Skip to content

Nomination Excitations: Getting Rolled

26 March 2012 @ 18:53

Despite Rick Santorum’s twenty-two point blowout victory over Willard Mitt Romney in Louisiana, the relentless calls to rally behind the Milquetoast Morman have gotten even louder.

-In a well-written and insightful piece over at The American Spectator, Stacy McCain takes on the ‘Roll Over For Mitt’ crowd, which contains some interesting bedfellows.  A highlight:

Now that conservative are indeed beginning to unite (Santorum beat Gingrich by more than 3-to-1 in Louisiana), Newt and his supporters seem surprisingly amenable to accepting the GOP Establishment’s “Roll Over for Romney” consensus, rather than joining Santorum’s conservative crusade. This stubborn reluctance of Gingrich to read the handwriting on the wall was perhaps predictable to anyone who has studied the habits of oversized egos, a familiar quantity in politics. Even more predictable, however, was the media’s eagerness to accept and promote the “inevitability” mantra that for weeks has been quite nearly the only argument Republicans have heard in favor of Romney’s candidacy.

Having campaigned for president almost non-stop since 2007, Mr. Inevitable was always the Republican heir apparent for 2012, given the GOP’s longstanding custom of nominating the “It’s His Turn” candidate, second place in the primary campaign being practically a guarantee for the nomination next time around. Ronald Reagan lost to Gerald Ford in 1976, George H.W. Bush lost to Reagan in 1980, John McCain lost to George W. Bush in 2000, and in each case, the second-place finisher went on to be the next Republican nominee. (The party’s 1996 nominee, Bob Dole, was also a re-run, having finished last in the 1980 primary campaign. Many conservatives felt that Dole’s ’96 running mate, Jack Kemp, had missed his shot at the White House by refusing to mount a primary challenge to the elder Bush in either 1988 or ’92.) By virtue of being runner-up to John McCain four years ago, then, Mitt began the 2012 campaign as the pre-emptive favorite.

In retrospect, the ups and downs of Romney’s “Flavor of the Month” rivals over the past year look almost like an orchestrated spectacle, as if the media and the pollsters had conspired with GOP insiders to create a buzz of artificial excitement around what otherwise might have been a dull and predictable Republican primary campaign. Now, however, the media message seems to be, “Fun time is over. Act like sensible grown-up Republicans and vote for this rich guy of dubious ideological sincerity whom the party establishment wants to shove down your throats.” To do otherwise, it is implied, is to be immature, unrealistic and unserious because (the sensible grown-up Republicans assure us during their frequent appearances on TV panel discussions) Romney is the most “electable” candidate. Skepticism toward this “electability” argument is dismissed by Mitt’s media minions in tut-tutting tones, and woe unto the conservative who predicts that Romney will most likely repeat the pattern of previous establishment favorites and lose in November. The sensible grown-up Republicans who have endorsed Romney condemn such predictions as treasonous pessimism — giving aid and comfort to the Democratic enemy — whereas by contrast the Romneyites expect their own predictions of Mitt’s “inevitability” to be accepted as Neutral Objective Facts. (And don’t you dare accuse them of bias!)

Between his inevitability and his electability, Romney’s advocates would have you believe their man is an unstoppable electoral juggernaut, a lead-pipe cinch to become the next President of the United States, and they’ve managed to sell that proposition with the assistance of journalists who seem suspiciously eager to ignore all evidence to the contrary….

Whatever the intent of the media’s repetition of Mitt’s “inevitability” mantra, the effect is to discourage support for Santorum, to demoralize conservatives by telling them that the fight for the Republican nomination is already over, and to force them into a premature acquiescence in the putative triumph of Romney, despite the fact that this allegedly more electable candidate has so far gotten less than 40 percent of the vote in GOP primaries and caucuses. If you suspect that the intent of this demoralizing message is the same as the effect, you are certainly not alone. Nor are you alone if you remain determined to resist the media’s demand for an unconditional surrender to Romney. There is at least one other conservative willing and able to keep up the fight, and his name is Rick Santorum.

In a post over at The Other McCain, Stacy puts his argument more succinctly: ‘Kiss my ass!’

-Stacy links to blogger Daria DiGiovanni who offers a rousing and well-reasoned defense of Rick Santorum staying in the race, with a marvelous takedown of Willard and Romneycare [I have seen the future of health care and it is happening now in Massachusetts].  Two highlights:

It’s unfathomable that just two years after Nancy Pelosi and the liberal progressives in D.C. rammed Obamacare down our throats in spite of widespread public opposition, that the Republican party is poised to nominate a Northeastern liberal who imposed a state-level version of this onerous legislation in Massachusetts. As if that isn’t bad enough, “Romneycare” as it is commonly known, provided the blueprint for Obamacare and even shared the same adviser, Jonathan Gruber.

Speaking of Mr. Santorum’s response to a ‘reporter’ from The New York Times, she writes:

It’s refreshing to watch a GOP candidate for President express the outrage so many of us are currently feeling, instead of promising to run a “civil” campaign. Remember when uber-moderate “maverick” John McCain condescendingly dismissed the valid concerns of a woman on the 2008 campaign trail, claiming she had nothing to fear from Barack Obama? Turns out, that woman was absolutely right. Our freedoms are being stripped away, our national security is at grave risk and religious liberty is under assault.

And yet, the Cocktail Party set and squishy “moderates” within the party insist on challenging the Alinsky disciple currently occupying the White House with another unprincipled politician whose only conviction appears to be winning a presidential election. In spite of his many shortcomings, our moral superiors in the party who dismiss Romney opponents as “uninformed”, “ignorant” and “extreme” — as if upholding the United States Constitutional and its principles of limited government and opposing ever-expanding and intrusive government is somehow radical — insist Mr. Romney is “Mr. Electable”.

Please do take the time to click here and read Miss DiGiovanni’s whole post.

-If I were a generous man [and I’m not when it comes to otherwise smart people acting like fools] I would ascribe this ‘Mitt Is Inevitable’ thing to the fact that people like Matt Drudge and Roger Ailes are so obsessed with defeating Obama that they’ve willfully blinded themselves to Mitt’s defects because they have somehow gotten it into their heads that only someone like him can pull in enough of the non-paying-attention voters, but I’m not.  The only way Willard can win is if Obama screws-up so badly in the next few months and his Socialist minions fail to steal enough votes.  Like Leftists everywhere, Team Obama will be playing extreme hardball and, as we have seen, the GOP Establishment and Team Romney are timid.  Perhaps the GOP Establishment likes him so much because they see that Willard is just like them: a wimp.  That’s what he was as Governor.  I watched him very closely up here in New England and he was laughed at by the Legislature.

-In a comment he left over at Stacy’s joint, Richard McEnroe [of Three Beers Later infamy] shows he understands who and what Willard is:

It’s time to call a spade a spade. Mitt Romney is not a moderate. He is not a Republican. He is a carpetbagger, going wherever he has to and saying whatever he has to say for his own advantage while meaning none of it. His own wife has admitted they didn’t even know any Republicans before Mitt decided he could use them in 2002, and he has been happy to stab them and conservatives in the back since.

The campaign he is running now is poison to the GOP. As with Meg Whitman in CA, the constant barrage of attack ads will alienate and disgust the electorate at large, driving them away from both the candidate and his party. This is not a theory; this is documented history.

-Senator Mike Lee, thought by many of us to be a friend of The TEA Party Movement, has come out and endorsed Romney.  I can’t top Jeff Goldstein’s response, which is worth quoting in full:

TEA Party Favorite Mike Lee endorses Romney

Just like TEA Party favorite Nikki Haley before him.

Evidently, the TEA Party movement we all supported — and whose message we have worked tirelessly to promote — was in favor of state-run health care, TARP, stimulus, Cap-and-Trade, federal minimum wage increases tied to inflation, the necessity of higher gas prices, the right of a state bureaucracy to overrule religious conscience, and the prudence of an individual mandate that will turn citizens into subjects, and create a Kafkaesque committee of 15 political appointees wielding calculators and profound power to determine our health needs.

Oops. Do I ever have egg on my face!

Re: everything I’ve written since Dec 2001. Never mind.

-Finally: The thing that ticks me off the most about the calls to support Willard is the fact that it is clear to anyone not willfully blinding themselves that we conservatives DON’T WANT MITT ROMNEY AS OUR NOMINEE.  We don’t trust him to be conservative.  We know that on one of the two biggest issues confronting us he will be unarmed in the General Election: Obamacare, devil spawn of Romneycare [the other is the Mohammedin threat, especially Iran, and he is a Muslim-coddler].  Strip away the Bob Dobbs-ish mask Willard wears and you’ll find there is no philosophical there there — there’s only a bland technocrat lurking behind the curtain.

  1. KingShamus permalink
    27 March 2012 @ 07:22 07:22

    I agree with every word you just said, especially your last paragraph.

    Having said that, I am of the mind that Barack Obama is such a danger to the continued existence of the Republic that getting him fired in November is job one. This takes precedence over the fact that the favored GOP nominee might very well be the dull technocrat with no philosophical underpinnings whatsoever.

    Now, if Rick Santorum can beat the odds and win this thing…then we might have a chance to get a person with at least some conservative leanings. Dismantling the welfare state will be much easier if the Republican at the top of the ticket understands why he should try to that. What a nice development that would be if Santorum could pull off a minor miracle.

    • 27 March 2012 @ 16:36 16:36

      It would be, but it’s not looking good. I will probably vote for Willard if he gets the Nomination, but I will do nothing to help him or the GOP do it. I’ll concentrate on the Congress.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: