Rudolph Guiliani’s Perspective on the Election Outlook

Speech | 7/17/2012 | Me

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I saw a webcast speech by Rudolph Guiliani last evening. He is of course very positive on Romney and what he would do if elected. He said that Romney’s strength, and weakness, as a candidate is his evenness, what he called “balance.” It’s a strength in that he’s not prone to shoot from the hip, and a weakness (from the “conservative" perspective) that he’s not a good ideological spokesman for our cause.

But what is our cause, at bottom? Our cause is reflected in something else Guilliani said: he has never seen it be so easy to raise money for a campaign. And the reason for that was simple: people are personally affronted by Obama’s attacks on them. He said that a millionaire told him that those attacks had set his own grandchildren against him for being rich. To the extent that he was tempted to disinherit “the bastards,” as Guiliaini quoted the grandfather.

So what is our cause? Our cause is fundamentally our belief and understanding that for all the faults that leftists can promote as reasons why money and property ownership are illegitimate, overall the system of property rights causes at least a significant positive correlation with the ownership of property and money and the owners’ contributions to society.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Ownership of property and money generally follows contributions to society. The scale of the rewards may not seem to be proportionate in some particular cases, but “conservatives” (the Constitution and American society are truly progressive and truly liberal; freedom unleashes change and is not in that sense “conservative” at all) appreciate the limits of attempts at what Thomas Sowell calls “cosmic justice.”

The “cosmic justice” standard is an arbitrary one which is really nothing but a way to slander those who have played by the rules, and gained by it. And Mitt Romney will continue to flounder until and unless he wakes up to the fact that Obama’s attacks - and the attacks are personally orchestrated by the president himself - are not truly attacks on Romney personally but on the principle that anyone prospers without political pull. The way to deflect Obama’s attacks is to publicly defend, not his own past but America’s - and to attack America’s present under Obama’s and the diminished future which President(!) Obama desires for America.

And to promise, not the cosmic “justice” of the second guesser but prosperity based on the freedom to reap where risk is rewarded by society and not by the arbitrary diktat of the government.

SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil . . .Common Sense Thomas Paine

[Hokestuk]

Obama has been an unparalleled disaster, the most insidiously divisive preezy this country has ever known. I remember when McCain was getting the nomination, and someone said McCain is too old. I said that I would sooner vote for a cardboard box before I would vote for Obama. Now, more than ever I feel that way still. This time I say we forget our sometimes legitimate quibbles with our nominee, because we must get out of the White house what is in it now. Donate$$.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Worse than 4 more years of Obama with the GOP in opposition to his Liberal policies, would be possibly 8 years of Romney running the Republican party further to the Left. And in those 8 years Romney will be campaigning as President for more Liberal Republicans to win offices. And after those 8 terrible years of Liberal Romney, you are likely to get a Democrat for 8 years and you know that person will be a Liberal.

[afraidfortherepublic]

That millionaire’s ungrateful grandchildren have problems other than Obama. He should put their inheritances into trusts payable when they are 65. Let them make something of themselves without help from grandpa’s money.

[kitkat]

>>>That millionaire’s ungrateful grandchildren have problems other than Obama. He should put their inheritances into trusts payable when they are 65. Let them make something of themselves without help from grandpa’s money.>>>

AGREED!

[beenaround]

Ditto.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Do not look to me for someone who approves the choice of Romney as the standard bearer for 2012 or any other year. The man has never been a conservative leader, and that is what the time cries out for. In fact, I adopted the tagline “DRAFT PALIN 2 1/2 years ago because I wanted us to coalesce around a conservative leader early precisely to forestall what in fact has transpired.

But, transpire it did, and that is where we are. One thing to say that we will get them next time, but our situation is already dire and will be worse in two, say nothing of four, more years of our tutelage by Obama and Holder. And a SCOTUS stacked by the loss of our tenuous grasp on the majority there. We can fight for a more conservative Congress at the same time. But even with a conservative majority in Congress, an Obama Administration which presumes that it cannot be held to account for any breach of his oath of office could break down the very civility of our nation.

We cannot take for granted that there will even be a “next time” if Obama wins again. You will get the new term of arrogant Democrat governance soon enough; if Mitt is indeed as bad as you expect he can be sure he will be primaries in ’16 and his bid for reelection will fail.

[Hokestuk]

Hi conservatism_IS_compassion, I’m glad I belatedly rechecked this page, as your comment is OUTSTANDING! I hope you will repeat more often here on FR, and elsewhere.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Thx.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Worse than 4 more years of Obama with the GOP in opposition to his Liberal policies, would be possibly 8 years of Romney running the Republican party further to the Left. And in those 8 years Romney will be campaigning as President for more Liberal Republicans to win offices. And after those 8 terrible years of Liberal Romney, you are likely to get a Democrat for 8 years and you know that person will be a Liberal.

History shows that it’s as much as you can expect to hold the presidency for 3 terms. And that’s with a Ronald Reagan or an Andrew Jackson.

But I wouldn’t take for granted that Romney will win reelection if he is anywhere near as bad as you expect. If he’s that bad, he’ll get primaried in 2016 - and will lose his reelection bid.

Obama is a scofflaw, and a scofflaw in the White House is disastrous in the extreme - anyone else has people who can check him. But if the president, in charge of the force of the government, flouts the law it is next to impossible to check him. It’s a long shot to be able to defeat him, but we have to try because failure is not an option.

Romney, we can be confident, will not be a scofflaw.