Condoleezza Rice has, in my estimation, served this country with distinction.
First, as a member of the National Security Council during the presidency of George Herbert Walker Bush. Then, as Secretary of State, during the presidency of George Walker Bush.
A FOX News poll released yesterday said that Rice is the top choice of the Republican faithful to be the ticketmate of Mitt Romney, the party’s presumptive presidential nominee.
But she is not the top choice of this social conservative; this long-time Republican.
That’s because Condi supports abortion “rights.” And, frankly, because the 58-year-old has never been married; never had children.
I believe that, after Barack Obama’s jobless “recovery” and his government takeover of the nation’s health care system, the biggest issues in the upcoming presidential campaign will be marriage and abortion.
Romney, the GOP standardbearer, can proclaim himself as the candidate who stands with the majority of Americans who believe in the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage.
On the other side is Democrat Obama, who stands with the abortionists; who stands with the homosexuals who defile the institution of marriage, which was created by God Almighty.
I believe Romney loses both the abortion and marriage issues with Condi on ticket.
For while she says that she opposes late term abortion and she favors parental notification when an under-age girl seeks an abortion, the fact remains that, if her views became policy, there would continue to be more than one million unborn babies killed each year.
I do not know Condi’s views on marriage. Whether she agrees that it is the backbone of society; that it should be reserved exclusively to one man and one woman; that same-sex marriage is an abomination in the eyes of God.
If she agrees with all that, her views coincide with those of social conservatives and Christian evangelicals, who make up a third of the Republican Party base.
Nevertheless, it would be hard for Condi to make a strong, convincing case for traditional marriage when she’s never been a bride herself. When she’s never been a mom.
I’m not condemning Condi for never being married. And by absolutely no means am I criticizing her for being childless.
I’m simply saying that that a never-been-married, childless woman – or man for that matter – is not the ideal spokesperson for family values.
That’s not to say that there is no place in a Romney administration for an individual boasting the distinguished resume of Condoleezza Rice.
Maybe U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Or Secretary of Homeland Security.
Just not a heartbeat away from the presidency.