Romney, v. Gingrich: Are The "Smart" Republicans Missing Something, Or Am I?

This was a post I wrote to Senator DeMint:

I understand that you endorsed Mitt Romney in 2008. It is remarkable to me how so many smart established conservatives are clearly in his corner this year, pretty clearly because they think "he's our best chance to win." A) I don't believe that. I think they will make a hideous beast of him. But besides all that, B) I have to wonder whether these people are carefully considering just how...("deep" is just too weak a word – the numbers are astronomical) a hole we are in, with respect to our debt, entitlement liabilities, and inflated currency.  Are soaring prices only restrained by institutions holding those dollars out of general circulation? But C) I've watched the man closely, and putting aside his historical "pliability" on issues, apparently with respect to his audience, I just don't think he gets it.

Streamlining and capitalizing an existing organization are one thing. Cultivating the social terrain for the seeding and growth of new and innovative efforts is quite another. To paraphrase Bush in another context, I've looked into his eyes (including at a speech at our state's 2008 convention), and I just don't see a philosophical compass. Someone who looks at the situation we are in, and proposes no tax reform (not even rate cuts) and no entitlement reform, I don't regard as serious.

In 2008, he opposed The Fair Tax, which would have been a boon to individuals and aspiring entrepreneurs, eliminating all income and employment taxes. I think Romney’s clients and co-travelers much prefer the arcane system of tax loopholes and credits to the prospect of a sales tax on their planes and boats. I think it would be better if ALL commercial expenditures were undertaken for their genuine relevance to a business, rather than for purposes of luxury and/or tax advantages.

Here's what I fear most: that as president his actions would be so politically tentative, rather than bold and ably defended, that there will be little chance of averting the type of hardship that our situation portends. And as was the case with Bush and the spending and gentility as to broadcasting the dangers, when the troubles come, Republicans will catch the blame. Boy, I can hardly wait. I'm still praying that Gingrich, with his clarity and communication facility, will recover and be able to capture the nomination. I would only feel bad for Romney because it seems to me that personally scaling the Mt. Everest of attaining the presidency is more important than saving the nation from its folly and mental ambiguity.

Comments

Make sure to check out the comments on Facebook.

I agree with you that you are not one of  the smart Republicans-my only issue is trying to figure out who is. 

One of your main worries is our entitlement liabilities?  Which "entitlements" are you talking about?  And how are they a detriment to our economy?  In fact, all money that is spent on individuals in vulnerable financial situations is money that is healthy for the economy, as virtually all of that money gets spent on essential services and commodities, that keep the economy flowing. 

While almost the opposite happens on entitlements for the rich-where most of that money is spent on luxury goods which are generally not made in America, or on travel, or put into trust funds where large amounts of cash are held by way too few individuals.  Excess wealth (like your so called fair tax would create) doesn't produce job creation and a healthy economy, excess wealth causes laziness, it causes bottlenecks of cash, it causes money to flow out of our country and into overseas accounts.   While certainly Mitt Romney would encourage this type of wealth concentration, nothing that the self-serving Newt Gingrich would do would be any better. 

Romney is an intellectual pygmy in comparison to Gingrich. The author is absolutely correct: in these difficult times the whole nation  has to unite around Gingrich, the only one giant in modern politics, the only one who had great accomplishments in the 80-es and 90-es and not surprisingly, he is endorsed by Art Laffer, Ben Elliot, Michael Reagan and Rob McForlan. The titans of 80-es who won the Cold War, and created the economic boom and prosperity, are endorsing Newt, and modern political dwarfs are endorsing Mitt. I don't understand those people. Don't they see that Gingrich is a great modern American, who in accomplishments, ability to work across the isles, creativity, debating skills and sheer brain power is far superior to other candidates (including Romney and Obama) . Newt is already a historic figure for what he had accomplished in the past. If he is not the nominee, it will be a tragic mistake by Republicans. America needs him. In this particular moment in history - there is no one like him. Democrats understand it and slyly promote Romney's inevitability - knowing that Romney, if nominated, would be destroyed by Obama.
 

© 2015 TexasGOPVote  | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy