is the only candidate that could defeat Obama. Indeed, Ron Paul is the only candidate that provides a clear enough alternative to Obama to be elected.

A presidential candidate must have, maintain, and support strong moral values.

Michele Bachman was the ideal candidate. I think it is a truly sad indictment of the republicant party when she was not a landslide favorite. Romneycare is Obamacare. I love Ron Paul, but he is weak on defense. Newt represents everything that is wrong in the republicant party. Don't know enough about Santorum. That leaves Rick Perry.

He would command respect and promote a willingness among a conservative legislature to re-balance the power of the judiciary.

Mark,

As I read your qualifications above, I realized that there IS one person who fits the bill. Your only problem is that you need to understand - completely understand - where Ron Paul is coming from as far as foreign policy.

Thomas Pynchon once said "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." This is the problem with Ron Paul's so-called isolationist stance on foreign policy as presented by the media. If only someone would sit down to fully understand where Ron Paul is coming from rather than spending all of their time answering the wrong questions, people might be able to begin to comprehend our founding fathers view on foreign policy.

Yes, Ron Paul is not promoting his own policy, he is promoting that of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and all those other dead people.

I urge you to do a little homework for yourself and I urge you to stop accepting the soundbites from the MSM, and then maybe, just maybe, the "light will come on" and you will understand the genious behind our forefathers foreign policy rather than jumping to conclusions and answering the wrong questions.

Your paragraph lists the needed characteristics for a "candidate." You then ask for the needed characteristics for a "President."

A President needs to get elected. For 2012, a candidate needs to have razor-quick thinking, as the debates and out-of-nowhere questions will be brutal, or he/she will not get elected. Who in the Republican field has that quick reflex thinking???

I don't see my ideal candidate on the current slate. He/she will have to be strong on: 1) Closing both borders and deporting illegals with less than 10 yrs residency and their offspring, 2) repealing ObamaCare and let states do their own and independent reform, 3) be willing to push for a proposed 28th ammendent, limiting elected terms, et.al., 4) insist on energy independene with our fossile fuel reserves and forget about global warminggreen energy, 5) pulling the US out of the UN, 6) Allow for the passage of Stand Alone Legislation with no add on ammendments, 7) repeal the Brady bill and all other Federal gun restrictions and let states didtate their own.

I refer you to this quote: "The best candidate for the job is devoted to Liberty as endowed by our Creator and enshrined in our Constitution. He is a man of strong faith, is devoted to his family and has served his nation in uniform with honor. He has a good record of executive leadership, both in the private sector and government. He is an effective advocate for free enterprise, limited government and tax reform. He is smart, articulate, charismatic, and experienced and a great debater with a remarkable sense of history. He has an outstanding comprehension of complex domestic and foreign policy matters. He bases his positions on constructionist logic, not political expediency, and is bold in his vision for our nation. He is salt of the earth, not a silver spoon Ivy Leaguer. He has strong ties to the renaissance of American conservatism launched by Ronald Reagan".

One can easily discern that President Reagan was not speaking of the attributes of Mitt Romney and this quote has more descriptive attributes of Newt Gingrich! It is time for the American People to choose their next president and Not the GOP establishment, the media, liberal and conservative as well as the political pundits of both parties for their own political agendas.

The Press is no longer a News Media. They have become a powerful Political Force in America and the Public is being led like a lamb to slaughter for political expediency and personal agendas.

THE PEOPLE SHOULD RESEARCH EACH CANDIDATE BASED ON EACH ONES VALUES, INCLUDING TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES WITH MORAL CHARACTER AND INTIGRITY, RESPECT FOR THE RIGHT TO LIFE, TRUSTWORTHINESS, KNOWLEDGE BOTH OF PAST HISTORY AND CURRENT EVENTS, A LOVE OF COUNTRY ACCORDING TO PAST PERFORMANCES AND EXPERIENCES AND MORAL FAMILY TRADITIONAL VALUES.

The attributes that represent our Nation and its people, not settle for what the good ole boys of the establishment want for us always making excuses for the candidate of their own choosing, saying well we will have to accept this fault or that one and get on with nominating our candidate! Hog Wash!

The People Must take charge and stand up and Vote their own Conscience and show the media and establishment that we are not as dumb as they think any longer.

We all should look at the one candidate that the media continues to bad mouth, find fault with and/or discredit who has a proven past performance of standing up against the wind and doing what is best for the American people and is in fact most in line with the Quote by Ronald Reagan above

Only the Truth will set us Free! All the lies and deception will keep us in bonds forever and we fall prey to those who set out to deceive us and we become the ponds of darkness and their personal political agendas. We were warned of those who say look this way or that for he is the one, but we are not to follow or believe them for they are the deceivers. Get informed and Use your own mind!

God Bless America!

We need a staunch /conservative. Amen to this article. America is anemic,she is hanging over the cliff. We have absolutely no margin for error. There is a grand conspiracy to create a "One World Government" with a universal religion (Islam) United Nations Agenda 21 must be destroyed. Notice this is something that is avoided like the plague,as far as discussion from debates. There are several candidates linked to this "Communistic move" as well as politicians in D.C. This is treason in my book. Punishment should be just. "When the American people find out what the Federal Government has done to them; I would not want to be the President;I would not want to be in the Executive Branch; I would not want to be a Congressman or Senator or a Judge on the bench. I would not want to be Governor,congressman or senator, or a judge on a state bench,nor would I want to be even in law enforcement or even the local dog catcher. People will hang them out to dry on the Capital steps.

Mark,

As I read your qualifications above, I realized that there IS one person who fits the bill. Your only problem is that you need to understand - completely understand - where Ron Paul is coming from as far as foreign policy.

Thomas Pynchon once said "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." This is the problem with Ron Paul's so-called isolationist stance on foreign policy as presented by the media. If only someone would sit down to fully understand where Ron Paul is coming from rather than spending all of their time answering the wrong questions, people might be able to begin to comprehend our founding fathers view on foreign policy.

Yes, Ron Paul is not promoting his own policy, he is promoting that of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and all those other dead people.

I urge you to do a little homework for yourself and I urge you to stop accepting the soundbites from the MSM, and then maybe, just maybe, the "light will come on" and you will understand the genious behind our forefathers foreign policy rather than jumping to conclusions and answering the wrong questions.

@BobA - Trump is an agent provocateur. He is a celebrity and money-changer. He does whatever is best for Trump. I would not be surprised if he has a "deal" with Soros to run as an indie just to split the vote.

follow the oath and defend the constitution. stop with all the hiding of info from the american public..all including obama must prove they are eligable to hold the office..no more sealed records..sign into law term limits for congress and the senate..repeal obama care..arrest and prosecute all who helped to get obama into office with knowlege of fraud..thats a start...god bless America...

Marc, You have described Ron Paul to a T! He is my first, last and only choice for President because he will adhere to the Constitution every time, no excuses. But to imagine that a president has the power to dictate repeal of constitutional legislation is going too far. The president (present occupant excluded) is not a dictator. We need to ensure we send constitutional members to the US House and Senate to further the restoration of our republic. It's about more than just the presidential election!

Agree,Al-it is a start. We need to find out who all is behind aka obama. The biggest crime in the history of the world is being executed before our very eyes. Let the arrests begin.

A national primary day is a really BAD idea, giving an insuperable advantage to the very few monied and well-organized candidates. It will give us only Big Government, Big Spender types. That Iowa and NH mean little does NOT mean there should not be serial state primaries. Super Tuesday is essentially a national primary day, and it has not served us well in candidate selection.

Watch Mitt Romney's first debate. Then immediately watch his last debate. You will see that he has adjusted his views according to polls, much the same as Bill Clinton did. He is nothing more than a modern day politician, a parrot.

With Newt, you'll have to go back a little farther and do some homework. He's waffled so much I couldn't tell you what he believes in. He talked big with his Contract for America, but then caved on just about every point. Compromise? I don't think so.

Think about this: If you have everything and the other side has nothing, what happens each time you "compromise"? You lose and they win. A death of a thousand cuts. Newt compromised and compromises way too much and he has given away way too much.

There is one person who has never voted against his principles, which are the principles of our forefathers and you all know who he is......

Just my 2 cents worth.

I realize this is not a religious debate. It is a debate about which person is most suitable for the job of POTUS. I believe that person is Mitt Romney. I also think that the main reason why there are so many "any-body-but-Romney" people out there is because of his religion.

I lived in Utah in 2002 and I saw what he did to pull the 2002 Olympic games out of a tailspin crash. He's got the qualities to do the job. If you have misconceptions about his religion go to www.lds.org or www.mormon.org for answers to your questions. it's a good religion. It supports anybody wanting to follow Christ in truth and it will support any family wanting to be happy and successful in today's world.

Here is a scripture from the New Testament I read today that I think describes what is happening in America and what we need to be doing about it. Paul is talking about contention and the practice of unity and forgiveness and tolerance, 2Cornithians 2:11 "Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices."

Here's one from the Book of Mormon, the prophet Nephi speaking, 2 Nephi 28:19-20 "For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger and perish: For behold at that day (speaking of right now) shall he (meaning the devil) rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good." We need to stop bickering, and finger pointing and join together in the cause to save our good country from ruin.

To me it is inconsequential that Romney is a Mormon. Any man that could do what he did in Utah in 2002 has the qualities to be a great leader. I will not vote for him simply because he is Mormon. That is not a good enough qualifier. I know plenty of Mormons that wouldn't make a great POTUS and wouldn't want to be. I am voting for him based on my personal first hand experience of watching him in action as the Olympic chairman.

He has good values, he has proven capacity and I feel that any who hold bias against him because of his record are seeing through a skewed lens based on incorrect understanding of his religion.

As Americans we need to search out truth, let go of misconceptions,use our best judgment and ask God for help in choosing the best candidate to be able to lead this nation right.

Turnip ... kumquat ... grilled cheese sandwich ... heck! I'd vote for a stinking dead squirrel carcass over our current white house resident. Any one of these would do less damage.

"He is salt of the earth, not a silver spoon Ivy Leaguer."

How can anyone run for POTUS these days without TONS of money? To me, "salt of the earth" isn't excluded status merely because the person was born into or made money in their lifetime. It is what they do with the money and what they value that defines their "saltiness".

If there was a way to viably run for public office without breaking a family budget, I know three of us who would tomorrow!

Your last sentence says it all... "Our single focus must be to defeat Obama, and frankly, I would fully endorse a turnip in order to achieve that objective."

It matters not who the GOP runs... a left wing Republican is better than the Socialist Obama. I will pull the GOP lever in November, even if Mickey Mouse emerges with the nomination.

He should also have a fire in his belly to prosecute Obama and all the lying liberals that put him in office.

There is no perfect political candidate..axiom

We have the means to explore the physical make up and attributes of all know incumbents and those aspiring for political leadership, why did we not at least ask to see physical, validated proof of this uncredentialed doofus that now occupies the WH?

Is it to much to ask the MSM and all the glorius pundits that we entrust to at least vet these people properly and not rely on a emotional pig-in-a-polk, marketed clown to break down the racial barriers we are so immensely proud of? To put it bluntly the MSM failed miserably at their job, are bias and least of all objective. They have somewhere decided they are the king makers but are really now a bunch of unqualified know nothings using video, print and media to push ignorance and uninformed opinion...hell they can't even get the news from around the world right for the most part.

We have qualified people to stand for election and do a good job if they have clear purpose but when you have to fight back the lies and deceptions that accost you from the media then all those good ideas are wasted, "We" the tax payers and voters are stuck with a lot of train wreck clowns.

How can you say that the candidate must be "salt of the earth" and "grassroots" in the same article where you bash Iowa? Ronald Reagan spent quite a bit of time working in Iowa as a radio broadcaster. He didn't think the Iowa caucus was meaningless. If he had,he wouldn't have campaigned here. Stop being so snooty toward Iowa, Mr. Alexander. It makes you sound like some kind of silver spoon Ivy Leaguer.

The Republican party should go the way of the Whigs; everyone on the party label is tarred with the brush of the robber barons and the RINOs need to join their real home in the Jackass Party. The GOP is a dead weight on conservatism, the dead hand of past greed.

All of the Republican candidates (including Jon Huntsman, although I agree with your evaluatuion) are better than the useful idiot currently in the WH, so since none of them are particularly attractive, the main qualilfication is an ability to beat the clown who is posing as Campaigner in Chief.

None are so blind as he who will not see.

Ron Paul is precisely the man you describe. Why do you not acknowledge he is the candidate for which you claim to be searching?

I hear criticism of his foriegn policy ideas. Yet, he is in strict adherence to the Constitution. These critics either misundersand him, or misundestand the Constitution.

Surely, after all of your talk, you don't misunderstand this.

Our candidate should honor the rule of law as outlined in the Constitution and understand free market economics ie; capitalism.

I'd like to see "who's electable" if only people not on welfare or any other government dole, were the electorate.

From Barry Goldwater(1964)

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' "interests," I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.

The Conscience of A Conservative (1960), p. 15

First thing on the agenda: that we go by our bill of rights,which was first, the Declaration of Independence,the Constitution, and other amendments thereof, and limit the Supreme Court with their power grab of our citizens rights and abuse of the things that I said first here. The President is supposed to be one who is a President of all the people, all the time, not partisan, and not an instiller of aggression in the race card in this country. All the progress in harmony between the

races has been obliterated with the current President, seems like everyone has contempt or hate about something or someone now in this country. We need a President who believes in not kneeling down to leaders of foreign countries, and apologizing for our legitimate actions. He needs to believe in a Supreme being, which is God almighty, and whoever disagrees with me, I could care less, this is my opinion, my independent opinion. We need one who respects State rights, which are supposed to be still legal and viable. The things that made this country great are the things it will take to keep it great and they don't exist now in the current platform, we are in a state of tyranny now and most people can't see it, and as long as the Government produces a nanny state, the people that thrive on that will be in accordance with that. We are almost at the point or are already at the point where the employed can't take care of the "I can't help myself crowd". Let the Government do it, Yes, the Government is doing it, little by little, usurping the power of everyone in this country, big and small.

Marc I think you are missing the point on the faith thing. Whether or not you believe in God, Jesus, demons, angles or otherwise, the basic moral values of Christian doctrine is what we are talking about here. You have to admit, there is an alarming number of people out there who don't know right from wrong! I myself am a Christian and have said many times that if I die and there is no God to go before, I still will have lived a better life because of my faith. Would like to add that I would rather have faith in God than I would any of these lying, deceitful politicians!

I have written extensively on this subject. We as a nation have become misogynists when it comes to nominating and electing a president. This great country has provided the resources to develop an American with the best qualities and virtues to serve us in the highest capacity. Some 70 million Americans made a horrible choice in 2008; we cannot afford to do it again. All the pundits, commentators and even Mark Alexander have made the assumption that a male MUST be 'the one.'

I vehemently disagree; there are at least three women ready, willing and able to lead us back onto the path of strength and virtue from which we began departing under Wilson, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton. Sarah Palin has the credentials. the Chutzpah and the intestinal fortitude to do the job as does Michele Bachmann or Condoleeza Rice or Frances Rice. It is time to change course and Captains. No matter what; if we do not choose wisely, we are destined for more of Obama's Marxism, his dictatorial posturing and disloyalty and a country run by homosexuals and communist Czars. The very thought makes me nauseous.

I will agree with Douglas, Carolyn, Adk Rebel, Joe, Rob, Jeff & JP. Ron Paul is that candidate.

Your list of attributes,except for possibly charisma describe the one one present candidate whom has always been true to the Constitution. Dr.Ron Paul.

Of course the biggest problem with our present 2 party system is that it is a Party System only open to insiders that want to keep the status quo.

The infighting and slanderous attacks only strengthen our enemies (Progressive/socialist incumbent). If we wind up with a nominee that is not a strong candidate we as Americans lose(again). The blame can be laid at the feet of the media for their one sided view but in the end "We,the people" let it happen by not demanding serious changes to how media ,pollsters and big money special interests control how the candidates are chosen and who gets a chance on the playing field. given the hype over the democrats choice for the republican nominee(Romney) we should pause to ask ourselves why they want him to be the one we pick!

As an aside ,after 37 years of voting republican I am fed up and might set this one out rather than hold my nose and vote as I did 4 years ago.

After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar, but never worked as an attorney. As a venture-capitalist, Romney¹s first major business deal involved investing in a start-up office supply company with one store in Massachusetts that sold office supplies. That company, called Staples, now has over 2,000 stores and employs over 90,000 people. Romney or his company Bain Capital (using what became known as the ³Bain Way²) would go on to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino’s, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others. Got your calculators handy? Let¹s recap. Volunteer campaign worker for his dad¹s gubernatorial campaign - 1 year. Unpaid intern in Governor¹s office - 8 years. Mormon missionary in Paris -¬ 2 years. Unpaid bishop and stake president for his church -¬ 10 years. No salary as president of the Olympics -¬ 3 years. No salary as MA governor ¬- 4 years. That¹s a grand total of 28 years of unpaid service to his country, his community and his church. Why? Because that’s the kind of man Mitt Romney is.

Hard to improve upon your ideal cnadidate but one you have final please send out by itself so that we may send to our frineds, etc. Agree Obama must be defeated if our country is to survuve.

I am so disgusted with Captain Ahab, Kamikaze Gingrich, that I have suddenly become a Romney supporter, of sorts. I'm not even a Republican, but for the sake of the survival of our Republic, the Republican Party needs to united behind a candidate that can end the tyranny of Obama, the Propaganda President. Instead, Gingrich and Perry are engaged in intentional "friendly fire". Gingrich' PAC, Winning Our Future, is doing just the opposite -- DESTROYING our future!

If Gingrich, heaven forbid, became the GOP nominee, I would probably vote for another four years for the Teleprompter Tyrant! That's how repulsed I find his reprehensible behavior. Romney isn't my first choice for president, but Snewt Gingrich is my LAST!

Other attributes of our ideal candidate: The person most be a True Leader (honest, ethical), not simply a successful manager. Leadership and management ain't the same thing. Further the candidate should be a life-long student. The candidate must be a judge of good character, in order to choose wisely competent, honest, and dedicated people to advise and assist in executing the government's missions.

All I need is a candidate that meets the Reagan requirements in this article; and I'll be very happy!

I support Gingrich, for the Republic Party. He is very knowledgeable about out Constitution and history. He public stated on TV, during the debate, that one of his priorities would be to over haul our legal system and to get rid of the 9th Circuit court. He also supports a strong Military Force to protect our way of life. I don't believe Matt Romney can beat Oama. To me he seems to lack the leadership this countries really needs. I believe Gingrich has that political back ground and the ability to become this Nations Commander in Chief without putting us into another war. We need a change before it becomes to late.

Your list of attributes,except for possibly charisma describe the one one present candidate whom has always been true to the Constitution. Dr.Ron Paul.

Of course the biggest problem with our present 2 party system is that it is a Party System only open to insiders that want to keep the status quo.

The infighting and slanderous attacks only strengthen our enemies (Progressive/socialist incumbent). If we wind up with a nominee that is not a strong candidate we as Americans lose(again). The blame can be laid at the feet of the media for their one sided view but in the end "We,the people" let it happen by not demanding serious changes to how media ,pollsters and big money special interests control how the candidates are chosen and who gets a chance on the playing field. given the hype over the democrats choice for the republican nominee(Romney) we should pause to ask ourselves why they want him to be the one we pick!

As an aside ,after 37 years of voting republican I am fed up and might set this one out rather than hold my nose and vote as I did 4 years ago.

dear dr frankenstein where are you hiding...please resurface and piece together a monster of a republican candidate from all the bodies available..where are you when our country is in such terrible shape...your wishful admirer..little boy very blue...

Dear Mark Alexander, Patriot Post et. al.

Thank you for slapping the cobwebs from my thinking and saving me the anxiety of this ongoing MSM, Pollster, and Party Bias (both sides) Hipocritical SnowJob.

The attributes of 'Presidential Candidate', described in one succinct paragraph is absolutely clear and tremendously useful.

I might also add 'let he who is without sin, cast the first stone'... meaning, each and every voter should also aspire to the same attributes in that paragrapgh - or swallow their prejudice and keep silent.

One final observation: We all might be well served by seriously considering how easily abused are the moral and ethical judgements we make about everything, including our personal actions in our personal life. We are human, and long lived, so what person does not get off track at some point. Though judgement is a natural part of everyones thinking process: abusing and exploiting this inherent aspect of human nature is dispicable. The social forum for campaign presentations are better described as a mine field of foul play, rather than a fair and balanced playing field. I wish your columnists could find a way to rate Media and all the other 'ilk' who scavage their existance off of such negative pursuits. I would love too, somehow, but feel I am ill equipped to the task.

Profound thanks for that paragraph on the attributes of a presidential candidate - which I believe each individual should also embrace, as role model for being a responsible American Citizen as well.

We are much too timid, authoritarian government rule,socialist government. Let's tell it like it is and what he is. Attributes of the next president should be Love American first and foremost, don't brag about being a constitutional attorney and then trample all over the Constitution, no Terrorists, Marxists, Communists, Socialists, and social engineering thugs in your cabinet, in your circle of friends, etc. We can't blame you Mr President for all of this, our Congress knew, many of us knew it and the Courts knew your kind but failed to vet you before or now. You either love America with all your heart and soul or get your ass out. Guess I've said enough, don't think I would like a FEMA Camp.

To All: Gads!!! My apologies for the poor spelling and grammatical errors. My thumb tripped on the 'submit' key as I tried to scroll back to the top for an edit!

First and foremost, I want a candidate who calls a spade and spade and is willing, above all, to fight with every part of their being for this country. A proven record of doing their utmost to stick to Reagan's principles helps! Mitt Romney doesn't fit my criteria, neither does Ron Paul or Jon Huntsman. Gingrich and Santorum come the closest. I choose Gingrich.

Republicans do not know how to win. We are too busy tearing each other apart to the glee of the Left. nThe Demo's are united. How? Listen to any of them on TV and not one will badmouth Obama's administration. How they can be a part of what is ripping America apart, I dont know. Well, I really do know. They have no religious values, only politics. That is their God and if they lose that, they will have nothing. So much for their unity!

Mark,

So far, it seems that Mitt Romney is The Big Turnip!

Like you, I would vote for a turnip rather than vote for Obama.

I truly hope for all of us, that we don't end up with a 'Defaulter As President' ... from either party!

What other attributes should the next president possess? He should be anyone other than Obama. That's a start.

Advocating the "best" qualities for our next president, while interesting, doesn't actually do any good. One seldom gets the absolute best of anything, and as long as the candidates name isn't Obama, he/she will be eminently good enough.

Ken Simon

He should already have been so very successful as an investor, a businessman, a producer of goods and/or services that his income is established for life and he has no need of more income. He should be in the pattern of Washington, asking no pay, only remuneration of expense incurred, and reasonable minimal expense at that. Never should an office be a means to wealth or income or things or contacts or privilege. If one is not strong enough to have already succeeded then one cannot understand what others need to succeed. And of course one must have succeeded, not just inherited, and not disapated anything inherited.

Military service would be essential to demonstrate decisions made to sacrifice one's own freedoms for other's freedoms. Adventure and reasonable risk taking should have been already demonstrated, risking his own, but not others lives and fortunes.

An in depth understanding of Julius Caesar from the standpoint of many authors should be required. Also an in depth understanding of Moses, and David both leaders of the most advanced nations in their times in terms of hygiene, economics, social life and military activities along with civic responsibilities and organizational structure.

An in depth understanding of Alexandar before he fell to the evils of Internationalism should be expected.

An in depth understanding of Napoleon is needed not only in strategies and tactics, but in governing, in energy, in loyalties, in caring for the interests of his own people, and no other peoples. Especially one should understand the Law systems of Napoleon and how he righted former wrongs. One should understand the Emporer's sense of justice and forgiveness. As with Julius Caesar, it was much the same with Napoleon who understood Caesar.

One should understand Alfred the Great, and his part in the protections of Protestant Christians in the protections of what was to become our founding heritage and culture.

One should Understand General Washington as a lad, a young man, a mature adult, an officer, a gentleman and a president. Washington's example of living away from home eight years for his country and not taking any pay, only remuneration of expenses is an example to emulate.

One should understand Robert E. Lee, who is the example of another George Washington, and one should understand General Thomas Jackson another example of the forbearance and fortitude of General Washington. Many authors works must be comprehended in the study of successful and beneficial, benevolent rulers who cared greatly for the advance of those who depended upon them.

A candidate should also have been an author, having written sufficiently that his mind, his thinking, his priorities, his values, his norms and standards of what is right and wrong could have been documented, then compared against his recorded decision making and results from those decisions. His ability to spot error and failure in himself, to acknowlege and list it, and to learn to avoid such errors again, should be demonstrated not only in words but in thinking behind the words, in decisions processes and in correct actions taken.

George Washington's rules and code of conduct which he wrote of and adhered to as a youth could be a measuring standard against a candidate.

If Julius Caesar, Alexandar, Napoleon, Frederick, Hannible, Nelson, Cromwell, Moses, David, Churchill, Washington, Lee, Jackson, MacArthur, Adam Smith, Madison, Patrick Henry, Adams could not in majority approve of the candidate per their examples of their standards, then the candidate should withdraw and let his betters be drafted even against their will into being voted upon for the high office. No man who goes against the heritage of the above men is worthy to lead the people whose heritage was first theirs cited above.

I get the feeling your preaching to the Choier.

I never see your esseys anywhere elsse!

Since theoretically the winning republican candidate will be taking it to Obama in the general election, why isn't "which republican candidate can take it to Obama the best" the criterion for winning the right to carry the Republican banner in the fall?

I believe each debate during the republican primary should be a roast of Obama on national tv, with Obama not present, not a roast of the republican candidates by the main stream media host.

Alexander's Best GOP Candidate is a cop out.

There is one candidate who clearly articulates the Constitutional limited powers given to the chief executive, and that is Ron Paul.

The problem so many "Republicans" have with Mr. Paul is that he isn't considered "electable."

He doesn't have the slick looks or greatest communication style. Too bad for the nation, that we won't vote conscience but rather what appeals to our ears and eyes. Shame on Republicans.

This faith debate is one of the many reasons why I no longer identify as a conservative. Our religious values are of course important in politics, but saying that someone can't be a conservative because they are an atheist is a mite unreasonable. I still vote as conservative as I ever did, but that is because that is the nature of the game, and the other options are moderate and liberal, which suit me even less.

when one googles Alinsky and DNC Corruption we see

the "rules" that the dems use to unseat the Republicans. It would help if all candidates would

read this and find out what they are up against.

Of course Romney has the lead, mormons have been

knocking doors for years seeking folks for their

cult. (will there be baptisms for the dead in the

east wing?) I also wish the candidates would follow

Reagan in not speaking ill of one's opponent. The

fellow Art L when he was interviewed said he thinks

all the candidates are great, but one is better, that all the financial plans are good but his is

better. Why not simply say those types of things

rather than getting off the facts and into the

propaganda wars? Who ever I vote for must be a

small govt. Republican, not another elitist or

progressive. Use Jack Webb's approach, "Just the

facts mam!" And one more thing the unemployment

facts are 23% in the building trades, why is no

candidate talking about this?

Alexander's Best GOP Candidate is a cop out.

There is one candidate who clearly articulates the Constitutional limited powers given to the chief executive, and that is Ron Paul.

The problem so many "Republicans" have with Mr. Paul is that he isn't considered "electable."

He doesn't have the slick looks or greatest communication style. Too bad for the nation, that we won't vote conscience but rather what appeals to our ears and eyes. Shame on Republicans.

The un-named man you are describing is Ron Paul. Why not just come out and say it? I understand that it is your policy not to endorse candidates until the general election, but at times like these such a policy borders on cowardice. If you desire the "circular firing squad" to cease fire more rapidly it seems your purpose would be better served by dismissing Mr. Obamalite, Mitt Romney, out of hand and embracing the only candidate that has remained true to the Constitution throughout his tenure of service to the American Republic. Your failure to even mention Ron Paul among the candidates is striking. Are you content to be as embarassingly obtuse as the other media outlets in this country?

I think we need someone who is committed to limited federal government and is willing to spend every penny of their political capital to reduce the scope and reach of Washington, D.C. Someone that will get the government out of the way of the American people so that prosperity can reign. And someone, as Commander-in-Chief, that will take seriously their duty to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

For those of you who denigrate faith, I would suggest that this country was founded by people who believed all human beings had natural rights that were endowed to them by their creator. And while most of these people were Judeo-Christians, they did not require others to have the same beliefs. However, the system of limited government that was established by the Constitution will only work if the governed are virtuous and moral people.

“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Benjamin Franklin

If you are someone that promotes atheism, please tell me where the people that elect politicians should get their virtues and morals from…Karl Marx perhaps?

Alexander's advocacy of a national presidential primary was his most important and significant point. The rest is preaching to the choir.

Our present system lets rich candidates buy the elections. Not as nicely as Alexander put it, Iowa and New Hampshire don't amount to a sneeze in a sandstorm, but millions are wasted in those races.

There will never be a perfect candidate, especially in view of how the media treats candidates, but if we had one primary election day, everyone would get a fair chance. V/r, Tejano Jack

I realize this is not a religious debate. It is a debate about which person is most suitable for the job of POTUS. I believe that person is Mitt Romney. I also think that the main reason why there are so many "any-body-but-Romney" people out there is because of his religion.

I lived in Utah in 2002 and I saw what he did to pull the 2002 Olympic games out of a tailspin crash. He's got the qualities to do the job. If you have misconceptions about his religion go to www.lds.org or www.mormon.org for answers to your questions. it's a good religion. It supports anybody wanting to follow Christ in truth and it will support any family wanting to be happy and successful in today's world.

Here is a scripture from the New Testament I read today that I think describes what is happening in America and what we need to be doing about it. Paul is talking about contention and the practice of unity and forgiveness and tolerance, 2Cornithians 2:11 "Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices."

Here's one from the Book of Mormon, the prophet Nephi speaking, 2 Nephi 28:19-20 "For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger and perish: For behold at that day (speaking of right now) shall he (meaning the devil) rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good." We need to stop bickering, and finger pointing and join together in the cause to save our good country from ruin.

To me it is inconsequential that Romney is a Mormon. Any man that could do what he did in Utah in 2002 has the qualities to be a great leader. I will not vote for him simply because he is Mormon. That is not a good enough qualifier. I know plenty of Mormons that wouldn't make a great POTUS and wouldn't want to be. I am voting for him based on my personal first hand experience of watching him in action as the Olympic chairman.

He has good values, he has proven capacity and I feel that any who hold bias against him because of his record are seeing through a skewed lens based on incorrect understanding of his religion.

As Americans we need to search out truth, let go of misconceptions,use our best judgment and ask God for help in choosing the best candidate to be able to lead this nation right.

Let's be for real, If George Washington, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson were to run today the Media would plaster them for being “to far out there". Today the one true Moderate compared to them is slammed as a "nut case" and branded as unelectable. As Machiavelli would say a Republic can only stand as long as the People are not corrupt. I fear when a majority of the People sees nothing wrong with taking property from one, who worked for it, to give to another who has not then those people are corrupt. Don’t even hide behind the statement that the Government can do that, a Just Government gets its power from the People and the People do not have that power so they cannot transfer that power to the Government.

First Question for the any presidential candidate should be:

Do you agree that the truths which our Founders declared in our country’s charter to be self evident truly are?

In other words do you believe that each individual is created with the natural right to live and the freedom to pursue happiness and that the purpose of our people created government is to secure those liberties?

As I read your wish list for the ideal candidate, I honestly (and with a sense of excited anticipation) thought that you were leading up to an endorsement of Ron Paul.

Now, I am left scratching my head and wondering, "Why?"

To paraphrase the Lord, "Has Ron Paul been with us so long, yet we know not who he is?"

Back in 2008, I thought he was a nut if not a fool. But, as our nation has been in such a crisis, I began listening to the professorial (if not polished and toothy like Obama or Romney) physican from Texas and then decided to read his book, "End the Fed." It was then that I realized that the greatest threat to our lives, liberty and national security is, more than anything else, the Federal Reserve's monetary policy. As I have listened to Dr. Paul with an open mind, I have come to learn that the President's role is not to create jobs, but to use his power to defend the people's liberty and the individual states' powers and to use the "bully pulpit" (forgive the referrence to the progressive Teddy Roosevelt) to educate the citizenry on the essentials of Liberty and how the Constitution is crafted, not to limit our rights but to put a stronghold on the powers of the national government.

Ron Paul is following in the footsteps and preaching the wisdom of our founding fathers. Sometimes what he says doesn't sink in right away, much like the Lord's parables in the Bible. But, if you love Liberty, you will come back again, and again until you GET IT! God bless you, Alexander, and all patriots who read this. Dr. Ron Paul--the cure in 2012!

Th ideal cndidate shoud be able to speak in short pithy sentences, using informal everyday English and avoiding the sort of poiticospeak that characterizes poor old Mitch McConnell and almost everybody else in DC legislatures. Chris Christy a good example of the right kind of speech.

Also, Alexander is dead wrong in wanting a single national primary day; this would simply insure the success of those with the most money to spend on advertising. Current system lets underfinanced candidates, willing to work very hard indeed, substitute shoeleather for dollars, get a chance to get known favorably, and thus begin to attract the donors that are essential if he/she is to be able to particiapte in the big-primary-state rollout.

We must have person with the knowledge and belief in the following:

The Founding Fathers were right, are right, and will always be right.

The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of the United States, The Federalist Papers, and Wealth of Nations are the cornerstones of what made the United States of America the greatest country the world has ever known.

The farther we stray from those truths, the less free and happy we are.

Common Sense from the Heartland - http://howardwemple.com

How about someone who understands true Individual Freedom, free markets and limited Government. It is my understanding and hope this would be very helpful. But the list is long and varied because we as a People and as a Country are in really deep trouble. Years of Socialist, Progressive infiltration of our General Government has created many difficult issues to overcome.

How can a conservative Republican candidate be selected when anyone and everyone may vote in the Iowa and NH primaries. I would suggest that the candidate that emerges victorious should have -20 points added to their ranking.

I would rather ask - who do you think is the second best - you will surprised that the second best is normally the best overall.

"Not Obama" isn't good enough. We are so far up the creek without a paddle that electing a RINO or a delusional isolationist isn't going to work for those who wish to return the country to its origins as a Constitutional Republic instead of the Democracy it has become. It's apparent reading the comments on this site and other similar sites that even among those who profess support for the Constitution that there is much confusion and disagreement about what that would entail. While the majority of Americans are doubtless good and decent people, decades of "progressive" education and media misinformation have left this majority without a moral compass and a very skewed sense of right and wrong.

Maybe it would be better to continue to go over the edge of the cliff at full speed in a race car than just slowing a bit and going over in a pedal car. If we do it sooner rather than later, maybe, a faint maybe, the survivors would have the strength and wisdom to pick up the pieces. Doubtful at this point.

He must be pro-life all the way and have a plan for restoring legal protection to all innocent human life. Otherwise he needs to go.

Mark, You wrote this: Sadly, the Republican presidential contenders are still running plays out of an antiquated and self-destructive political attack playbook. I dont see Ron Paul in that. I know In the past that you dont see eye to eye with him especially concerning his foreign policy. People can pick and choose what they apply in their life from Gods word, but that does not mean that they will recieve liberty. In fact they are being decieved and dont even know it. Two elections ago I gave up towing the party line to know more about the person than the party. The national archives in Washington is a wonderful tool. Extensive research has showed 3 men of high constitutionality and integrety in the 19th century. Ron Paul is listed among these men. His voting record speaks for him. If we are to have real liberty, we are to have it across the board without picking and chooseing what we like or dont like. Many Americans who do not understand Ron's message of liberty is because it is missing from our education and because they have never heard it,it sounds foolish. This has been purposely thought out years ago by those who know how to control the people through the flow of information. Ron's message by the way is not his but the core vaules of our Constitution. I am a subscriber since you've started and thourghly enjoy The Patriot Post. I'm not one seeks his 15min. or puts titles on people, but simply this could be said of me by those who know me. I love the Lord this country and its people. Have a blessed day Mark, Kirby in TN.

I hope the Republican President would put John Bolton in as Secretary of State, Michele Bachman as Secretary of Education so she can work herself out of a job and earn popular credentials, consider Herman Cain for Vice President as he would not be afraid to settle arguments in the Senate, Varnay of Fox Business news for Treasurer, and fill the Cabinet with conservative Washington outsiders, but leaders in their fields. How about Scott Walker for Secretary of Labor.

CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY!

I would be very compforted by a candidate,just like Pres.Reagan.

Pres.Reagan was a class"B"movie actor.He was,and remains a CLASS-A president,comander+chief,and non-bowing world leader.

It is ironic,Pres.Reagan hosted Death Valley Days,on T.V.

Bamer is currantly hosting death valley days,in reality.

The ideal candidate should also be a teacher of who we are, as Americans, and what has made America great.

The next candidate must tell the American people like it is. He must tell the truth, which is completely obfuscated by the media. He must set aside political correctness and expose and attack Obama for what he and his followers are really like, politically and otherwise. He must tell the American people that they must have the fortitude to make the sacrifices which will be necessary to turn off the spigot of funding non-accountable agencies who govern everyone's daily lives down to the soap we use. And, he must not attack his fellow candidates. He needs to focus on one job and one job alone: defeat Obama.

An intelligent person could never believe in God, how can he believe in something he cannot see – like commitment, truth, or ethics or love.

The founders of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights could recognize design in creation. If you only believe in evolution and chance, explain the evolutionary process of the development of the cascade of coagulation. How would the “whatever” lived long enough to evolve while it is bleeding out ?

The tenets of the framework of this country are based on a Creator, and Truth, Justice and individual liberties. The pursuit of happiness is learning who you are, why you are here, and living a fulfilling life for yourself and those that you may influence and assist.

Those are the two choices, chance and design. I prefer a world where the handiwork of a Creator may be seen everywhere around me

Given all that is at stake...The appropriate candidate must have experience on the national level and be able to understand the national budget and then balance it !!! He must also possess a depth of knowledge in not just national politics but international politics. Some one who reflects President Ronald Reagan's principles.

Your post for Jan. 12, 2012 is a little disappointing. The ideal candidate is one that seems to be winning. Although not my first choice, a recent investigation of minutes and meetings while he was the Governor, tells me he is now the one. Although not flamboyant in his approach, the important issue is, who can win and take Obama this year. Out Country, in the shape it is in right now, would be better off with a 5th grader who would do no worse. Instead of playing the game of who, you should make a choice early and support the choice with your words and actions. That is the problem right now, too many people are holding back, acting like they are waiting so they can show everyone they are on the winning side. We need people and publications that are willing to commit themselves to a cause now. Mark, don't wait like the rest, do something, anything, but show your colors and support now.

Having heard him in a recent interview with Mark Levin, I believe the candidate that you are looking for, minus government sector experience, is Florida Rep. (LTC) Allen West. After a couple terms in Congress, he will be hard to beat.

Alexander states the truth. President should take the Oath to "Support" the Constitution. That is Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution. HOWEVER NO President has EVER taken that Oath. The Office of President is an "Executive" Office. Thus they should "Support" the constitution, by taking the proper oath Art VI Section 3. Instead the Pres. takes the Oath of Pres of US, to "Defend" the Constitution. BIG Difference!! Presidents are taking an Article II Section 8 Oath. Wrong Oath!! Read your Constitution CAREFULLY!!! Richard

Many of my friends have asked me which candidate I will vote for in November. Well, it won't be Obama that's for sure, but on the Republican side none of the present hopefuls are very appealing or exciting. Most Americans want the best man to run, but unfortunately, the best man is not interested and has not come forward. Of the ones jousting for the top spot out there now, there is really only one bashing Obama, while the rest bash each other. That is hardly productive, and in fact, when they start that in the debates, I either hit the mute button or change the channel. And I must not neglect the other large group of possible voters who really don't care one way or the other as long as that unemployment check keeps coming. They never care until after the fact, and by then it's generally too late anyway.

1.Restore and protect our Constitution in it's original intent.

2.Stop the onslaught on Christianity.

3.Gain and maintain fiscal responsibility an accountability.

4.Get the deficit stopped and get what we have reduced.

5.Down size the government at federal and state levels.

6.Preserve and maintain the sovereignty of America and of individual states.

7.Stop the excessive taxes on American citizens.

8.Always maintain a ready military armed forces.

I believe all of these points are vital to our growth and protection as a nation.

Anyone failing to protect America on all eight points should not hold or run for the office of President of the United States or any other governmental office on federal or state levels.

Surely, Mr. Alexander, you realize that the description you posted describing the best Republican candidate fits Dr. Ron Paul like a glove?

Are you kidding?? If you added Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, and Reagan, threw in John Marshall, George Marshall and Friederich Hayek, you wouldn't create the impossibly perfect candidate described in your profile. Be real. We don't need the perfect man/woman, just one with solid conservative credentials. Unfortunately, we don't even have that, yet. After the ridiculously destructive debate schedule that our friends at the RNC set up, no one will escape looking electable. Let's pray for a miracle.

Rule of Law has been subverted by both congress and past and current Presidents. Kennedy was a Democrat who when asked about the Roe vs Wade decision in the 60's, said "I am a catholic and do not agree with abortion, but my oath and honor as President means I will enforce the law as written until it is repealed or changed by Congress". Since then Congress has passed laws saying they will increase the Social Security trust fund by raising taxes, then violated their own laws to not use the trust for other reasons. The President has violated equal rights and equal enforcement of law by both changing equal rights policy that passes down to the supposedly independent Justice Dept, having aids and Cabinet Heads ignore subpoena's, and by non enforcement of existing DOMA, Marijuana, immigration law by executive order and policy. Executive Orders by themselves were prior exception to law, and rule of law is supposed to be non negotiable. Every problem we have goes back to root problems of exceptions to different states and exceptions to enforcement through policy. Even the passing of the Voter Registration Law is farcical in its intent. It is not a uniform rule when the wording uses the descretionary term "may" for states to follow or not follow. If the Congress passes a Federal Law that affects all Federal Elections, and the states take federal money or are bound to conform to something of national significance, then the law is to be written as a rule that is equal, enforceable and uniform in application with no exceptions. A Presidental Candidate should be aware and speak out about his knowledge of all the abuses both congress and the President has perpetuated in both writing and enforcing law, and acknowledge that he/she will enforce existing law as written until it is changed or repealed etc.

Words have meaning and saying one believes in the "rule of law" has little significance when lawyers and courts have strayed from the original meaning and definitions of rules and law, and Presidents and congress have written exceptions and unequal enforcement into the writing and their own policies. One could say that this President and his Justice Dept have been "racially profiling" the whole country and our nation, by prosecuting only those states and cities that attempt to enforce law equally on all citizens, and reward with non prosecution those states that encourage exemption from law (Black Panthers, santuary cities).

Even the Senate failing to pass budgets for 3 years, is violating the Constitutional responsibility, and we have to ask why anyone or entity allows non enforcement of rules or law, to get so out of hand that it becomes common or acceptable or normal to the government bureacracy?

If there are "checks and balances" power within the constitution, why has Congress and the Executive Branch and the Courts, failed to act to stop abuses to extensive to name???

Those are the questions and knowledge that all Presidental candidates need to know. The extent of abuse by lawmakers, even a so called Constitutional teacher-lawyer, who acts like he has complete immunity from equal enforcement or Oath Keeping, and pursues a course that is contrary to civil rights and equal rights historical attempts at equal enforcement of law. Pardons,taxes,prosecution and law writing, by Governors and Presidents etc have become in actuality a exercise in taking opportunity and knowledge away from the honest and hard working, for speecial treatment and exception to the poor, the ill, the minorities, the special interest groups who depend on classification and stereotyping by the lawmakers for their livihood and exemption from "normal" or a majority character and national interest policy.

What is happening in our Primaries is what the Founders hoped to avoid, by creating the electorial college and House representation. The control by a large state or large population over a smaller state or population. The primaries show a few early caucus/primary states can eliminate or judge for 42 or 48 other states, who will be able to continue into the interior of the country. That was not the intent of the constitution, but has evolved through money and lawful manipulation of the process. While we were sleeping, opportunity was taken away from the electorate and candidates to compete. Now it is up to S.Carolina and florida to vote for candidates that the rest of the country may be interested in, but who are not the "chosen" with money or political party strength on their side. Don't buy into the rhetoric of "who can't win", give the candidates the chance to compete through opportunity and early states representing all of the country in right to choose the best candidate through majority will.

As long as the candidate doesn't have a string of Communists hanging around the oval office. We've put up with Obama's incompetence, lies, cover ups, but to have people with radical behavior and party identification such as Obama's thuggis friends,this by damn is unacceptable. And what is more unacceptable Congress let him do it.

Mr. Alexander's first assertion is questionable. Historically, the media talking heads and politicians breathlessly tell us before and during EVERY election that it is THE most important election in our lifetimes. That assertion is almost always nonsense hyperbole. Though we are sliding closer to the abyss---the point of no return--- I still think the assertion that 2012 is the make or break election is nonsense.

Perhaps we're already past the tipping point. Can we return to the Constitution and the rule of law? With apologies to the late Joseph Sobran, probably not. As Sobran noted, "Too many Americans depend on government money under programs the Constitution doesn't authorize, and money talks with an eloquence Shakespeare could only envy." (See Joseph Sobran's "The Silent Revolution," 11/21/2000)

As an eternal optimist, I prefer to think Sobran is wrong... but see little evidence to dispute him. Walter Williams, Robert Higgs and numerous other economists and respectable thinkers seem to agree with Sobran. Do Americans really want liberty?

George Bernard Shaw once wrote: "The government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." This seems an undeniable axiom... just NOT Ron Paul.

Obama's election deserves credit for generating the Tea Party Movement. Were it not for the extremist, arrogant actions of Obama in collusion with a Democrat Congress, the great masses would have slept on, ignoring the fact that we've been sliding toward the abyss of bankrupcy and socialism for decades.

Ron Paul has been waving his arms and sounding alarms in the wilderness during this same time, but gathering only a small, but mostly unnoticed, following of people who truly want a return to the Constitution and rule of law. Has the Tea Party grown large enough to make a difference?

It was the excesses of Bush and the GOP Congress that got the Republicans thrown out on their keesters (Congress) in 2006, and which resulted in electing the imposter, Obama, in 2008. McCain would have been just an extension of Bush policies and thus the overwhelming electoral response was: NOT BUSH!

So, it was the record-setting spending and hypocrisy of the Republican Congress, in collusion with George Bush, who set the table for the Obama and Democrat takeover in 2006 and 2008... which thus invited their arrogant excesses and set the table for the Tea Party movement in 2010.

The American people missed a golden opportunity to clean house in 2010. But the major parties hold us in contempt and in electoral bondage and typically present us with NO CHOICE choiceless elections. Vote for Liar 1 or Liar 2! Vote for Crook 1 or Crook 2! We need to clean house and vote out every incumbent, regardless of their "D" or "R" affiliation --- with the exception of Ron Paul and---maybe--- a few others.

Having missed that chance, here we are with the pendulum still swinging toward the Republicans (or at least away from the Democrats). If we elect Santorum, or Romney or Newt, we'll get just more of the same. If we give the GOP a majority in the Senate and it holds the House, we'll create the temptation to backslide on the GOP's so-called principles and return to the arrogance of 2002--2006. Unfortunately, for too many in the GOP (e.g., Newt), holding power is more important than anything and the good of the Party always takes precedence over the good of the people or obeying the Constitution.

The President, per the Constitution, is primarily the Commander-in-Chief of our military and the enforcer of the law. The President should NOT enforce any law that does violence to the Constitution. It's Congress that should be making law. It's Congress that should work with the President to select appropriate judges and justices, and who should impeach those judges who do violence to the Constitution. It's Congress and ONLY Congress that should declare wars. The President should only order our forces to war when it's been declared ON RECORD by the people's representatives.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate among the GOP field who would actually obey the Constitution with regard to his powers. He is the only candidate who would veto unconstitutional spending and force Congress to override said vetoes. We the people have to do better in selecting our members of Congress in order to have any chance of returning to the rule of law.

The President is not a dictator, not the final word on morals and the U.S. is not yet a theocracy. The debate about the President's opinion of Abortion is ridiculous. The decision should be left to the states; it's NOT a federal matter no matter what the Supremes say. The states rule on the definition of marriage, it's not a federal matter.

Ron Paul as president would challenge the GOP Congress to stand up for its professed principles, and to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. The "establishment GOP" is terrified of Ron Paul because their constituency (the military industrial complex) wants to keep the perpetual war machine going. The establishment GOP doesn't really want to shrink government (see spending from 2002--2006), but rather only redirect it. A little grid-lock and a LOT more vetoes would be a beautiful thing.

The fact is, we simply cannot afford to be the world's policeman, even if we wanted the job. Even though some hawks and the Complex clearly DOES want the job, we the people (aka taxpayers) should have the final say. Ron Paul, as President, would return our foreign policy to that of the Founders, non-interventionism. America should seek free and fair trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none. We should avoid sabre rattling and gunboat diplomacy in all cases. Since we can rely on no other country, save our English speaking cousins (Canada, UK, Australia) to defend us, we should act militarily ONLY to defend our borders and prevent the conquest of our cousins. Otherwise, we should be strictly neutral in the conflicts of others.

Regardless of how the media and establishment GOP try to paint Ron Paul as an isolationist, or "weak on defense," the truth remains that we should put America first---that is what a policy of non-interventionism does. Our military should be about DEFENSE, not occupation, nation-building and other euphemisms for EMPIRE.

Getting government out of the way by strictly obeying the Constitution, our renovated freedom would return our economy to the envy of the world, eliminate our debt, and thus protect us by making us unconquerable.

As notable patriots past have pointed out, no nation on Earth can conquer America. Only we Americans can do it from within. Only the true vigilance and action of patriots can stop the power-lust and arrogance of politicians and traitors from achieving our destruction, in collusion with the lazy and incompetent voters who yearn to live at the expense of others. Do most Americans truly want liberty and the hard work and responsibility that entails? Or do they prefer the ease of political slavery? Time will tell.

If Ron Paul is not the GOP nominee for President, then America will most certainly continue the same death-spiral pattern, kicking the can down the road, and soon enough the pendulum will swing back to the irresponsible Democrats, displacing the hypocritical Republicans.... and we'll move closer and closer to the abyss.

All this said, I will vote for the turnip or any other lying vegetable to defeat Comrade Obama.

I abhor Obama because he abhors three things I cherish:

1 - Christianity

2 - The United States Constitution

3 - This Constitutional Republic

Boyd

Major Stu you got it, LTCol West is the man, I supported his last election although his district is well south of the 15th here in Florida, A man with great love of country, military experience, integrity, common sense (now that's unique.) How about bringing him on as a VP, getting some great experience while sharing all of what he has to offer. I thought Perry was the man, but people hung stupid on him because he's not a professional orator like the Chicago Mouthpiece Obama. But Texans may talk slow but they aren't stupid.

Should be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment.

If you really believed this was a tipping point and it is critical to restore Constitutional government, you would not make up a fictitious candidate but rather point out who that is running actually can be expected to follow the Constitution. Most of them have a clear record of trashing it, and only a fool would believe that they will govern their administration by the rule of law. By withholding an evaluation based on the Constitution, you are encouraging the process where the conservative vote is split and a liberal is selected as the GOP candidate. To whom much is given, much is required. You have a platform, but are not using it.

I always read your essays and usually agree with them wholeheartedly. I am strongly sympathetic to conservative causes in the U.S. and elsewhere and my criticism of what you are saying should therefore be interpreted as coming from a concerned friend, not an opponent of any kind.

The description you give of an ideal candidate is quite good and it would be great if such a candidate did indeed exist. What I don't understand, however, is why you dismiss Jon Huntsman so quickly. He has a very good track record in both the private sector and government. He was a very successful, conservative and popular governor of Utah for two terms. He worked as a diplomat for several years. He is charismatic, a good speaker and has a strong, conservative profile. I don't see what's wrong with that.

The reason people criticize Huntsman is because he worked for the Obama administration as an ambassador to China. Let me tell you, if you're the ambassador to China on behalf of the United States, it doesn't matter who's in the White House because you're there to promote American interests and these do not differ all that much between Republicans and Democrats with regard to China. Moreover, ambassadors have very little power and influence anyway so nobody should hold this against Huntsman. The fact that he called Obama "a remarkable man" shows that Huntsman was not stupid enough to say bad things about his boss to the leaders of an upcoming superpower. This is smart diplomacy. What kind of diplomat would Huntsman have been if he'd called Obama a very bad president? The fact that Romney criticized Huntsman for this in a recent debate shows that Mitt doesn't understand diplomacy or - as is more likely - is simply pandering to Obama-hatred among Republicans.

This latter point is exactly what is wrong with the Republican party today. Instead of insisting on social conservatism, small government conservatism or fiscal discipline, many Republicans elevate issues that have nothing to do with conservatism at all to such high levels that they become the party's dogmas. Take evolution. None of the candidates are running for "Christian in chief" but it is nevertheless seen as incredibly important that the candidate disavow the theory of evolution, even though this is not a political issue at all. It has nothing to do with laws, with the political direction of the country or any other issue that politicians should be dealing with. Climate change is another one. This does have political ramifications, of course, but apparently it has become Republican orthodoxy to reject the idea that there is such a thing as climate change. What does this have to do with conservatism? Nothing at all. In fact, one could very well take a Christian conservative stand by saying that man is responsible for the deterioration of our climate and our earth as it was created by God and that we should therefore fight climate change. In any case, the fact that Jon Huntsman believes in evolution and in the reality of climate change does not make him any less conservative. Anyone who says otherwise apparently believes that it is the federal government's job to have an opinion on evolution. So much for small government!

The Republican party has, to some extent among some people, deteriorated into a group whose primary belief is that liberals and Democrats are the enemy and the scum of the earth. They're not; they're wrong, but they're not the enemy. Al-Qaeda is.

Your "best candidate" paragraph is best matched by Newt. He has had problems, which he confessed, etc.

But we are not electing a pastor. Four times of a balanced budget with a Democrat President has never been done after years of unbalanced budgets. Seems the media and the Republican party are more or less forgetting that. In any event, we must vote GOP in large numbers to take the Senate, hold the house, and take the White House. How much longer can our economy wait to be rescued before it's too late?

Your list of attributes is right on target. What you fail to acknowledge is that Dr. Ron Paul fits everyone.

Devoted to liberty; no one more so than Dr. Paul. Strong faith; Dr. Paul is a committed Christian, married to his wife since 1957, with 5 children and many grandchildren. Served in the USAF 1963-1965 and the Air National Guard '65-68.

Leadership; Serves in the House of Representatives, defending the Constitution. Owns a successful private medical practice. A STRONG advocate of limited governement, free enterprise and tax reform. He is smart articulate and has a strong comprehension of complex foreign and domestic policies. He is the only candidate that has not taken politically expedient stands but adheres to a constructionist logic for a vision of our country. Dr. Paul is the salt of the earth, getting where he is by hard work and a superb work ethic, sticking to his principles, ALL while being a gentle and humble man. Your avoidance of the obvious speaks loudly of your "mainstream" view of the Republican Party.

I will never forget the inspired feelings that filled my heart as I listened to candidate, Ronald Reagan speak during election year 1980; what a welcomed contrast to Carter's miserable dribble. But, the so-called political pundunts at the time didn't share my view. I knew Reagan would be a great president; history confirmed it! Now, reminiscent of that time, as the swarm of pundits decry another candidate in similar fashion, I cannot help but feel that Mitt Romney will become a great president, too - because character matters most! Let the pundits say what they will once again.

I would say another characteristic encumbent upon the candidate would that he/she have a name rather than be a fantasy candidate.

Dr. Thomas E Davis, Col. (Ret). --

Thank you, Sir! Total agreement with that post. Any one of those women would provide great leadership.

It was said of Sarah Palin, "The political landscape is littered with the bodies of those that estimated her incorrectly." Dr. Rice (Condoleeza) could flatten any current candidate, hands down! Including Obama.

Mr. Alexander did not include the trait, or quality, of discipline. Which is internal as exemplified by George Washington. Which of the current candidates is most disciplined? Tough question. That is what I will look for, because I will follow a disciplined leader, wherever he may lead. Matter of trust. Without that, the mission is failed. So, Mr. Alexander, who might you deem the more trustworthy, more disciplined, in the current Republican field?

I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that there is not much difference between the R's and the D's in congress. Both want to be elected and re-elected and will use the taxpayers money to accomplish that. They have voted themselves a nice salery, a nice healthcare benefit, and a nice pension, all paid for by the taxpayers. Both sides spit on our Constitution (and probably have never read it, or do not understand it) and do not believe that the founding principles apply to the modern world. We the People are being led back into a world of slavery (debt) and loss of liberty (laws and regulations) that our Revolutionary War was fought to end. I tremble at the thought, but the only way out may be another uprising of the people to restore real Constitutional Government in this country. God Help Us All!

How about honesty and integraty and a valid birth certificate. One who does not lie or distort and lives by our constitution and has no Czars in the cabinet unappointed by congress. Someone who is a leader and who has worked in the private sector and not just a block organizer. Someone who respects Christianity and not a closet Muslim with Islamic beliefs. A leader and not a playboy zipping around the world in an Airforce B747 and apologizing for ill conceived American history. We need a REAL American in the WH.

Dear Editor, your error in your reply to my initial comment is the intentionally misleading opinion that one who does not believe in the supernatural only serves the one they see in the mirror every morning. Poppycock. Non believers channel their efforts to serving their family, friends, country"men", and fellow "man", while believers waste vast resources worshiping the non existent in an immoral hope that it buys them preferable treatment in a fictitious afterlife.

Wenn wir ein neues Deutschland haben sollen, muss die alte Konstitution beiseite gesetzt werden. -- das Fuhrer, Nuremberg, 1933

("If we are to have a new Germany, the old Constitution must be set aside.")

On several occasions, Obama said that he was “flying under the radar,” finding ways to “get around Congress.”

Peter Orzag, Obama’s former head of the Office of Management and Budget,  said, “We need to jettison the Civics 101 fairy tale about pure representative democracy and instead begin to build a new set of rules and institutions...relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.”

Understand the words. Understand the intent, the agenda.

Christopher J England - well said!

Ron Paul. Will stick to the economy, cut the fat, demand a return to the Constitution and will follow the original tenets of the Republican party; ie, individual rights, less government. He will stop our current role as "policeman of the world". As a devoted Christian, I understand the reasoning behind it, but must admonish those in our party for putting the social issues as platform components. This party has always strayed from the course by injecting religion into the elections. Build the foundation and maintain it. RON PAUL will do it.

Dear Marc:

if you sacrifice your wealth, your time, your life, for another human being, you are obeying The Great Commission set down by The Christ.

Where you err is in your ignorance of how deeply imbued this Nation is with the teachings of The Savior -- and how indebted The Founders said they were to those teachings and to The Creator's support of their efforts to establish this Republic.

Simply because you have a general impression of the publicly stated debt owed by The Founders to the Judeo-Christian Tradition doesn't make that Tradition any less valid.

It's a real shame that you young ones passed through (and I mean exactly that) public schools without having received an education. You should have studied History instead of Civics and Social Studies.

Perhaps you'll take it upon yourself to read what Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Franklin (Lincoln) had to say about Christianity as this Republic's moral -- and, hence, legal -- foundation.

The next President should be first and foremost loyal to the sovereignty of the United States, since the New World Order and the United Nations Agenda 21 is quietly taking over much of our country and our government. He should not deliver up favors to corporations or lobbyists in return for campaign contributions. He should consider all financial and trade decisions based on free and fair markets. He should be principled, ethical, and of such impeccable moral character that he would never embarrass himself or our country. He should work toward abolishing the unconstitutional Federal Reserve and returning the U.S. to sound money principles, and downsizing the federal government by eliminating unconstitutional czars, agencies, and Executive Orders that would not pass in Congress. He should bring all the troops home to protect our borders and our country, thereby stopping the insanity of perpetual war for the financial benefit of the military industrial complex.

Will in Phoenix - I agree with the premise that virtuous people are needed for freedom to succeed. I reject the implication that you need an irrational, unsubstantiated belief in supernatural spirits in the sky in order to be virtuous. Its a myth perpetuated by those of faith who want to stifle common sense opinions that differ from their own.

RADDAD, just because you "prefer a world where the handiwork of a Creator may be seen everywhere around me" doesn't mean its true. Read up on some science, you may learn the scary truth...

Oh, did I forget to mention the fact that we already have a candidate who fulfills all the requirements stated above and in Mr. Alexanders description of a great President. His name is Dr. Ron Paul. If you love liberty and your country and wish to maintain it for our progeny, vote RON PAUL 2012!

If, in addition to the qualities already mentioned, he spoke to foundational issues with the honest conviction of a centered core and yet was winsome and humorous enough to make even his opponents smile at times it would be a strength hard to resist and would make him very appealing to voters across the board.

I have become so disenchanted!! I do not like the GOP field. I do not like how talkshow host are ramming Mitt Romney down my throat. I despise the current occupant of the White House. He reminds me of the system I used to see across the Iron Curtain. I AM GETTING COMPLETELY APATHETIC!! I will be a conservative who sits this one out!!

Rifleman, just because "The Great Commission" is proscribed in the bible does not mean such morality is not natural to human beings. In other words, we don't need a book written by men in the dark ages to understand basic morality. Especially a book that also proscribes how to beat your slaves, abhor those based on their sexual orientation, offer your daughters for rape, slaughter your offspring, etc.

And honestly, it is you who err about the about how imbued this nation is with the teachings of the savior. In fact, most of the founding fathers were deists and did not believe in "the savior". There is much great literature on this subject, but I suspect you are not really interested in the truth - it may shatter your privileged worldview.

But irrespective of your beliefs or my beliefs, my continuing issue with The Patriot Post on this matter is that the separation of church and state is a brilliant concept that has helped our nation thrive, and the violation of which has been the source of tyranny through the ages and to this day. When government meddles with religion, religions suffer and when religions meddle in government, the people served by that government suffer.

So, if a man has "faith", he may or may not be a good candidate for President of the United States. But it is not necessary for a man, or a woman, to have faith in the supernatural, for them to have sound morals and to uphold the Constitution. And if said man wanted to use their office as President, to impose their faith on the nation, they would be in violation of the Constitution.

Alexander's Best GOP Candidate is a cop out.

There is one candidate who clearly articulates the Constitutional limited powers given to the chief executive, and that is Ron Paul.

The problem so many "Republicans" have with Mr. Paul is that he isn't considered "electable."

He doesn't have the slick looks or greatest communication style. Too bad for the nation, that we won't vote conscience but rather what appeals to our ears and eyes. Shame on Republicans.

Unfortunatly as in the last election cycle the media and polls seem to be choosing the (R) candidate. I am praying that Ron Paul end up on the ballot but it looks like the left wing media are going to choose Mitt for us. It will be a repeat of the last election a facist at best called a socialist against the photogenic RINO Mitt. Like McCain another RINO the conservatives in this country till not vote for Romney and the communist will get a second term thus destroying capitalism. When America finally wakes up it will be too late and America will be in the same situation as oh lets say Cuba. All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

Of all the candidates, Republican and Democrat, not a one deserves the Presidency. I've been a Republican since I could speak and have always had the highest regard for Dwight Eisenhower, one who did not want to be President to have an additional blurb on a resume. According to Stephen Ambrose's biography, Ike took over because it was (a his duty, and (b because it was either Truman or Taft. Ike beat Taft and Truman wisely stayed away, allowing Adlai Stevenson to become a Democratic martyr.

Ike was a soldier to the bone. Unlike all of his successors and most of his predecessors, he saw first-hand the horrors and costs to nations of war and, for this reason, sought peace. The US was stuck with Vietnam after Dien Bien Phu, but the US was also not involved in major conflicts after Eisenhower took office.

Were there a Republican today (or a Democrat!) like Eisenhower, one understanding the US in the context of the world and disregarding ideology, he would win almost unopposed. If nothing else, I would vote for that candidate.

Marc:

To be clear, I was implying that "faith" has certain core beliefs and practices associated with it. The ten commandments are representative of some of these core beliefs. So where do the people that elect our politicians get their virtues and morals if not from Judeo-Christian core beliefs? Gaia? Marx?

Marc:

To be clear, I was implying that "faith" has certain core beliefs and practices associated with it. The ten commandments are representative of some of these core beliefs. So where do the people that elect our politicians get their virtues and morals if not from Judeo-Christian core beliefs? Gaia? Marx?

The so-called "conservatives" and Christians have holler for a president that will uphold his Oath of office to God, the Constitution, for limited government, a godly man of integrity and principles, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

They or any one of you posting would not vote for George Washington if he was running under a different name! You have a man running now that more or less meets all those qualifications --certainly the principled ones, and you will have nothing to do with him. Why? because your really do NOT want a constitutionalist, a man of integrity, etc., instead you want a smooth talking phony!

We, the candidate, should go after Obama. So far he has not been vetted. Old girl friends? Who did he go with to Columbia? Social Security cards? We borrow 4 billion dollars a day. Times 365 that is 1.44 Trillion dollars a year we are overspending. By 2020 our economy will be destroyed. Will we get our social security then?

This by no means all but needs saying daily! DABALLEW b44dds@att.net is valid

My take on tis:

Hi, I’m John Doe. I believe all current representatives and senators, AND interested voters have good ideas and with your help we can and will bring some sanity to the governance of this great country.

As your nominee, I, Mr. John Doe, will use the expertise of Ron Paul for economic matters, the ideas of Rick Perry for matters of our representation matters such as part-time congress-men, the governing style of Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachmann and Jon Huntsman and I will draw on the support of other candidates and you my fellow citizens in order to regain the confidence of the American people in our government.

The current czars will be either ‘relieved of duty’ or moved into relevant departments after a complete review of all departments for a RIF (Reduction in Force) or even the departments’ relevance in todays environment. Along with help from Newt Gingrich I will obtain a consensus on, among other things, immigration reform that address’ our border controls, north and south, and the current illegal people already in this country as well as the criteria for our basic immigration policy.

I’m John Doe, and I approve this message.

The so-called "conservatives" and Christians have holler for a president that will uphold his Oath of office to God, the Constitution, for limited government, a godly man of integrity and principles, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

They or any one of you posting would not vote for George Washington if he was running under a different name! You have a man running now that more or less meets all those qualifications --certainly the principled ones, and you will have nothing to do with him. Why? because your really do NOT want a constitutionalist, a man of integrity, etc., instead you want a smooth talking phony!

As I read your wish list for the ideal candidate, I honestly (and with a sense of excited anticipation) thought that you were leading up to an endorsement of Ron Paul.

Now, I am left scratching my head and wondering, "Why?"

To paraphrase the Lord, "Has Ron Paul been with us so long, yet we know not who he is?"

Back in 2008, I thought he was a nut if not a fool. But, as our nation has been in such a crisis, I began listening to the professorial (if not polished and toothy like Obama or Romney) physican from Texas and then decided to read his book, "End the Fed." It was then that I realized that the greatest threat to our lives, liberty and national security is, more than anything else, the Federal Reserve's monetary policy. As I have listened to Dr. Paul with an open mind, I have come to learn that the President's role is not to create jobs, but to use his power to defend the people's liberty and the individual states' powers and to use the "bully pulpit" (forgive the referrence to the progressive Teddy Roosevelt) to educate the citizenry on the essentials of Liberty and how the Constitution is crafted, not to limit our rights but to put a stronghold on the powers of the national government.

Ron Paul is following in the footsteps and preaching the wisdom of our founding fathers. Sometimes what he says doesn't sink in right away, much like the Lord's parables in the Bible. But, if you love Liberty, you will come back again, and again until you GET IT! God bless you, Alexander, and all patriots who read this. Dr. Ron Paul--the cure in 2012!

He/She should dis-avow Fabian Socialism; promise the reduction of the Gargantuan Federal Government; especially first by embracing a tax reform and a Flat Tax.

He/She should dis-avow Fabian Socialism; promise the reduction of the Gargantuan Federal Government; especially first by embracing a tax reform and a Flat Tax.

"...the ultimate objective of defeating Barack Hussein Obama."

This statement always makes my teeth itch. Defeating Obama should not be our goal. Our goal should be to offer America a clearly qualified candidate with a platform that has the good of America and the American people at heart. Conservatives should and can do better than blasting each other and the POTUS with negativity. If that is all we can come up with, the American people will give us their votes and we wll have four more years of congressional disfunction.

Why don't Conservatives listen to Ron Paul's ideas. Not all, in my view, are viable, but he has captured a large following. If Jon Huntsman began sounding more like Ron Paul, he could become our next President.

How incredibly, incredibly sad that one can read here, here of all places, words of patriotic and constitutionally principled Americans so blithely declaring that those principles can be so readily be set aside so that "anybody but Obama" be selected to quide our nation in the terrible troubled times ahead. Is that not already how we have come to this place? Now is not the time to set principle aside, but to hold to principle regardless of the cost. There can be neither honor nor pride in voting for traitors to our founding merely because they can "win" and their traitorous activities be less than their predecessor.

Will in Phoenix - there are several great books on the source of morality including The Atheists Guide to Reality by Rosenberg, and The Moral Landscape by Harris. I'm reading the former now. While I don't claim to know all the answers, and I'm not sure I agree entirely with the cited literature, it is abundantly clear to those who dare look beyond religious scripture, that 1) core morality exists without those scriptures and 2) those scriptures are themselves of highly questionable morality. You mention the Ten Commandments. But, really, if a supreme omniscient being had to choose ten ultimate rules to establish a basis for morality would he include honoring him, keeping the sabbath, not blaspheming or worshiping idols and even not coveting neighbors wife and goods over, say not raping, not molesting children, not torturing. Apologists try to explain it away, but the bible proscribes treatment for slaves, offering daughters for rape, murdering offspring, and many other immoral acts and atrocities. It is absurd to claim that those who do not believe in the supernatural, no matter how good, honest, and fair they may be, cannot be moral, while those who follow the teaching of the bible are grounded with fundamental morality.

If conservatives truly want to know why our country is in such disarray they need only look in the mirror. How many times have we read on this and other conservative sites "I'll not vote for that rino" or "it's time to clean house get rid everyone who hasn't voted exactly the way I want" or "if this person runs I'm sitting this one out". It's enough to make me vomit. There is no perfect candidate, there never has been and there never will be. Ronald Reagan a man I truly admired and looked up to was not the perfect candidate or president. We need to get Republicans in office rino or not. Remember Obamacare passed without one Republican vote. Everyone needs to support the Republican candidate in every way they can. Is there a chance you'll be disappointed with Republicans voted into office? I can guarantee you will be but not as disappointed as you would if Obama gets in again. It is past time to bring back the big tent and kick some democrat ass.

Marc is quite prolific. There are many facets to Christian beliefs and faith. Protestant, Catholic, and others. Those that prosper the "big bang" theory, that name themselves atheist or simply scoff at the concepts of Christianity are not less in the strength of a belief. What does one believe? Whatever that is, it provides him a strength of focus. Tibetans have prayer beads. So do Catholics. Point is, one must believe in something outside himself. Some call it Christ, they are not wrong. Some call that focus as not Christ, but something else, Mohammed, Allah, Jehovah, and others. All such are arguments for the concept of "something" to believe in. Without that focus, belief in self and others is weakened. There are those that have experienced the power of concentrated belief. Call it what you will, no man is without a focus, a belief in something other than himself. Your argument is specious. Even Madeline Murray O'Hare believed in something outside herself. So do you.

Your list of attributes is too long, and far too idealistic, its just a reverse coin image of the Democrats wish list.

Get down to basics - what your country, indeed any country that is a mature economy (immature ones require leaders with other attributes)needs first and foremost, whether Republican or Democrat is a President that has 'rationality' as his holy Grail.

I say his because it is not a quality often found in 'hers'.

War service is not of paramount importance, religion is not of paramount importance, what class of society he comes from is not of paramount importance, adherence to a political ideology is not of paramount importance, but the ability to listen to advice and make rational decisions based on that advice to the benefit of the country is of absolutely paramount importance.

As an object lesson of how important it can be read John Lukacs "Five Days in London" May 1940 based on WW2 Cabinet Papers released by the UK government.

Put simply those 5 days of Churchill showing admirable ability to think rationally and strength of will to do the best for his country, did not win the war, it would take the Americans and the Russians later on to achieve that, but in those 5 days Churchill carried the day againt the appeasers, and ensured that Britain would not lose the war.

There has been very little rationality on show in your country or mine (Australia) in the last few years, and looking for signs of rationality during a politicking primary which I follow very closely, is a rather futile exercise, however you can see irrationality emerge during a primary and Perry, Paul, Bachman and Gingrich have all done that to one degree or another at some time, as has the President himself and his advisors, and it goes without saying the main stream media who probably cannot even spell rationality, let alone know what it means.

The only example of rational behaviour I have seen quoted is when Romney was Governor and changed the overflow of homeless people being put up in hotels from the most recent cases to the oldest cases, thus saving the state millions of dollars on the one hand and taking away the incentive for people to pretend to be homeless on the other.

Now that is good pragmatic, effective management and shows rational thinking ability and an appreciation of the realities of human behaviour.

If I knew he would apply that sort of approach to all the problems in the USA and the world, he would be my nominee for President.

How he handles the heat in South Carolina and maybe Florida will give me a guide as to his strength of will under fire, I suspect having been through it all before he will hold steady, and just as I see your Presidents 'coolness' as a sign of insecurity and a bluff to cover up lack of experience, I see Romneys $10,000 bet offer to Perry as a sign of strength and shows me someone who in the private confines of the white house is not going to be afraid of any confrontation with those promoting ill prepared briefs, whether they are US citizens or visiting leaders/diplomats from other countries.

Still early days, but on my crieria of rationalism, Romney is currently in front, if Cain was still in the race he would be second.

Lastly in general it is not rational behaviour when your major goal is to replace Obama to take aim at others who have the same goal, and take your eye off the main target.

The golden rule of selling is never knock your oppositions product, but creatively and maybe even subtedly show how yours is superior, so after all the narrow ideological Republican differences have been aired, again you have to get back to bascs which is who is most likely to defeat Obama?

I read where a Politco reporter said Republicans fall into line, Democrats have to fall in love - well at the moment Republicans are nowhere near in line, they are breaking ranks, and helping who should be their target, rather than themselves and the ever suffering independents who have to put up with fringe dwellers on the left and the right, neither of which if they attain ascendancy are going to be good for the country or the world.

Thank you Mark for your clear analysis of the Presidential candidate situation, especially about John Huntsman.He would NOT be the man.

I hope to make your comments known to as many in my e-mail address as I can.

Another quality of a good President right now for us is a woman who can contribute and stand by her man with experience to be a HELPER in all he does. She must be able to encourage him when things get hard. And understand the constitution and way of how government is to work too. She must show compassion to those less fortunate and be able to have her own outreach. I do have someone in mind who fits this perfectly!

Thank you for your usual excellent analysis of the importance of the next election. Getting close to four score years allows me a perspective younger folks do not have. This is the most critical time in the history of our Republic, and we must undo the damage already done. At one time in our history our forefathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Can we do any less?

Presidential qualities: under the umbra of "leadership" is the ability to select and instruct competent, effective and loyal subordinates, especially cabinet secretaries. It also includes the cojones to deal harshly and firmly with careerists who think the President shouldn't have been elected.

Dubya is our object lesson. Incredibly lucky in choosing Rummy and Cheney, abysmally failing in choosing guys like Al Gonzales on no other basis than loyalty. In retrospect, it's easy to see why Powell, who had been stellar as SecDef, was a pawn of the careerists at State - he simply assumed that they were as dedicated as the soldiers he had led before. Unfortunately, diplomats have no tradition of "duty, honor, country".

You have seen what the response has declared ... Ron Paul is the consensus. You do no good, in fact I would say it is a disservice, to layout some fictional candidate for which you want people to wait for 100% agreement. There is no one in that category now and there will not be when the smoke clears. So lets get realistic. Lets declare Dr. Paul as out candidate (the best constitutional patriot of the group) and then spend the balance of the time until the election clarifying his position in response to the brick bats that fly his way.

We do not need to participate in the mud slinging and name calling. Lets just let everyone understand that we support Dr. Ron Paul and then feature him in every issue.

Sure you can report what some of the others are doing. In fact, lets take their jabs and simply explain Dr. Paul's come back in detail. This notion that he is an isolationist needs to be clarified. His understanding of the terrorist threat .. not just how bad all Muslims are .. should be presented. Once people understand clearly what he believes we can bring additional supporters into the fold.

It seems to me, and others have hinted at it, that there is some other agenda on your part for refusing to acknowledge the reality of only one candidate that even comes close to your outline of the perfect guy.

Lets declare and then move into a positive mode.

I've told my congressman if he wants to get a feel and the pulse of alot of America, read the comments of the comments by the viewers of the Patriot Post. One solution if the conservatives had the muscle of the liberal media, we might get better people as President. You can bet you cojones that we wouldn't have Obama. If congress had vetted him properly demanded he to open up his life, which they did with George Bush and ignored much of John Kerry's sealed records he refused to offer. No way in hell would Obama have been elected, if we knew all of the truth, I know alot of what he said that is damaging and what others have written and researched It is amazing what has been written that our government and populace simply choose to ignore.

If you want to know everything about a person, just run for public office as a Republican. Democrats get a pass and we the people have to live with the fall out of a disaster.

YOUR ARTICLE DOESN'T HELP. YOUR COMPOSITE IS GOOD

BUT "HE" IS NOT THERE. THE CANDIDATES SEEM SELF-

CENTERED AS THEY CONDEMN THE OTHERS. THEY'RE JUST

FEEDING OBAMA GOOD LINES. REALLY STUPID.

WISH THEY COULD RESURRECT CAIN. OR BACHMANN.

REMEMBER, THE DUMMIES RAN MCCAIN IN 2008.

Thanks for the excellent essay that, as usual, shucks down to the cob.

After learning from a recent column by a zealous liberal named Bob Cesca that in an analysis of ALL congressmen dating back to 1937, Dr. Ron Paul placed dead last due to his strict adherence to his oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution! The further I read the more I thought the column must surely be some kind of subtle, back-door endorsement of Dr. Paul rather than a scathing attack on the man for actually doing what he swore to do in the solemn oath all elected officials take. Cesca's vitriol had an impact on me - after reading it I'm firmly in the Paul camp.

I agree with your summary and would offer my services as I fit your mold. Unfortunately, I am ineligible because at the time of my birth (in 1927)my father was still a Canadian. He was naturalized in 1936. Also, I'm much too old.

Hmmmm. Marco Rubio has a problem too, doesn't he???

Love your columns and wish you all the best.

John

Marc:

You miss the point. As I said in my last post, the ten commandments are representative of some core beliefs. You are free to skip the commandments that escape your grasp or don’t make sense to you. I would only suggest that you have a little humility when it comes to how much you really comprehend of the universe we live in. Good luck with your atheism.

The candidate must be able to say "NO" to illegal aliens who want jobs that unemployed American citizens could be holding, as well as free goods and services that consume taxpayer dollars.

Yes, preserve, protect,and defend our constitution by stopping the slaughter of our future citizens by abortion.

Our nation's defense depends upon supporting our strongest ally in the Middle East, Israel. This is crucial.

We must keep our military strong and available in case of surprise attacks. By dismantling our defense system, we are inviting such attacks.

He/She should dis-avow Fabian Socialism; promise the reduction of the Gargantuan Federal Government; especially first by embracing a tax reform and a Flat Tax.

Ron Paul has integrity and a real commitment to liberty, a strong defense and the constitution. He is the man we MUST elect.

[ALL OF THE GOP CANDIDATES ARE CFR GLOBALIST !!!!!!!!!! SO GUESS WHAT IT DOES NOT MATTER WHO YOU VOTE FOR IN THIS PARTY EITHER.....NOW IS THE TIME FOR AMERICA TO TAKE ACTION!!]bj

The Full Romney/Bain Documentary

Terry Black says:

January 12, 2012 at 10:00 am

Mitt Romney, is a CFR Globalist

Search: The Grand Facade of 911 2008 Presidential Candidates

Checkout : 2008 Presidential Candidates / CFR Members

Scroll down to # 7. Mitt Romney CFR Membership bio on his official website

Newt Gingrich is a CFR Member, it is not as hidden as Romney’s membership, as it can be found all over the internet!

I cannot understand how the public can be so numb after what we have experienced with Bilderberg Associate Globalist Barack Obama?

Globalist members and associates look after the interests of crony Corporate Oligarchs and elitists – they have an absolute disdain for citizens of any country, they think of us as dumb animals! They have such arrogance, simply because of their finances, they belive they can do anything they desire to the population and so they have decided to cull us by their Eugenics programs!

The talking heads that you are listening to on MSNBC, CBS, ABC, CNN – Lame Stream Media, owned by the Oligarchs Eg. Rupert Murdoch – Ted Turner and the like are leading “We the People” ( Sheeple ) down the path to the slaughter house!

The politicians the media is pushing into your face and down our throats: Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman , Rick Perry, Rick the War Hawk Santorum are all Globalists and Globalist Pro – while ignoring and talking as little as possible and throwing negative mind control out at us about the only candidate, who stands for Liberty, Constitution, Justice and the People in Congressman Dr. Ron Paul a man who believes in the preservation and sanctity of life it’s self!

Can you not see that these people are actually suceeding in manipulating and talking you into, voting against the only person who has true American values and your best interests at heart?

The truth is the hi-jacked system wants the following outcome: Globalist Puppet Obama to remain in power ( He has done such a fine job of turning America upside down and the Presidency , into a dictatorship, Indefinite Detention anyone?

The Oligarchs have thrown several nominee candidates into the ring that are members of the elitist CFR = Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman – Bilderberg Associate = Rick Perry, Barack Obama – Skull and Bones = Herman Cain, just as in war they invest in all sides, to be sure to maintain control!

The Globalists will except any candidate that is inside their system and willing to be a Puppett to their Shadow Government objectives ( Control of either Republican or Democrat Parties ) for objectives that are in line with the erection of “One World Government”, hence “The New World Order”, whom Herbert Walker Bush, talked so fondly of, as well as David Rockefeller, George Soros, Jay Rockefeller and the Rothschild family!

This condensed summary is the path to desruction we are being led down, while Europe is being pushed under the European Union Dictatorship Eg. Italy = Bilderberg Associate forced Government Representative “Three Card Monti”, a Bilderberg Associate now rules Greece – do your homework the fence is being set up all around the world!

Wake Up! We are being had!

The so-called "conservatives" and Christians have holler for a president that will uphold his Oath of office to God, the Constitution, for limited government, a godly man of integrity and principles, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

They or any one of you posting would not vote for George Washington if he was running under a different name! You have a man running now that more or less meets all those qualifications --certainly the principled ones, and you will have nothing to do with him. Why? because your really do NOT want a constitutionalist, a man of integrity, etc., instead you want a smooth talking phony!

Amongst Republicans there seems to be so many naysayers against Romney!

And he's not even the nominee yet. He may never be. We're not done voting, not by a long shot.

I suggest that we let the voting take its course - let the American people speak - and then back the nominee, whoever he is. Consider our alternative. There is none. We're faced with a choice between further despair and defilement by Obama, and the opportunity to heal ourselves via new leadership.

To withhold support for the Republican nominee because he's a mormon, or because he's old, or because you don't like his haircut, or because he's quirky, or because he forgets something on occasion, etc, is to support Obama and to allow him further time to continue destroying America. Everyone get a grip on yourselves.

I further suggest that we concentrate on installing conservatism in the Senate, preserve it in the House, and make a resolution with ourselves to BE VOCAL. Whoever the nominee is, and if he becomes president, we need to persistently let him know that he was elected to behave exactly opposite to the islamist/socialist he replaces. And he was elected to reverse the damage done by Obama and the Democrats. Good riddence to bad rubbish. Hopefully we will have learned the lesson that Liberalism is the cancer of mankind. We need to monitor everything the new president does, and jump down his throat with letters, emails, and phone calls whenever he pulls a liberal boner. In this way, we can keep him on the straight and narrow.

And people like Don Thornton, commentor from yesterday's Patriot Post, please, keep your religion out of this. You sound ignorant to me. Romney, or anyone else, can do a good job as president even if he is not of your religion. There are plenty of people doing fine in their jobs, who are not of your religion. If you don't support the eventual Repubican nominee, you will be helping Obama. Obama has probably been the country's absolute worst president, and his behavior and decisions in that capacity may or may not be a result of his religion, whatever it really is, regardless of his rhetoric. In the final analysis, his religion is irrelevant. We should judge him on his plethora of lies and misdeeds.

All we need do is to clone Ron Paul, take 20 years off of him and we would have the perfect President. Just remember not to hold your breath waiting to the RNC to see it that way. Ron Paul is not "on the take", never has been, and never will be. He loves our country and believes in the sanctity of our constitution. The RNC hates these attributes!

Q.) What other attributes should a Presidential candidate possess?

A.) An aversion to evil as evidenced by never having been anywhere near a New World Order meeting of the Bilderberg Group.

i read the report of john bolton's endorsement of mitt romney with some trepidation. i have long admired mr. bolton for his acumen and willingness to do the hard work of statehood. but his decision to back romney left me feeling like i was sucker-punched in the belly.

mitt romney is the least conservative of the republican nominees, with the possible exception of huntsman. after much consideration i could only understand bolton's decision as being one of pragmatism.

however, mr. bolton should be careful in his employment of bill buckley's pragmatic conservatism, it was a different day with different forces arrayed against the bastion of liberty. in buckley's day the battle was literally between the ideas of how to govern. today we face a battle for the very survival of government itself, as least government of the people, by the people and for the people. now that socialist ideas are in ascendency we can no longer afford to play these parlor games of big government vs limited government, that battle was won by socialistpm and their capable facilitators: educators. that battle was waged in relative obscurity for the past fifty years or longer, at least since john dewey. and socialists want us to keep arguing big v. limited as this will distract the conservative from watching the direction socialists are taking this country.

iraq, syria, turkey, iran v. israel, the straits of hormuz, the arab spring, north korea, venezuela, cuba, afghanistan, the european union, etc. should all raise red flags yet obama does nothing to protect our interests in these parts of the world. in fact he is set on removing a u.s. presence from them.

thus, the question should no longer be who is more electable, but which candidate has the courage to lead this country back from the abyss!

One step at a time, eagles. One small step at a time.

A person who believes in the Constitution as it was intended by the founders and not as it is liberally interpreted.

A person:

1. who believes in the Constitution as it was intended by the founders and not as it is liberally interpreted.

2. who clearly understands the Constitution and founders intent and does not have a competing personal agenda.

3. who believes in state rights and a small federal government as clearly defined in our Constitution.

4. who is a confident and competent servant minded leader who can work with the many factions within America, without losing sight of American objectives as intended by the founders.

5. who believes in a strong military.

6. of a sincere Christian faith as were our founders.

7. with strong loving family values and supports DOMA.

8. who fully understands the needs of America, which promotes a strong economy and independence.

9. who will strive to (a)reduce the massive federal regulations, (b)revise the tax code for parity and (c)deal with the illegal's in America by paving the way for the established means for legal citizenship or deportation.

A person who is a confident and competent leader who can work with the many factions within America, without losing sight of American objectives as intended by the founders.

A person who cleary understands the constitution and founders intent and does not have a personal agenda.

A person who believes in a strong military

A person of real sincere Christian faith as were our founders.

A person with strong loving family values and supports DOMA.

A person who fully understands the needs of America, which promotes a strong economy and independence.

A person who believes in state rights and a smaller federal government as clearly defined in our Constitution.

A person:

1. who believes in the Constitution as it was intended by the founders and not as it is liberally interpreted.

2. who clearly understands the Constitution and founders intent and does not have a competing personal agenda.

3. who believes in state rights and a small federal government as clearly defined in our Constitution.

4. who is a confident and competent servant minded leader who can work with the many factions within America, without losing sight of American objectives as intended by the founders.

5. who believes in a strong military.

6. of a sincere Christian faith as were our founders.

7. with strong loving family values and supports DOMA.

8. who fully understands the needs of America, which promotes a strong economy and independence.

9. who will strive to (a)reduce the massive federal regulations, (b)revise the tax code for parity and (c)deal with the illegal's in America by paving the way for the established means for legal citizenship or deportation.

How it is that you can not see that Mitt Romney fills all of the qualities you claim as being the ideal candidate to defeat Obama, except for having personally served in the Military, is beyond me. You constantly berate him as not being the true conservative he has become. We are so fortunate to have this man of integrity, virtue, demonstrated leadership skill, and love of country as a potential Republican nominee! He took one dollar as payment for his saving work in the Olympics, one dollar a year while Governor of Massachusetts, and asks nothing but to do good for the Nation---and you berate him constantly. Although it may not mean anything to you, I am not pleased. I have admired your stance on most issues, especially defense and explication of the Constitution, but on this you're to the left of the Founding Fathers.

Dear Patriot Post....thank you, thank you, thank you

for all your work during the past year. We enjoy

your website and recommend it to our teen-age

grandchildren. Please stay with us. We depend on you.We hope and pray for the right candidate in this

upcoming election. Again, many thanks.

Gary and Ann Robison--Hendersonville, NC

To: Marc, Rifleman, and whomever else is involved in this debate over religion.

In support of Marc, I would simply say the following off the top of my head:

1. Man grappled with moral issues long before the concept of God came to be. I think it started when Kronk the caveman whacked his neighbor, Bokk, two caves yonder, and dragged Bokk's mate away by her hair. The ensuing conflict is the stuff of legends. Bokk's beef with Kronk was not that God says Kronk was wrong, but that Kronk's actions hurt Bokk; and no one wants to be hurt. So anyone's "God" is not the only arbiter of morality. This is the genesis of Man's self-awareness and the realization of the effect of one's actions on others.

2. In any generation, the concept of what constitutes moral behavior, can and does stand alone and exist as a component of philosophy. Hence, this supports Marc's point that one does not require religion to dictate morality. In fact, per the above, it can be concluded that religions have co-opted moral codes for their own purposes.

3. When the Founders said that we are born with God-given unalienable rights, they are really using God as a proxy of sorts, to personify the rights that generations upon generations of prior philosophers concluded were desirable and valuable. The concept of God is still a matter of faith, for not even the Founders proved the existence of God. As opposed to the concept of "rights" as they exist in philosophy, it is easier for Man to hold onto and preserve rights if they are granted by God, a supreme being.

4. I think the danger Marc fears when religion enters politics is very real. The summation of God's desires for humanity is man-made since religion is man-made. As such, God's desires can be shaped and altered, and this is where age-tested good philosophy can become overidden by religious dogma. Case in point: if you offend Joe Blow in some way, he will likely take up his offense with you. But if you offend an Islamist, you will have offended Mohammad, and now that offense becomes orders of magnitude bigger, and as the world has witnessed, out of proportion with reality.

Marc may be an athiest. Or he may be an agnostic. I don't care. I just think he's understandably bristling against the idea that only good presidential candidates are found among men or women of faith, despite the fact that no one alive today can prove their faith to be the one true faith, and their God to be the one true God. I think Marc is quite naturally questioning why people of faith put so much stock into, and yield so much self-direction to, something that remains unproven. And then I think he's naturally questioning why he should accept a president of faith over one of philosophical principles. I, for one, don't know what Obama's faith actually is. But if it's his faith that influences his performance as president, I don't want any part of it.

The Constitution says that the government cannot establish an official religion. Maybe that was a reeeaaallly good idea.

I sent this to O'reilly, Glenn Beck and Cavuto, mentioning that all GOP candidates are only interested in spending their campaign money on attacks on each other and wasting all of it instead of fighting together to dethrone Obama !!

The "Best" candidate is easy: It's Newt with Rick Santorum for V.P. and this is simple because three groups want Mittens Romney really badly:

A. Hard core Liberal Progressives and the Obama party.

B. The Establishment (elitist) GOP.

C. The Main Stream Media.

Anytime you see a triangulation of those three groups, you KNOW it's bad for America.

Ron Paul? Crazy (yeah buddy, that guy's NUTS).

Herman and Michele (they dun runemoff.....).

Huntsman (named after a Polo shirt I spose'...).

Gary (Who?).....

It is unfortunate that so many people here seem to be regurgitating the establishment GOP's talking points about their golden boy, Willard Mitt Romney. Since our country is in dire straits, it behooves each and every one of us to take the time to research the background and/or voting history of each of these candidates. Having done so, I have concluded that all candidates except RON PAUL are globalists who will fall in line with the New World Order and sell our country out in a heartbeat. RON PAUL 2012!

It appears we are endorsing a turnip.

In regards to wanting a Presidential candiate to have served in the military: If someone was unable to serve due to a medical condition, would this disqualify a person as a Presidential candidate?

I've been saying for years that Repubs and Dems are two teams, playing the same game on the same court by the same rules, they just have different colored jerseys. Then I read this today from Judge Andrew Napolitano:

=========

What If Elections Don't Matter?

by Andrew P. Napolitano

What if Democrats and Republicans were two wings of the same bird of prey?

What if elections were actually useful tools of social control? What if they just provided the populace with meaningless participation in a process that validates an establishment that never meaningfully changes? What if that establishment doesn't want and doesn't have the consent of the governed? What if the two-party system was actually a mechanism used to limit so-called public opinion? What if there were more than two sides to every issue, but the two parties wanted to box you in to one of their corners?

What if there's no such thing as public opinion, because every thinking person has opinions that are uniquely his own? What if public opinion was just a manufactured narrative that makes it easier to convince people that if their views are different, there's something wrong with that -- or something wrong with them?

What if the whole purpose of the Democratic and Republican parties was not to expand voters' choices, but to limit them? What if the widely perceived differences between the two parties was just an illusion? What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter who's in the White House? What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter what the people want?

What if those vaunted differences between Democrat and Republican were actually just minor disagreements? What if both parties just want power and are willing to have young people fight meaningless wars in order to enhance that power? What if both parties continue to fight the war on drugs just to give bureaucrats and cops bigger budgets and more jobs?

What if government policies didn't change when government's leaders did? What if no matter who won an election, government stayed the same? What if government was really a revolving door of political hacks, bent on exploiting the people while they're in charge?

What if both parties supported welfare, war, debt, bailouts and big government? What if the rhetoric that candidates displayed on the campaign trail was dumped after electoral victory? What if Barack Obama campaigned as an antiwar, pro-civil liberties candidate, then waged senseless wars while assaulting your rights that the Constitution is supposed to protect? What if George W. Bush campaigned on a platform of nonintervention and small government, then waged a foreign policy of muscular military intervention and a domestic policy of vast government borrowing and growth?

What if Bill Clinton declared the era of big government to be over, but actually just convinced Republicans like Newt Gingrich that they can get what they want out of big government, too? What if the Republicans went along with it?

What if Ronald Reagan spent six years running for president promising to shrink government, but then the government grew while he was in office? What if, notwithstanding Reagan's ideas and cheerfulness and libertarian rhetoric, there really was no Reagan Revolution?

What if all this is happening again? What if Rick Santorum is being embraced by voters who want small government even though he voted for the Patriot Act, for an expansion of Medicare and for raising the debt ceiling by trillions of dollars? What if Mitt Romney is being embraced by voters who want anyone but Obama, but don't realize that Romney might as well be Obama on everything from warfare to welfare?

What if Ron Paul is being ignored by the media not because they claim he's unappealing or unelectable, but because he doesn't fit into the pre-manufactured public opinion mold used by the establishment to pigeonhole the electorate and create the so-called narrative that drives media coverage of elections?

What if the biggest difference between most candidates was not substance but style? What if those stylistic differences were packaged as substantive ones to re-enforce the illusion of a difference between Democrats and Republicans? What if Romney wins and ends up continuing most of the same policies that Obama promoted? What if Obama's policies, too, are merely extensions of Bush's?

What if a government that manipulated us could be fired? What if a government that lacked the true and knowing consent of the governed could be dismissed? What if it were possible to have a game-changer? What if we need a Ron Paul to preserve and protect our freedoms from assault by the government?

What if we could make elections matter again? What if we could do something about this?

Reprinted with the author's permission.

January 13, 2012

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at the Fox News Channel, and the host of “FreedomWatch” on the Fox Business Network. His latest book is It is Dangerous to be Right When the Government is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedom.

Copyright © 2012 Andrew P. Napolitano

In addition to the afore mentioned characteristics, the successful presidential candidate must be an honest man rifled with integrity in everything that he does or says. He must be a strong fighter with no fear of rejection. He must be humble enough to recognize that he sometimes needs help & that he does nothing truly alone - consequently he must provide credit where credit is due (even if it comes from the opposing party). He must be able to erase the lines of party affiliation both figuratively and actually in all of his policies. Instead, he must consider what is best for the nation (& to hell with party selectivity). He must be able to forget what an opponent did after the fight is over and a new beginning of cooperation is established - he cannot hold a grudge - but he must also ensure that mistakes are learned from and not repeated. Consequently he must be a learned man of history both within this country and throughout the world. He must be above religious preference. While he should be active & dedicated to his preferred faith, he must not allow that religion to dictate sole discretion on any decision made.

Given time I am sure that I could come up with a lot more attributes necessary to make a truly ideal candidate for not only the presidency but all aspects of governance. But most important of all, the true candidate must be patriotic & solidly behind this nation, all of our policies & all of our actions.

Dear Sir:

I am 70 and taught school 9-12 for 43 years 50/50 black and white. My wife taught art for 30+ years. We are Christians (methodists) and never ever thought that we would see the society go like it has gone. All directions are Bad.

Greed , lust, etc and etc. This is not being a person that holds anything aginst other people but if I am right the USA was founded on Christian principals. THAT IS WHAT I AM GOING TO HOLD TO THE REST OF MY LIFE. If I have to vote for Romney it will be the only time that I have voted for a Non Christian professed person in all my years . I have never failed to cast a vote in local/state and national elections. WE SIMPLY CAN NOT TOLERATE ANOTHER TERM OF THE LEADERESHIP WE HAVE IN WASHINGTON AND THIS COMMENT IS NOT FOR JUST THE PRESIDENT. NO ONE HAS ANY COMMON THOUGHTS ANY MORE AND DON'T CARE EITHER.

KRUSCHIEF SAID IN THE 50'S I THINK AT THE UN WITH HIS FEET ON THE TABLE THAT THE USA WOULD FALL TO COMMUNISM WITH OUT A SHOT. WE ARE WELL ON OUR WAY. GOD HAS TAKEN CARE OF ME AND MY WHOLE FAMILY AND IS STILL TAKING CARE OF ME AND MY WIFE. WE HOPEFULLY WILL BE WITH HIM BEFORE WE HAVE TO GO TO THE GAS CHAMBER OR GET AT TATO ON OUR HAD OR STARVE IN A PRISON.

THERE WILL PLENTY OF ROON IN OUR PRISIONS IN MISSISSIPPI OUR OUT GOING GOVERNOR JUST RELEASED 300+ CRIMINALS THAT HAVE MURDERED , RAPED ETC AND ETC. WHY? WOULD SOMEONE ON HIS WAY OUT DO THAT?

GOD BLESS YOU

CHARLES

What is wrong with all of you are you all under a spell only Ron Paul fits the credentials, it is him or you will loose because his supporters will never sell out if the Rep party does not pick him they will all go down and this country will go to hell. All the other candidates take money from lobbyist Ron Paul is not for sale, you get what you see, an honest man.

Sir Winston said it best.

Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities... because it is the quality which guarantees all others.

Winston Churchill

The primary requirements for an acceptable presidential candidate are the will and the plan to restore the Constitution to its rightful place of authority over the federal government, and the integrity to be incorruptible in that pursuit. Not just talk about it - platitudes that carry no policy weight abound - but specific plans to carry out such restoration are necessary, if the Republican Party is to be the engine of American Freedom that it repeatedly gives lip service to. The only person that has such a specific plan is Congressman Ron Paul.

While I'm not confident that he fully understands at present the nature of the threat that fundamentalist Islam poses to the Western World, however single-minded about a non-adventurist foreign policy he may be, he is not uneducable on this point.

Dr. Paul has been a consistent advocate of making the federal bureaucracy - the head of which is the President - subservient to the instrument that created it for at least the last 25 years. No other candidate can claim to be anywhere near as consistent in the defense of the Civil Rights of all Americans in the face of an increasingly totalitarian federal government as can Dr Paul.

Regarding the imperial and unconstitutional powers both assumed by the current President and abdicated to him by the Congress in the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act, Dr. Paul is the only Republican candidate that has both the vision to fully comprehend the existential threat that the federal government poses to our Republic, and the courage to stand in Constitutional opposition to it.

If the Republican Party truly desires to reverse the current administration's "fundamental transformation of America" that is only the latest manifestation of the Socialist/Progressive movement given presidential credence by Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and FDR, Ron Paul is the only hope.

"The Best GOP Candidate" articulated so well by Mr Alexander, does not exisit at this time. That means that, if things remain unchange, we be forced in this fall's election into choosing the lessor of two evils. This seems to be the current pattern of previous Presiential elections. So why won't the best and brightest of the GOP come forward?

Wasn't it Gladstone who said the definition of a statesmen is one who knows what direction God is going for the next 50 years.

Jon Savage, of course I believe in things outside myself. Its called reality, but it does not include the supernatural.

Will in Phoenix, you precisely make MY point by stating "You are free to skip the commandments that escape your grasp or don’t make sense to you." Really?! Is that a true basis for morality - a set of laws set forth by the supreme creator of the universe that I can cherry-pick for the ones I like? On what basis does one get to decide which rules can be followed and which can be ignored? Perhaps through common sense and a core human morality found outside the scriptures? I have many Christian friends who I have discussed this with and they all say that there are teachings in the bible that we can now agree don't need to be followed, much in the Old Testament, some in the New. But, again, by what mechanism do we decide which scripture we can reject? And, if rejecting certain scriptures leads one to be more moral than following the scripture literally, how can a claim be made that said scripture is a sound basis for morality?

And, as far as humility, I have much. I am awed by science, the vastness of the universe, the goodness and brilliance of my fellow man. But, I agree that my humility runs thin in the face of questionable and disprovable dark-age mythology.

Hamilton - excellent!

@Marc

It actually takes more to not believe in a Supreme Being that it does to believe in one. To not believe you have to first believe that nothing can create something and then that non intelligence can create intelligence. After you get past those two issues then one has to ask were morals come from if there is no God. If there is no God then each human is an animal that can do what they feel is right, welcome to Anarchy. When one believes and follows the teachings of the Supreme Being then one is bound by the Natural Laws established at Creation, welcome to Liberty.

Whomever we put up against Obama must have a thick skin! Plus, integrity, energy, focus, persistence, patience and respect for the Constitution.

He or she must educate the people who have lost touch with our country's values and in particular, define in the clears possible terms, the difference between conservationism and Obama's socialist vision for America.

A president should recognize that once he has committed our sons and daughters to go to war that he has NO MORAL AUTHORITY TO ISSUE "RULES OF ENGAGEMENT" once hostilities begin. This is left to whomever is in command on site. The objective is to neutralize the enemies ability to inflict harm on the forces of The United States...Then restore those troops to their families; WHOLE, if possible.

Rick Perry is the embodiment of all the traits needed in America. He is a job creator, family man and strong Christian and has a big heart.

With what is happening not in our Country but TO our Country, it is high time that we recognize that the failure to adhere to our Constitution has done serious damage to the Republic and we need a new President with some old bur tried and true ideals to get back to fiscal sanity, the end of undeclared wars,the adherence to our Constitution and the elimination of outdated and useless Departments that have not achieved the Objectives that they were meant to do.

THAT CANDIDATE IS THE ONE AND ONLY RON PAUL.

The man for the Job which must be done.

Each time a true conservative stands up, they are destroyed by the left, the left cheerleaders of the media, all with the blessing and aid of the Republicans as well. The Republicans have sold us out, they intend to run Romney, even if they must shove him down our throats. Romney is not the answer, he is not even a conservative. We need reform not comforming, we need leaders who have the onions to stand up and fight for this country, and the Republicans are failing miserably. Which leaves us who? America needs to wake up and take Washington back. These politicians are not leaders, they are Representatives of their people, and that is all. The arrogance and corruption of them, on both sides, has mushroomed way out of control. I see even treason. Well you can shove Romney alright, I will never vote for him, and the Repubs have lost this supporter.

The primary quality he must possess is: he/she is emphatically not Barack Hussein Obama.

I am starting to have doubts about your professed mission statement. I have grave reservations about any holder of political office, or candidate for office, that does not call for an end to the Fed. Also, I wonder if you have ever heard of a man named Peter Hendrickson and his books on the tax system of these United States. I do not claim that he is absolutely correct but I, with my limited ability, both intellectually and resourcefully, cannot find any fault with what he says. Basically he says that while the tax code as written is legal, constitutionally, it does not apply to the majority of Americans and that the collection of it from us is a fraud perpetrated by ALL (Ronald Reagan included) who have ever held federal office. Maybe you could investigate him and his writings, he currently resides in a federal prison for standing up to this tyrannical and oppressive government. Another thing that distresses me is info on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports of all federal, state, county and local governments that show, again I admit to limited ability to decipher much of what I read, apparently that all these entities have investments and income that could totally abolish the need for tax at all but they keep it all hushed up, to keep us in perpetual slavery. I understand that you may right me off as some fringe kook, but, if these things are true and you do nothing to help get the word out on it, you are no better than the 545 elite gang members who do everything in their power to stay in power. Ronald Reagan said many great things and did do things that made life better for many, but he never called the Fed out as an absolutely unconstitutional and tyrannical non governmental organization that in fact is in direct opposition to the pursuit of LIFE, LIBERTY AND HAPPINESS.

Marc:

My intent through all this dialogue was to suggest that virtuous people are required to make a republic work and that much of the morality underlying the Constitution was based on Judeo-Christian religious beliefs. The Founders had this debate when drafting the Constitution. And as you have pointed out, many were atheist like you. My original comment:

“For those of you who denigrate faith, I would suggest that this country was founded by people who believed all human beings had natural rights that were endowed to them by their creator. And while most of these people were Judeo-Christians, they did not require others to have the same beliefs. However, the system of limited government that was established by the Constitution will only work if the governed are virtuous and moral people.

“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Benjamin Franklin

If you are someone that promotes atheism, please tell me where the people that elect politicians should get their virtues and morals from…Karl Marx perhaps?”

That’s the great thing about America. You are free to believe what you will. But just because you firmly believe it, doesn’t make it so.

I am starting to have doubts about your professed mission statement. I have grave reservations about any holder of political office, or candidate for office, that does not call for an end to the Fed. Also, I wonder if you have ever heard of a man named Peter Hendrickson and his books on the tax system of these United States. I do not claim that he is absolutely correct but I, with my limited ability, both intellectually and resourcefully, cannot find any fault with what he says. Basically he says that while the tax code as written is legal, constitutionally, it does not apply to the majority of Americans and that the collection of it from us is a fraud perpetrated by ALL (Ronald Reagan included) who have ever held federal office. Maybe you could investigate him and his writings, he currently resides in a federal prison for standing up to this tyrannical and oppressive government. Another thing that distresses me is info on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports of all federal, state, county and local governments that show, again I admit to limited ability to decipher much of what I read, apparently that all these entities have investments and income that could totally abolish the need for tax at all but they keep it all hushed up, to keep us in perpetual slavery. I understand that you may right me off as some fringe kook, but, if these things are true and you do nothing to help get the word out on it, you are no better than the 545 elite gang members who do everything in their power to stay in power. Ronald Reagan said many great things and did do things that made life better for many, but he never called the Fed out as an absolutely unconstitutional and tyrannical non governmental organization that in fact is in direct opposition to the pursuit of LIFE, LIBERTY AND HAPPINESS.

I do not know how that posted twice. Sorry

A good nominee for President must possess good PRINCIPLES. Therefore Flip Romney should not be the nominee nor should he be considered for the V P spot either. I do wish that Romney would drop out, change to democrat where he really belongs and run a Primary against obama. If forced to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of the evils then consider this: obama is honest enough to admit he is a socialist. Romney is dishonest about which side he is on therefore obama is more trustworthy and the lesser of the evils. I do hope that the Republicans wise up and not force me to pick the lesser of the evils

I do not know how that posted twice. Sorry

He should be a President committed to the concept of equal opportunity for all Americans, as opposed to the goal of universal “equality” at a least common denominator. His commitment should include an intent to dismantle the systems of racial and gender preferences, and quotas, with which our society is cursed.

"The best candidate for the job is devoted to Liberty as endowed by our Creator and enshrined in our Constitution." So says your latest post about the ideal candidate, and then you continue: "As our ideal presidential candidate is not among the current lot, we must all vote for the primary candidate who most closely embodies him."

Yet among all of the present candidates, only Ron Paul fits most of your wanted traits, and you continually refuse to consider him. This shows me that the "good ol' boy" network is still alive and well in our country. And when Obama is re-elected, or one of his Republican clones gets the job, it will be business as usual in Washington DC. Perhaps most people do NOT care for our Founding Fathers' Declaration of Independence and Constitution any longer. But I do, and so do most of the people who support Dr. Paul.

We have two choices in this election - freedom or continued and worse slavery. I will para-phrase my Bible: choose you this day whom you will vote for, but as for me and my house, we will vote for Ron Paul.

"The best candidate for the job is devoted to Liberty as endowed by our Creator and enshrined in our Constitution...".

Sounds like a resume for Ron Paul. What a pity the Patriot Post remains willfully blind to this rather blindingly obvious truth. Your failure the use your influential editorial reach to try and rally broader conservative support for Dr Paul makes you part of the problem, not the solution.

Excuse me, but every time I read one of these editorials it reminds me to donate another $25 at ronpaul2012.com

There has been but one candidate in these debates who has stated publicly that he cannot see himself as President. Rather than declaring himself a man of great virtue or exceptional wisdom, he consistently advances the message of individual freedom, Constitutional government, sound fiscal policy. He doesn't promote himself or his accomplishments. He promotes our nation. I believe he has shown himself as the only candidate truly worthy of the presidency. He already has my respect. He will also have my vote.

Ron Paul is the only patriot running against Obama The silence in the media is deafening even from the Patriot Post HE IS SO CLEAR on issues yet remains invisible while everyone defends their flawed candidates Join the rEVOLution spend a little research time on him

There has been but one candidate in these debates who has stated publicly that he cannot see himself as President. Rather than declaring himself a man of great virtue or exceptional wisdom, he consistently advances the message of individual freedom, Constitutional government, sound fiscal policy. He doesn't promote himself or his accomplishments. He promotes our nation. I believe he has shown himself as the only candidate truly worthy of the presidency. He already has my respect. He will also have my vote.

The best attributes are

honesty, morality, prolife, and prove it by their lives.

They MUST be a christian -our nation is built upon the precepts of God and Jesus Christ (christianity) It is what has made our nation great because He has blessed us. Let's keep it that way!!

What else needs be said? You've just described Dr. Ron Paul.

It was announced today that Obama has amassed a war chest of $240 million for the upcoming election. We now know where $240 million of the missing stimulus money is.

I DO believe the Beltway political advisers, pundits, and national media grasp the significance of the 2012 federal elections. The aforementioned groups continue to willingly promote the socialist agenda put forth by whomever is the architect of Mr. Obama's policies, and labor to encourage and foment rancor and disinformation to any and all potential challenges to that agenda. For the Republican Party's part, it will take nothing less than a clear, consistent message of conservatism and liberty, which should be fairly simple to contrast against the current program of socialism/serfdom. Only then will there be any viable challenge to the incumbent Obama.

Marc,

You disagree with everybody and everything stated here...and you are disagreeable. With that in mind, please leave the discussion.

Those who qualify according to your list won't run for the same reasons Herman Cain is no longer in the race. Without a third party, we are doomed. Unless of course we could run a nation wide write in candidate campaign. That might work if done the right way. The only person I would vote for that is currently still in the race is Ron Paul. I won't vote for any one else. Simply because there is no difference between any of them and the Obamanation that we have in office. I suspect I will vote for an independent candidate like I did last time. Yes, I know that will probably mean Obama wins but so what, Obamacare/Romneycare what's the difference.

THE NEXT PRESIDENT FIRST SHOULD REPEAL OBAMA CARE. THEN HE MUST USE WHATEVER IT TAKES TO MAKE SURE ARTICLE 2 SECTION 1 & 3 ARE NEVER VIOLATED AND TO PERSUE IF OBAMA IS ACTUALLY IN VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION OF OUR CONSTITUTION. IF SO SEND HIM TO JAIL ALONG WITH HIS DEMOCRATES FOR LETTING THIS HAPPEN. I KNOW THIS WILL PROBABLY NEVER HAPPEN.NO ONE HAS YET TO TAKE THIS OBAMA TO TASK, THEY ALL LEAVE A LOT TO BE DESIRED, INCLUDING MCCAIN WHEN HE RAN FOR OFFICE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE OBAMA SHOW HIS TRUE BIRTH CERTIFICATE.THE DEMOCRATS MADE MCCAIN SHOW HIS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE REPUBLIC LEADERSHIP BUT IT SEEMS THAT DEMOCRATS STICK TOGETHER LIKE GLUE. I HOPE THE NEXT PRESIDENT DOES WHAT EVER IS NECESSARY TO BRING CONSERVATIVE VALUES BACK TO OUR NATION. GOD HELP AMERICA

Consistency in values, actions and opinions.

Ability to ignore main stream media attacks and talk directly to the people. In a language that can be easily understood.

He should be pro-life, and for a balanced budget amendment, and flat tax. He should promise to overturn obama-care as his/her first duty as POTUS. He should downsize the Federal Gov't by eliminating the depts of NEA's: National Education Association, National Endowment for the Arts, the EPA, the NLRB, the IRS, and should remove all unions in the public sector. He should force all public employees to pay into their retirement and medical insurances in the same amount as the average of the private sector. He should turn over public education to private organizations OR allow parents to opt out of public education and receive private education instead or home schooling, with the money that would have gone into public education steered to the school that their children are attending. He should recommend term limits to all members of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches, and use his/her powers and influence to have members of the other branches who usurp the specific powers that were delegated to them under the U.S. Constitution but instead become a law unto themselves to be impeached - ie: The Supreme Court of U.S.

He should be pro-life, and for a balanced budget amendment, and flat tax. He should promise to overturn obama-care as his/her first duty as POTUS. He should downsize the Federal Gov't by eliminating the depts of NEA's: National Education Association, National Endowment for the Arts, the EPA, the NLRB, the IRS, and should remove all unions in the public sector. He should force all public employees to pay into their retirement and medical insurances in the same amount as the average of the private sector. He should turn over public education to private organizations OR allow parents to opt out of public education and receive private education instead or home schooling, with the money that would have gone into public education steered to the school that their children are attending. He should recommend term limits to all members of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches, and use his/her powers and influence to have members of the other branches who usurp the specific powers that were delegated to them under the U.S. Constitution but instead become a law unto themselves to be impeached - ie: The Supreme Court of U.S.

He should also move the creation of money to the U.S. Treasury and away from the Federal Reserve so that no interest can be charged for the new money. He should overturn, by executive order, the misinterpretation of the 1st amendment to mean separation of church and state, and re-instate it's true meaning by clarifying that it means that GOVERNMENT is restricted from having any influence on the church unless that entity violates U.S. Constitutional law, and that the Church should be able to have influence on government - meaning that the wall only applies to government, NOT the people, so that "the free exercise thereof" is exactly what it means. That means that private citizens should have the freedom to teach and talk about Christianity in public schools because Christianity was the religion on which this nation was founded upon as is evident by the voluminous writings of our founders, and disregard the MODERN interpretations that are now being taught in public education shcoos, colleges, and universities.

He/she should also remove by executive order, the penalty of losing tax free status if a religious org. engages in political activity. He/she should also overturn by executive order, the law that prohibits religious org. from renting public buildings for religious purposes as New York and other cities have done. He should make it mandatory that all peoples living in the United States to have a photo ID card to perform any transaction in the public sector including voting, and receiving any kind of license.

Mark:

The most important thing about the next POTUS, will be his ability to appoint Federal Judges, specifically Supreme Court Justices. We have 4 Justices over the age of 70. Two are liberal, one Conservative and one Moderate.

I expect Ginsburg to retire at the end of the current term, giving 0 his third appointment. Sotomayor is 56 years old and Kagan is 50. If he were to appoint a third justice, his left-leaning appointees will make up 1/3 of the Court for the next 25 - 30 years. If Breyer (73) retires, as well, 0 will have appointed 44% of the Justices in a mere 4 years. That would definitely bring about "Fundamental Change", but not the kind I believe in.

If that is not enough to scare true patriots to get out and support the most Conservative candidates, nothing will.

TUNGSTEN BALLS!!!-----STAINLESS STEEL OVARIES!!!

J.J.B.Jr.(USN.RET.)

Maryland.

I do not know how that posted twice. Sorry

The president should give back to states what belongs to them. A flat tax of 10% across the board for individuals, businesses, corporations, etc. God only requires 10%. NO EARMARKS! Congress shall only meets 6 months yearly. Congress and president shall not have a retirement or medical benefits. Term limits of 2 terms per house and senate. Its a priviledge to serve as it is to vote. Congress shall be required to be accountable to all laws of the land just as their constituants are so required. Congress shall not be allowed any gifts from lobbists or special interest groups.

First, he must be a Christian. (The Constitution was written by and can only be protected by those who have a righteous foundation. We fight daily against those who live for the Christian's demise. We should understand and face head-on this glaring fact!)

Second, he must love his country above all other countries.(We've seen what damage anything less can do!)

Third, he must be a true conservative in all aspects of his life. (Yes, he should be able to stand head and shoulders above the common man. The position demands it.)

Fourth, he must understand in full the responsiblilty he holds in his hands when he sends young patriots out to war. Balanced only by the love of Liberty, and the requirement of Sovereignty.)

Just want to share the following commentary from Allen West:

Allen West on the Marines Incident:

'Shut Your Mouth, War Is Hell'

1:37 PM, Jan 13, 2012 • By DANIEL HALPER

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.), a former Army lieutenant colonel, sends THE WEEKLY STANDARD an email commenting on the Marines' video, and has given us permission to publish it.

“I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.

“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?

“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”

Bruce R Pierce - I agree that it does take more to not believe than to believe. It takes more intellectual curiosity to search for the truth beyond what was spoon fed to you since birth. It takes more courage to stand up for beliefs that are unpopular. It takes more rational thought and reason to open your mind up to possibilities that you have been taught to fear and loathe. But your premises are flawed and lead you to draw flawed conclusions. If you decide you every want to take the more challenging path, there is a lot of great literature out there that debunks your points. I recommend Godless by Barker or Atheist Universe by Mills. Demon Haunted World by Sagan is also a great read.

Shawn in NC - -I disagree. And no.

Deborah - perhaps we should amend the Constitution to make it a requirement that the president be Christian. Of course it would have to nullify the last part of sentence of Article VI: "...but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

To facilitate ratification, I'd suggest deportation of all non-Christians - they are not REAL Americans anyway.

Contrary to the beleifsof some, our Continental Congress was made up of Christians, there was a book written by an athiest in 1924, attempting to disclaim that fact, in 1925, a pastor wrote another book refuting almost every word of the previous book, but it seems that every once in awhile, the former seems to surface with no mention of the latter. I would suggest that one would pick up sermons by the late Dr.D James Kennedy and his books, and I would also suggest several books by the late Dr. Walter Martin, also known as the Bible answer man. If you are an Athiest, there is absolutely nothing that will change your mind, as you are already dead, but if you are an Agnostic, then there is hope, to finish, I have read some of the book of Mormon, and I have found that Joseph Smith knew very little about Christianity, History, or Judisim, not to mention that his family as well as personal history which are suspect in itself. Mormonism is a Cult religion, the same as at least a dozen other pseudo Christian religions. I have a number of Mormon relatives, and know them for what they are. I tend to ask how many people actually saw those golden tablets? the answer is none, the revised egyptian heiroglyphics that they were written in has never existed, and some of his translations were in perfect Elizabethian English, a language that never existed at the time that those tablets were purportedly written, then there is the question of those magic spectacles, as well as the gazing stones just to name a few of the inconsistancies of the Mormon Cult.

Oh if only Ron Paul understood the need of an ultra-strong national defense that would at times require interventions on foreign soil and always require the support of our friends, ie. Israel

This is the major stumbling block I have in giving him my wholehearted support.

Peace through strength!

I saw a picture of Ron Paul with a caption that said: "Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your next door neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come to your house and break your windows."

People need to understand Dr. Paul's foreign policy better. I am sure he wants a strong national defense, it's the "police of the world" he wants to end.

Dr. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate on the ballot that has CONSISTENTLY voted in line with the Constitution, and will continue to do so. He is the only candidate NOT supported by special interests (Goldman Sachs, etc...). People need to wake up and realize that all the other candidates are just MORE OF THE SAME.

First off requirements:

A valid birth certificate;

Be a Natural born citizen to two U.S. citizens;

Never given up their citizenship;

Never espoused anti-U.S. sentiments or ideals or rhetoric;

Believes our country should be and remain strong including most especially our borders;

Believes in the ideals of our Founding Fathers;

Believes that because someone of means is established financially, that he owes someone who is less fortunate. Giving should come from the heart, not from extortion and force;

Believes that our centralized monetary system should be controlled by congress and sole American interests as originally intended by our founding fathers. And that our monetary value should rest primarilly on the gold and/or silver standard and that money can never be printed without an equal backing in the treasury.

I've been watching Republican primaries all my life. It's like watching an endless re-run of "The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street" from the old Twilight Zone series. We destroy ourselves with endless in-fighting and suspicions, and when no one is left standing, the monsters move in and assume control. Isn't this supposed to be the classic definition of insanity?

To the editor - You have PLENTY of comments here but you did not include mine, and I am wondering why?

What really concerns me is who is going to be the POTUS' cabinet.

A President is one who can select advisors with the loyal intellect to supply quality information on their specialty and then the President has the ability to use said quality data to formulate decisions making the United States and its Constitution stronger and more secure. In the end nothing else really matters.

I think a point to consider while deciding whom to vote for would be Reagan's 11th Commandment, Thous shall not attack another Republician. These Mad Dog attacks must cease.

Loyalty to the Constitution a must; Loyalty to party breeds contempt for the people!

Jim Qualls thanks for putting the theme to Looney Toons in my head...

And so Marc, the question is then, who is the best candidate for the presidency of this once great nation who embodies all of the characteristics you so eloquently elaborated for us (besides yourself of course).

Your article leaves me frustrated simply because it is true. "Other" is still out there, but since he's not running this time I fear there won't be a next time. God save the Republic.

Face the facts! This country needs an injection of "what made America great". For the past several elections, it's all been about "charm". The candidate who has the looks and ability to charm the electorate has won the nomination and POTUS. This electorate is all about voting for the best looking, sexy, and charmingly smooth talking candidate. Sadly, because of this, the most intellectual protector of the constitution and advocate for the people are not electable. We must nominate the candidate who most closely meets both criteria. The perfect example of this ideal candidate is Ronald Reagon. So, with this in mind, which candidate most resembles Ronald Reagon?

Face the facts! This country needs an injection of "what made America great". For the past several elections, it's all been about "charm". The candidate who has the looks and ability to charm the electorate has won the nomination and POTUS. This electorate is all about voting for the best looking, sexy, and charmingly smooth talking candidate. Sadly, because of this, the most intellectual protector of the constitution and advocate for the people are not electable. We must nominate the candidate who most closely meets both criteria. The perfect example of this ideal candidate is Ronald Reagon. So, with this in mind, which candidate most resembles Ronald Reagon?

As an avid reader and supporter, I am quite disappointed again to see such a patriot as Mr. Alexander rooting, cheering, and (silently) campaigning for Gingrich. Mark my words, Ann Coulter is right about supporting Romney, and if we as conservatives do not purge our prejudice and misconceptions of Romney then we can kiss our sorry butts goodbye when BHO is re-elected: Socialism - four more years will be the un-doing of the USA. We all know this!

Because I work in the health insurance industry, let me just say that 98% of Americans HAVE NO IDEA what is going to happen if OBAMACARE is allowed to fully kick-in on 1/1/2014. And, for Mr. Santorum's information, so-called "Romney-care" was NOT the model for what the Liberal-Socialists crafted as the miss-named, Affordable Care Act. Make no mistake, this DISASTER has been in the making - all 2700+ pages - long before the Massachusett Experiment Romney authroized became law.

Bottom-line: Gingrich cannot defeat Obama; BHO will be re-elected; Obamacare will become untouchable and therefore will change our lives miserably, along with a very long list of other laws, regulations, tax-hikes, etc. that will surely come! This is most frightening to consider! Therefore, my plea is to cast away your anti-Romney (anti-Mormon) prejudices before its too late! Save this comment for future reference so as to mark my words. ~ J

How can you Huntsman has no conservative features at all? He is FAR MORE consistent than Romney or Gingrich and impeccable. Have you read his views?

Carolyn Flynn, Douglas Kelly, Robert, and many others beat me to it! I read this paragraph and immediately knew who was being described. Let's start from the top.

-- "The best candidate for the job is devoted to Liberty as endowed by our Creator and enshrined in our Constitution." Who's the only candidate known as the "Champion of the Constitution?" Hint: he's also the author of the book "Liberty Defined."

-- "He...is a man of strong faith, is devoted to his family and has served his nation in uniform with honor." The candidate I'm thinking of is an evangelical Christian, father of five children, and served in both the Air Force and Air National Guard (the only remaining candidate every to have worn the uniform).

-- "He has a good record of executive leadership, both in the private sector and government." Leadership often shows itself outside of an executive mansion. Leadership can be stepping in with compassion when the rest of the world steps out. But leadership on the Hill? Sometimes that takes the form of standing for what you believe in no matter what and earning the nickname of Dr. No.

-- "He is an effective advocate for free enterprise, limited government and tax reform." His plan would cut one trillion in spending in his first year alone and eliminate five departments right off the bat. That's what I call limiting government! He supports eliminating the income tax and IRS. How much more aggressive can "tax reform" get?

-- "He is smart, articulate, charismatic, experienced and a great debater with a remarkable sense of history." Smart: how many candidates can quote Mises and Rothbard and explain the Austrian business cycle...off the top of their head? I daresay just one. Charasmatic: he's the grandfatherly, inspiring type. Experience: thirty-plus years. Great debater with a remarkable sense of history: a little room for improvement on the former, (bearing in mind that the principles of liberty cannot be reduced to five-second sound bytes), but spot-on when it comes to the latter.

-- "He has an outstanding comprehension of complex domestic and foreign policy matters." My candidate is still tracking. And better yet, he espouses the foreign policy of our founding fathers: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none" (Jefferson); "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible" (Washington).

-- "He bases his positions on constructionist logic, not political expediency, and is bold in his vision for our nation." My candidate has voted "no" during his congressional career more than any other congressman in history. This could not be true of someone concerned with political expediency.

-- "He is salt of the earth, not a silver spoon Ivy Leaguer." He went to Gettysburg College, got his medical degree from Duke University, and was a practicing OB-GYN who delivered over 4,000 babies. He also frequently lowered his fees or worked for free and refused to accept Medicare and Medicaid. "Salt of the earth"? Most assuredly.

-- "He has strong ties to the renaissance of American conservatism launched by Ronald Reagan." This candidate led the Texas delegation for Ronald Reagan at the GOP convention in 1976, and was once endorsed by the Gipper.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, I'm speaking of Dr. Ron Paul. Alexander, I think I have adequately defended Dr. Paul and illustrated just how completely he lives up to your qualifications. Am I missing something?