GOP race fluid in state-by-state view

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Mon Jun 18, 3:53 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Rudy Giuliani, John McCain (news, bio, voting record) and Mitt Romney dominate the 10-man field for the Republican presidential nomination, with Fred Thompson threatening to roil an unsettled race.

Rare circumstances serve as the backdrop.
The sitting Republican president and party standard-bearer, George W. Bush, has abysmal job-performance ratings. Vice President
Dick Cheney' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Dick Cheney doesn't want the job and there's no natural heir, a significant departure for a party that historically has nominated the next in line.

The result is one of the most fluid GOP races in half a century.
Giuliani, a former New York mayor; McCain, an Arizona senator; and Romney, an ex-governor of Massachusetts, are the strongest contenders. They lead the field in organization, endorsements and money.

But Thompson, the former Tennessee senator and "Law & Order" actor, casts an enormous shadow and placed a close third behind Giuliani and McCain in a recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll. All but certain to enter the race, he's become a favorite of conservatives who are underwhelmed with the current field.

Underdog candidates — former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) and five other long-shots — are looking to catch fire in certain states.
The
Iraq' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Iraq war, immigration, terrorism and abortion are the hottest issues.

To win, a candidate must collect a majority of delegates — 1,255 to be exact. That number, like the date of each state's contest and the delegate allotments, is in flux. Voting begins in January. Here's an early look at the race:
___
IOWA — Jan. 14 (32 delegates)
Romney has emerged as the one to beat, and his strategy calls for winning the caucuses to ride a momentum wave to New Hampshire. Unknown here before 2007, he's spent $1 million in TV ads and direct mail to introduce himself, visited 11 times and hired veteran operatives. McCain is vigorously campaigning here after skipping Iowa in 2000 and has built an organization that rivals Romney's. The 70-year-old senator is trying to overcome his unpopular support for immigration legislation, the perception that he is yesterday's candidate and doubts that he'll be a loyal Republican. Giuliani has sent mixed signals about how hard he plans to compete here. His support for abortion rights and gay rights alienates some conservatives. Both Giuliani and McCain bowed out of a high-profile straw poll in August. Thompson could find success in Iowa. Lesser-knowns pinning their hopes on the state haven't broken through. Brownback may have the best chance and is courting the religious right.
___
NEVADA — Jan. 19 (33 delegates)
The state presents a new dynamic for Republican hopefuls, given that it recently decided to hold its Republican caucuses earlier than in past years. Giuliani, McCain and Romney are trying to determine how to hard to compete in Nevada; the focus has been elsewhere. Nevertheless, all three have raised money here and rank well in surveys. So does Thompson. From neighboring Arizona, McCain may have the best chance to capture Nevada. He's a frequent visitor and he can readily address Western topics such as water rights, American Indian issues, property rights, energy development and immigration. Nevada ranks in the top five of states with the most Mormons and, as a member of that faith, Romney could benefit. But McCain isn't ceding any ground and has dispatched Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., a Mormon and an ally, to campaign in Nevada. Giuliani has scooped up some high-profile endorsements. One unknown is how the immigration issue plays in the Hispanic-heavy state.
___
NEW HAMPSHIRE — Jan. 22 (32 delegates)
The state should be McCain's to lose, given that the senator bested Bush here by 18 percentage points in 2000. He is universally known and has an existing network of backers. But he's fighting the notion that he's different from the rebel the state once embraced, and he's facing a serious challenge from Romney. The Bostonian has a vacation home here and is well-known as the GOP governor of liberal Massachusetts. His $1 million in TV ads have focused on a conservative message as he runs to the right of his rivals. Another Northeasterner, Giuliani, also has appeal here, with his moderate-to-liberal record. Independents are a wild card. In the last contested GOP primary eight years ago, they voted en masse in the GOP primary and helped McCain win. This time, the state is trending Democratic and independents could choose to participate in the star-studded Democratic contest. None of the long-shots is gaining steam.
___
FLORIDA — Jan. 29 (112 delegates)
The early advantage goes to Giuliani. The delegate-rich Sunshine State has a Republican electorate most amenable to his moderate-to-liberal views and plenty of retired New Yorkers. Giuliani, who has a double-digit lead in state surveys, has focused on solidifying support and building an organization here, perhaps more so than anywhere else. Giuliani also is a celebrity who attracts cash, and strong fundraising is crucial with Florida's expensive media markets. Romney is giving chase to Giuliani and has the support of several allies to popular former Gov.
Jeb Bush' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Jeb Bush. McCain, too, is a regular in Florida, and campaigned for current Gov. Charlie Crist last fall. Three variables loom large: the impact of the strong-polling Thompson, how immigration plays in the Cuban and Haitian bastions and the fallout of the state's decision to move up the primary in violation of party rules. The GOP says states that cross it will lose half their delegates.
___
SOUTH CAROLINA — Feb. 2 (46 delegates)
The Southern state is ripe for Thompson to bigfoot the top-tier contenders who are locked in a three-way race but haven't won over influential conservatives. A state survey shows the all-but-declared candidate essentially tied with Giuliani. McCain's state campaign is a powerhouse in organization and endorsements, but his unpopular immigration stance and lingering resentment from a bitter 2000 race complicate his quest. He counts the state's popular Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record) as a close friend and adviser. Romney has a strong presence and has spent money on TV ads and direct mail. But his Mormon faith is an obstacle in a state heavily populated by Christian evangelicals. Giuliani is popular with moderates along the coast; conservatives elsewhere don't like his support for abortion rights and gun control. Huckabee is a possible dark horse, given his credentials as a Southern Baptist preacher and former governor. But some voters aren't convinced he can win in November. Enter Thompson, a Tennessean with a right-leaning Senate resume.
___
MEGA TUESDAY — Feb. 5 (at least 831 delegates)
It's all about momentum and money on Mega Tuesday; candidates will need heavy doses of both to compete in more than a dozen states holding contests. Retail politicking will give way to ultra-expensive TV advertising. More than 50 percent of the GOP delegates will have been chosen when voting ends on what amounts to a national primary day. If Giuliani survives earlier states, he could be a force given the roster of Northeastern states where he has ties and delegate-rich states where he could have appeal — California (173), New York (102), New Jersey (52) and Connecticut (30). The Giuliani camp has suggested the rapid-succession primary calendar may dilute the importance of leadoff states of Iowa and New Hampshire. Thus, he also has been spending time in Feb. 5 states and paying particular attention to California. There, and in some other states, candidates can win delegates congressional district by congressional district, and they may try to cherry pick the districts offering the most delegates. McCain and Romney contend the compressed calendar makes early states even more important. Even so, they, too, have ventured to California and are establishing operations in other Mega Tuesday states. Romney was born and raised in Michigan, and he's angling to triumph there. McCain won the state in 2000 and wants a repeat. Thompson's Tennessee and nearby Georgia also vote that day. Arkansas, where Huckabee was governor for 10 1/2 years, is on the roster as well.

New Gallup Poll, Giuliani still leads the GOP pack

New Gallup Poll
Posted: 18 Jun 2007 08:04 AM CDT
USA Today/Gallup released their new national poll today, putting Fred Thompson in second place on the GOP side: Republicans Giuliani 28 Thompson 19 McCain 18 Romney 7 Gingrich 7 Rudy Giuliani has an...

Brownback aide chided on anti-Mormon bid

Brownback aide chided on anti-Mormon bid

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer Sun Jun 17, 4:47 PM ET

WASHINGTON - An aide to GOP presidential candidate Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) has been reprimanded for sending e-mail to Iowa Republican leaders in an apparent attempt to draw unfavorable scrutiny to rival Mitt Romney's Mormonism.
Emma Nemecek, the southeastern Iowa field director for Brownback's presidential campaign and a former state representative candidate, violated campaign policy when she forwarded the June 6 e-mail from an interest group raising the questions, the Brownback campaign said Sunday.

The e-mail requested help in fact-checking a series of statements about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Among the statements: "Theologically, the only thing Christianity and the LDS church has in common is the name of Jesus Christ, and the LDS Jesus is not the same Jesus of the Christian faith" and "The LDS church has never been accepted by the Christian Council of Churches."
"Sen. Brownback completely disavows himself of this and any personal attacks on religion," said Brian Hart, a spokesman for the Kansas senator. Hart said the campaign apologized to Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, once they learned of the e-mail.

"It was not originated by Ms. Nemecek and the purpose was to fact-check. But it was in violation of campaign policy and it won't happen again," he said.
The controversy comes as Brownback and Romney are scrambling to attract socially conservative voters in advance of Iowa's Jan. 14, 2008, caucuses.

Both candidates say they are ardently anti-abortion, although Brownback — a former Methodist who has become an evangelical Roman Catholic — has criticized Romney for supporting abortion rights as recently as two and a half years ago.

A spokesman for Romney's Iowa campaign, Tim Albrecht, said the campaign accepted Brownback's apology but called the incident "unfortunate."

"It's unfortunate that these attacks of religious bigotry were taking place," Albrecht said. "Sen.
Brownback has apologized and we are glad he has worked to minimize these repugnant attacks in his campaign.

There is just no place for these types of attacks in America today."

First Amendment protects, doesn't bar, religion

First Amendment protects, doesn't bar, religion

By Joseph A. CannonDeseret Morning News
After my column on the resurgence of atheist books attacking religion, a reader wrote that I should "stop trying to shove (my) beliefs down everyone else's throats." He also noted that he has "a feeling that separation of church and state is something (I) loathe." Our reader is making a mistake, common at least since the 1960s, that because the First Amendment prohibits state-sponsored churches and protects religions from government interference that there can or should be no discussion of religion in the public square. The framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were deeply concerned that state-supported churches and laws requiring certain types of belief in God would give religions the power of the state to enforce particular doctrines. Undergirding the framers' thinking is a strong commitment to a religiously pluralistic society in which all ideas, including religious ideas, compete in the marketplace. Thomas Jefferson, speaking about the conflict of religious beliefs, argued that "reason and free enquiry are the natural enemies of error." Jefferson believed that religion itself would benefit from open public discourse. Jefferson noted, for example, that "had the Roman government not permitted free enquiry, Christianity could never have been introduced." Alexander Hamilton believed that one of the principal attractions of the United States to prospective immigrants was that instead of "mere religious toleration" there existed under the new Constitution "a perfect equality of religious privileges." Far from wishing to exclude religion from the public square, the Founders had a deep understanding that not giving government sanction to a particular church would lead to religious diversity which would strengthen the religious impulse of the citizenry. George Washington understood this, and, speaking for many of his colleagues, said that "of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." Paul Johnson in his exhaustive "A History of the American People," (Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1997) concluded that "America had been founded primarily for religious purposes, and the Great Awakening had been the original dynamic of the continental movement for independence." So what does all this two-century old stuff have to do with our times? The debate about the role of religion in society continues and has escalated in recent years. Those against religion and belief in God have some more tools in their tool kits. The long trend of secularization and modernity beginning in the mid-19th century has had its effect. In great part, the existence of religion and its effects have been largely ignored in modern scholarly research and public policy. Many scholars treat religion as an artifact, believing that the postmodern world we find ourselves in has moved beyond religion. But it turns out that religion is much more stubborn than many of the scholarly crowd assumed. So stubborn that some scholars today are rethinking the role and consequence of religion in public life and culture. In 1994, Oxford University Press brought out "Religion, the Mission Dimension of Statecraft." This study was "prompted in part by a concern that the rigorous separation of church and state in the United States has desensitized many citizens to the fact that much of the rest of the world does not operate on similar basis." In order to achieve more peaceful reconciliation to bitter conflicts, greater stress must be placed on "approaches that key to deep-rooted human relationships (religion) rather than to state-centered philosophies." The contributors to this volume believe that religion in general and religious individuals in particular can play a "powerful role in peacemaking" in world conflicts. More recently, and more fundamentally, a group of American scholars are rediscovering that religion is an indispensable tool in understanding why some countries are successful and why others are so "agonizingly slow" to progress toward "democratic governance, social justice and prosperity." Two recent books, "Culture Matters," (Basic Books, 2000, edited by Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel P. Huntington) and "The Central Liberal Truth" (Oxford, 2006, Lawrence E. Harrison) talk about the relationship between cultural values and human progress. Harrison is an immensely well-respected scholar at the Fletcher School at Tufts University and a former director of a number of United States Agency for International Development missions in Latin America. Based on two decades of intimate observation of Latin America, Harrison concluded that the fundamental problems leading to the underdevelopment in Latin America had more to do with culture than other factors and that "culture is powerfully influenced by religion." In a recent interview on C-SPAN, Harrison stated that it is hard to overstate the role of religion in the successful development or underdevelopment of countries. Some commentators disagree with Harrison on his evaluation of particular religions and particular regions and some disagree as to the weight applied to religion in his analysis. However, everyone agrees that he has reshaped our understanding of the relationship between religion and international development. These two examples of recent scholarship underline the importance of religion even in our post-modern culture and the need for civil public discussion of religion. Such a discussion is entirely consistent with intent of the Founders of our country, does not violate the principle of separation of church and state, and is not intended to "shove" anyone's particular religious beliefs down another's throat.

Joseph A. Cannon is the editor of the Deseret Morning News.

Giuliani stays above fray - & rides high

Giuliani stays above fray - & rides high
BY DAVID SALTONSTALLDAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
Sunday, June 17th 2007, 4:00 AM

As the front-runner in the Republican primary for President, Rudy Giuliani is supposed to be the biggest target in the race - he has certainly got his vulnerabilities.
But in a shift that underscores Giuliani's steady perch atop the GOP polls, Republican rivals John McCain and Mitt Romney are increasingly aiming their barbs at each other, not Giuliani, in what many see as a new race-within-the-race - the battle for second place.
"It looks like this primary will be between Rudy and someone," said Republican consultant Roger Stone, who is not working for any of the candidates. "And this race has become a fight over who that second someone will be."

The dynamic could not have been clearer last week. As Giuliani merrily announced a 12-point plan for America - while aiming all his jabs at Democrats - Romney and McCain were engaged in an increasingly bitter intra-party brawl.

It started when McCain reopened charges that Romney had flip-flopped on abortion, in part with a new, in-your-face letterhead that announced, "Mitt vs. Fact. Say. Do. Anything."
The packaging was a satirical punch at Romney's campaign logo of "Strong, New, Leadership," and Romney's camp hit back hard, saying the attacks were a "desperate" ploy by a "faltering" campaign.

It was all music to the ears of Team Giuliani, which happily stayed above the fray, even though the former mayor's pro-choice views make him by far the most vulnerable on the topic among conservative voters.

"Right now there are two candidates fighting about abortion, and Rudy's not one of them," said a pleased Giuliani aide. "That's a good day for us."
Aides to Romney and McCain said they weren't aiming their barbs at Giuliani because they believe that sooner or later, his pro-choice, pro-gay rights views will catch up with him and send his poll numbers plummeting.

Indeed, Giuliani's numbers already seem to be inching down in conservative primary states such as Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, where he now runs second or third. But he remains firmly atop most polls.
Experts say Giuliani's ability to avoid the crossfire underscores how McCain and Romney - and now former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, it seems - are increasingly fighting for the same conservative wing of the GOP.

Meanwhile, Giuliani is left to sweep up the 40% of Republican voters who consider themselves pro-choice, as well as others within the GOP drawn to his record as a fiscal conservative.
"He sustains no damage by floating above the fray," said Stone. "He just continues to build his image and say what he wants to say, while the others go at each other."
dsaltonstall@nydailynews.com

Related Articles
Rake in $1M, and you can be Rudy 'Captain'

The Immigration Debate: Globalists vs. NationalistsMerrill Cook

The Immigration Debate: Globalists vs. NationalistsMerrill Cook

Much of the local reporting regarding the immigration debate has focused on immigration rights groups, like La Raza versus illegal immigration opposition groups, like the Minuteman Project. While this has been a colorful, interesting - and, indeed - important conflict, the more significant battle underlying the immigration debate is between corporate America and America's middle class, or rather, between the globalists and the nationalists.

The current Senate Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty bill for 12 to 20 million illegal aliens is little more than an attempt to reward mass criminality. The provision in the bill for enhanced border security is "a spoonful of enforcement to make the amnesty go down." No one is surprised by Sen. Kennedy's commitment to amnesty.

The important question is: Why would the president of the United States and a number of leading Republicans in the Congress be so willing to stomp all over the conservatives and tear the Republican Party apart in their rush to be the architects of this so-called "Grand Immigration Compromise?" The answer lies in the ongoing fight between corporate America and America's middle class workers. This battle can also be characterized as a fight between those whose priority is globalization (the globalists) versus those whose priority is American sovereignty (the nationalists). The political action committees (PACs) of America's largest companies, especially the multi-nationals, provide the bulk of the money to both political parties and particularly to the campaigns of members of Congress. The No. 1 priority of big business today is to have an endless supply of cheap immigrant labor and to avoid penalties for hiring illegal aliens in violation of current U.S. law.

The next most important (and related) priority of big business is to enable its labor force to move just as freely across national boundaries as trade and capital do. In concert with America's political and economic elite, big business wants a world without borders. Corporate America's fight to legalize America's 12 to 20 million illegal aliens is directly related to its desire to unify Canada, the U.S., and Mexico into a North American Union similar to the European Union. The ultimate goal is global governance and the withering away of national sovereignty. With the vastly lower cost of labor inherent in both of these big business priorities, corporate profits will soar, at least in the short term.

America's workers strongly opposed NAFTA and China's Permanent Most Favored Nation status. Both were promoted by corporate America particularly the multi-nationals. A trade surplus with Mexico at the time NAFTA was enacted has turned into a $1 billion per week trade deficit. The Permanent Most Favored Trade status for China enacted in 2000 has resulted in a $1 billion per day trade deficit! Even the most conservative estimates indicate a loss of at least 6 million American manufacturing jobs from these two pieces of legislation. These corporations in the words of Pat Buchanan, "Want to be rid of their American workers, but keep their American consumers."

America's current political leadership, in crafting the "Immigration Grand Compromise" currently in the Senate in return for campaign contributions from corporate America PAC, has exposed itself as a facilitator in the effort to sell America's middle class down the river. It's up to the people to rise up and stop it.

Merrill Cook is a former member of Congress. He resides in Salt Lake City.

Rolly: Romney's Mormonism a problem for ambitious Utah Republicans

Rolly: Romney's Mormonism a problem for ambitious Utah Republicans
Paul Rolly
Article Last Updated: 06/16/2007 01:15:26 PM MDT

Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Senate Majority Leader Curt Bramble say they are bucking their Mitt Romney-loving compatriots in the Utah Republican Party by endorsing John McCain for president because they are so impressed with the man. Skeptics would beg to differ. After all, it was just two years ago that Huntsman told the Deseret Morning News that he was writing briefing papers for Romney and helping the then-potential candidate behind the scenes. He also said then that he wasn't interested in joining a presidential administration because he loved his job as governor. But former Gov. Mike Leavitt spouted the same thing, right up until the time he accepted President Bush's nomination to be administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. In that same 2005 interview, Huntsman said that he had talked to national security and foreign policy experts in Washington, D.C. about helping Romney if the former Massachusetts governor were to run for president. But, like the ad says, life comes at you fast. Just a year later, Huntsman was foursquare behind Arizona Sen. John McCain's presidential bid. Did the governor think him the better man? Perhaps. But Republican insiders close to the Romney campaign say politics can provide cruel ironies sometimes. And here's a beauty: While Romney's presidential aspirations excite fellow members of the LDS Church, giving them a real hope that the country might see its first Mormon president, Mormons with their own high political ambitions will be disadvantaged if Romney wins. There will be no Mormons in a Romney Cabinet, or in any other high-profile job in the administration, Romney backers say, because of the candidate's sensitivity about the negative view so many people seem to have about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Romney candidacy itself has been beneficial for the church's image, especially with his recent rise in the polls and favorable showing in Republican candidate debates. If he proves himself an acceptable candidate, maybe Mormons really aren't so weird, the logic goes. "The only thing that would be better is if Romney were bald so people could see he doesn't have horns," joked one Romney worker bee. But Romney supporters say he is acutely aware of the misgivings about Mormonism, especially among Christian fundamentalists, and will not aggravate anyone's paranoia by appointing Mormons to high positions. So if Huntsman, say, would like to be in a Cabinet, or ambassador to China or India, Romney is not the star to which he would hitch his hopes. Shurtleff, too, has ambitions. And, as fate would have it, is a fellow Mormon. The attorney general has indicated he would like to run for the U.S. Senate when one of those two seats opens up. That means that either Bob Bennett, whose third term ends in 2010, or Orrin Hatch, whose sixth term ends in 2012, would have to retire. Both senators would be in their late 70s when their respective terms expire, making each of them old enough to be Strom Thurmond's son during his last term in the Senate. So Shurtleff, too, might favor an administration with no LDS ties. Then there is Bramble. His recently announced endorsement of McCain set off negative blog traffic in his home base of Utah County, where McCain is seen as too liberal. But Bramble is a dad. A good one, by all accounts. And today is Father's Day. And Bramble's son Jeff already is showing signs of political interest, serving as an intern in the Utah Senate and running a political action committee for Utah County Republicans. And, it is said, will soon be employed by none other than Sen. John McCain.

Rick Koerber FreeCapitalist.com

Thoughts This Father’s Day
by Abel KeoghJune 15, 2007

One of my heroes is Orson Scott Card. An award-wining writer and gifted storyteller, Card has a talent for writing wonderful novels with believable characters, solid plots, and, ultimately, positive messages.
But it’s more than Card’s ability to write well-crafted, entertaining novels that make him one of my heroes. What I really admire about Card is his dedication to his family and how seriously he takes his role as a father.
I was reminded of this after reading a column he wrote for The Rhinoceros Times. Card, who has been teaching at Southern Virginia University for the last two years, gave a final exam to the students in his Contemporary American Novel course. He asked his students to compare the American culture depicted in novels they had read to their own experiences with American culture.
As Card read the essays, one of the themes he found throughout them was the comments about decisions the students’ parents made. For example, some fathers had taken lower paying jobs so they could raise their kids in a small community rather than a large city. Some mothers made the decision to stay at home. Other parents had made decisions to move their families to more family friendly neighborhoods instead of more affluent ones. Many rearranged their lives or made other sacrifices so that at least one parent could be at home and that the children had easy access to both parents.
Reading about the decisions these parents made forced Card to re-examine the decisions he was making as a father. Card wrote:
What was I doing, driving three hours each way to teach at a university? I would leave on Tuesday morning and not be home till late Thursday night. I still have a newly teenaged daughter at home.
What message was I giving her, compared to the message these other parents had given their children?
Wasn't the message: "Being a professor and getting to do cool stuff at a university is so important to me that I will miss 3/7 of your remaining years at home"?
In other words, I was saying: "Other people's children are more important to me than you are."
I had thought that I was doing something quite noble and wonderful -- and, in the long view, it's hard to think of a nobler and more wonderful profession than teaching.
But most parents who absent themselves from their children's lives believe they're doing something noble and wonderful.
Until I read about what my students' parents had done for them, I couldn't see how I was not practicing what I preached.
Even as I told people in essays and speeches that the most important gift parents can give their children is their physical presence in a loving home, I was going off to another city three days a week -- and I couldn't even pretend I had to do it for money, because that isn't how I made my living.
Then Card announced his decision to stop teaching – for now anyway. Once his youngest child is in college, he’ll consider going back to the roll of mentor. In the meantime he’s rededicating himself to a career as a father with everything else relegated to the status of a job or hobby.
Reading Card’s column a week before Father’s Day, struck a chord with me. As a father of three young kids, it made me consider how I’m doing as a father.
Am I spending as much time as possible with my kids or am I filling my time after work with “more important” things like checking e-mail or other activities that can really wait until the kids go to bed? If I come home from work tired and frustrated, am I taking my frustration out on the kids? In short, what kind of example am I being to them? Am I showing them that they’re important to me and that I value my time with them?
I’m far from being a perfect father. I’m still learning how to control my temper when my boys spill flour or frozen vegetables when I’m cooking dinner. And I could probably do a better job of paying attention to my six-month-old daughter when she coos at me late at night when she’s sitting next to me as I work on my next book.
But I’m doing something right – at least I think I am. I think I’m doing a reasonably good job of not only spending free time after work with them but taking an interest and being involved in their activities.
After my three-year-old goes to bed, I sit next to him and talk with him about whatever’s on his mind. Usually these talks evolve into some sort of tickle game but I know those five to ten minutes together are his favorite part of the day and the part he always makes sure I’m going to do as I help him get ready for bed.
Because the practice proved successful with my three year old, I started spending a few minutes with my 19-month-old son after he goes to bed. Even though he’s not as excited about it as his older brother about his alone time with dad, his eyes do light up when I enter his room, sit next to him in bed, and talk.
Hopefully I’m not just paying lip service to the importance of fathers but showing my children that they are important enough to me that can put some things aside and focus on them.
Father’s Day is a great day to recognize the important roll of fathers and the influence they’ve had on our lives. But it’s also a good time for fathers to pause for a moment and make sure they’re not only giving their children a loving home to live in, but their time and presence too.
Thank you, Mr. Card, for reminding all fathers everywhere what our real focus should be and for not just mouthing the words of a hero but acting like one too.


Abel Keogh is the editor of FreeCapitalist.com. You can email him here. His book, Room for Two, will be published by Cedar Fort this fall.