Learning From Iowa

Well, the caucus in Iowa is now history. And while most pundits are now concentrating on New Hampshire's primary, I am thinking about what we might learn from Iowa.

The first thing we learned is that the far left liberals tried every deceptive trick in the book to convince people that Ron Paul was in the lead - WAY in the lead. Not only in Iowa, but in 45 states (which, of course, is completely bogus). Their purpose, of course, is to undermine the Republican primary process by artificially inflating Paul's numbers. I point, as a prime example, to the AOL "straw poll" that has shown Ron Paul well in the lead for the last two weeks - right up until the results came in.

Another thing we learned is that Hillary Clinton is not the "shoe-in" that many Democrats believed. She obviously is not the automatic pretender to the throne - though a pretender she is.

And we learned that a large number of voters actually support a solid Christian ethic in our government.

But most important, we learned that, in Iowa at least, the people want things to change in Washington.

And therein lies an enigma. Yes, they want change. But not just any change. They want more honesty, more integrity and more leadership. If they get those things, the people realize that all the rest - Iraq, health care, social security, taxes - will all fall into place.

Rather than focusing on issues, the people are focusing on character and leadership. The contenders should pay heed!

Of course, there are those pundits who will say that the vote for "change" is specific to the heartland, and that the more "elitist" places like New York and LA may have different ideas. And, to some extent, that is true. But even in those places the people want meaningful change. The difference, of course, is that middle America is grounded and the elitists are not. While middle, mainstream America seeks change in the quality of Washington, elitists have been brainwashed into believing the only change that is necessary is a change in party.

And that will cause a problem in '08. In many elitist areas, people will vote for a "shallow" and meaningless change, by voting for Hillary or Obama, while grounded Americans will vote for real change in the form of integrity and leadership.

Most of us know that leadership and integrity should win out. The problem, however, lies in the simple fact that a great number of people are so clouded by partisan hatred that they would rather vote for the Devil, himself, than to vote for a Republican - even if their futures depended upon it.

And that is sad. The American people deserve the best leaders we can get - and it should be of small consideration as to what party they belong to.

We should all strive to forget party for a moment, and think about the realities of the candidates' leadership ability. Hillary claims that ability, but the facts, and her record, actually show otherwise. And Obama is so incredibly inexperienced - in today's world, that is not what we need in a leader. Ron Paul is a nut. Giuliani is a Democrat in Republican clothing, which shows an inherent dishonesty. McCain is too liberal on important issues, such as immigration. And Romney - well, it's hard to pin him down, which also is not a good sign of leadership.

That leaves three true contenders, if meaningful change is what you want. But only two are running, with only one a serious contender.

Newt Gingrich is a strong, thoughtful man with proven leadership ability. He is probably the best man for the job facing us in the years ahead. But he is not running. Duncan Hunter is nearly ideal, but he is not a serious contender because the financing is not behind him - it's hard to raise money when you refuse to become a puppet of special interests.

That leaves Mike Huckabee. He has integrity, and the ability to lead. And his funding comes from the people, not special interests. His message is strong and clear, since it got through even though he could not compete with the others on a dollar-for-dollar campaign. In other words, any candidate who can make such a great showing, without having the money behind him to get the word out, is obviously a man with the right message.

Now we have to wait and see if the majority of America is willing to vote for real change, and not empty political promises.