By MIKE EVANS
Mitt Romney, presidential candidate and sometimes Barack Obama act-alike, has overcome one hurdle on the road to the Republican nomination. Unless one of the other candidates now seeking election rises to the top, it looks like the contest in November could be “Anybody but Obama” versus “Anybody but Mitt,” leaving the American people with having to determine which is the lesser of two evils.
While some observers see similarities between the two men, perhaps the most visible comparison is in the area of healthcare. The hated Obama health care fiasco is being contrasted with Romney’s Massachusetts healthcare plan. Obama staffers in the West Wing and Romney’s Republican competition claim that the two programs are nearly identical. Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty even coined the term “Obamneycare” to describe the Massachusetts program.
Romney’s detractors are correct: In Obama’s program the industry regulations, the directive for individuals to have insurance coverage, and the government financial support aspects are all similar to the Massachusetts system. Conversely, Romney is correct in his assertion that he did not raise taxes, but fails to give credit for that to the Bush administration having authorized more flexibility with Medicaid funds. However, to Romney’s chagrin, Obama gave him a presidential pat on the back for his accomplishments in the Massachusetts healthcare arena.
Also, the former governor, if nominated by the Republican Party, will likely face a challenge from evangelical voters, many of whom look upon the Mormon religion as a cult, and would refuse to vote for Romney based on that belief. A “cult” is described as any group that denies the deity of Christ and preaches a salvation defined by works. That alone would qualify both the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses as cults. It would be difficult for conservative evangelicals to back a candidate who has Joseph Smith and not Jesus Christ as a hero.
So, where does that leave the Republican Party? Tea Party challengers such as Rick Perry and Rick Santorum have little chance, as the protest vote is likely to go to Ron Paul. Newt Gingrich, of course, is seen as too much an insider by some and too promiscuous by others. John Huntsman can’t seem to sustain a rally above 10 percent long enough to cobble together a viable campaign. And, like the last election, Obama would win, not because of his meritorious first term, but because the Republican Party would again introduce a candidate like John McCain, who was too old and irritable to succeed. Mitt is considered to be too arrogant and wealthy for the average American to rally round.
So fasten your seat belts; it’s going to be a long year. If the United States is forced to intervene in Iran and target its nuclear infrastructure in the fall in order to keep the rogue nation from closing the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, Obama will likely be guaranteed another four years in the White House. Such a move seems highly likely given Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s continued mad ravings, and climbing oil prices.
I am reminded of a verse in Ezekiel (22:30): “And I sought for a man among them who should build up the wall and stand in the breach before me for the land that I should not destroy it…” It is not my place to tell you for whom you should vote; but it is my responsibility to charge you to pray and seek God’s will before you step into the voting booth and make a selection. May the God of all peace give you direction and wisdom and knowledge as you seek Him first.