Daily Archives: March 6, 2012
Okay, so before I begin this I have to make a disclaimer. When coming into this election season I originally and incorrectly relied on what I knew about Romney from the 2008 campaign. This was a problem because back in 2008 I was so busy with work and writing I didn’t have much time to do a lot of research on all the candidates. I had settled on Rudy in 2008 and when he dropped out I just got tired of the whole thing and didn’t do much research (mostly because it was clear that it was going to be liberal Obama v. liberal McCain, neither of whom I would vote for, so why bother) so I didn’t bother to do any research on McCain’s numerous and slanderous lies about Romney being a liberal. After four years those lies, unchallenged and hardened a little in my mind and it took a while for me to do the needed research to see that Romney is a conservative and is exactly what this country needs.
But I will say in my defense it is primarily because, as the Founding Fathers would be proud of, I have a knee jerk reaction to believe the worst of any politician until proven otherwise.
But as bad as my knee jerk hatred of politicians is…the supporters of other candidates is worse, by leagues…
Paul supporters are crazy fanatics…principled crazy fanatics, but fanatics all the same. I once heard Larry Elder describe the problem of the size of government as “Republicans want to take a pen knife to a problem that requires a machete.” That may be accurate…but Paul and his supporters want to forgo the machete and just graduate to a full strafing of napalm.
Santorum supporters are as sanctimonious and unprincipled as their candidate. They also think that hatin’ us some gays and bannin’ abortion and dem evil birth control pills are clearly the most important issues facing this nation right now.
Newt supporters are just knee jerk Republicans. Gee he was speaker of the house I should vote for him. Gosh.
And I will admit that Romney supporters are a pretentious lot, but it might have something to do with that whole actually have done research and looked into the actual voting records and past acts of all the candidates. You know that whole “I can read” thing does make one a bit pretentious.
Oh Democrats, before you even think of using this against us, may I remind you that to support your guy you not only have to ignore 4 years of miserable failures, criminal acts, and outright incompetence, but you also have to ignore economics, history, human psychology, philosophy, sociology, common sense, reason, facts, truth and a whole of other stuff. At their worst any Paul, Romney or Gingrich supporter is better than any Democrat.
Why do I bring this up…well because the anti-Romney people, besides all being on the lower half of the average mark on IQ scale, are just getting desperate and it’s pathetic. For instance I’ve seen this video making the rounds to show that Romney’s a liar.
So in one video he says it’s an executive’s job to get funds where they can find them. In another he says that as executive he will get funds where he can find them. Yes, truly those two contradict each other. Huh? Granted in the debates he chides the three guy in Congress for offering the funds in the first place, but I believe the colloquial phrase is “don’t hate the player, hate the game.” Rick, Newt and Ron along with the rest of Congress helped set the rules…but we’re going to blame Mitt for playing by those rules? Huh? How does that make Romney look like the bad guy? It’s kind of pathetic really.
Here’s the problem there is no reason to vote for Santorum or Newt. If I still believed Romney was just a Massachusetts liberal, I’d be sitting things out like I did last time. Newt and Santorum have done twice the liberal things that even the worst lies about Romney claim (yeah, thank right and left wing media for pointing that out). But the saddest part of all is what’s going to happen after this primary is over.
The vast majority of the GOP voters are going to line up behind Romney and he is going to win the middle and in November win the White House.
And here’s the funny thing that is going to happen. While I will defend Romney right now as the most conservative of the remaining candidates (which he is) I will judge him as President not by the fact that I voted for him but by his actual actions. When he is conservative I will praise him and when he is liberal I will be a sieve of vitriol and venom. But the funny thing is that those same Santorum and Gingrich (and even a few Paul) supporters , being the Republican sheeple that they are will defend President Romney as if to question him is to question the scripture. Why? Because he’s a Republican. Need proof of this hypocrisy? Just look at how those same supporters are defending Rush Limbaugh right now. Rush went too far, he could have attacked Fluke on the medical facts she distorted, on the fact that she is a leftist shill, that it was her choice to go to a Jesuit university and she can live with that choice, that her whole argument is for an expansion of government power into the private sector that would be unprecedented in any free nation (not so much in fascist nations)…but no, he chose to sink to the liberal level and attack her sex life (even he admitted Monday that he was wrong to do so). He let the liberal agenda that this is about sex become the item of discussion, and by doing so betrayed conservative principles. But those Santorum and Gingrich supporter march lockstep with what they believe to be conservative commentator as much as liberals march lockstep to CNN, MSNBC and media matters. (And democrats remember Santorum and Gingrich supporters are the minority in our party, sheeple are the majority in yours).
How else do I know? Because these people didn’t demand Bush’s head for his Medicare drug socialist expansion. They didn’t demand his impeachment after the bailout (I did, but I was not blogging at that point otherwise I’d have link here). Now I will admit that I was slow to condemn Bush on Afghanistan and Iraq, because the intent was right, to free the oppressed, and it’s hard to see whether an occupation is going well at first (if it was going well and going poorly would look much the same at the beginning) but I think we can all admit at this point that while the military side was executed without flaw, the diplomatic after we win the military engagement side was handled by idiots. But you don’t hear the valid condemnation of Bush for his lack of a plan in Iraq or Afghanistan, or for his socialist policies from the right even those the bleeding heart deserves it. So I know they’ll march lockstep to President Romney even when he is wrong (and even if he is the second coming of Reagan he will at times be wrong).
Which is kind of ironic don’t you think.