Romney’s woman problem: He needs a new message - The Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/romneys-woman-problem-he-needs-a-new-message/2012/04/09/gIQAe2Bv6S_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions ...."Women and independent voters have seen a party enthusiastically confirming its most damaging stereotypes. The composite Republican candidate — reflecting the party’s ideological mean — has been harsh on immigration, confrontational on social issues, simplistic in condemning government and silent on the struggles of the poor. How many women would find this profile appealing on eHarmony? This is the hidden curse of the Republican congressional triumph of 2010. Republican activists came to believe that purity is all that is necessary for victory. But a presidential candidate, it turns out, requires a broader ideological attraction than your average tea party House freshman. Republicans forget how they have recently won the presidency. In 2000, George W. Bush campaigned — in both the primaries and the general election — on increasing the quality of education for poor children, on humane immigration reform and on expanding care by faith-based organizations for the addicted and homeless. These issues were personally important to Bush. They also signaled to independents and women that he could think beyond normal ideological boundaries. This form of “compassionate conservatism” is now broadly reviled among conservatives. The need for an analogous agenda, whatever it is called, remains unchanged. To secure a decent shot at this election, Romney will need to offer some positive vision for the common good."....
RRD:Mr.Gerson,the only "positive" thing the government can,or has a right to do for the "common good"(a term lifted from Communists),is to PROTECT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
This is not "ideological",it is MORAL.
"Compassionate Conservatism" is a violation of Individual Rights.
The Government has no right to violate Individual Rights.Politicians have no right to promise to violate Individual Rights to bribe people with other people's money so as to win elections,they have no right to violate Individual Rights,AT ALL.
When I hear people (who support Romney) speak about how Obama is spending us into third world status,how "anyone would be better than Obama", I'm curious if they have given any thought to the fact that the Predident is the leader of his party,and that there is one power Obama doesn't have;he doesn't control the GOP.
He cannot turn the GOP into the Democratic Party-lite.
Romney can. But pay no attention to me,just keep repeating that ”Obama is worse”,& that once we get rid of him....we'll do what? Stage a primary challenge in 2016 when Romney is running against Hillary,or Pelosi,or Obama or whomever the Dems put forward? Obama is really not unique in the Democratic party.
Will we ”drag Romney to the right”?
How?
The only leverage the Conservatives have lies in their refusal to support him.
If we must "hold our nose",and support him,no matter how bad he is,because "we've got to beat Obama",what leverage will we have? But we will we stage a "teaparty takeover of the GOP"?
We cannot even keep the Republican "Leadership" from betraying us on the Debt-Ceiling. I have been hearing this mantra since I was a teen during George H.W.Bush's campaign against Clinton:
"Support the GOP now and fix it later"...
I heard this in 2004,and in 2006,and in 2008,and in 2010,just as I'm hearing it now,and we will be hearing it in 2016,and 2018,and 2032,and the reason is simple:pragmatism.
The Conservatives can't,or won't, see the forest from the trees.
While they are focused on beating a single person,in a single election,the Left is using the Republican's past support of the Individual Mandate,Cap and Trade,& "Judicial Restraint",& "Deference to Congress" etc,to sell their proposals,& to disarm their opponents. They laugh at our short-sightedness. Some quote Lenin when he says that the Capitalists are short sighted enough to sell us the rope that we will use to hang them. Obama's goal it to remake America,not to win elections. What better way to achieve that goal than to wipe the field of all principled opposition and make the Teaparty look like partisan hacks. And a Partisan Hack is what you will look like if you say that Obamacare is socialism,that it is a outrage against Individual Rights,that it is evil,that it is immoral,oh,and Romney is "not ideal", & "He's imperfect",& ”he's not the candidate I would prefer,but he's the candidate we have”...
If Obama had done nothing other than pass Obamacare would he be "imperfect"?,"Less than ideal",& ”not the candidate I would prefer,but he's the candidate we have”?
How do people intend to get Romney elected and perserve their credibility?
Will they acknowledge how bad Romney is?
If so they will preserve their credibility,but undercut their ability to "sell him",just as was the case with Mccain in 2008.
If not they will appear as hypocrites,and unlike Obama's hypocrisy the hypocrisy of Republicans will be repeatedly shown on TV. The ironic thing about pragmatism is that it is one of the most impractical belief systems on earth.
RRD:Mr.Gerson,the only "positive" thing the government can,or has a right to do for the "common good"(a term lifted from Communists),is to PROTECT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
This is not "ideological",it is MORAL.
"Compassionate Conservatism" is a violation of Individual Rights.
The Government has no right to violate Individual Rights.Politicians have no right to promise to violate Individual Rights to bribe people with other people's money so as to win elections,they have no right to violate Individual Rights,AT ALL.
When I hear people (who support Romney) speak about how Obama is spending us into third world status,how "anyone would be better than Obama", I'm curious if they have given any thought to the fact that the Predident is the leader of his party,and that there is one power Obama doesn't have;he doesn't control the GOP.
He cannot turn the GOP into the Democratic Party-lite.
Romney can. But pay no attention to me,just keep repeating that ”Obama is worse”,& that once we get rid of him....we'll do what? Stage a primary challenge in 2016 when Romney is running against Hillary,or Pelosi,or Obama or whomever the Dems put forward? Obama is really not unique in the Democratic party.
Will we ”drag Romney to the right”?
How?
The only leverage the Conservatives have lies in their refusal to support him.
If we must "hold our nose",and support him,no matter how bad he is,because "we've got to beat Obama",what leverage will we have? But we will we stage a "teaparty takeover of the GOP"?
We cannot even keep the Republican "Leadership" from betraying us on the Debt-Ceiling. I have been hearing this mantra since I was a teen during George H.W.Bush's campaign against Clinton:
"Support the GOP now and fix it later"...
I heard this in 2004,and in 2006,and in 2008,and in 2010,just as I'm hearing it now,and we will be hearing it in 2016,and 2018,and 2032,and the reason is simple:pragmatism.
The Conservatives can't,or won't, see the forest from the trees.
While they are focused on beating a single person,in a single election,the Left is using the Republican's past support of the Individual Mandate,Cap and Trade,& "Judicial Restraint",& "Deference to Congress" etc,to sell their proposals,& to disarm their opponents. They laugh at our short-sightedness. Some quote Lenin when he says that the Capitalists are short sighted enough to sell us the rope that we will use to hang them. Obama's goal it to remake America,not to win elections. What better way to achieve that goal than to wipe the field of all principled opposition and make the Teaparty look like partisan hacks. And a Partisan Hack is what you will look like if you say that Obamacare is socialism,that it is a outrage against Individual Rights,that it is evil,that it is immoral,oh,and Romney is "not ideal", & "He's imperfect",& ”he's not the candidate I would prefer,but he's the candidate we have”...
If Obama had done nothing other than pass Obamacare would he be "imperfect"?,"Less than ideal",& ”not the candidate I would prefer,but he's the candidate we have”?
How do people intend to get Romney elected and perserve their credibility?
Will they acknowledge how bad Romney is?
If so they will preserve their credibility,but undercut their ability to "sell him",just as was the case with Mccain in 2008.
If not they will appear as hypocrites,and unlike Obama's hypocrisy the hypocrisy of Republicans will be repeatedly shown on TV. The ironic thing about pragmatism is that it is one of the most impractical belief systems on earth.
No comments:
Post a Comment