Skip to comments.Can Obama's Relection be a Good Thing for Conservatives?
Posted on 03/30/2012 2:25:10 PM PDT by Ben Barrack
Conservatives are disheartened. It's becoming increasingly apparent that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee in the fight to defeat Barack Obama. If four years of Jimmy Carter so awakened Republican voters that they nominated Ronald Reagan, why has nearly four years of Jimmy Carter on steroids so sedated Republican voters that they've decided to nominate the equivalent of Gerald Ford as the best option for defeating him?
In large part, the establishment insists on it and, like Obama, seems disinterested in the will of the people. This establishment is so invested in Romney that it is overlooking the potential consequences of one very real possibility.
What if he loses? The establishment's credibility will have been torpedoed. Yes, at great expense, but torpedoed nonetheless.
If you thought the Tea Party was angry in 2009, just wait until 2013 if Barack Obama is sworn in for a second term after defeating Mitt Romney. For starters, conservative voters will be outraged at any Republican Senator, Congressman or Governor who helped shove Romney down their throats. Accountability could take on an entirely new meaning and those elected leaders will have their feet held to the fire like never before. Romney's name will be added to the long list of liberal Republicans who couldn't seal the deal. Any attempt by establishment elitists to point to Goldwater as evidence that conservatism can't win will be met with sardonic laughter that hopefully drives a stake through the heart of the argument.
Consider the example Fast and Furious, an operation that is not only being revealed as something akin to Watergate with murder but could very likely implicate the heads of nearly every major department and agency in the Obama Administration, to include DHS, DOJ, the FBI, and the State Department. There have been multiple reports that House Speaker John Boehner has asked Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) to back off of his investigation, ostensibly because of how high it could go.
While appearing on the Fox News Channel, Judson Phillips, the founder of Tea Party Nation was visibly frustrated at the lack of interest on the part of Republican Party leadership relative to being more aggressive with Attorney General Eric Holder. Judson went on to say the following:
What my friends in Washington tell me is that Boehner says what he learned from the 1995 government shutdown is you never pick a fight with the president.
If Romney loses to Obama, Boehner will be forced to pick that fight.
If Judson is correct, it points to Boehner being more interested in running out the clock with the November election representing the final whistle than in a dogged pursuit of justice, regardless of where it leads. Avoiding a showdown could conceivably allow Attorney General Eric Holder, FBI Director Robert Mueller, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to skate depending on their respective levels of involvement instead of facing impeachment and removal from office for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Boehner has most certainly come across as disinterested in commenting on the scandal publicly and won't deviate from a short statement of support for what Issa's committee is doing. It would seem that Issa is wrestling with quite the Executive Branch behemoth and could use a greater show of public support from the House Speaker.
If there are any stories the establishment wants to see go away after the election, the ones about Obama's Birth Certificate, Social Security number, and Selective Service registration are at the top of the list. Such concerns are irrelevant, they say. Besides, the election is less than one year away and it's pointless to entertain the notion. The implication is that Joe Arpaio's investigation, even if it yields anything of substance, will be anti-climactic because Obama will be out of office and everyone will have moved on.
That is, unless he wins. Then what? If you thought the Birthers were loud before, just wait and see what happens if Obama is reelected.
Not only will the Birthers who generally don't come across as avid Romney supporters have four more years to continue their incessant drumbeat of demands for answers to their eligibility questions but the establishment that has made every attempt to ignore them will have been roundly defeated and, consequently, forced into a position of having to listen. With the wind knocked out of the establishment, its members will also be barraged with demands that they reconcile with their base (not the other way around) for supporting yet another in a long line of incredibly pathetic candidates. As much as the elites won't want to admit it, the Republican Party agenda could be set by conservative voters who were ignored by an establishment that still doesn't get it.
Tolerance will be in very short supply.
The sad prospect of Romney as the nominee is seemingly trumped only by the prospect that Obama could get a second term, which is made more likely, some believe, if Romney is nominated. Establishment, general election Republican losers like John McCain and Bob Dole have endorsed Romney, as have Governors Chris Christie and Nikki Haley. Tea Party favorites Marco Rubio and Christine O'Donnell have as well. A dangerous type of groupthink seems to have set in among Republican politicians that has generated a bizzare coalescence around a liberal candidate when the time is ripe for a conservative one.
For crying out loud, serial liar Howard Dean said the Democrats fear a face-off with Romney most over all the Republican candidates. Those of us who understand liberal tactics know that Dean means the exact opposite; that's why he said it. It'd be like a head coach proclaiming that his team fears facing his opponent's back up quarterback in an attempt to fool the other coach into starting him. Republican elites aren't as smart, apparently. They've been told by Howard Dean that their third string quaterback gives them their best chance and, by gum, they believe it.
Something else almost certain to happen after Romney's nomination; his religion will be thoroughly vetted by the liberal media. Most Americans know little to nothing about Mormonism but that is all going to change with Romney's nomination. According to a Gallup poll, 22% of Americans are hesitant about voting for a Mormon. Some argue that Mormonism is antithetical to Chrisitianity; some argue that it isn't; still others don't much care. One thing is certain. Everyone will know more about it with Romney as the Republican nominee for president. That, too, should be a good thing no matter what side you're on.
Don't lose heart, conservatives. Instead, check out Romans 8:28, which says:
And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
In 2013, the Republican elites could find themselves at the intersection of 'be careful what you wish for' and 'sleeping in the bed you made.'
I hope they're preparing for both.
Ben Barrack is a talk show host on KTEM 1400 in Texas benbarrack.com
get over yerself...we HAD a chance, actually several of them since the 90s to stop bambam, and each was pissed away by the brokers in the early run-up to the elections, resulting in the inevitable *lesser of evils* and guilt trip rhetoric...
just by the 'holier than thous' and '*purist* conservatives' language, you admit that you KNOW that your 'lesser than' advocacy somehow is superior to us less enlightened and undeserving proles...your condescending tone is noted, and rejected...
for that, you can simply kiss my 'holier than thou' ass and enroll in an English 101 course, and maybe you'll realize that theres no box on the ballot to vote *against* a candidate, and that a vote *for* someone indicates the voters approval of said candidate...
since i physically cant vote against bambam, and i intellectually/morally cant vote for any of the losers being pushed to *REPRESENT* me, my family or my country, you might need to prepare for the worst, because *WE* arent playin that game this time...
if you want to live in FEAR and cower to the dictates of the rin-o-p and rnc,fine... Im done with the flying circus that is fed politics.../rant
nobody wants/wanted a cival war...too bad nobody listened when we voiced opinions to change course 10, 20 , 30 or 50 + yrs ago...now its inevitable, and id rather do it, than make my kids do it for me...
THAT, my FRiend, is UNacceptable...
You are really scaring me sjb...we are on the same side of this argument.
No matter what one thinks of Repubs in general, four more years of Obama will be unimaginably bad.
” THAT, my FRiend, is UNacceptable...”
None of this is acceptable.
...and you are a good guy too. I am not telling you what to do, that is your conscience.
However those Republicans who give Romney a blank check to promote any liberal policy he wants under the guise that only he can save America (and they are lining up in droves just as Gilbo and I said they would), they are looking for lots of self induced pain.
I see the past week or so Romney ALREADY said that man-induced global warming is a serious problem. He didn't even wait till he wrapped up the primary.
He says he is for raising the Federal minimum wage. Seems like that is something states can do on their own.
” I am not telling you what to do, that is your conscience.”
I don’t have one anymore.
If we had had any leadership at ALL, Obama would be in the 30’s. The blood is on the GOPe for this outrage, should it come to blood. I can understand that the Dims have moved hard left, as I could see that coming 20+ years ago. I NEVER thought I would see the D.C. Republicans 50% weaker than Trent Lott. It is almost unbearable to watch these cowards hide in a cave, afraid of offending a black man.
As I have said before, I will be watching closely to see what Romney does after he feels he has safely won the nomination, assuming that happens.
Will he flip his positions back to his liberal ones ?
Will he sound convincing?
Will he attack Obama?
It is possible he could surprise me.
Yeah, it will be interesting.
Yeah, it will be interesting.
The real question is: Would Obama’s re-election be good for the country?
The answer: No.
I can always count on you :)
You know they are terrified when the tell us they would vote for Stalin to beat Obama.
Well you know there are distinct advantages to losing despite the obvious extreme drawbacks. The Supreme Court is by far the biggest drawback.
Assuming Romney beat Obama in 2012. Then
Case 1: Scalia or Kennedy, or both, retire or die before 2017 (would turn 80 in 2016). I would guess that Romney would appoint people who are not as far left as O's would be, but "moderates" on the SCOTUS could do a lot of damage. The left has plenty of support in the bureaucracies, just waiting for any excuse. It's possible that he would appoint conservatives, but who knows.
Case 2: Scalia and Kennedy survive until 2017. Romney might be a 1-termer, followed by a leftist monster. Or Romney is reelected, and Scalia and Kennedy, age 84 in 2020, could retire and we go back to case 1.
Obama wins reelection:
Case 1: Scalia or Kennedy, or both, retire or die before 2017. I think it's almost certain that Obama appoints a very far left stooge or 2, and the GOP goes through the motions of asking questions, but does not block the nomination.
Case 2: Scalia and Kennedy survive 4 years. Either a GOP candidate (could be Romney) or a Dem will be the new POTUS. Good chance of electing a R in 2016, perhaps better than Romney, but far less likely it would be Coolidge, Eisenhower, or Reagan. We might lose the chance for a GOP POTUS better than Romney to replace conservative justices who left between 2013-2016.
Ginsberg, Breyer, and Thomas could leave the court too. This is an extremely complex probability problem, not a logic problem.
The midterm election is the biggest plus. Obama wiped out Bush fatigue and 2 elections of solid rat gain in 2 short years.
Another plus is not having a GWB "see you at the signing," paving the way for another Obama. If Romney wins, I hope that does not occur, but Romney's past is not very reassuring.
If the court overturns Obamacare that would take a lot of the sting out of it. But if they court upholds it and Obama wins then socialist medicine is here to stay forever and ever.
That ugly possibility worries me too.
So I dont think its worth the risk, God help me Id take a flyer on a RINO and hope they arent as big a disaster as the last RINO. If Romney wins as is as big a RINO as most of us think then we cant win either way.
As I said, the possibilities are extremely complex. I have not decided whether to vote or not (of course I won't vote for O.), because Romney might be worse than Obama, e. g. he might flip again on amnesty and take the GOP down the way GWB did. My wife has already declared she won't vote for POTUS this time.
Man, the whole situation is as ugly as ugly gets.
But this much is clear...if Obama wins, nothing will stop him from destroying America.
Scalia will never voluntarily retire while Obama is POTUS. I suspect Kennedy feels similarly.
That means there is little chance that the court will change the next 4 years. I wouldn't make their retirement the basis for my decision.
Suppose Kennedy or Scalia retires in 2017 due to health problems after a Romney POTUS is such a disaster that Dems take the WH and Senate again?
See?? It's not so easy to forcast.
that was about all the hope&change i had left for reach around the aisle politics, or worse, utter capitulation by our *reps*...
rand paul is about the only vote ive ever made that i dont regret...wish we had 100 like him, and just one for POTUS...NOT his daddy tho...hehehehe...
I will NOT compromise my principles again...
That's possible ONLY if the conservative justices on the Supreme Court survive four more years. In fact, I hope they're immortal, especially if Massachusetts Mittens somehow gets elected, because Mittens is the next David Souter appointment waiting to happen.
You HAVE TO. Vote for the RINO or the puppy gets it.
It could save us a whole 2 or 3 years before the country implodes.
you got a pic of the 'not this $h!t again' guy ???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.