If Mitt, Then What?

So Mitt pulled off a significant win in Florida and is now the clear front runner for the nomination. I wouldn't go so far as to say his path is clear to the nomination, 'cause I suspect Newt has a lotta hate left left in his boiling pot still to spill over. But, supposin'...

Supposing Mitt is the nominee, now what? So let's try to be fair.

Mitt says some of the right things now which I am not sure I believe and he says some of the wrong things now which I am pretty sure he means.

So let's talk about some of the wrong things. Mitt defends the States right to mandate individual citizens purchase things they may not want or need. He rightly differentiates between the Federal and State issues here, but by doing so he misses the big picture.Is such a mandate unconstitutional at the federal level? You betcha. Is it the most unconservative thing you could possibly do at the state level? You betcha. The fact that Mitt continuously defends Romneycare shows that he is no way a small government conservative, but we knew that didn't we? Will he be better than Obama on this score, probably, marginally. But remember that this mandate is the head of the spear for the current attack on religious liberty in this country.

But the bigger question for me is on the life issues. Mitt says mostly the right things now, but we all know that just a political blink of an eye ago that Mitt publicly and vocally supported things that are as morally repugnant as can be. He supported abortion very vociferously right up until the day he decided to run for president. Most reasonable people find such a a last minute conversion an act of deceptive convenience. Who could possibly blame people for not believing it? I can't.

Now, I have heard it argued that Mitt never really governed like a pro-abort, that maybe he just said what he needed to say to get elected in a deep blue state. What he is saying now is what he really believes. So that is your best case scenario.

Your best case scenario is that we can HOPE that the Republican nominee was a liar and a fraud on the most critical moral issue of the day and HOPE that he lied just to get elected. And that is your BEST case scenario.

Of course some will try to sell us the remote possibility that his eleventh hour conversion of convenience is completely genuine and the timing is all just one big coincidence, e.g. Florida swamp land for sale.

No, our best case scenario is that on the most critical moral issue of the day we must HOPE that the "pro-life" candidate is a liar and a fraud. Welcome to Republican politics.

Comments

  1. Commie Mitt or crook (but Changed Masn Catholic!!)Gingrich? Both are owned by the Fed/military industrial complex. More slavery, poverty, more war. Goodby USA. No thanks. You have a choice. But why would you want peace, sound money, economic and personal liberty?

    ReplyDelete
  2. How about we just abstain from voting for president or do a write-in?

    ReplyDelete
  3. simple

    the biggest statement Romney can make is who he picks is his running mate.

    I am willing to take him at his word on the life issues if he selects someone with a respected pro-life record.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I searched out the Mormon position on abortion. In a nutshell, it's an extremely liberal spot on the pro-life spectrum, allowing abortion in the case of rape, incest, threat to the life of the mother, or severe handicap of the baby. But, it IS still on the pro-life spectrum, and declares abortion for personal or social convenience verboten, describing it as "...an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret.". Mitt is a devout Mormon; I would believe him when he says he is pro-life. The Mormon position leaves a lot to be desired, but it is a huge improvement from the Obama position.

    ReplyDelete
  5. FYI:
    Prof. Glendon says at NCReg:
    "The pro-life movement has worked so hard and staked so much on the effort to change peoples’ hearts and minds through education on the life issues that it would be strange to reject former pro-choice people like Ronald Reagan, Henry Hyde and Mitt Romney when they become pro-life advocates."

    And

    "I really can’t improve on the U.S. bishops’ 'Guide to Faithful Citizenship,'"

    What do you think of her logic on Romney?

    I don't think she has it right on the Guide since I don't believe it says pro-abortion-choice candidates should be disqualified from Catholic votes (bah to proportionality here).

    Gerry

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Mitt is a devout Mormon; I would believe him when he says he is pro-life."

    He was a "devout Mormon" back when he was running against Ted Kennedy and spouting that he had ALWAYS been "pro-choice" (unlike the once pro-life Kennedy) and was trying to run to Kennedy's left on social issues. He was a "devout Mormon" back when he was running for Governor and rejected the endorsement of a Massachusetts pro-life organization.

    So, which "devout Mormon" are we supposed to believe? The one who was "pro-choice" for all of his adult life, or the one who suddenly became "pro-life" on the eve of his first presidential run?

    Romney is a fraud and a liar, and I won't be voting for him. It's 3rd party or write-in for me if he becomes the nominee.

    ReplyDelete
  7. BTW, I have the greatest respect for Prof. Glendon. I've read all her recent books, too.

    ReplyDelete
  8. the biggest statement Romney can make is who he picks is his running mate.

    The Vice President of the United States' primary function is to attend state funerals and make the President look good by comparison. Other than Dick Cheney and Al Gore, no Vice President has had any real substantial influence on an administration. In Gore's case, he was (at least at the time), cut from the same cloth ideologically as the President.

    Don't get fooled by Vice Presidential selections.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This report on Romney from 2006 is disturbing:
    http://massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Don't get fooled by Vice Presidential selections."

    Exactly, Paul. Even adding Santorum or Perry (which would NEVER happen) or Bob McDonnell (which might happen) to the ticket couldn't save Romney's candidacy for me.

    And there is going to be a HUGE push for Romney to pick Christie as his running mate. Count on it. And if he does, what then?

    A Romney-Christie ticket would be about as big an F-U to (a) social conservatives and (b) tea party folks as the establishment could come up with. Given the unbridled arrogance and pettiness of these people, which has been on full display during this primary season, I wouldn't put it past them. They'd like to think they can bury so-cons and tea partiers as viable voting blocs once and for all, and they're arrogant enough to believe they can get elected with a Northeastern RINO ticket like Ronney-Christie.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

    Here's your candidate...Can it be any clearer than this? Pray over that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. About the Vice President thing...

    If he chooses a pro-abort or an abortion squish for a running mate, that tells you all you need to know.

    If he chooses a pro-life running mate, all that tells you is that he thinks he needs pro-lifers to win. Nothing more.

    ReplyDelete
  13. In the GOP primary at FL, anyone can practically vote by just registering as a Republican. Hence, Democrats might have done just that to put Romney on the top and set him up for failure in the general elections. The Romney win is bogus and Conservatives must not lose heart over it. However, the GOP must not make the mistake of nominating Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If Romney is the candidate, then the Democrats will have two candidates to choose from: Romney and Obama. Being lukewarm will always get you a dance with the devil--and the devil wears spiked heels.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I am still dreaming of a brokered convention, when some wildcard, renegade delegate coup, or procedural voodoo vaults Santorum to the top. So, I hope Rick hangs in there.

    But, if Romney is the nominee, so be it, and anyone who doesn't pull the lever for him allows for the rule of Obama. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I do not like or trust him. A shade better than the current liar in the white house but we would continue down the slippery slope, even if perhaps slightly slower.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "... if Romney is the nominee, so be it, and anyone who doesn't pull the lever for him allows for the rule of Obama ..."

    Yeah, you keep voting that way and see if things ever change for the better. I won't keep voting that way. If that "allows for the rule of Obama", blame the GOP, not me.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

    Except that in this case it's the barely mediocre being the enemy of the truly horrid.

    ReplyDelete
  19. If we truly believe that Obama is a goner, then we need to put a real Conservative not a RINO. The myth of Romney's and none others' electability vs. Obama is just Kool-Aid. Romney is garbage and the GOP should know better. The DNC is supporting him either because he'll lose or he'll continue the Liberal policies of Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh quit whinning. You ragged on Newt constantly, Paul would've been a good nominee in the 1930s and we all know Santorum has no chance. So.....we're stuck with Romney which of course means four more years of O. The pill is ready all we can do is swallow and chase it down with some Covousier.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I am so unbelievably appalled at the tactics by certain folks within the Republican establishment during this primary season to pull out all the stops and go all out to ensure that Romney gets the nomination. The Republican party is as good as gone and has been hijacked and taken over by neocons. Some well-established, so-called conservative pundits, who have been around for a while, have systematically blown all of their credibility over the past few months with their blatant shilling for Romney. We can only hope that the Republican voters realize this before it's too late. But I fear it may be, and Romney is not the candidate we need. By the end of this year's election, we may witness the final days of the Republican party as we know it, as true conservatives will have to come to terms with the fact that this party no longer represents conservative values and is controlled by neocons who will always ensure that people like Romney and McCain get the nomination. True conservatives will have to break off to form a third party (maybe a real, bonafide Tea Party). We can only hope, because that is what we will need. The Republican party is no longer valid.

    Sarah Palin summed it up best with what is going on here with the establishment's choosing of Romney. I am absolutely appalled at everything they are doing to ensure Romney gets the nomination, and he absolutely won't have my vote in November. Every one should read Sarah Palin's summary of this situation:

    Cannibals in GOP Establishment Employ Tactics of the Left
    http://www.facebook.com/note.php? note_id=10150516734848435

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Yeah, you keep voting that way and see if things ever change for the better. I won't keep voting that way. If that "allows for the rule of Obama", blame the GOP, not me."

    EXACTLY! Jay Anderson and Rick are exactly right about the need for a real conservative, rejecting Romney if he is the nominee, voting 3rd party, etc. Blackrep is dead wrong and that attitude of voting for the Republican no matter who he/she is because the Democrat is worse is the reason the Republican party is now ruled by neocons. And Rick, that's also why the Republican party WILL make the mistake of nominating Romney. There is no way I will ever vote for Romney, and if any of the rest of you ever want to have any hope of changing the Republican party or this appalling system, then do not vote for Romney if he wins the nomination - vote for a CONSERVATIVE.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment