I hated to do it, I felt guilty almost.  But I had to choose between the four remaining flawed candidates and make a decision for who I wanted to represent the Republican Party.  To me,in order of importance, the issues are 1) The War and Foreign Policy, 2) The Supreme Court, 3) Issues of ethics and morality, 4) The economy, and 5) Intangibles.  As a teacher, I will grade each candidate on each issue, then assign each an overall grade.

1) The War and Foreign Policy:  We have an ideology loose in the world that wants to destroy us.  It has made that abundantly clear through its words and deeds.  The only way to deal with this ideology is to kill its zealots, and to create conditions in its strongholds where it can no longer flourish.  It is not easy and it is not pretty, but this is the enemy we face.  Bush has done what he must, now we need a candidate to carry on and improve on his effort.
              A. There are no A's.  There was one, but his campaign never gained traction.  That was Duncan Hunter. 
              B.  I would give 2 B's.  John McCain gets the scope of the war.  Whenever he speaks of foreign policy, I get enthused.  He understands like Tony Blair and George Bush understand, what is at stake and why we must fight.  But John McCain is inconsistent.  He does not see how other things relate to the war.  He does not understand that global warming zealots are using their issue intentionally or not, in such a way as to create a dependence on the Middle East.  He does not understand that the Border relates to our national security.  He does not comprehend that sometimes, you have to fight dirty.  Guantanamo is not perfect, but no prison is.  Our soldiers are not perfect, but they never have been.  Sometimes, the good guys have flaws, but we cannot stop fighting or agonize publically about our mistakes.  John McCain wants it both ways.  he wants to be liked by the media and the world opinion, yet fight for our freedom.  Sometimes the two are mutually exclusive.  On the war, McCain is right and both Democrats remaining are wrong.  If he wins the nomination, I will vote for him on this issue alone.  But he does not tie the war to other security issues and for this, he is dropped a grade.  Mitt Romney also gets a B.  On the war and on other security issues, he says most of the right things, but he says them without much conviction, without the knowledge and depth of knowledge that McCain has.  He seems to have rehearsed lines.  On the up side, he will surround himself with people who get it, and get good advice.  But I cannot say much better for him.
            C. I would give Huckabee a C.  He says many of the right things, then he says things that give me the sense that if the going gets tough, he will walk away.  He says things that imply that Iraq is Bushs' war, not our war for freedom.  He is naive, I think, and that makes me nervous in war time.
           D No D's
           F. I give Ron paul an F.  He is delusional and hopelessly clueless about history and I cannot vote for someone who cannot understand what we fight for.  Because of this, I will not bother to vote on him for other issues even though in economy and such lies his strength.

2) The Supreme Court:   To me, there are two issues.  Is the President a strict constructionist, and is the President a die hard conservative.  A constructionist believes in a limited role for government, for strict adherence to the Constitution in rulings, and most of all, for strict separation between the legislative branch and judicial.  A constructionist, such as Bush, will appoint judges with the same view, who will not attempt to legislate laws, but stick to the job of interpreting them.  A conservative, who shares my conservative values, will look for an appointment who seems to also.  It does not matter as much as the philosophy of constructionist,but it matters.

On this issue, I have to give Romney and Huckabee incompletes.  Neither has served in the federal government where their Judge appointments can be evaluated.  Both appear to be conservative, but neither can be clearly called constructionists.

I would give McCain a D on this issue.  As a part of the Gang of 14, he made a decision to stand as a roadblock to any judges who did not satisfy Liberals.  What is worse, I do not think he did this out of liberalism, I think he did this as a personal vendetta against the President for beating him in 2000.  That makes it worse, it makes it childish.  He has shown no clear ideology on the nature of the courts, his politics are personal and petty on this issue, hardly traits that qualify him to be commander in chief.

3) Ethics and Morality:  On this issue, there are really two parts.  Personal ethics and political ethics.  Political views shape policy, but personal morality shapes the man and cannot be left out of the equation in my opinion.

Huckabee gets an A-.  He was a Minister, and has a personal record as a clean and positive person.  He has consistently supported life issues and other moral issues.  His views on Criminal Justice stem from his faith, and while I do not agree with all of his decisions on pardons and such, he at least seems morally consistent.  He gets the minus for these flaws on criminal justice.

Romney gets a B+.  His Mormonism is irrelevant to me.  I am not saying it doesn't matter, it mattters far more than his politics.  I am saying it is irrelevant to his suitability to office.  He drops a grade because of his social liberalism in Massachussets.  I accept his answer on how and why he changed, but these are moral issues, and it is hard to take a conversion on them as ironclad until evidence is seen.  We'll see as things go along, he could rise or fall on this issue.  His personal morality is not in question.

McCain gets a C-.  McCain has reliably voted for pro life and pro family issues, but his disdain for Christians is open and blatant, and his involvment in the Keating 5 and messy personal issues is troubling.  He mostly drops because he seems to shed some of his moral stances for politics and this disturbs me greatly.

4) Economics:  This includes, tax policy, spending, and also issues such as the environment and trade policy.

McCain and Romney get B's.  McCain used to be a reliable tax cut and low spending vote, but has shifted.  He has done so again for the joy of basking in media and as a personal rip on Bush, who champoins tax cuts.  Romney spent far too much as Governor, mostly because of the liberality of his state.  He also came up with health plans that would cost dearly to implement.  Again, though, while I cannot give him a higher grade based on his record, I give him this grade because he appears to understand that federal and state governments have very different roles.

Huckabee gets a C.  He spent huge amounts in Arkansas.  At the same time, he calls for the fair tax, an idea I love.  But his spending record seems even worse than Romneys.  He is the essence of a "Compassionate Conservative", a great thought, but a reality that ends up in high deficit spending and an unwillingness to appear mean cutting redundant and unneeded social programs.

5) Intangibles:

Huckabee gets an A-.  He has a great speaking presence, a quick wit, and a great skill as an orator.  

Romney gets a B+.  He is a good speaker, but comes across as patrician, almost arrogant.  He seems to be speaking lines, I don't see conviction behind his statements.

McCain gets a B-.  He is a good speaker, I get fired up when he talks about the war.  But he is such an inherently angry and bitter person, and at times he comes across petulant and childish, despite his hero status.  

So the grades come across as follows:

McCain            B, D, C-, B. B-  GPA of  2.28
Huckabee       C, I, A-, C, A-  GPA of 2.85
Romney          B, I, B+, B+, B GPA of 3.25

I have to give the vote to Romney.  I don't want to, I hate to vote for a play-doh candidate, a man who seems to become whatever he is asked to be rather than having his own convictions.  But the other two have deeper flaws, and any of the three are a vast improvement over the Democratic choices.  So today, I voted for Romney.  We'll see how it all plays out.