The principles that rule this blog

Principles that will govern my thoughts as I express them here (from my opening statement):


  • Freedom of the individual should be as total as possible, limited only by the fact that nobody should be free to cause physical injury to another, or to deprive another person of his freedoms.
  • Government is necessary primarily to provide those services that private enterprise won't, or won't at a price that people can afford.
  • No person has a right to have his own beliefs on religious, moral, political, or other controversial issues imposed on others who do not share those beliefs.

I believe that Abraham Lincoln expressed it very well:

“The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do, at all, or cannot
so well do, for themselves — in their separate, individual capacities.”


Comments will be invited, and I will attempt to reply to any comments that are offered in a serious and non-abusive manner. However, I will not tolerate abusive or profane language (my reasoning is that this is my blog, and so I can control it; I wouldn't interfere with your using such language on your own!)

If anyone finds an opinion that I express to be contrary to my principles, they are welcome to point this out. I hope that I can make a rational case for my comments. Because, in fact, one label I'll happily accept is rationalist.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Primary choice

In a couple of weeks, Maryland will have its primary. While I will support former Governor Bob Ehrlich with ease, despite his position on transportation as I mentioned in my post on Aug. 11, for the Governorship, I have a dilemma in trying to pick a Senate candidate. There are eleven running in the Republican primary, none of whom I've heard of except for John B. Kimble, a perpetual candidate who ran four quixotic races against Albert Wynn for the House of Representatives. (He has also run for something just about every two years more recently. But in a Senate primary against Michael Steele 4 years ago, he won 3% of the vote! I must admit that in the more recent elections since he quit trying for the Wynn, now Edwards, seat, I was not aware of his candidacy for these offices.)



The other candidates, insofar as I can find out anything about them, are none of them very attractive to me. There is Jim Rutledge, who has been advertising some online, and so I looked him up. His website talks a lot about "freedom," which looks appealing. But one of those freedoms he's put in bold on his site is the right to bear arms, hardly something that would lead me to support him. And another, which looked a bit more reasonable, was "freedom of speech"; but it seems by his site he means the freedom to make homophobic pronouncements! What a terrible choice!



I have seen some immense campaign posters for another candidate, Eric Wargotz. And he and Rutledge seem to be the most serious candidates, according to the information I can find on the Web. But Wargotz is hardly a better choice than Rutledge. His site talks up his life membership in the NRA and his social conservatism. It doesn't seem to be as much socially conservative, though; no outright homophobia and he does talk a lot about limited government.



Of course, I've ignored 8 other candidates. Nobody takes anyone but Wargotz and Rutledge seriously, though. However, one of the others, a dentist named Neil H. Cohen, describes himself as "the only moderate in the race." And his positions on the issues are more reasonable. Though he probably has little chance, if I were voting today, he'd probably get my vote.



Still, I suppose that in November, Barbara Mikulski will beat anyone the Republicans will nominate. And that is too bad; even the worst of the Republicans would be an improvement over her.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I agree that pretty much any of the Republicans would be better than Mikulski. Therefore, since you're never going to agree with anyone on everything, maybe you should vote for who has the best chance of beating her! PPP is the only polling group to look at this, and they found Rutledge does the best. This is likely due to the fact that his campaign organization and volunteer operation is superior to anyone else's. He certainly would be a vote against the Obama agenda that is killing our economy. Something to think about! Good luck with your choice.

Opinionator said...

You make a valid point; the only problem is that, so far, of the four I've looked at, Rutledge is the one I like least (he comes off as very bigoted and homophobic). But I have to look at the other seven.

The question "who has the best chance of beating her" is a very good one -- but would Rutledge's supporters stay home if Cohen, say, got the nomination? And would some of the moderate Republicans vote for Mikulski if Rutledge were the nominee? And what, exactly, would Rutledge's chance, as opposed to Cohen's, of beating her? I wish I could see those numbers.

Ralph said...

ANON 11;43 is so very wrong. The most recent poll, Rasmussen on 8/19 shows Wargotz has been closing the gap. He gained 9% points against Milulski in one month! She fell from 58% to 55% and he rose from 33% to 39%. Overall, the spread went from 25% points to 16% points. Clearly, Wargotz efforts and his supporters are making a difference. The poll results cited by ANON 11:43 are terribly misleading - just visit ppp and read how the unfavorables are for that candidate. Frankly, any republican candidate touting that dem pollster and those results at that site is in sorry shape since that poll and its details are awful for all republican US senate candidates and they never ask the question of those surveyed, who they would prefer in the R primary (or they certainly don't report the results). I agree that Rutlege is extreme and I am favoring Wargotz.

Opinionator said...

Ralph: I have not seen any of these polls. But I think that a moderate would have a better chance to peel off some of the voters from Mikulski than any far out conservative, not to mention that I'm more comfortable with a moderate anyway as closer to my own opinions. So I think that, even if Wargotz and Rutledge are the main candidates, I'm likely to vote for someone else: Neil Cohen.