First, let me say that I don’t have a favorite among those left. I don’t like any of them much at all. However, I have noticed a tendency in voters to forgive some character flaws over others.
Newt Gingrich comes with a lot of baggage. Everybody knows it. It has been aired for a number of years. Yet, people can’t forgive him even when he asks for forgiveness. The thing they can’t seem to forgive is his multiple marraiges. That’s okay, but it’s not the only character flaw that determines if a person will stay true to his word in other matters.
Mitt Romney has a lot of baggage; more than people realize along with a ruthlessness about how he deals with competition that looks like it might win over him. Not mention his perpetual campaign that began in 2007 and has not ceased since. In addition to that ruthlessness, he can’t seem to stay on one side of an issue; any issue. Some call him the Flipper but it’s worse than that. He often reminds me of those blow bop dolls that kids like to punch. The doll reels backward, forward, and to the sides before it finally rights itself, ready for the next punch only to repeat the cycle. Once we can finally sort out where he actually stands on an issue, there is still his ruthlessness against his opponents to consider. Remember Fred Thompson? Here’s what the Romney camp for 08 did to Fred Thompson, in Thompson’s own words:
[…] Days after I got into the presidential race in 2007, I was greeted with a website, “PhoneyFred.org,” described in the media at the time as an “anti Fred Thompson smear site.” You couldn’t really tell who was behind it, but we learned of it from the Democratic National Committee, which made ample use of it. We assumed that they had created it. However, a reporter at the Washington Post (of all people) decided to find out who was behind the site. After a lot of effort, she traced it to an executive of TTS Strategies, a South Carolina consulting firm run by J. Warren Tompkins, one of the most notorious hardball political operatives in the country.
Politicians of opposing campaigns were known to get the “Warren Treatment.” He ran Bush’s 1980 campaign, in which anonymous flyers and telephone calls accused John McCain of fathering an illegitimate black child.
In 2007, he was running Mitt Romney’s campaign in South Carolina, where Mitt was behind the rest of us in the polls. Of course, when confronted, both Tompkins and Mitt were “shocked” to learn that a rogue employee (who ran Tompkins’s office) was running such a website (out of the office), and the site was taken down immediately. One of the more benign and amusing things the site accused me of was being a “flip flopper.” I kid you not. […]
Do read the rest of the article. The part quoted is near the end of the article which is mainly about Herman Cain. Like Fred, I don’t know if Romney’s campaign was behind the torpedoing of Cain(whom I did support) but it does remind one of what Romney is capable of. Now that Gingrich has somewhat burst Romney’s bubble of inevitablitiy, it will be interesting going forward.
By the way, Santorum has a lot of baggage, too. Google Santorum scandals and you’ll see. I won’t spend a lot of time on him because he doesn’t seem to be getting much traction after Iowa. So does Ron Paul. Google him, too.
It does remind one of the old cliche about living in glass houses and throwing stones.
But character flaws should be expected. These men are only human, after all. There is no perfect human being save one who died for our sins and sins we still commit. Depending on our worldview some sins are worse than others, though God nor Christ ever differentiated between one or another.
Fred’s article about Cain does make one wonder about things when Romney chose the very same firm that torpedoed Fred to manage his campaign again this time around (emphasis mine).
[…]”We knew coming here that Romney would have a bull’s-eye on his back but now it’s the size of the Target sign,” said J. Warren Tompkins, a South Carolina GOP strategist advising Romney’s campaign. “You’ve got to worry about that. We’ve got to survive here, but if you do the probability of getting the nomination is pretty good.” […]
I’m not exactly advocating for either Gingrich, Paul, or Santorum over Romney but neither am I discounting them just because the media wants Romney. Given that the ‘inevitability bubble’ has burst, this primary season could get real interesting if we stop this selective forgiveness some their transgressions while beating up others for theirs. Hopefully, if we can manage to do that, we can have the least of the leasser evils that have been foisted upon us.
Even as we “politicos” wrangle over policies and issues, we are still losing the debate on conservatism. This article brought that home.
Partisan politics is a deadly weapon that is destroying the fabric of one of the greatest societies in history. It’s frustrating to watch Americans slowly losing their grip on true freedom. It seems that we’re either free to be liberal or free to be conservative. How does choosing between these two failed ideologies give us real freedom at all? (emphasis mine)
The bolded words is where the writer went wrong. He has confused conservative with Republican. I can understand his mistake. Most people make the same mistake. However, the reason most conservatives vote Republican is that fact that we lose less freedom and at a slower pace than if we were to vote for the Democrat instead.
He doesn’t understand that conservatism isn’t a political ideology but a way of living in that freedom he is in such fear of losing. Conservatives are individuals and believe in individual freedom and come at our decisions in individual ways knowing there is no “one size fits all” solution to any problem whether it’s on a personal or national level. Not even state to state.
In 2008, you voted for change with Barak Obama(click TN on the map). You didn’t get what was promised in the easy campaign slogan. Instead you’ve gotten the shaft: high unemployment and bigger government.
Somebody during the 2008 presidential campaigns asked: “Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?” It wasn’t Obama who asked that question but I believe the answer is a fairly clear, “No.” We are not better off, quite a bit worse off, and it looks to be getting worse than worse. After doing everything it could to grow the deficit to grow government, putting more than double the Bush years unemployment rate out of work, the government is going to shrink the deficit by spending for Unions and Teachers by cutting back on food stamps. It was such a success, they want to repeat it to fund another initiative.
Is this the change you voted for? How about some real change in your own backyard, Nashville? If you’re tired of being handed the same old promises, election year after election year for decades, why do you keep punishing yourselves? Continue reading
I had started a series to highlight five candidates for this district Out of the five planned two are done and only two will be done because the remaining candidates have either declined or ignored the series of questions I asked for article content. Hartline’s profile is here.
Both had good answers to the series of questions, but Hartline has the advantage: Activity and raising money, both of which are going to be necessary to challenging an incumbent in a district that isn’t on the radar with political pundits.
NASHVILLE – Congressional candidate Jeff Hartline of Mount Juliet is raising record contributions for his campaign to unseat incumbent Congressman Jim Cooper. First quarter financial disclosures filed with the Federal Election Commission show that, of the several candidates for the Fifth District Republican nomination, only Hartline raised
significant sums of money from individual contributors.
Hartline raised almost $45,000 during the first quarter – more than any Republican has ever raised to run against Cooper in the 5th district – with all of his contributions coming from individual donors. None came from political action committees and none came from Hartline’s personal funds. Hartline is the only candidate for the Republican nomination who raised a significant amount of money from individual donors.
In addition to his money raising fetes with individual donors, Mr. Hartline has Nashville business owners pledging $500,000+ to his campaign. In politics, November is a lifetime away but one believes Hartline has what it takes to send the message to the beltway that Washington, D.C. works for us, not the other way around.
E Pluribus Unum once predicted an 80 seat pickup for Congress. Given the anti-incumbent sentiment in the country with a deaf Congress that passes massive spending bills under the guise of reform and against the will of the people, it is possible that districts once considered safe are endangered. WV’s Alan Mollohan, a 28 year incumbent was defeated in primary, as was Arlen Specter and other incumbents such as Barbara Boxer find themselves in tough primary fights.
It’s time for some unexpected upsets. There are sites focusing on some crucial races including RedState and 73wire. Let’s not forget those districts that aren’t being considered in the push for conservative candidates. Cooper is entrenched and has a long political career with district hopping representing TN-04 from 1982-1994 before moving to Nashville and becoming a Congressional Representative once again since 2002.
Hartline is conservative. He is also a man after my own heart with his love and faith in the people of Tennessee. I don’t believe we can ask for a better representative for Tennessee’s 5th district.
He deserves our support and TN-05 deserves better than Cooper. Check him out and donate if you feel so inclined.
Crossposted to Redstate
Apparently, the President of the United States is afraid of him. While the “I won” comment is making its rounds across the blogosphere to the rest of the world, there was more than that to the story.
President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.
“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.
Has anyone pointed out to the President that Rush Limbaugh is a talk show host? To have the most powerful man in the nation afraid of him might make some people feel pretty good but I have a feeling that Rush will find it hilariously immature.
Did I mention Limbaugh’s a talk show host? It’s his job to do what he does. That’s what he gets paid to do. If people are listening to him, it must be because he has something to say worth listening to. Perhaps if the President were less concerned with trashing the dignity of the office to which he were elected and listened to some Rush himself, he wouldn’t be using such immature comments in strong-arm Chicago-thug style tactics to get his way.
Did I mention Rush Limbaugh is a talk show host? I’m sure I have. Aside from the fact that he’s usually right and revels in being right, he’s paid really to entertain us, which he does admirably. The humor makes the bitter pill of reality goes down easier.
Kind of reminds me of that line in “Indpendence Day” when Connie was reading the papers with bad press against the President, played by Bill Pullman, when she read, “… needed a warrior but elected a boy.” The similarity ends there, however, because we have elected a boy, whereas Pullman showed the right stuff, via acting, when it was necessary.
One hopes that the boy matures quickly or it’s going to be a very rough four years. He needs to start with refreshing his memory on the actual meaning of bipartisanship. Such would not include descriptors indicating fear of a TALK SHOW HOST or the words, “I won.” Bipartisanship would include reasoned and respectful debate on differences to reach a compromise, something the Democrats never gave Bush for his entire eight years but expect as their due because “they won.”
Sore losers, poorer winners. Indeed, it seems as if the Democrats in majority are bent on retribution and vengeance for their previous losses than working for the good of the nation. Okay, if that’s the way they want to use their power, that’s what they can do, but any Republican with an ounce of self-respect will not be on board with it. Don’t give them an out to blame Republicans for their failures. Make the Democrats own their legislation in every way.
From a comic strip came this great pearl of wisdom: “With great power comes great responsibility.” Comic… strip… Get it? It’s time the Democrats took responsibility for their agenda rather than finding willing scapegoats upon which to place the blame for failures.
Between comic strips and talk show hosts, one wonders how anyone is expected to take the Democrats seriously.
Yes, it’s a pun on a RedState blogger’s screen I.D. but it really fits. Pilgrim, himself/herself, took a segment of an old speech and changed but one word in it to say this:
If abortion is right, it ought to be extended; if not, it ought to be restricted — there is no middle ground. If it is right, we cannot justly object to its nationality — its universality; if it is wrong, they cannot justly insist upon its extension — its enlargement. All they ask we could readily grant, if we thought abortion right; all we ask they could as readily grant, if they thought it wrong. Their thinking it right, and our thinking it wrong, is the precise fact upon which depends the whole controversy. Thinking it right, as they do, they are not to blame for desiring its full recognition as being right; but thinking it wrong, as we do, can we yield to them? Can we cast our votes with their view, and against our own? In view of our moral, social, and political responsibilities, can we do this? Wrong as we think abortion is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity arising from its actual presence in the nation.
Mr. Lincoln, stated thus about the issue of slavery in 1860. My reply to the entire missive that pilgrim wrote was that this one segment encapsulates conservative ideals because you can interchange any issue barring those of a federal nature such as national security and use the same argument over and over again.
The more we continue to look to the federal government as the cure to all ills, the less freedoms we have, as outlined in the Constitution.
Read the whole entry at RedState. It’s a very good one. This is the message that conservatives should carry first and foremost and why we need strict Constitutionalist judges. Were they all so, then California could enjoy its socialist state, as well as some others, and those states that reject such ideology could employ what they deem best without the fearsome fighting that is eroding the heartstone of the Constitution itself: individual liberty protected by a small central government with all other rights accorded to the individual states.
If necessary, perhaps it’s time to divorce conservatism from the Republican Party and carry the message to the people. With the state of current affairs, the relationship between conservatism and the Republican Party reminds me of a marriage wherein one spouse is forced to stay married to the other, in spite of the other’s chronic infidelities.