Posted on 08/11/2012 10:58:39 PM PDT by smoothsailing
August 11, 2012
Paul A. Rahe
In choosing Paul Ryan as his Vice-Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has opted to go for broke, and he has indicated that he is a serious man -- less concerned with becoming President of the United States than with saving the country from the disaster in store for it if we not radically reverse course, willing to risk a loss for the sake of being able to win a mandate for reform.
I have been unsparing in my criticism of Romney's political record. I unsay not one word about that. If we were to judge him honestly by his conduct as a Senatorial candidate in Massachusetts and as that state's Governor, I believe that we would find him sadly wanting.
I have also consistently been of the opinion that, of the declared Republican presidential aspirants, Mitt Romney was the least unacceptable. In his private capacity, he is a man of excellent character; as a businessman, he was accomplished in the extreme; and, as a candidate, he consistently displayed the discipline required. There were others in the race who had good qualities, but they lacked one or more of the crucial qualities that Romney possesses.
I also hazarded a guess -- that current circumstances might make a genuine conservative of Mitt Romney, that his understanding of the fiscal crisis we face might very well force him to think more deeply about the moral roots of that fiscal crisis, which is to say, about the inner logic of the administrative entitlements state and the moral as well as the fiscal bankruptcy produced by that inner logic. I was accused of wishful thinking, and the accusation was just. For my wish was, indeed, father to the thought, but this does not mean that the thought was wrong.
Governor Romney's choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate suggests, in fact, that my suspicions were correct. For by making this choice, Mitt Romney is declaring war. There will be no evasion, no triangulation, no attempt to mask what is at stake in this election. Instead, Romney and Ryan will directly confront Barack Obama and call him to account for putting us on a ruinous course.
This will alter radically the dynamics of the race. The money spent by Obama trying to demonize Governor Romney will prove to be money entirely wasted. The election is not going to be about Mitt Romney. It is not going to be about the sexual revolution. It is not going to be about Bain Capital. It is going to be about the failed policies of Barack Obama, about their dangerous character, and about the sober, sound alternative the Republicans represent.
This will help the Republicans in Senate and House races immeasurably, for it will give Romney and Ryan coattails -- now, without a doubt, the candidates in these other races have something concrete on which to run: repeal Obamacare, pare back the entitlements state, reform our system of taxation, and put our fiscal house in order. No one will doubt the capacity of the Republicans to rule.
I have predicted that Romney will win by a landslide. The choice of Paul Ryan means that Romney has chosen the path that will maximize the significance of his victory and its impact on the races for seats in the House and Senate. As in 1980, this is going to be a national election -- in which local particularities count for much less than usual.
If you still have doubts, remember November, 2010.
Karl Rove is on the side of the good guys.
Axlerod is the enemy and always wears a black hat
Jeff is not banned. That is his about page, just like several other FReepers.
Hussein would be operating in the face of some gop opposition. Willard would not. So instead of 3 marxist SC justices, who the gop might not confirm, you would end up with 3 david souters that they would confirm. Net result: we’re screwed.
As for obamacare, I do not see that willard would actually push to repeal it. This would be in the category of unfulfilled campaign promises. And the gop-e would do nothing to push the issue. Remember that the insurance companies like obamacare just fine.
As for DoJ, I think it’s true that willard wouldn’t try things like backdoor gun control. He would just use the front door instead. In the spirit of “compromise” and “bipartisanship.”
Good post, Doug.
Thanks for confirming what I said: “Rational people cannot believe that Obama and Romney would be the same”.
For me it’s more like, do you take a whiz in the middle of your bed or on the kitchen floor. Either way it’s is going to stink up the place, but one you don’t have to lie down in.
Sure you can live with urine on the kitchen floor, but do you want to?
Thanks primary voters. Thanks one hell of a lot you bastards.
And I thank you for confirming that there are “conservatives” who would shill for Van Jones for President - so long as he had an “R” after his name.
As a strong conservative for six decades, I proudly support Mitt Romney without reservation for President. I wouldn’t support vanJones for manure spreader. What made you come up with this insane comparison?
The truth hurts. Policy under Romney would not be radically different from Obama due to the unwashed masses demand for bread and circuses. The only reason for a conservative, based on principle, to vote for Romney is to remove Obama because of his unconstitutional power grabs. I fear the only way the nation returns to a true constitutional representative republic is to go through near total economic collapse and pray for a benign, short lived military directorship. A quixotic notion perhaps, but hardship and suffering is the only way the nation's character can be rebuilt to what it was.
Well, vote for the Kenyan then.
Please do tell what the rest of us don't know about this congenital liar. Truly, if he is as bad as you say, shouldn't the voters be forewarned?
C'mon, step up and don't be bashful, we eagerly await your revelations...............
I agree. I am not very optimistic that Romney will be that good a president. I will be satisfied for now if he can run a good enough campaign to beat 0bama.
Michelle Malkin will be next.
Dems are just wired different.
You draw some excellent parallels between Romney & 0bama & depression era presidents. I am not very optimistic that Romney can ‘save the country’ per se if elected either, although he should at least be able to significantly slow its current deterioration. I will be satisfied for now if he can run a good enough campaign to beat 0bama.
You certainly do know how to devine meaning from a graphic. /sIt seems that everyone who preemptively tries to equate the two candidates' performance in office makes this gigantic mistake.
LOL!
“Please do tell what the rest of us don’t know about this congenital liar. Truly, if he is as bad as you say, shouldn’t the voters be forewarned?
C’mon, step up and don’t be bashful, we eagerly await your revelations...............”
Fool, there are a dozen video montages of Romney on You Tube saying the exact opposite thing from scene to scene. Or do you only get your news from LDS approved sources? Even going so far as to rewrite his own book, or deny what he said in an interview and accuse OTHERS of lying about it. His perversity is extreme.
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.