If You Like Political Grandstanding…
January 20, 2012
You gotta love Newt Gingrich—or not. Last night, Newt got a standing ovation from the red-meat crowd as he tossed ‘em a juicy steak, a diatribe about he was “appalled” and “astounded” at the “despicable” idea that John King would begin a presidential debate by throwing out such “trash” as to ask Newt about his second marriage and the things that his ex-wife said in an ABC interview. You can watch if you can stand it:
Newt Gets ‘Em Going in South Carolina
Frankly, it doesn’t take much parsing to see through Newt’s protestations. His taking-to-task of CNN comes off as rehearsed, at least to me; it doesn’t take much of a brain to figure that Newt had to know it was coming at some point, and he used it, predictably, as a camera-ready opportunity to bash the press. Yes, the mainstream press needs some bashing; fine. But his words are a very convenient dodge; there is nothing inappropriate at all about him being asked such questions. Yes, Newt, every person is touched by pain; we get that, but get this, spud: you caused her pain. And the pain of your first wife (who is even a more sympathetic figure; this second wife was, apparently, culpable in the first divorce. Hard to feel terribly sympathetic toward her, come to think of it). You carried on a long-term affair (or two). You are to blame. Are you forgiven by God? Hope so, but that’s not the issue. Are you a conservative? Some of the time, but that’s not the issue. Can you be trusted to lead? Absolutely not; we’ve seen enough of you that we all ought to know that. And your grand telling-off of John King is a pathetic attempt to mitigate your indiscretions, a nice sleight-of-hand trick to take the focus off the very legitimate issue of character.
Now, it’s fair enough to say that it’s hard to trust Flip Flopney because of his, shall we say, “fluid” approach to convictions. Flip isn’t my first choice by any means, and if I do pull the lever for him this fall, it’ll be with a clothespin on my nose, perhaps literally. But we know what your convictions are, Newt, and what they aren’t; we’ve seen enough of you to know that it would be a crying shame if America had to choose between you and President Obama. It would leave this American searching for the best third-party choice he could find.
Just What I’ve Been Saying about Newt…
January 5, 2012
Newt Gingrich, the Religious Right, and Rank Hypocrisy
Thankfully, Newt’s windbagging notwithstanding, there now appears little chance that he will be the nominee.
So I Was Wr…Wr…Not Exactly, Totally Right
January 4, 2012
Of course, Rick Perry will not be the next president. In fact, since he apparently knows when to hold ‘em, and more importantly right now, when to fold ‘em, he will no longer be in the race 48 hours from now. Michelle Bachmann, apparently at this point, lacks such knowledge…
But in one sense, of course, I was…closer to right. Conceptually, I was right, just had the wrong guy, of course, as Rick Santorum proved to be—out of the absolute blue, of course—the person who grabbed the mantle of “not Romney and not Paul”. Now, can he sustain that momentum? Remains to be seen. Paul is a non-factor long-term, as I’ve long argued. Romney’s front-running status was enhanced last night, but he’s not the inevitable nominee, given the “Romney Ceiling”, given the obvious fact that conservative Republicans en masse don’t trust him, though I think most of them find him an acceptable alternative to Obama.
So all of that said…go, Rick!
A Definition of Liberalism
December 30, 2011
Contemporary Liberalism can be defined as the attempt to verify the proposition that reality is optional. Thomas Sowell provided the insight for that observation.
A Bold Prediction…
December 19, 2011
I’m neither a prophet, nor the son of a prophet. And yet I am prepared, on the week before Christmas 2011, to name the man who will be the Republican nominee and, I believe, the next president of the United States.
Rick Perry.
Yes, I could be accused of doing some wishful thinking here, I concede, since I’ve made it clear ever since he announced that he is my first choice for the Presidency. But here is my rationale, why I really have begun to believe, debate stumbles and all, that Rick will emerge as the nominee:
1. It is abundantly clear that the rank-and-file doesn’t trust Mitt Romney as the Republican standard-bearer. I have some ideas why this is the case, and you probably do too, but they’re not germane to this discussion. Suffice it to say that while others have risen and fallen, Romney’s lukewarm support has stayed roughly the same. Romney is this year’s McCain, albeit a bit more conservative version (if he can be trusted): he’ll do, but he’ll never, ever thrill Republicans. Ever. Nobody will wake up on Election Day and proclaim, “Hot Diggity, I get to go vote for Mitt Romney!!!”
2. Newt’s popularity is falling—fast. What is becoming clear is that he’s not the conservative some think he is; he’s not got the support of many of those who worked closest with him in Congress; he’s prone to saying some incredibly stupid things; he can’t win the Presidency. Thankfully, people are onto him, and I predict his slide will continue.
3. Ron Paul excites a certain percentage of people, but scares a much higher percentage. The people who love Ron Paul love him more than any others love their candidates. He’s truly a pucker-or-duck figure; nobody is ambivalent toward Ron Paul. Personally, I like a whole lot of what he says, but I don’t like his foreign policy, and I don’t like his unelectability, and he’s not my guy. And despite the fact that he’s now taken his turn atop an Iowa poll—and even though it’s conceivable he’ll win Iowa—he will not be the nominee.
4. This, then, leads us to ask, “who’s left?” And the polls are beginning to trend to Rick Perry. He is, in my judgment, the one candidate with a stellar record of governing, a stellar position on social issues, and no (known) character issues. Granted, there are a few positions Rick has taken in the past that I think were unwise; granted, he needs work in debates (only because these exercises in silliness seem to matter to some people). But all of that said, given that the other conservative candidates, Michelle Bachmann (unelectable) and Rick Santorum (a nice Veep candidate, perhaps) aren’t getting traction (and won’t), it looks to me like Rick is well-positioned to be the conservative choice. He may win Iowa—I’m betting on it, in fact—and though he isn’t running strong in New Hampshire, a good Iowa performance will help his standing there. Then comes South Carolina, and by that time, it may be down to Mitt and Rick. Nikki Haley’s endorsement aside, South Carolinians are quite the conservative lot, and I see him being very competitive there.
In the end, I think Rick is the last man standing.
And the next President.
George Will’s Interesting Take on the Republican Candidates
December 5, 2011
is found here.
This piece is well-worth the read, exposing, among other things, a side of Jon Huntsman that I was unaware of (in Will’s eyes, Huntsman’s program is “the most conservative”). He has a great take on Rick Perry’s stumbling campaign, and why Republicans ought to look at what matters instead of what the banal media wants to tell us matters:
Rick Perry (disclosure: my wife, Mari Will, advises him) has been disappointing in debates. They test nothing pertinent to presidential duties but have become absurdly important. Perry’s political assets remain his Texas record and Southwestern zest for disliking Washington and Wall Street simultaneously and equally.
He also gives us more perspective on the pathetic idea that Newt Gingrich ought to be the Republican standard-bearer. Great read.
UPDATE: Ramesh Ponnuru has another great piece on why Newt Gingrich is the wrong man at the wrong time. Oh, and he’s really not any more consistently conservative than noted flip-flopper Flip Flopney.
How Stupid Can Republicans Be
December 1, 2011
I have said many times that polls this far out don’t matter a whole lot, and they don’t, insofar as the general election is concerned. But this poll, taken as it was just a few short weeks before the beginning of the primary season, and because of its startling results, does matter—and what it means, if it holds, is that I will not be voting for a Republican in 2012. I don’t even know who the Libertarians are running for president, but I’m penciling LP in right now for my vote. I reiterate: I will not vote for Newt Gingrich for president. Period. End of story. And I firmly believe that nominating him will ensure four more years of Barack Obama. Now, I’ve been wrong before, and strange things can happen in presidential politics, but Newt has so, so much baggage that, his tremendous intellect notwithstanding, he is a bad choice as the Republican nominee.
How stupid can Republicans be to nominate him…
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
