Establishment GOP As Clueless As Ever

I was watching this clip of Mitt Romney being interviewed on Hannity, and I sighed. A lot. I shook my head with disbelief and not a little sorrow.  Here it is, watch it, see how you respond:

 

Although I definitely believe that we’d be in much better shape right now as a country if Mitt Romney had won last November, I (almost) can’t believe how . . . seriously, truly, deeply stupid he is about the “mistakes” he claims to have made.  Hispanics.  Really?  That’s why he lost?

This is a deep and serious problem with establishment GOP: they honestly believe that their own big spending, big government solutions are way better than leftists’ big spending, big government solutions, and because they are so invested in this big spending, big government ideology, two major things happen (neither good for either the GOP or our republic):  one, they compete for Democrat voters on Democrat turf, and two, they do so at the expense of their own base . . . failing to care that the base is deserting them in record, wacko bird numbers. They seem to think that GOP numbers are tanking because of the left; that’s only half right–they’re also tanking because conservatives are fed up with them and have been for years.  What they don’t seem to understand is that they will never ever win by running as Democrats against actual Democrats.

Sure, if Mitt could have turned out Hispanics in the numbers (both real and fraudulent) that turned out for Obama, he’d have won.  He didn’t lose by all that much, after all, but the people who didn’t turn out, who didn’t vote for him weren’t only the Democrat and Obama’s base; they were prominently, in large numbers conservative voters (seriously, this is what Mitt worries he did so wrong: he didn’t win over enough Obama voters. Yet if the GOP had run an actual conservative, conservatives would have turned out in huge numbers as we did in 2010).  Instead of worrying that he, amazingly, turned out fewer conservatives than that national disgrace John McCain, Romney is worried that he didn’t turn out enough of Obama’s voters.  You can’t make this stuff up, you really can’t.

It’s insane.

Yet this is what the GOP elite are thinking, planning for, and worrying about.  How, they fret, will they ever convince Obama voters to vote for their big government instead of Obama’s big government?  Gee, they wonder, what can we do to show that we’ll hand out just as many phones and other freebies as Obama?  That they’ll grant amnesty without secure borders (ahem Rubio and Paul Ryan) just like Obama?  How can they convince Obama voters that their big government solutions to “national” health care, “national” education, and a myriad other issues they want to solve via the federal government and increased tyranny are better than the Democrats’ federal programs, regulations, and general tyranny?  If only they could solve that problem, they are certain, they’d win a presidential election.

Never mind that Americans are sick of, don’t want, and actively reject all that big spending, big government nonsense that does nothing for the American people (except enslave them and whittle away at that their God-given rights) and does everything for the political class and their cronies.  Who cares what Americans want?  Not the Dems.  Not Obama.  And no, not the GOP establishment who are trying to compete on regressive turf with regressive policies for regressive votes.  They think that’s a winning strategy, and they think that even as the American public declares that it wants less government spending and fewer federal programs.

Never you mind that it doesn’t work, that an election that Obama never should have won was not won by Obama but lost by these regressive GOP establishment types who really, truly, deeply believe that their key to success is to out-regressive the regressives, to win over regressive voters with their bigger, better, more policies, programs, regulations, laws, mandates, and dictates.  They just keep churning out unacceptable candidates that the conservative base of the GOP continuously rejects in hopes that they’ll finally hit on one who will appeal to not only indies but to a good portion of the Obama base.  That’s the plan.

And they think it’s a good one.

They see headlines like Ted Cruz now leads GOP presidential pack and The conservative shift in public opinion has happened in all 50 states, and they conclude, as Mitt Romney does in the above video, that . . . Hispanics!

You can’t fix stupid.  You can only vote it out of office, out of power, sweeping it out of the way.

Election Eve

Well, here it is . . . the night before the big day.  The biggest, most important election of my lifetime.  I find myself wavering between being hopeful and optimistic (those D+11 polls are laugh out loud hilarious; no way are dems showing up in those numbers) and anxious and worried.  I’ve read the predictions, read the polls, read the pundits, and . . . I honestly can’t understand how this election is so close.  It seems impossible to me that Americans can still be taken in by the naked emperor wannabe.  But it seems they are . . . at least enough so for people to be saying that this election is close.

I’m not so sure, and looking at the crowds that are gathering for the humble, competent, balanced Romney and the hottie fiscal genius Ryan, I can’t help but be reminded of obnoxious, petty, petulant, and unhinged 0’s ’08 crowds.  Granted people aren’t swooning and fainting and acting like total idiots, but that’s a good thing in my book.  Leftists–those who aren’t insanely predicting a 0 blow-out–are calling this election “too close to call” and a “tie,” so that’s also a good sign.  They aren’t saying it’s a 0 win, and they would be if they thought it was really too close to call.  I’ve seen exactly one Obama-Biden sign and scores of Romney-Ryan ones, so that’s also heartening.  Florida, at least where I am, seems to be going the right way.

After I vote for Romney/Ryan tomorrow, I’m heading to Chik-Fil-A again–a lot of people on Twitter are talking about this, and I think it’s a great idea.  And then, yummy chicken goodness in hand, I’ll be settling in for the results to roll in.  I would not be in the least surprised by a Romney landslide, but . . .  I’m not counting on it, either. Praying for it, wishing for it, hoping against hope for it, yes, yes, yes.

I hate this.  Hate it.  I hate not knowing what is going to happen to our great country–will we do the right thing and avert true disaster?  Or will we not?  Are we too far gone?

Sigh.

So what are you thinking?  Who do you think will win?  By how much?  And why do you think that?

Paul Ryan: Smart, Savvy, and Sexy

Okay, so the alliteration makes me sound like a fangirl (yeah, yeah, I kind of am), but how wonderful that Mitt Romney chose the marvelous Paul Ryan to be his running mate.  I’m ecstatic.

Good choice, Mitt.  Seriously good choice.

Everyone’s running their favorite Ryan clips, but here are a couple of my faves that I’ve not seen elsewhere:

House Budget Trailer: America Deserves A Better Path

Paul Ryan’s CPAC 2012 Keynote Address

*sigh*  I would have loved (loved) to have seen Paul Ryan on the top of the ticket this year, but this is good, too.  Oh, so good. Don’t forget Ryan on the urgency of the entitlement crisis or on the “contraception ruling” that tramples, if not explicitly revokes, our First Amendment rights to freedom of religion and religious expression.  And note his organized, fact-based response to one of 0’s many lie-laden speeches.

You Eeyores among us, take a break.  A decade-old dog bone dug up and left to fester under the hot Florida sun in a garbage dump  would be a better VP than Biden.  Ryan is everything we’d hope for in a vice president, not the least of which is being actually presidential in both manner and temperament.  As Professor Jacobson notes, this election goes far deeper and is far more meaningful to America than either Romney or (*sigh* #DreamyVP ) Ryan, so Eeyores:  Get on board or get out of the way.

VP Musings: A Girl Can Dream

Our very own, most fabulous JACG (aka Just a Conservative Girl) has written a thoughtful post about the potential VP picks for a Mittens McRomneyCare ticket, and I thought it would be fun to consider picks for the others, as well.

By the way, here’s what I commented about potential Mittens’ picks:

Romney needs two things: foreign policy cred and TEA Party support. Make that three things, actually, because he needs to reach out to minorities, too.

For these reasons, the short list for the Romney campaign probably includes Rubio, Jindal, and West. No way in hell is either Palin or Bachmann on it, but they may be stupid enough to consider Christie or Rand Paul. I doubt he’s thinking Ryan as Ryan’s strength is the economy and budget (the same as Romney’s purported strengths). Ryan would add to a Santorum ticket, not Romney’s. I’d love to see him pick Herman Cain, but seriously doubt it’s even a distant thought. My pick is Colonel West.

There is a chance that he’ll go with Nicki Haley, a smart choice for the women’s/minority vote, but I wouldn’t put money on that one.

To expand a bit on this (as I am wont to do):  Romney is a crap RINO, big government nightmare, so the last thing he’s going to do is consider (even for his political fortunes) either Sarah or Bachmann, it just won’t happen.  They are everything that his tiny little soul loathes (i.e. strong proponents of American principles, small government, and we bitter clingers).

The “stupid enough to consider Christie” thing is based in the fact that Christie is a moderate at best, a RINO at worst, but if the establishment/RINO GOPs are anything to go by, they won’t care about that.  Christie would add nothing to a Romney ticket that isn’t already there (except a stark contrast in personality).  Rand Paul . . . okay, I’ll admit it, my feelings about his lunatic father influence the way that I think of him.  He’s not really been bad (or nuts), so that’s probably not fair, but . . . it’s there.

I love, love, love Paul Ryan.  Just love him.  But he’s not going to add anything to a Romney ticket, alas.

Hermann Cain I also like, but his big claim to fame is his 9/9/9 plan, so that’s not a help to Romney.

That leaves Nicki Haley and Allen West.  I doubt that Haley would be picked, but she’d be a good choice (despite having only been governor since 2010; Romney picks up the experience slack), so I go with Allen West for a good Romney match.  He’ll bring TEA Party support, and he’s got the foreign policy experience and deep understanding that Romney utterly and totally lacks.

So what if it’s Santorum and not Romney (a girl can still dream)?  Santorum would do himself no favors selecting someone like Sarah or Bachmann, and he’d be making a mistake to select Cain; these are all “controversial” figures, and he’s got that market cornered (alas).  Santorum’s strengths are foreign policy and Constitutional grounding, so he doesn’t need that from someone like Colonel West.  What Santorum lacks are economic credibility and secular appeal.  That’s where someone like Paul Ryan can be a boon (who am I kidding, there is no one like Paul Ryan. So Ryan it is).

And what about Newt I love FDR Gingrich?  [insert heavy eye-rolling]  He’s great as a sort of attack dog against the media and BO, but he’s still a big government is the answer guy, so he needs to look at someone who’s not.  He’s also unstable and strange, so he needs to balance that out with stability and normalcy.  His best pick would be someone like . . . you know I’m going to say it . . . Paul Ryan.  Would Ryan agree to run with Newt?  Yikes, I’m just not sure.  Bob McDonnell might be a good choice (see JACG’s reasoning).  But maybe Newt could do something that would shake up the entire process, select a moderate Democrat (i.e. a real, old-fashioned America-loving Dem, not a commie) like Evan Bayh or Joe Manchin.

Newt’s got the . . . um, brass to do it, and it would certainly make things . . . interesting.  Heck, I’d support that ticket even though it would save the Democrat Party, or maybe because it would save it.  Conservative Democrats are a dying breed, pushed out by progressives (aka communists), so it’s in our best interest, as a nation, to restore the Democrat Party to its former, pro-American ideals.

Yeah, yeah, I’m dreaming.  But a girl can dream.

.
.

.

Fuzzy’s 2012 Prez Musings: God, No Romney or Huckabee. Please.

So I just saw this headline from Rasmussen: GOP Voters Like Three Candidates Best for 2012, and I couldn’t click over fast enough.  Alas, it’s the same three: Romney, Huckabee, and Palin. 

I can’t stress enough how very very little I like Mitt Romney for president.  He is the former governor of the lunatic state (we’re actually a commonwealth) in which I live, and he did a lot of fun things like cut masses of fire fighters and police across the state (er, commonwealth), leaving many communities without first responders that they sorely need, instead of taking on the unions who have negotiated crazy contracts that (among other egregious offenses to fiscal responsibility and common sense) enable “wounded” (i.e. oops, I dropped my beer bong and slipped a disc) troopers to (as they call it) “double-dip.”  You know, collect money from everywhere while still working “on the side” (they’re disabled, right, so no more state troopering, just a big pay off and early pension).  The result of Romney’s “tough” cuts?  Towns and townships across the commonwealth with too few police, too few firefighters . . . but lots and lots of “body guards” and “bouncers” who are not physically able to work for the police force or as a firefighter but can take these second jobs and still get pension and disability benefits. 

He’s also, of course and far more importantly, responsible for the amazing disappearing tax dollar disaster: RomneyCare.  It’s ObamaCare writ tiny, and it’s costing huge.  And it’s not improved anything in health care here.  Nothing.  I did see Romney on some show give a satisfactory (to everyone who’s not me) response when asked about this (I rather think it was on Hannity because I was busy trying to decide who had better hair.  I ended up going with Hannity because he’s an actual conservative).  Romney said, and I’m paraphrasing:  RomneyCare is wonderful at the state level, and I’d do it again, but with changes.  I would never ever ever impose something that was intended for a single state on the entire nation; it’s unconstitutional to do that; I respect states’ rights.  Blah blah blah.

Here’s the problem with RomneyCare:  ideologically it is not reconcilable with conservativism.  Period.  Not on the state level, not on the national level.  Nowhere, no way, no how.  It’s spreading the wealth, it’s commonwealthizing (yeah, yeah, just made that up, sort of like nationalizing) health care.  In the MA law, we have to pay a penalty if we are not compliant (sound familiar)?  And we are all taxed to pay for it, and everyone’s premiums have gone up, including poor people’s who then take deductions for it (i.e. tax payers are hit for that, too).  And our taxes just keep going up.  Heck, our current useless governor recently tried, and I’m not doing a Fuzzy’s Faux News bit here, to charge people for going into the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV here, DMV or Department of Motor Vehicles elsewhere).  That’s right, a $5.00 cover charge just to walk in the door.  It was ultimately not enacted, but that’s how desperate this state (er, commonwealth) is for cash.  I expect a giant Cali-style garage sale any day.  And it’s in no small part due to the enormous entitlement that Romney the not-conservative forced on us all.

If you can make RomneyCare fit a conservative ideology or worldview, I want to hear it.  Really, I do.

Needless to say, I’m hoping against hope that 2012’s Republican candidate is not Romney. 

As for Mike Huckabee . . . I like him, but I’m not comfortable running someone who is also, or was, a preacher.  The idea of Huckabee being the 2012 presidential candidate makes me nervous not only because I’m not personally comfortable with a preacher as president (that’s my own deal, and I get that others don’t feel that way) but because I don’t think he can beat BO.  He’s not got the get in the dirt and fight for the win attitude that it would take.  He’s a gentleman, and he won’t “go there” when he should (like McCain didn’t, and remember how that turned out).  Now, Huckabee is a real conservative, and I admire him greatly, but please don’t let’s put him up against BO.  He’s too nice a person, too much the gentleman, too gracious.  While he’s busy turning the other cheek and rising above the fray, BO and his thugs will have their boot on his throat.  Remember, the BO campaign took out Hillary Clinton, arguably one of the top two nastiest and dirtiest-fighting pols alive today (BO being the reigning champ).

Which brings me to Sarah Palin.  She’s got the grit, the fight, and the backbone to take BO on; I have zero doubt about that.  And I honestly believe that she would best him in any debate.  What worries me still about her is that I just don’t think she can win indies.  And she’d need indies to win.  It’s a numbers game, after all, and without indies, she’d not pull it off, especially now when the House is in Republican hands and many people believe that BO has been neutered (I don’t, but we’ll see how it plays out).  There’s no urgency to drag BO out of office now that he’s being checked by the House, and that urgency is what might have swung indies to vote for Palin if Tuesday’s election had been 2012, with both houses and the WH in radical socialist democrat control.  I think the Republicans, barring any stupid attempts to work with the socialist agenda, will take the Senate in 2012, too, so again, less urgency in putting a Republican in the WH.  Big picture, though, we absolutely must have one to repeal that healthcare monstrosity before it “goes live” in 2014 (BO has always taken his second term as a given).  Sarah Palin is young, she can wait a few cycles for her time; I’d love to see her win the WH, but 2012 is key to repealing ObamaCare, something we need done.

And that’s the bottom line.  We absolutely must have a Republican president in 2012, or we will never be rid of ObamaCare.  Never.  It’s literally do or die in 2012.  We can’t take wild (or even mild) risks with our presidential candidate, we can’t put too much hope in a candidate that we all know outside our own ranks is not a viable presidential candidate (if O’Donnell and Angle had won Tuesday, I’d be singing a different tune on this one).  There is too much at stake.  One sixth of our economy, our nation’s health care system (the best in the world), and far far too many of our freedoms and choices . . . that’s a lot, and I’m not willing to gamble when the stakes are that high.

So the question becomes who can win, who has the backbone to fight BO tooth and nail, who is fiscally responsible, who loves America and supports our military, who respects our Constitution, who has experience (preferably executive as a governor, but business or legislative experience would do–BO lowered the bar to a ridiculous low on experience), and importantly, who can lead?  I think, given this president’s embarrassing behavior, that we don’t really need anyone who is “polished” (geez, that asshat gave the British Prime Minister plastic helicopters from the WH gift shop, groped the Queen of England, made the Dali Lama slink out the back door by the trash bags, gave “shout outs” to his buddies before addressing the Fort Hood terrorist attack, verbally attacks and disparages his own people, and bowed down and hugged and otherwise belittled himself before communists, tyrants, and dictators.  The man thinks “corps” is pronounced “corpse,” for God’s sake.  Anyone would be an improvement.).

Here are the remaining four that Rasmussen polled on:  former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (13%), Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (6%), Texas Congressman Ron Paul (5%) and Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels (3%). Seven percent (7%) prefer some other candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided.”

I guess I’m in the 7% who prefer “some other candidate.”  And here are the top three in my oh so humble opinion:  Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, and Paul Ryan. These men–and yes, I know they are all men, but our best women (Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Jan Brewer) might not win, and winning is the only hope for this country’s salvation–these men are all solid conservatives, are all more than a match for BO in every conceivable way (ideologically, of course, but more importantly, they are all articulate, intelligent, and knowledgeable), all share our core values, all are American patriots, and all have as much, or more, experience than BO did in 2008.

The downside:  Christie is a bit, as we say in polite company, “rough around the edges.”  He’s absolutely freaking wonderful in my book, I like plain speaking, but many people are turned off by it.  This could be a liability with left-leaning indies.  Rubio, I have reservations about because of his using campaign money for personal reasons (I know he paid it back, but it still bugs me).  Ryan . . . well, it’s hard to think of a downside, but I guess one could argue that he doesn’t have enough experience (laughable given how thin BO’s resume was) or that he’s not knowledgeable about foreign affairs. I don’t know, it’s hard to come up with a downside on Ryan.  But none of these downsides–for any of them–is a deal breaker or would cost them the election.  I can’t think of any that are that substantive.

The upside:  Christie has proven himself to be a man who has the courage of his convictions and will do exactly what he says he will do.  The man is a budget-balancing dynamo who is completely unafraid to tackle unions (huge in NJ), special interests, and anyone else who stands in the way of the welfare of his state, including people in his own party.  I like that.  A lot.  Rubio has shown that he is an adept politician who understands what the people want and what America is, and he seems dedicated to fulfill his promises of fiscal responsibility and smaller government (I also secretly think it’s a good idea to run a Hispanic against our first-ever most historical watershed unprecedented wonder of all wonders ocean-controlling planet-healing black president. I would never advocate running just any Hispanic.  No “quotas” here, no “affirmative action,” no PC crap. The real deal, and Rubio is the real deal).  Ryan is absolutely brilliant; he’s also gorgeous (well, all three are gorgeous, aren’t they?), articulate, and . . . well, presidential (something we sorely lack currently).  He’s also got an amazing mind for finance and economics, something we will definitely need in 2012.

What say you?

.
.

.