LIFE IN THE ASYLUM
WHY IS THIS SO HARD?
Where is Ronald Reagan
when we need him? Why is his Eleventh Commandment such a hard concept to
remember and to follow?
[For readers who don’t recall the
Eleventh Commandment, see the picture.] But what did Reagan ever do that would
make it a good idea to emulate any of his concepts? How about this: from the
very founding of the Republican party in Abraham Lincoln’s day, there have been
only two back-to-back Republican presidential landslide victories. Want
to guess who holds the record? Stupid old Ronald Reagan (1980, 1984). What about Ike, you say?
Close, but no cigar.
But . . . but . . . 1984 was soo
long ago. How can we expect our younger, union teacher-educated Republicans to
know or remember such things? If only there was some kind of new technology (we
could call it “the internet”) where we could learn about such things. If we did
have access to such a wonder, we could discover that
“mainstream”, “establishment”, “moderate” Republicans did not want any part of
Ronald Reagan. They insisted in 1976 that Gerald Ford was the best candidate.
He, after all, was moderate, steady, and “electable”. Especially since, during
his partial term as the “accidental president,” he had given us “WIN Buttons”
and a lifetime Supreme Court seat for the awful John Paul Stevens. Ford went on
to stumble his way through a terrible campaign and gave us four horrible years
of Jimmy Carter.
Thank God the “establishment” Republicans
are always there when we need them. After we barely survived four years of
Carter, they tried very hard to give us either Ford again (believe it or not), or George H. W. Bush. Fortunately
Reagan won the nomination, but in their wisdom they named H. W. as Reagan’s
running mate, because H. W. was moderate, steady, and electable, which, of
course, Reagan was not.
After two landslide election
victories and two very successful presidential terms, Reagan was
Constitutionally limited and had to step down. The “establishment” nominated H.
W. to run for what only the totally clueless (including H. W.) did not realize
was Reagan’s third term. Bush did win, and went on to break his pledge not to
raise taxes, and to give a lifetime Supreme Court seat to the awful David Souter. After
four years the nation realized it had not gotten Ronald Reagan’s third term,
and in 1992 handed the White House to the libertine Bill Clinton.
This brings us to the real point of
this article: one of Clinton’s first political masterstrokes was naming his wife and a secret
committee to devise a secret national healthcare plan (Hillarycare) to be shoved down the throats of
unwilling Americans. Enter Newt Gingrich. Gingrich, a “bomb-throwing”
“backbencher,” devised the Contract with America and in 1994 astonished the
political world by engineering the Republican takeover of the House of
Representatives for the first time in forty years. Even Ronald Reagan had been unable to accomplish that. Under the
circumstances Hillarycare was never even brought to a vote.
Gingrich was elected Speaker of the
House and accomplished some notable things, including a very successful welfare reform, the
first balanced budget in thirty years,
and forcing Bill Clinton to state: “The era of big government
is over.” But thank God
the mainstream Republicans were still there when we
needed them. The 1996 presidential election loomed and we needed a moderate,
steady, and electable candidate. How about Bob Dole? After all, it was also his
turn. Dole, a decent person and wounded war veteran, muddled his way through a
losing campaign, later going on to make a number of memorable
erectile-dysfunction TV commercials.
Meanwhile Gingrich, surprisingly enough,
had made a lot of enemies among the moderate, steady, and electable people of
both parties. He resigned from the House before the 2000 election ushered in
two terms of the “compassionate conservative,” George W. Bush. Bush did some good things and some
very bad things as his eight
years ground by.
In 2008 there was no incumbent
candidate for president, but thank God we still had the services of the
“main-stream” Republicans. Once again we needed a moderate, steady, and
electable candidate, even better if it’s his turn. Enter the truly inept John
McCain. Has anyone started to see a pattern here? McCain, inexcusably, almost
literally gave
us President Obama. Obama has given us a nightmarish first term,
including lifetime Supreme Court seats to the awful “wise Latina” and the awful
Elena Kagan.
And here we are. Another
presidential election looms. At last we have learned our lesson. We need a
candidate that is moderate, steady, and electable, even better if it’s his
turn. The description answers itself: Mitt!
He’s rich, preppy, looks good on the cover of GQ, and really, really
wants to be president. What could go
wrong?
Mitt, you may recall, gave the
long-suffering people of Massachusetts the gift of Romneycare, a literal model for Obamacare. Has
he acknowledged any error over this? Not a bit. He bursts with paternal pride at this
“accomplishment”. The key difference, you understand, is that with Romneycare,
you won’t have to go to Washington to beg some bureaucrat for permission to see the doctor of your choice, you
will only have to
go to your state capitol.
Governor Mitt was also bursting
with pride in a press release dated December 7, 2005 (an ironic way to
commemorate Pearl Harbor) when he bragged: “Massachusetts is the first and only
state to set CO² emissions limits on power plants…the toughest in the
nation”; and that in enacting those regulations he had elicited input from
“experts” such as “John Holden” (sic – Holdren). That name may ring a bell -
John Holdren, a dangerous left-
wing lunatic, today holds the post of Obama
science czar. Click around on Google and take a look at some of Holdren’s
“expert” ideas. Has Mitt acknowledged any error over this? Not a bit.
Paul
Rahe summarizes Mitt well: “He is not an especially well-educated man. He
is the son of a businessman, and he is himself a business-school product.
He understands management; he believes in management; and he is ready, willing,
and able to manage our lives for us. Like many Republicans of similar
background, he has given next to no thought to first principles.”
For obvious reasons the likely Republican primary voters are
simply not enthralled with Mitt. Stupid people! Reenter Newt, who comes into
the primaries on a shoestring budget. He is not poor, but he is not rich in the
Mitt sense. He takes part in every one of the seemingly daily candidate
debates. And all he does during each of those debates is give by far the best
answers to every question put to him. When the questions can be answered he
answers with knowledge and erudition. When the question is ludicrous, [as many
are, e.g., tell us what you would do to fix the economy – you have 30 seconds]
he chides the questioner (as no other candidate does). When the premise of the
question is completely bogus [Have you stopped beating your wife?], he
challenges the premise, while other candidates try to fumble their way to an
answer.
Newt suggests (correctly) that we
need to get a runaway judiciary back within its constitutional bounds. Everyone
else freaks out: “Crazy!” “Dangerous!” Unfortunately, Newt (not a lawyer) has
read Article III of the Constitution and either the others have
not, or worse,
they don’t care what Article III says. Read it. It is barely one page long.
Newt says a runaway court like the Ninth Circuit could be abolished. Article
III says: “The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one
supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time
to time ordain and establish.” This
is what is known as the plain language of
the Constitution: Congress may establish a Ninth Circuit, and Congress may
disestablish the same Ninth Circuit.
The likely primary voters began to
notice the difference in the candidate’s debate performances. Seemingly out of
nowhere Newt’s numbers began to rise, and he became
a serious challenger,
perhaps even a likely winner over the Mitt. Once again, the nation turns its
lonely eyes to the “mainstream” Republicans. Newt must be stopped. What
Eleventh Commandment? This is war! We can’t count on the left to destroy Newt,
we have to do it ourselves. Mitt, Michelle, Rick, and the
why-won’t-he-just-go-away Ron Paul, get together in the Green Room with the
left-wing moderators for fully coordinated attack-Newt sessions. Attack Newt
videos and billboards spring up like mushrooms.
And here is, at least to this
writer, a real surprise: some of the most vitriolic attacks come from people
one may have thought were reliable conservatives. George Will. Charles
Krauthammer! Ann Coulter!! Mark Steyn!!! What is going on? Perhaps some of
these folks just aren’t who you thought they were. Mark Steyn relies on
anti-Newt statements from John Sununu. You may recall John Sununu as the
brilliant advisor who pushed H. W. Bush to break his no new taxes pledge,
costing him reelection, and to nominate the awful David Souter to the Supreme
Court. Mark, we love you, but John Sununu?!
Newt is not the perfect candidate. Ronald Reagan may not
have been the perfect candidate. In reality, there is no such thing as the
perfect candidate. The terrible failing of the United States in 2008 was that
53% of the voters were seduced into believing Obama was the perfect
candidate. Now we are running out of time. We have to take the best that is
available. There was a moment when Abraham Lincoln desperately needed a general
who would fight and could win battles. When he noted that Grant might have
those qualities, his advisers objected that Grant was reportedly a heavy
drinker. Lincoln replied [Pick one]: A)
“That man has too much baggage!” or B)
“Find out what he drinks; I want to send a barrel to each of my other
generals.” For us, this may well be one of
those moments.
MO ATTY
No comments:
Post a Comment