Tuesday, November 29, 2011

The Irrationality Of The Anybody But Romney Crowd

The goal isn’t to defeat Romney. Its to defeat Obama. However, that isn't the goal of the anti-Romney crew. They want to defeat Romney so badly that they don't care if America gets another four years of President Obama.
It never ceases to amaze me of how irrational the anybody but Mitt crowd is.

They’re willing to accept Newt Gingrich who supported Cap and Trade, medicare plan D prescription medication coverage, and the creation of the TSA. Additionally, he's had approximately 84 ethical violations against him while he was Speaker of the House, cheated on his wives and was a lobbyist for Fannie and Freddie who was paid $1.8 million in “consulting fees." Moreover, Newt Gingrich doesn't have the kind of character that conservatives want in the White House.  Finally, if Newt has the opportunity to go against Obama in the general election, he would be most likely to lose the Presidential election in 2012 much like John McCain did in 2008.
They’re willing to accept Herman Cain who has private sector experience but no public sector experiences, cannot articulate a serious foreign policy position on Cuba, Libya  and has accusations (unproven yet) of sexual harassment and adultery. Moreover, his "999" plan would be a disaster for the economy.

They were excited about Rick Perry who supported a force mandate of immunizing young girls against sexually transmitted diseases, cannot debate to save his life and has very little to offer in terms of domestic or foreign policy.
Moreover, the anybody but Mitt crowd was excited about Michelle Bachmann until they realized she has no leadership experience and hasn’t made any major accomplishments in Congress other than being on the Intelligence committee.
Then there’s Rick Santorum whose campaign is barely breathing. He’s a great guy but he has nothing to offer either. For the anybody but Mitt crowd, he’s a great choice. The problem is…he can’t defeat Obama.
It amazes me that these so called "conservatives" have been flip flopping on all these candidates when the best choice is obvious to the rest of us:
Despite President Obama’s horrendous policies and governing record, he nevertheless has a pretty good chance of winning re-election in November 2012, not only because the U.S. economy may be showing some improvement by then, compared to this year, and not only because he will have killed more Al Qaeda leaders than did Mr. Bush, but because the GOP isn’t sufficiently rallying behind the only worthy candidate: Governor Romney. Never underestimate the GOP’s willingness to shoot itself in the foot electorally.
GOP conservatives falsely accuse Romney of “flip-flopping,” even though his character is stellar and his campaign themes have been both good and steady, and even though fickle conservatives themselves have flip-flopped almost weekly, dashing about promiscuously and desperately seeking “anyone but Romney” – first Sarah Palin, then Donald Trump, then Michele Bachmann, then Rick Perry, then Herman Cain, and now – the worst of all possible speed dates – Newt Gingrich.
What is so delusional about the anybody but Mitt crowd is that they're willing to support all other severely flawed candidates just to ensure Romney loses this election regardless of the fact that he broad spectrum of appeal democrats, independents, moderates, tea party and conservatives. Jennifer Rubin, in her column for the Washington Post, points out that this unhingedcrowd wants a pure candidate rather than a candidate who is appealing to a wide spectrum of the American people:
The point, you see, is not to advance (incrementally or otherwise) the conservative ball but to remain forever aggrieved. Whatever deal is attainable and whichever candidate is acceptable to a broad cross-section of Americans are almost by definition unacceptable to those voices.
Jennifer Rubin also out that the anybody but Romney has a different yet irrational agenda than the rest of America:
Notice how their interests now diverge from the interests of the party in gaining governing majorities and the White House? They’re only happy if the most flawed candidates survive? Something is amiss. Indeed it is. You’ll hear plenty more of it, and some weird defenses of candidates, any candidate other than Romney, any candidate who couldn’t possibly win. The far right echo chamber is going to be screeching at fever pitch. The rest of the party, and the country at large, will be just fine. 
Lets look at Mitt Romney to see how irrational they are in opposing Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney is a fiscal conservative. He's had a long and successful career in business. He's got a great economic record when it comes to job creation, taxes and fees, and getting the state of Massachusetts out of a $3 billion deficit to a $2 billion surplus. With his wealth of experience and success in the public and private sector, Mitt Romney has an excellent jobs plan that will help get America on track if he's elected President in 2012.
For social conservatives, he is the most appealing candidate since he's been a strong family man since he's been married once to the same woman for 42 years. No sexual harrassment charges against him. No accusations of adultery. Romney has been able to create the ideal family: stable marriage, stable family, stable job, great home and lots of grandchildren. He's pro-life, opposes gay marriage and is a strong supporter of the family.
For legal conservatives such as myself, Mitt Romney is the most ideal candidate. He has assembled an amazing team of legal advisors for his 2012 campaign. He has vowed to appoint judges who will not legislate from the bench and who will follow the Constitution.

When it comes to the issue of health care, Mitt Romney has been a strong conservative. Mitt Romney was opposed to the idea of a nationalizing our health care system as early as 1993 or 1994 as President Clinton was pushing to pass HillaryCare. He was opposed to opposed HillaryCare 2.0 in 2007.
Moreover, Mitt Romney adopted the Heritage Foundation's proposal to implement the individual mandate at the state level. Once he implemented RomneyCare, he received a lot of support from conservatives. One of the reasons why they liked it is because the cost of RomneyCare was less than 1% of the state budget. RomneyCare was not a big issue for Romney during the 2008 Presidential election.
However, conservatives have unjustifiably and unreasonably became angry at Mitt Romney when President Obama became President and passed ObamaCare. Its important to remember that Obama flip flopped on RomneyCare by opposing it during the 2008 campaign before supporting it in his presidency. A close look at the facts reveal that there is no possible way that Obama modeled ObamaCare after RomneyCare. There are too many differences between RomneyCare and ObamaCare. Despite these facts, too many conservatives think that RomneyCare is a socialist program simply because of Obama's false claims that he used RomneyCare as a template for ObamaCare. However, RomneyCare is not a socialist health care program. Moreover, RomneyCare is constitutional and ObamaCare isn't.
Mitt Romney has repeatedly promised to repeal ObamaCare and that he would do so on the first day of his Presidency. In fact, Paul Ryan, the conservative Congressman from Minnesota, has stated that he is very confident Mitt Romney will honor his promise if he is elected President. In addition to repealing ObamaCare, Mitt Romney unveiled a new health care plan for America that is not based on his health care plan in Massachusetts.
The facts are clear. Mitt Romney is a great leader. He was an major player in getting Republicans elected in the 2010 midterm election. He's also the most electable candidate who can defeat President Obama in this election. He's also the only candidate who can remain competitive with Obama when it comes to raising campaign funds.
Its clear that the anybody but Mitt Romney crowd is irrational given that each of the 2012 candidates is not the candidate conservatives of all stripes are looking for. Mitt Romney is the right candidate for this election and they refuse to accept it despite Romney's experience, qualification and character. 

This article has been cross posted from Conservative Samizdat.


Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

A-freaking- MEN. My frustrations exactly. In May Newt calls Ryan's economic plan right wing social engineering and is immediately slain in the conservative media for having said it. With in 2 days he begins the backpedaling campaign and the "I wasn't referring to Paul Ryan" comments, and yet Newt is a "principled conservative"? He's lounges on a sofa w/ Pelosi w/ a massive big govt proposal to solve global climate change, but then, when the heat is on, admits he "made a mistake" and yet, he's the principled conservative? Mitt, despite endless criticism for Romneycare, stands his ground and affirms what he did for his state was right, but wrong for the country as a whole, and he is unprincipled? Something is very very wrong here. It stinks to high Heaven. Well said J....ALL OF IT

crazy4boys said...

J, this was a powerhouse article! So many arguments boiled down so succinctly.

Anonymous said...

Great article J. Sadly the "ABR" don't care, they love to point out romney's faults while willing to ignore the fault of others. They are willing to help Obama in his agenda to "kill romney".

Ohio JOE said...

"The goal isn’t to defeat Romney. Its to defeat Obama." Preferably, the goal is to defeat both. If we are going to defeat Mr. Obama, let's exchange him with somebody who understands Conservatism and capitalism well and can promote them. True, those who support Mr. Gingrich simply because he is not Mr. Romney are wrong. But those who support Mr. Romney just because he is not Mr. Gingrich or Mr. Obama also have issues.

Terrye said...

Ohio Joe:

No, the goal is not to defeat both..not unless you have a viable alternative to Romney and the ABR crowd does not. They would support Satan himself to stop Romney.

Gingrich is not fit to be president. He does not have the character or temperament and he is no conservative anyway.

Rubin is right..people don't like Romney because he can win and that means he appeals to people they don't like. On the other hand most Americans think Gingrich is a joke..hence he is an alternative for the crybabies.

Ohio JOE said...

"They would support Satan himself to stop Romney." Now that is rich coming from the Nobody But Romney camp. You guy were anybody, but Huckabee, then anybody but Palin, patronizing voters saying 'if you guys want a woman, pick Bachmann.' Then Anybody, but Trump, Then Anybody, But Bachmann 'why she is worse than Palin.' Then on to Anybody, But Perry 'why Huckabee was not as bad now.' Then Anybody, But Cain 'at least bring back Bachmann' they cried all of a sudden. Now, Anybody, but Gringrich 'listen up you rubes in flyover country, HERE US CRY WOLF again.'

I am just waiting for "ANYBODY BUT SANTORUM" and "ANYBODY, BUT PAUL." The Nobody, But Romney crowd is all over the map and sure makes one's head spin.

Anonymous said...

J, nicely stated!

OJ, If not Romney, then who? I know you don't like Newt. In your opinion, who can both beat Obama, and be a good president?

Of the choices we have, who are you going to choose? I've heard you complain about Ellie voting for Obama for 2 years. Now, it seems you are also going to help him. So ironic. You must see that if you vote for anyone but Romney, you will help reelect him. Newt can't beat him, and there's no one else on the horizon coming to save the day.

-Martha

Ohio JOE said...

Martha, I do not have to vote for either one. I told you several times that I will not vote for Mr. Obama, unlike your friend.

Anonymous said...

OJ, by not voting for the person who can beat Obama, you are essentially supporting Obama.

By not voting, you will inadvertently help Newt--who will lose to Obama-big time.

I think it's terribly ironic, considering all the complaining you have done about Ellie.

-Martha

Ohio JOE said...

The fact that Ellie voted for Mr. Obama is the least of her problems. The division that she helped cause in the party is worse. Instead of trashing Mr. Obama and Mr. Gingrich (and they both deserve some trashing) maybe you could give a reason to vote for Mr. Romney like Noelle does. Yes, it is tempting to be become a Romneyite in order to defeat Mr. Gingrich, but I have a little more dignity that that.

Right Wingnut said...

OJ, you forgot about their obsession with Perry a few months back. Remember? "I'll leave the party if Perry wins the nomination....Perry is the most corrupt....anybody but Perry"

I admit to pointing out many of Perry's faults, but the Romney camp was way over the top...including attacking him for his religious beliefs. Kind of ironic isn't it?

Ohio JOE said...

"but the Romney camp was way over the top...including attacking him for his religious beliefs. Kind of ironic isn't it?" Yup, the general public is getting tired of all this wolf crying.

Anonymous said...

RW, that is a flat out lie. Romney supporters NEVER attacked Perry for his religious beliefs. You lie.

He has been attacked for playing the religion card against Romney, and for working with, and using KNOWN bigots.

Perry is corrupt. As corrupt as Newt? I don't know, but they both stink.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

Martha, Bullshit. Huck, Perry, and to a lesser extent, Palin, have all been mocked by some Romney supporters for their faith.

Ohio JOE said...

You are correct RW, it is also interesting that when one of her friend tried to mock Mrs. Palin, the Pastor in the video was African American. Imagine if we would have posted a video of Mr. Romney and there was an African American pastor in the video, why we'd be double bigots.

You know, the sad part is that there is an indication that Mr. Perry actually does have a few too many religious bigots in his camp, but who in their right mind is going to believe this after all this wolf crying.

Anonymous said...

RW. LIES. Prove it.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

OJ. Facts are facts. You just need to courage to believe the facts.

It's weird how you think reporting facts is crying wolf, but whatever.

-Martha

Ohio JOE said...

"It's weird how you think reporting facts is crying wolf, but whatever." Yeah, after so many half truthes who is going to believe it when the wolf finally come. I used to think it was fun to yell fire from the balcony when I was young until my grandmother explained that the fire department would not come in the event of a real fire.

Don Parnell said...

Romney in 2002 said several times "He supports woman's right to choose." In the 1994 debates against Senator Kennedy Mr. Romney tried to further left than Mr. Kennedy! Romney has no scruples or principles.

MassCon said...

LOL, RW.

That is rich.

Mocking Palin and Huckabee because of their faith?

Proof, or it didn't happen.

You are really dumb, aren't you?

Ohio JOE said...

You have not been around long, MassCon

Anonymous said...

I'm a conservative, independent Mass. native who lived through Romney's time as governor.

It was my distinct impression that he did his 4 years in office not to solve the absolute disaster that the decades of Democrat house and senate have created, but only to tick a check-box on his resume.

I'll vote for Romney if he's nominated, but I want a GENUINE conservative instead.

Pro-life, pro fiscal restraint, anti-PC doesn't seem like a lot to ask for.

I sure wish there was someone else left standing.