Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
- 01-24-2012, 01:25 AM #1
Conservatives afraid Romney a perpetual loser
Newt or neutering? Conservatives afraid Romney a perpetual loser
First posted: Monday, January 23, 2012 08:09 PM EST
Ask any Liberal, their favourite Conservative leader was Joe Clark. It’s obvious why: He was a perpetual election loser. The fact that he isn’t particularly conservative is an extra bonus.
This is the dilemma posed by Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, now battling former House speaker Newt Gingrich for the Republican presidential nomination. Conservatives are terrified that Romney is a Joe Clark conservative — the choice of the media and the left because he’s going to be a gracious loser. Just like John McCain was in 2008.
Romney wasn’t a particularly conservative governor — not surprising, given Massachusetts’ liberal bent. But Romney’s track record includes enacting government-run health care in that state similar to the national version pushed through by Barack Obama in 2009.
Even if Romney does become president, he’s hardly an ideological champion of the right. Yet that’s what the Republican Party wants — at least the millions of ordinary American conservatives who make up the bulk of the party. They’re the same people who took to the streets by the millions in the peaceful Tea Party protest, demanding a return to smaller government.
But the party bosses like Romney — well coiffed, well financed and well connected. Which explains the series of anyone-but-Romney candidates to briefly capture the hopes of Republican conservatives, only to be replaced by the next in line: Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum — and now Gingrich.
Each of these challengers has their flaws, but what they have in common is they are to the right of Romney, and each has a more combative style than him, too. By staying in the race long enough, it’s as if the anybody-but-Romneys finally had to settle on Gingrich as the clock ran out.
Gingrich is a fascinating character but perhaps a better fit as a professor, which he once was, than as the executive of the most powerful country on Earth. He’s a brainstormer, a futurist, a great debater. He was the inspirer of the big 1994 Republican takeover of Congress, with his 10-point Contract With America. That win was in reaction to a left-wing president who had proposed to nationalize health care, too. Gingrich has had his questionable policy moments, such as when he mouthed the platitudes of the global warming crowd — a clear calculation that it was better to profit by sailing with that strong wind than against it. And Gingrich has certainly made a tidy profit since leaving office, billing millions in speeches and government relations contracts. That’s not offensive in itself, but many of his clients were on the other side of the ideological spectrum — including Freddie Mac, the government home-loan agency which, along with sister organization Fannie Mae, helped start the dominoes falling in the 2008 banking collapse.
And then there’s Gingrich’s serial adultery. It’s bad form for anyone, let alone a candidate who talks about conservative values. More than his political flaws, it’s his personal life that might undo him — rich lobbying contracts and infidelity. But both the national media and the general electorate forgave Bill Clinton for serial adultery. And Obama’s administration has set new lows of crony capitalism. Google “Solyndra” if you’re curious.
Grassroots Republicans have seen their party lose with bland centrists such as John McCain and Bob Dole. They may lose with Gingrich, but at least they know he’ll go down fighting.
Source: Newt or neutering? Conservatives afraid Romney a perpetual loser | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto SunU.S. Constitution - Article IV, Section 4: GUARANTEES AMERICA FROM INVASION!