Perhaps it’s my advancing years. Next month 66 candles will grace my (big) B-Day cake so perhaps I’ve mellowed to the point where my right wing has become dysfunctional.
Don’t believe it. I, that is to say myself, remain steadfastly conservative. My life’s experience has demonstrated to my satisfaction that Burke’s observations about wisely governing remain as valid in the 21st century as in the eighteenth.
And the latest GOP debate showed to my satisfaction that the Republican Party has some pols who do in fact seek to govern based on the lessons of experience and history rather than theoretical notions.
Yes, I would very much like to see and hear my version of conservative utopia, but whoops! UTOPIA is “no where” and there is no place in a conservative political outlook for perfectionism. There is however in my opinion plenty of room for reformation and I’ll take it where I can get it.
The experience of Obama, Reid, Pelosi et al has me in an imperative mode: To wit; the sooner those folks are politically neutered the better. And that means winning and more winning in 2012.
There is presently no GOP hopeful I would not much prefer to 44. The need is to pick a candidate who is as close as possible to a slam-dunk victor a year from November. So the question becomes who combines a likely victory with advancement of conservative policies.
At the moment I am certain we have at least three possible candidates who pitted head to head with the Failed Liberal Obama Presidency or “FLOP” would decisively win the election and markedly advance policies that will limit government and maximize liberty. They are, again in my view, Romney, Cain and Huntsman.
Each has the wit and life experience to make a very favorable comparison with the incumbent. Each would mean solid gains for our way versus what we would certainly get if 44 gets a second chance.
While Huntsman seems to be viewed as a liberal I believe he would actually govern to the right of Romney. Cain would be to the right of Huntsman.
So Romney appears to be the most “centrist” of the trio, I am certain he would disappoint the Red State Nation from time to time, but I am very, very certain that President Romney would be much preferable to the alternative. Romney admits his medical plan in the Bay State is flawed. That is a more mature and conservative stance than Gov. Perry’s obstinate defense of welfare-state immigration policies.
Another knock on Perry is his whole Social Security stance. SS was flawed from the get go, but it has been around now for 7 decades. Reform is necessary and conservative leadership will recognize that 70 years of policy will require smart and obviously better ideas to make real change politically viable. Perry’s “Ponzi Scheme” characterazation was neither smart nor accurate. Our national pension scheme is presently unsound no doubt, but Marco Rubio’s straight forward approach was honest and accurate and Charlie Crist got no where trying to hammer him. Lesson learned.
Regarding Supreme Court appointments which seem very likely to come in the next few years any of these three would be virtually certain to pick a stricter Constitutionalist than Obama.
All three have pledged to get rid of Obamacare and there is no reason to doubt them.
Look we can disagree during the primary season, but let’s not for one nano-second lose sight of the stakes a ‘la a caller on Rush Limbaugh’s program today. “Lisa” from New Hampshire told guest host Mark Steyn that she “won’t go for another McCain” To this the ordinarily sensible Mr Steyn opined that Huntsman would “take us over the cliff in high gear” Romney too, but more slowly.
Now that is just plain Leninist-speak…totally off. There is nothing in Huntsman’s record as Utah governor, nor his proffered jobs plan to support the idea he would quickly lead us to ruin. Romney’s Massachusetts stint makes him a bit more suspect as a conservative, but let’s cut the hyperbole please.
We should be filling our loose-leaf notebooks with the many examples of the Obama admin’s failures. He is beatable. Very beatable.
And beating him wil advance our agenda.
Beating him means replacing him with a president who will weigh anchor on our incredibly dynamic economy.
Beating him means a coherent foreign policy.
Damn! I can’t wait!