Electoral Compass: Who Is The Most Conservative?

I found my way to a very interesting site called Electoral Compass USA.

It asks you some very direct questions, by way of making statements and asking whether you completely agree, somewhat agree, neutral, somewhat disagree, completely disagree. Then, it shows you where you fall on a grid compared to the 2008 U.S. Presidential candidates. Here’s the picture of where I fall relative to the candidates (the pencil points where I fall, the circle shows which candidates fall within a certain range of my viewpoints):

[Click the picture to enlarge it]

The only statement/question that I thought was off-base was:

Creationism should be taught in science classes in school

I think this is off-base because it focuses on the wrong thing. It asks whether one faith-based belief (Creationism) should be taught in science classes without asking whether another faith-based belief (Darwinian Evolution) should be taught in science classes.

In my opinion, a standard should be set and then that standard applied consistently. Either allow all faith-based beliefs to be taught in science classes in school, or allow none. Don’t ask, “Is Creationism science?” without also asking, “Is Darwinian Evolution science?” Both are accepted by faith, as clearly shown in the debate over the new movie “Expelled“, which has set a new record for comments over at HotAir.com, with 178 unique commenters leaving over 2300 comments.

Either allow faith in science classes in school, or keep faith out of science. Natural Selection is scientifically proven, and results in a loss of genetic information in a species. Darwinian Evolution is taken by faith, and would require an increase in genetic information in a species (going against the Second Law of Thermodynamics).

Back to Electoral Compass…while Fred Thompson was my first choice early in the election cycle, I now think that showing Fred Thompson as more socially conservative than Mike Huckabee is wrong in at least one area: The Human Life Amendment. Mike Huckabee agrees with our Founding Fathers that it’s a clearly obvious (self-evident) truth that life is a God-given (Creator-endowed) unalienable right:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Fred Thompson does not support the Human Life Amendment because he thinks it is a states’ rights issue. That means that he does not believe it is a God-given unalienable right, and that makes him less socially conservative than Mike Huckabee on the issue of Human Life.

You don’t make a states’ rights issue out of an unalienable right endowed by our Creator.

(UPDATE: Fred Thompson was later unmasked as a “stalking horse” for John McCain. Fred Thompson entered the race late and left early. He had no “fire in the belly”. He wasn’t in it to win it, he was in it to ensure “my good friend John McCain” won it. Thompson’s role in the 2008 election was to draw enough Conservative votes in South Carolina to ensure that John McCain did not lose to Mike Huckabee in South Carolina the same way John McCain lost to George W. Bush in South Carolina in 2000. Remember that McCain gave his infamous “Agents of Intolerance” speech shortly after losing the South Carolina primary to Bush. Now Fred Thompson wants us to trust John McCain in regards to judicial nominations. I don’t. We’d get more Souters. Fool me once, shame on you…fool me twice shame on me.)

And as for John McCain, there is no way that he should be placed anywhere near Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee. John McCain should be placed next to Hillary Clinton. They are two peas in a pod, and McCain’s is no Conservative, as evidenced by:
1) His leadership of the Gang of Fourteen (to block judges/justices that were “too conservative”)
2) McCain-Feingold (which unconstitutionally limits free speech)
3) McCain-Kennedy (which would have provided Amnesty for those who have broken our immigration laws)
4) His support of Lieberman-Warner.

Here are my comparisons of McCain vs. Huckabee on several issues:

Judges:
McCain was the father of the Gang of Fourteen that was intended to block nominees who were deemed “too conservative”. McCain called Alito “too conservative”.

Huckabee committed in writing that he would appoint nominees who had proven track records similar to Alito, Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas.

Taxes:
McCain supports the massive taxes in Lieberman-Warner and opposes the Fair Tax.
Huckabee supports the Fair Tax, as well as smaller, less expensive Government that can only come as We the People live more Godly lives and govern ourselves instead of expecting Big Government to govern us. Put down your stone, forgive the bad joke, and listen to what Mike Huckabee says about government in this video.

{putting in block quote to set this apart from the main flow of this comment}
Now, in regards to the joke, keep in mind that “trying to shoot” someone (as Allahpundit described it) takes three things: 1) Ready 2) Aim 3) Fire.
“Ready” means several things, including loading the gun with ammunition. Huckabee’s joke only mentioned one of those three things (Aim) about a man who wants to limit 2nd Amendment rights and insulted the very people to whom Huckabee was speaking. It was an unplanned joke, that only came as a spontaneous reaction to a loud noise off-stage. Here’s the real reason why that joke got so much coverage in the media. In the future, if anything bad happens to Obama and people try to nail this on Huckabee, allow me to remind you that on two separate occasions Hillary Clinton talked about not just “aim”, but assassination.

Life:
McCain does not support the Human life Amendment.
Huckabee supports the Human life Amendment.

Immigration:
McCain co-sponsored McCain-Kennedy!
Huckabee committed in writing to secure both borders with fences by July 2010.

Free speech liberties:
McCain co-sponsored McCain-Feingold, which unconstitutionally limits 1st Amendment rights.
Huckabee fully supports 1st Amendment rights.

Second Amendment rights
McCain’s position is….
Huckabee fully supports 2nd Amendment rights.

Faith:
McCain called certain Christians “Agents of Intolerance” and implied that George W. Bush is an “Agent of Intolerance Republican”.
Huckabee is tolerant of people of all religions.

Intelligent Design:
McCain has yet to take a stand (that I know of). He should be asked if he supports open and honest debate in science, or if he is an “Agent of Intolerance” who believes that any dissent from Darwinian Evolution should be Expelled.
Huckabee supports open and honest debate in science.

Gore-bull Warming:
McCain is in the Al Gore camp. McCain fully supports Lieberman-Warner.
Huckabee believes that we should be good stewards of the Earth that God has given us. Based on the following, he is not in the Al Gore camp:

“A conservative Republican and devout Christian, Huckabee believes he has a biblical responsibility to protect God’s planet from climate change, even though he’s not convinced that climate change is largely human-caused.” http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/11/19/huckabee/

“don’t try to get into the middle of the science of global warming. … There may be [a human role in climate change]. But whether there is or there isn’t, it doesn’t release us from the responsibility to be good stewards of the environment. It’s the old boy scout rule: you leave your campsite in as good or better shape than how you found it. It’s a spiritual issue. [The earth] belongs to God. I have no right to destroy it. I think we work toward alternative energy sources. [We need to make it] like the Manhattan Project or going to the moon. We need to accelerate our energy independence. — Newsweek, March 7, 2007” http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/climate/index.html

In an October 30, 2007 letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal, at page A17, Huckabee clarified his position:

I believe that we must be good stewards of our environment and support many paths to reducing our emission of greenhouse gases, such as more nuclear power and alternative sources of clean energy. As part of our overall effort, I also support a cap and trade system, which has worked well for reduction of sulphur dioxide emissions. However, I do not agree with those who want all allowances to be auctioned off because I believe that will create too great a burden on businesses. The alternative to cap and trade is a carbon tax, which I don’t support.

http://www.carbontax.org/progress/us-presidential-contenders/