On Mitt, Moderation and Palin
Good thing the Founding Fathers weren’t so-called “moderates” — the USA would have never gained its independence. And yet, those of us who believe in the vision of our Founders and the watershed document known as the United States Constitution have been under assault this entire primary season — attacks that have only intensified since Mitt Romney emerged victorious as the presumptive nominee. And no, I am not referring to the left.
From the beginning, many of us have voiced our legitimate concerns about Mitt Romney and his — shall we say — relaxed form of conservatism (though at CPAC he described his political philosophy as “severely conservative”, which aside from being inherently asinine, will no doubt be regurgitated endlessly in DNC campaign ads). As NotMittRomney observes:
Just to name SOME of his flip-flops, all of which occurred within the last twenty years when he was a Republican — Romney used to adamantly pro-choice, but now he claims to be pro-life. He once favored amnesty for illegal aliens, but says he’s against it today. He opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2003, but now says he wants to keep them in place. Romney campaigned against the Contract with America and proudly told voters he wasn’t a Reagan/Bush Republican. Today, he says Reagan is one of his heroes. Romney used to be strongly in favor of gun control, but now he says he’s against it. Romney once said the global warming debate “is now pretty much over” because we knew the earth was warming and mankind was the cause of it. However, he’s now changed his mind. Romney used to oppose “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but he currently supports the policy. Romney used to be opposed a Constitutional Amendment to protect marriage, but he backs the Amendment at the moment.
What changed? Well, Mitt Romney decided to run for President and had to convince conservative primary voters to support him.
With an Alinsky-ite in the White House who’s had 3 1/2 years to unleash progressive destruction on the country our Founders risked their lives, honor and fortunes to procure for future generations, We The People had a real opportunity to put up a principled, accomplished conservative who would embody a clear-cut alternative to Barack Obama’s oppressive statism. Instead, we’re stuck with a feckless, gutless and self-interested GOP machine that would rather continue to play the failed “next in line” moderation game with a weak candidate who actually agrees with Obama on a host of issues.
How many times must we repeat this failed experiment? And why is it so difficult to understand that when you have a candidate who can positively articulate why the principles of the United States Constitution are good for everybody, you can win over the so-called middle (i.e. low-information voters)? Let’s face it: it’s mainly due to the success of the progressives in infiltrating public schools, media and pop culture over the last 50+ years that we even have a significant portion of the electorate that “swings” from election to election.
But rather than persuade these voters with common sense and a candidate who can credibly challenge the socialist vision of the current White House occupant, the GOP power-brokers are content to preside over their monarchy and order their grassroots peasants to fall in line. Even worse, they’re currently on a renewed rampage against Sarah Palin — the woman who saved John McCain from a landslide and had a remarkable impact on the success of the 2010 midterms.
Of course, Palin has a proven record of taking on GOP hacks and winning, which is their main motivation for attempting to destroy her. There’s no one of prominence in the Republican Party who comes close to matching her ability to fire up the base; get under Obama’s skin with her relentless tweets, Facebook notes, editorials and interviews; and attract massive crowds wherever she goes. I have no doubt that aside from family considerations, one of Palin’s biggest reasons for declining to run for the presidency was her knowledge that the GOP fix was in. It’s one thing to fight the left (who are at least honest about their intentions), but it’s quite another to face an uphill battle waged by the Rockefeller wing of the Republican Party; their thinly veiled contempt for Palin and the Tea Party surpasses any disdain they might have for Obama and the damage his commie administration is inflicting upon our great nation.
Policies aside, so far Mitt is spectacularly living down to expectations, from agreeing with Obama on student loans to playing the class warfare game. I’ve asked the question before and it bears repeating: Will Mitt Romney go after Obama and his policies with the same passion and money as he did his primary opponents?
Funny, but I don’t recall him ever referring to any one of them as a “nice guy”, as he recently referred to Obama. For the sake of our country Mitt, if you can’t bring yourself to correctly call him a socialist — a charge easily proven by his redistributive policies — can you at least refrain from these unnecessary and undeserved pleasantries?
And to the Mitt supporters who dismiss his critics (as someone did to me on Facebook last night) as “tin-foil hat wearers”, you’re not doing him any favors. Counting exclusively on the “ABO factor” to drive turnout on Election Day is a losing strategy, as is alienating the base of the party — you know, the people you need to win, the ones who roll up their sleeves, walk precincts, make phone calls and wave signs? Without them, not even the highly prized independents will put you over the top. Besides, it’s just plain rude and condescending, especially when we’re the voters who — unlike the swingers — are fully informed — and that knowledge includes Mitt and his “severely” non-conservative record. So stop insulting our intelligence; you’re only making yourselves look small and petty.
As for the GOP elites, they are today’s “loyalists”, who deem themselves a modern version of “Cool, Considerate Men” when in fact they’re just a bunch of well-heeled cowards — or to use Andrew Breitbart’s word, eunuchs. If the men in the video below had prevailed, the USA would have never existed. I just pray that in spite of the ruling class, patriots can prevail in restraining whoever wins in November with a solidly conservative congress:
Consider my vote in November a choice for the lesser of two evils. But my passion, energy and fight will be reserved for electing as many real (as opposed to “severe”) conservatives into the House and Senate. As for the Mittbots, insult me all you want, facts are facts.
Sarah Palin is a “shining light on the hill” and I so wish and I pray she takes over the Oval office in the very near future.
I agree with you 100% Archie! But before she can make it to the Oval Office, I’m afraid we have to dismantle the Rockefeller Republican stranglehold on the party because none of them would ever want that to happen and would work feverishly to prevent it.
Thanks for your comment!