Is That Conservative Knees I Hear Buckling? Where's The Tea Party, Now?
by Larry Perrault on January 12, 2012 at 4:38 PM
I'm sure I'm not alone in being a little despondent about the progress of things. I wrote first that Romney wouldn't win because 3/4 of Republicans opposed him, most notably the Tea Party that gave Republicans an historic win in 2010. Remember them? Not much sound out of them, now. Anyway, I've been saying more recently that Romney wouldn't win UNLESS conservatives buckle. Alas, I'm afraid I see some knees sagging. Sarah Palin's still holding any fire and conceding that Romney MIGHT be the guy. Jim DeMint has said it's starting to look that way. Nikki Haley in SC was bought off awhile back. Conservative talk show hosts are starting to like him, though I think Rush is still steady, and I hear Levin has endorsed Santorum.
I still think if Palin and others were adamant that this is not satisfactory, it would be a sudden punch that would alter the trend. But maybe she doesn't want to crap in the party pool? I could deal with Romney if I thought he would be led by stronger conservatives in Washington and really follow a clear course out of the corrupt junkyard that has been created. But I don't think that Romney will do that. Not because he means the country harm, but because he doesn't have a clear framework of principle. I don't think a nominated Romney will win on his own merit, but if Obama LOSES and Romney becomes President, he will be the pragmatist that is his nature. For the sake of the country, Santorum, Gingrich and Perry need to consolidate as soon as possible. One of them can beat Romney. Three of them can’t.
America's situation will bring pressures that must be dealt with, and he will deal with them as the Europeans have so far: rocking the boat as little as possible, and kicking other problems down the road as FAR as possible. He will NOT change the long Washington trend that has brought us here, reforming taxes and entitlements, to BEGIN with. I wouldn't be surprised if he forswears that in the general campaign. He will not restore the engine of American innovation and production that has been stuffed into a cage. But many Republicans will be happy if we just WIN...at least for a few months. When I gave up on Republicans over a decade ago, before but predicting Bush's spending and government growth spree, I answered the priority of "winning," with this statement: "At some point you have to ask, 'Win WHAT?’” When Bush was elected, I wrote the next morning: "Leviathan gets a night manager," and it did. Spending and government grew at the fastest rate since LBJ in the 60s.
I hope we aren't there, again. But there's a difference. When Bush took office and during most of his term, the economy was relatively healthy and the debt was huge, but not out of sight. Today's debt payment is only perceptible through a telescope, Asset v. liability inequity on entitlements was nearing insolvency. Today, it's banging on the front door. Unemployment was reasonable. Today, many Americans are under or unemployed, and new commercial innovation is tied in regulatory knots. Banks are tight with money because productive investment plans can't be defined in today's environment. The US is broke and in impossible debt, but subsidizing other broke states.
How long can that go on and what could our creditors ultimately demand of us? Though he was/is a good man and a responsible administrator, I wasn't a big fan of George H.W. Bush's candidacy or presidency. But he did bring us a useful term to describe today's situation: "Deep doo-doo." So where are the conservatives? Where is the Tea Party. The establishment clearly has no use for the force that drove them to the biggest congressional victory in decades; they can't wait for them to come get THRM. If they want another bite of government, they'll have to TAKE it, like they did in 2010.