Thursday, December 20, 2007

Questioning the Motives of Roger Simon, et al.



Roger Simon, for those of you not aware, is the chief political columnist over at Politico. Typically, I head over to their site to read the work of Jonathan Martin. He updates multiple times a day concerning the latest developments on the Republican side of the Presidential race. You can access his work HERE.


However, it was Simon that caught my attention during my latest visit to Politico. On the front page of the site was another hit piece of his directed at Senator Fred Thompson.


Today, I would like to address characters like this Mr. Simon fellow. Individuals like Simon have a single criticism that they repeatedly express concerning our candidate of choice, Senator Thompson: He’s lazy.


And, I have a simple response: If true, so what?


What’s interesting is that none of the supporters of the other Republican candidates ever challenge Senator Thompson on any authentic, important, Presidential issues. Indeed, it would be reckless for Romney or Giuliani followers to question Thompson’s plan to fix the Social Security system because, quite frankly, their chosen candidates do not have plans of their own. Another example: Even Senator McCain, whom I generally approve of, fails to challenge Thompson on principle. Would Senator McCain like to battle over illegal immigration with Thompson with the conservative base at stake? I think not.


Time does not permit comparing conservative candidates soup to nuts, so allow me to summarize: Republican Steve King (Iowa) received a 100% rating from the American Conservative Union in its latest assessments. Congressman King endorsed Fred Thompson. Moreover, Senator Thompson, himself, maintained a near 90% lifetime rating from the ACU. Thompson is, unquestionably, the conservative choice.


Yet, failing to damage candidate Thompson on any sort of policy issues, critics like Simon continue to bring up this tried-and-failed connotation of “laziness” for the former Senator. Thompson has successfully overstepped this issue by citing a prolific career that seems to prohibit laziness by its very productive nature.


Yet, I will ask this concerning the deemed “laziness”: Are we attempting to elect the nation’s next best campaigner? Or, are we trying to find the individual best suited to be the next President?


Is a perceived “weak” campaign that effective of a criticism? It is not.


This is petty politics people. I beg of anyone that reads: Please do not permit the influence of individuals like pundit Simon to cloud the candidacy running less on showmanship and more on solid policy. Please keep in mind what’s really important when electing the next President of the United States.