It’s Time to Saddle Up

A broad metal chain.

As Rick Santorum suspended his campaign yesterday, Mitt Romney appears to have become the inevitable GOP nominee.  Due to the aggressive nature of the GOP primary season this year, there are no doubt many hurt feelings and cries of outrage.  Many are feeling anger and extreme disappointment, as Mitt Romney was clearly not even the second choice of many conservatives and the Tea Party. To be honest, Romney was not my first or second choice, either.  Yet, the table has been set and it’s time for us to re-adjust our focus.

While it has been a nasty six months of campaigning between the “establishment” candidate and the ever-changing “conservative” choice, we have now must prepare for a political war that hasn’t been experienced since Hamilton and Jefferson.  As conservatives, we must understand that the 2012 election means a complete change in the course for the United States.  There will be no going back from our decision in November, as Obama has already indicated his real agendas are still secret.  Implementation of “ObamaCare” alone in 2014 will ensure a complete remodel of society and the economy we live in.  The addition of another four years of socialistic policies would certainly bring us to an unimaginable place in our history, perhaps with even violent results. This is why we cannot afford to backbite and hold grudges over our issues with Romney anymore.

The stakes are too high and the result is too permanent. Our future generations deserve our present participation.

For some, this concept of uniting behind Mitt Romney and the “Establishment” may drudge up resistance and anger, yet consider these following reasons why we must unite in our battle.

Conservatism and the Tea Party have come extremely far in the GOP since 2008.  Due to the nomination of John McCain, conservatism has surged in the last four years and has become a major force in the Republican Party.  The crescendo from the ‘10 mid-term elections sent numerous freshmen congressmen to D.C. along with a new mandate and direction.  If we can dump our short-term memory and remember these strings of victories, it should become obvious we cannot afford to take any steps backward in 2012.  In 2008, it would have been inconceivable that grassroot-conservative members of the GOP could become such a strong force in the nominating process.   Yet, here we stand having changed the face of the GOP and beginning a journey back to the days of Reagan.  To stop or to sit-out the election now would halt the significant progress made and would begin to send the political environment back towards the status-quo.

Mitt Romney is a viable candidate.  It is very popular right now to claim that Romney cannot beat Obama in the general election.  It is easy to buy into this myth when it is combined with the frustration of other candidates losing to the “Establishment pick”.   While the frustration is warranted, we have to remember who his opponent is: Barack Obama   

Romney faces the most radical President in our nation’s history.  As a magnified version of Jimmy Carter, he has overseen soaring unemployment and gas prices, while the economy and the public’s’ moral simultaneously collapse.  Compared to President Obama, Romney has the potential to appear as a strong, fiscally-conservative alternative.  Even with Romney’s former healthcare law and “flip-flops” on past beliefs, comparisons of him to Obama are a stretch, at best.  There is no record indicating Mitt Romney would suspend oil-drilling in the gulf, criticize/threaten the Supreme Court, or even attempt to bypass the U.S. Congress whenever beneficial.  More importantly, Mitt Romney shows very little contempt or blatant disregard for the foundation of the United States, compared with our current leader.  With the economy failing, Barack Obama is extremely beatable by any candidate the GOP could have put forward this year, even Mitt Romney.

This election may be the last chance for the United States.  As the President’s current and future policies create more inflation, debt, and social division; the window for a change in direction is closing extremely quickly.  As mentioned before, the implementation of ObamaCare in 2014 will alone cripple the deficit and economy.   Each of the divisive policies from the current Administration will become amplified in a second term, furthering the goal of creating a government-dependent society.   If this dependent-society is achieved over another Obama term, the GOP nominee in ’16 may not matter.

Even more important than all the potential policies of a second Obama term are the Supreme Court nominees that are sure to be selected in the next four years.  If Obama is allowed to stack the court with liberal justices, then control of the other branches will be strongly irrelevant.  The Supreme Court will become the new policy-maker, approving and overturning laws based on the liberal agenda, not the U.S. Constitution.

To defeat Barack Obama, conservatives must begin to rally behind Mitt Romney in the next few weeks.  It is a make or break moment, as the nation must choose between embracing the radical changes of this administration and returning to its capitalistic roots. This year, conservatives must unite and fight for their beliefs and their country.  We should be extremely proud of the progress made in the last four years and be encouraged by the battle seen during the primary.

This November, we must realize the Presidency is within our grasp.  We just have to saddle up and take it.

About these ads

12 thoughts on “It’s Time to Saddle Up

  1. Saddle up is right, I held my nose having to vote for McCain whom I never believed could overcome the Obama hype. T think Romney has a far better chance and Obama has lost a lot of his luster. Saddle up indeed.

      • arj, I do think that Giuliani’s been hurt in this process. He’s down more than 10 ponits nationally.Carlos, Dick Morris is pro-Huckabee and anti-Romney. He’s a past advisor of Huckabee campaigns.arj is right that you’re correct about Romney offering nothing to a VP ticket. Whoever gets nominated (Giuliani, McCain, or Romney) will want someone from the South. I’m going to be fasting and praying between now and the Republican convention that this does not end up being Huckabee, though a Guiliani-Huckabee ticket is all-too-probable, given Giuliani’s need to mobilize the Bible-vomiters.arj is also right that Romney was quite unlikely to win re-election as Governor in Massachusetts. He was reasonably popular, but Shannon O’Brien (his Democratic opponent) was a very week opponent. Duval Patrick, who was Romney’s successor (and another prominent black politician) is an exceptional campaigner, and would likely have beaten Romney, though not by as much as he beat Romney’s Lieutenant Governor, Kerry Healy (a woman politician who was a good enough candidate personally, but who had no organization or advisors because the state Republican party in Massachusetts is basically non-existent and Romney’s organization went with Romney to campaign nationally for the Republican nomination.)And the reason Liddy Dole didn’t do well in Republican primaries is the same reason Dick Lugar didn’t, and it had nothing to do with sex in either case. She just never materialized into a compelling candidate. Most candidates don’t. The other women candidates (e.g., Carol Mosly Brawn) never even stood a chance at making it to the first tier of candidates.Dan, national polls comparing candidates mean nothing right now. Remember George H. W. Bush’s 1988 campaign in its infancy? People were sure he’d lose because he couldn’t shake his wimp image (there was even the famous Newsweek cover with the photo of George H. W. Bush and the word WIMP in pink letters). By 1992, everyone thought that he was unbeatable thanks to record-high approval ratings. Regarding Obama and his liberalism: He was among the most liberal state-senators in a very liberal state (and he’s only a few years out of the state senate, after all).Devyn, the liberals want Huckabee to win almost as bad as conservatives wanted Dean to win it 2004. The difference: Iowa liberals in 2004 proved to be smarter than Iowa conservatives in 2008.Steve Evans, you’re absolutely correct.Todd Wood, I’m glad you like Bible-vomiting evangelicals. I coined it myself.Clark, being underwhelmed by primary choices is practically a national pastime.jjohnsen, here’s another blanket statement: It’s utterly impossible for core-Democrats (the ones who vote in primaries) to chose a president who will be good for America; the question is merely which one will do the least amount of harm. If they weren’t so anxious and eager to predict and bemoan America’s next defeat (as we saw earlier this year when the Democratic leadership wanted every excuse to cut and run in Iraq, but had to shut up when sticking it out proved them wrong), then things might be otherwise. But the sad truth is this: The only constituency more damaging to US interests than the religious right are the core-Democrats.kevinf, qualifications have very little to do with presidential campaigns. If history is any record, they have little bearing on presidential effectiveness.Brad, the accusations of rape against Bill Clinton are pretty compelling. I believe that he should at least have been put on trial for them.Jeremiah J, if you think that my predictions are things that I desperately hope will happen, then you’re giving me too much credit best I can tell, I haven’t strayed much from conventional wisdom. But it’s easy enough to prove you wrong. Read my response to Margaret Young.Furthermore, you haven’t read me very closely if you’re under the impression that I think that Romney’s a great and appealing politician. This seems to be more what you desperately want to think I believe, but it sure is not what I believe.And Obama is easily the most liberal candidate after Kucinich. Look at his record in the Illinois state senate. Bible-vomiting refers especially to any evangelical who is anti-Mormon enough to ask, Don’t Mormon’s believe that Jesus is Satan’s brother? or to vote for someone who asks that. Although I’m an active Mormon, I’m proud to stand in the company of atheist secularists when it comes to decrying the stupidity of Bible-vomiters. (I’ve been an atheist, and I think it’s a perfectly respectable position. In fact, it’s not all that different from Mormonism. Atheists believe that all religions are false, and we Mormons believe that all religions are false but one. A difference of one is hardly even worth mentioning.)Margaret Young, I’ll take your bet. My prediction about who is ultimately going to win the nomination has been the same since last summer: Hillary vs. Giuiliani. My prediction for who wins the presidency: Hillary by at least 8%. (Sigh. Boy-oh-boy, do I hope I’m wrong.)Mark D and Carlos, there’s zero chance that Utah will vote for Obama. Alan Keyes was the most conservative candidate seeking the Republican nomination in 2000. The last Democrat presidential candidate they voted for was Johnson. Not only was that 4 decades ago, but it’s a biased sample: Johnson won in every state no matter how Republican except Arizona (Goldwater’s home) and a handful of staunchly Democratic southern States (thanks in part to his opposition to the Civil Rights Act). In any event, it’s been decades since race/ethnicity has been a major factor in politics among whites, though you’d never know it listening to those who are perceived (rightly or wrongly) as black leaders. Obama’s victory in Iowa, to be sure, is a landmark event. But make no mistake: It’s a lagging indicator.

  2. I agree. It’s anyone but Obama for me and that anyone is now Romney. I’ll work as hard for him (even though he was never my first choice) as I would have for anyone else. Obama is a danger to this nation and he HAS GOT TO GO.

  3. As you stated, Obama has alluded to the fact that his true agenda is secret. His campaign team believes wholeheartedly that Americans are once again going to be stupid enough to believe him when he says “your gas will be free, your education will be free, your living expenses will be free, your health care will be free, your debt will be forgiven, and each American will get one of these Unicorns I presently have hidden ‘where the sun don’t shine.’” Well…or some derivative thereof, at the very least. He can’t run on his accomplishments or what he will do as President. He has no accomplishments worthy of noting, and what he intends to do as President apparently can’t be spoken of! His whole campaign will be based upon lies and lollipops, using slash and burn techniques to cover up the fact he is completely unfit to run this country.

    • I do not believe it will work this time. Even as I posted this article last night, Hilary Rosen went too far on her comments on Ann Romney. This will be the pattern up to the election, as the liberals will overplay their hand.

    • John, Lindsey Graham is a very popular ctoiervansve, and would be a solid choice. The only problem I see with him is that he’s also a senator, and (other things being equal) he’d do better not to have a ticket with two congressman JFK pulled this off, but just barely. A senator is going to be the next president, but the conventional wisdom (for what it’s worth) is that the ticket should be balanced with some executive credentials.So I’m going to side with conventional wisdom on this one and say that McCain would do better to select a governor. Crist in Florida would be a good choice, because Florida is a key swing state. Crist, though, has only served a year, and it may not be the best thing for the Florida GOP to have it’s Governor hi-jacked into presidential politics.Jeb Bush would be a great choice were it not for his last name.Bobby Jindal is a ballsy but unrealistic choice he’s only just been inaugurated.The only female Republican Governor is Sarah Palin of Alaska. That would be an interesting choice, but it would seem a bit feeble. Does anyone know anything about Governor Palin?There’s Jane Swift, the former acting governor of Massachusetts, but she’s ill-qualified and did a terrible job here. Paul Cellucci chose her to be the Lt. Governor based on the fact that she was from western Massachusetts, and she became acting governor when he left to become US ambassador to Canada. She did a bad enough job that she paved the way for Romney to run successfully for governor on a platform of change after 12 consecutive years of Republican governors in Massachusetts. (She hates Romney because his candidacy denied her the opportunity to run for re-election.)Condoleeza Rice would have been an exceptional choice were it not for the fact that the Iraq war has made her such a divisive figure.If the idea of selecting a woman trumps the fear of a senate-heavy ticket, then Elizabeth Dole is the obvious choice. She hails from the south and talks like a southerner. She is well known, well respected, very smart, and qualified to be president in her own right. She’s charismatic, a credible speaker, and a shrewd politician. As an added bonus, she served in Reagan’s cabinet.Senator Hutchison from Texas is also quite capable, but she has the demeanor and look of a primary teacher and I don’t think that she’ll wear well in a national election.Senator Snowe is too liberal for a McCain ticket.When choosing a VP, geographic and political balance are always considerations. This election seems to place an added emphasis on gender and ethnic balance, and I think that on the balance that’s a good thing. Once these issues are addressed, candidates do best to choose someone either to bolster their credibility (e.g., Johnson for Kennedy, Cheney for Bush, Benston for Dukakis, Gore for Clinton) or to shore up some wing of the party (e.g., Quayle for Bush, Bush for Reagan, or Nixon for Eisenhower). McCain doesn’t need anyone to bolster his credibility, so look for him to go for a staunch ctoiervansve in any case.Look for Obama to choose someone to bolster his credibility. Hillary would likely choose someone to shore up support in her party. If she’s concerned about the black vote, this could be someone like Doug Wilder or Duval Patrick. Personally, I think that she’d do better to select an hispanic running mate, because many Hispanic politicians have American-sounding names and don’t register very strongly on American’s ethnicity radar (e.g., Bill Richardson), and a black and a woman on the same ticket may well be too risky for the backward-thinking segment of America which still makes up a large portion of the electorate. There are too many prominent and well-qualified hispanic politicians in the Democratic party to name them all here.

  4. I am finally totally on board with Mitt. Not much happier than I was with McCain, but he’s our runner. We simply have to man up and ride this out with him…or deal with 4 more years of, well, whatever you want to call the mess we’re in now.

    GO MITT!

Leave your thoughts....

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s