Skip to content

…wherein yours truly proceeds to field-dress Mittens and Coulter.


So!  Coulter is backing Romney!  How exciting, yeh?  Sure, I get it BUT…

ON the one hand, Coulter’s pre-emptive laundering of Noot’s laundry disarms both the Left and Knute’s “conservative” brethren.

On the other, her “support” of Mittens comes off rather as damning with faint praise.

As to this business of the Media “pushing” alternatives to Mitt – I don’t hear that at all on radio news, but I’ll take Eric’s word on that.

There’s a dynamic at work, though, that scores media tolerance for Romney somewhat differently: They are pretty much apiece with liberal RINO’s misguided belief that a Conservative or Libertarian will “lose the middle.”

The point of Reagan wasn’t that he was Ronny the moovee star so much as he was a confident Goldwater styled Libertarian-Conservative.  (He was hated then by “mainstream” statist Republicans and remains a vampiric terror to them still.)

More to the point, ANY of the present Republican field of candidates can beat Obama.  ANY.  Barry has the most pathetic, vulnerable track record in modern American history. The #Occupier of the White House makes Carter look good with increasing numbers, even on the Left.

A majority of precious “undecideds,” “middlers,” “moderates” and “independents” are now sick of this Administration.  They don’t hate America the way it does; and… They’re getting the message loud and clear that only a pro-small-business administration that will reduce Government burden and actually unwind – UNWIND – three or four decades of eco-statism and crony-fascism is capable of returning America to Security and Prosperity.  Mitt ain’t the guy.

The conceit that Mitt is the “only” winnable candidate buys into the same arguments that have given us a consistent string of Statists and RINO’s for decades.  The evil of William F. Buckley’s effeminate, proximious conservative notion that “we must nominate the most conservative candidate that can win” is its strategic naiveté.  That yielding of intellectual ground time and again has sent us candidates the likes of John McCain.  Such a glorious string of victories for Liberty that has been over the last five decades, huh?

Go Mitt. [yawn]  Go.

9 Comments leave one →
  1. 2011/11/18 13:04

    The more stridently people insist that they know who is and is not winnable, the less seriously I take them. John McCain and Bob Dole have been the results of their feverish calculations, and we all know how helpful that lot has been. Sad to see A.C. jumping on that bandwagon. A firebreather like her should be pulling for a principled underdog, not throwing in with a RINO whose only “virtue” is he is less likely to offend those who are shocked by conservatism.

    • 2011/11/18 13:53

      I’m with you. But a wee voice suggests to me that she’s playing both ways, consciously or otherwise: This helps Newt more than Romney.

      Either way, I’m still pulling for Cain until he wins or withdraws.

  2. Libertarian Advocate permalink
    2011/11/18 13:42

    Good to see you back in form..

  3. 2011/11/19 18:42

    great post. the fact that I agree 100% about the GOP tendency to go “moderate” doesn’t hurt. how many times can they repeat this mistake without learning?

    if Mitt or Newt get the nod, I fear it’s the death of the Republican Party.


  4. 2011/11/20 19:49

    “I take them. John McCain and Bob Dole have been the results of their feverish calculations”

    Wrong. They were both the product of having already run presidential campaigns and having a superior ground game as a result. That is where Romney is right now it’s no trifling asset. I, for one, am growing tired of seeing him being torn down as though he had some horrible past. The guy is a damn good candidate on paper. His policy positions are pure gold and is an honorable guy who has grown more conservative in his positions over the years. (Ronald Reagan ring a bell?) He’s probably going to be the nominee, and he’ll make brakabama look like a drooling dumbass by comparison.

    I’ve been all over the internet asking Romney haters what it is he ever did to earn this irrational hatred they have of the guy and I get nothing but fcking crickets whenever I ask the question. There is the health care thing that was overwhelmingly supported by the people of that state. Other than that, there is absolutely nothing.

    • 2011/11/20 20:30

      “His policy positions are pure gold and is an honorable guy who has grown more conservative in his positions over the years. (Ronald Reagan ring a bell?) He’s probably going to be the nominee, and he’ll make brakabama look like a drooling dumbass by comparison.”

      Agreed, with caveats. You lay out the case for Romney well. What gives me positive hope is the general field this time. Conservatism, especially libertarian-conservatism is the general language of debate. Romney has evolved Rightwards; Noot too. Solid, consistent libertarian conservatives and libertarians make up most of the rest (save Huntsman, whom I don’t know much about.)

      I’m prepared to go to the mat for Romney and I’ll back it up by working to elect the strongest conservative Congress possible to keep him honest.

      But honestly, Chuck, we all know that the Convention will be split with no clear winner up-front, and that the back-room boys will pick the obvious candidate. (Damn, but Sarah looks hot in blue, yeh?)

  5. 2011/11/20 21:40

    I’m really not going out of my way to make a case for Romney. It’s the case against him I don’t get. There is a ton of anti-Romney sentiment on the activist right and I just don’t get it. I’m simply perplexed by it. Had Romney been the nominee last time around, I honestly think he could’ve beaten brakabama. I suppose some of the frustration stems from the fact that he’s been running a general election campaign in the run up to the primaries, but it’s working. He’s holding back for a reason. He has a huge arsenal at his disposal and he doesn’t want to use it winning the nomination if he doesn’t have to.

    I’m growing in my appreciation of the guy.


  1. Hey Dummies, It’s the English Embassy Under Seige, Not the British Embassy | Maggie's Notebook

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s