You read the headline correctly: I staking my little spot in the Right-O-Sphere and endorsing Mitt Romney. Why? Let’s consider something that Jonah Goldberg wrote today that resonated with me
…Romney has his faults, but his 2 percent milk personality makes him hard to demonize. He seems more like a super-helpful manager at a rental car company than a fire-and-brimstone preacher. The White House would dearly love the opportunity to run against a culture warrior. It seems many in the media would like the same thing. Hence the absurd grilling of the candidates in Saturday night’s ABC-Yahoo-WMUR-TV debate.
Romney was at his best swatting away the swarm of inanities at the debate — birth control is “working just fine.” He’s weakest, however, when discussing himself. In this he is the anti-Obama. The president is never more eloquent and heartfelt than when he is talking about himself; it’s his ideas he can’t move.
Romney, meanwhile, has the opposite problem. Voters can buy his policies; it’s the salesman that leaves them unsure. For instance, in the Sunday Meet the Press debate, Romney suggested that he didn’t run for re-election as governor of Massachusetts because to do so would be vain or selfish somehow. “That would be about me.”
I’m tired of cult-like adoration of politicians. I’m tired of politicians that think they are the best thing since the invention of the thong bikini. Now, certainly, Mitt surely has aspirations, and must have an ego to run for POTUS. Pretty much the only guy who didn’t want to be president was George Washington, who saw it as an unwanted duty. But, I’m tired of all the drama. This country doesn’t need drama in leadership, it needs competence. Super helpful manager Mitt Romney is that guy.
Now, I’d love to throw my support behind Jon Huntsman, who is the best conservative in the race. Personally, I can understand why he worked for Obama as ambassador to China. But, he won’t explain it to the people. Furthermore, while I could care less if a person is a Warmist (believer in anthropogenic global warming), I do care if they want to impose those beliefs on me through legislation and regulation. Huntsman will be out of the race by the end of January.
Newt Gingrich is a massive flip-flopper, beyond normal politicians. He really doesn’t understand the private sector. Nothing he has said or done makes me think he isn’t a Warmist who wants to impose legislation/regulation to “solve” the issue. Consider that he was about to have a chapter in his forthcoming book about AGW, written be a massive Warmist. He would be good on foreign policy, but, it comes down to 4 words for me: “I don’t trust him.”
Rick Santorum? Too much of a social issues guy, and, I just don’t think he is electable.
Ron Paul? Yeah, he has some good domestic policy ideas, but, he would never get them passed. Congress, whether GOP or Democrat controlled, would tune him out. And, he is completely unelectable. His foreign policy is dangerous, and he would spend most of his time explaining his newsletters, Trutherism, etc and so on during any general election. I don’t trust him, either.
When it comes to Mitt, I trust him. Yes, he is a Republican squish. He has some great points and some bad points. The guy is not out there attempting to build a cult, like Ron Paul, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama: he’s out there attempting to create a situation which would drag America out of the same river that ends in the same falls that Italy and Greece have gone over. The same falls that much of Europe is heading towards. Mitt doesn’t want to go there. Yes, some of his economic policies might be painful, but, I trust, as much as one can trust a politician, that Mitt means what he says.
As far as meaning what he says, I like that he won’t back down from RomneyCare. He owns up to it, but I trust him when he says he wants ObamaCare repealed and no mandates and Big Government solutions at the federal level, but, if a state wants to do it, that’s their prerogative.
I trust him on globull warming. Is he still a Warmist? Perhaps. But, he says he will not implement any legislation nor regulation to “solve” the issue. Frankly, people can change their minds about their beliefs with more facts. I did.
He also believes in real environmental issues, but finds a way to match prosperity with safeguarding the environment.
On foreign policy, he seems to be tough where necessary, and would bring stability in our dealings with other countries.
On illegal immigration, yeah, I’m not convinced. Yet.
Romney mostly stays away from attempting to divide people.
Mitt’s number 1 focus is on jobs and the economy. That’s what this election is about. And, again, I trust him. He has lots and lots of deep plans. Real world plans.
I don’t want a guy who wants to be president as a notch on his belt, but someone who will calmly go about being a competent manager, making decisions, some of them tough, that are in the best interest of the country, rather than how cool it makes him look. Would he be perfect? No. Bush seemed to be the same way, but, I think we can agree that Bush could get rather squishy on many domestic issues. Romney is not the perfect conservative. But, he would make a great president, one without all the drama, who would simply Get Things Done.