1. He is entirely correct that Romney would make a much better (not to mention less dangerous) POTUS than Obama II.
2. He is entirely correct that Romney would likely make a better POTUS than either Santorum or Gingrich, although they would either of them be an upgrade from Obama II.
3. He is correct that a Republican Congress will be hard pressed to restrain Obama II, and that Congress may even flip back Democratic in 2014.
Here's the problem: it's not Obama, it's Obama's world view. He's just particularly ruthless in pushing it aggressively. Obama isn't alone: he has the entire Intelligentsia on his side, the MSM, the European Elites, the international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). They're all in the same tribe, which believes that things should be run by them, with a strong, interventionist government in charge (run by them, 'natch), and with the peons givering deference where it's due (to them, 'natch).
Romney's in that tribe. So's Newt, and probably Santorum. And 60% of the Republican Party. Only Ron Paul explicitly rejects that world view.
Essentially, it's the Blue State model - although we need to recognize that all of Europe is deeper Blue than even Massachusetts. Here's the crisis: the Blue model is collapsing.
It's falling apart all over the world as the State finds that it's spent too much on the wrong things, and that buying off the proles to keep them in line has gone as far as it can. There has been massive deficit spending for a long time, and now whole chunks of the Progressive Edifice are simply starting to fall off - indeed, Greece will leave the Eurozone in a matter of months, declare a massive default on their government bonds (likely losing 80% of their nominal value), and return to the Drachma.
Of course, then there will be no more deficit spending (who on earth would buy their bonds?) and the Blue Paradigm will join the Aeropagus as obscure Greek history trivia. Greece, of course, will be joined by others in Europe, and the United States. What's the over/under on when Illinois defaults on their State bonds? California?
The problem with the GOP is that they have been junior members of the Blue tribe for the past quarter century. The crises of the next four years are crises of this Blue model:
- Social spending (entitlements) approaching 80% of government revenue.
- Trillion dollar a year deficits as far as the eye can see.
- Slow business investment due to massive uncertainties (tax policy and the strength of the financial markets will play a major role here).
So the question is, who is the best man for the job of POTUS, if our long term goals are (a) change this Blue world view to something sane) and then (b) fix entitlements before we join Greece?
I think that the answer is that we want Barack Obama to be in the Oval Office as the Blue Model comes crashing down.
You see, Romney will roll up his sleeves and try to fix things, but his fixes are likely to be at least a little sane, and so he'll get savaged by the Intelligentsia saying Paul Krugman sez we need a 3 Trillion dollar stimulus!!eleventy!
And so when the bottom inevitably falls out, Romney will take the blame, not Obama. And we'll go back for another round of Blue Model on steroids, because nobody will want to trim Social Security and everyone will be invested in stupid Romney screwed everything up.
If the O-Man is there another 4, they won't have this - particularly if he rules via regulation, not legislation (as is entirely likely).
And so, we have no chance to survive, until the Left decides that maybe this isn't such a good idea. If we're lucky, they'll figure this out as Europe and a couple States crater but the rest stagger on.
My view is that we are better off (long term) taking the massive hit that will be another Obama term, getting it over with, and then picking up the pieces of the collapsed Blue (Democrat and GOP) statist model. We need to make our time, or perhaps Zig for Great Justice.
Your mileage may vary, void where prohibited, do not remove tag under penalty of law.
Wow....you're depressing when you right. I kind of like the strategy though...let Romney lose so he goes away, and then in 4 more years, blame it all on Barry.
I just hope there are pieces to pick up in 4 more years.
I agree with greg. I've believed for a long time that the best way to reveal just how stupid rules are is to follow them to the letter, and I believe that's true of a government too. But there's a lot at stake here. It's going to be hard to pull that lever next to Obama.
Pessimist that I am, I have to wonder though - will letting Obama sink the ship convince We the People that the whole Leftist (Leftern?) philosophy is worthless, or will it just convince them to let somebody else try again with a few tweaks? Like Bullwinkle used to say in his magic act, "This time for sure!"
The gamble that I'm making is that we're stronger and more resilient than Europe, and that their collapse will be a wake up.
If Obama really can sink the ship, then it's far less seaworthy than I believe, and a Captain Romney won't do us any good.
You've said it before, but I didn't want to believe. I think you've finally convinced me ... I don't want it to be true, but alas, so it goes.
My view is that we are better off (long term) taking the massive hit that will be another Obama term, getting it over with, and then picking up the pieces of the collapsed Blue (Democrat and GOP) statist model.
Doesn't this assume the collapsed Blue model doesn't result in a tyrannical state that makes 1984 look like Pollyanna? The technologies that the fed.gov can (and has - in some cases) put in place are far beyond anything Orwell imagined.
The President has always had the power to surround the White House with tanks and declare martial law "for the duration of the crisis". That none have done it is a testimony to the character of the men and the love they've held for the constitution. Seen any of that lately?
Graybeard, I don't for a minute doubt whether he'd do it if he thought he could get away with it. But we saw the better part of a million people on the streets protesting a couple years back, and we have more than a couple Governors making serious 10th Amendment noises.
People won't stand for it, Governors won't stand for it, and that means National Guard opposition to any sort of thing like this.
Plus, I simply don't believe that the Military would do it. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so.
What you're advocating would essentially result in insurrection - on the part of the people or on the part of the military.
Either way, it would be uglier than "Romney did it."
How descriptive of our current situation!
Unfortunately, I've been thinking for a while now that the only way we're going to turn things around is to actually hit rock bottom and reverse course. Kind of like a drunk realizing that they've gone as low as they're willing to get, and it's time to get clean and sober. I don't think that we've hit that point yet, but we seem to be getting close. The only question is whether people will be able to stave off the feelings of hopelessness and actually stand up and start making a difference. Ah well, if I could tell the future I'd be able to win the lottery.
Borepatch while you assume the people would rise up has it not occurred to you that they know the day of reckoning will come and they have prepared for it. Why do you think they will be patrolling the skies of the USA with drones.
So, where do the drone controllers come from? It takes training to operate high-tech stuff, and I believe that most of our military will either step aside or actively join in whatever correction we end up with.
I doubt we could have a military dictatorship here, but we could have the military cleaning out DC until a replacement can be fashioned.
The problem I see is that we are not alone in the world. If we collapse, what are the Islamic states and China and everyone else that hates us going to be doing?
We are living in that old Chinese curse about interesting times.
BP you accuse the boys of being elitists; true or not - the older I get the idea that all men are created equal is no longer part of my world view.
The ruling elite has always been part of any human society; as has the filthy stinking underclass of peons. Every day in life I see men and women that can accomplish and build things and those that cannot or will not.
Is it not intellectually dishonest for libertarians to claim they can create a functional society and viable gov't without some kind of elite? Or am I misunderstanding you?
There's a difference between elitist and elite. There's also a difference between an elite who make their mark in the private sector creating value, and one who makes their mark in government telling everyone how to live their lives.
I'm entirely unimpressed with our governing "elites", at least over the course of the last 40 years or so. And the underclass quite frankly would be a whole better sight off without the "help" from their "betters".
Then again, my preference structure runs very strongly to "get offa my lawn".
you misundersestimate the left. there is no limit to which they will go. If they fail that only means they didn't try hard enough.
allow 4 more and you gain a country further left and further unmanageable. For that I would blame you.
This is what I think you're saying - a car is careening down a steep hill with a brick wall at the bottom. Obama is the guy who would be mashing on the accelerator thinking he can ignore the laws of physics. If you let Romney drive, he may not have enough sense to put his foot on the brake but he probably has enough sense to let off on the gas.
Which crash will be more spectacular? Remember, you're going to be riding with one of these guys. I can see maybe surviving if Romney is driving but all I see if Obama keeps driving is Rhodesia in the 70's or Bosnia in the 90's. I don't want to go there so I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Romney.
Borepatch did sayeth: "So the question is, who is the best man for the job of POTUS, if our long term goals are (a) change this Blue world view to something sane) and then (b) fix entitlements before we join Greece?"
Said individual has not even been identified yet, much less being actually involved in the nominating process. Of the actual candidates, the answer is "(D) None of the above".
and also sayeth: "And so, we have no chance to survive, until the Left decides that maybe this isn't such a good idea. If we're lucky, they'll figure this out as Europe and a couple States crater but the rest stagger on." (emphasis mine).
Snowball's. Chance. In. Hell. The Left is blinded by their intellectual self-righteousness. Ho Chih Minh advised the Khmer Rouge against a purge of professionals, as it would fail and plunge the nation into a 'dark age' -- their response was "They couldn't accomplish it, but we can -- we'll just do it harder". Until the Progressive Left is shunted is shunted aside politically by the equivalent of shunning by the populace, we're stuck with their destructive policies.
and he also sayeth: "My view is that we are better off (long term) taking the massive hit that will be another Obama term, getting it over with, and then picking up the pieces of the collapsed Blue (Democrat and GOP) statist model. We need to make our time, or perhaps Zig for Great Justice."
I'm starting to consider this view -- my concern is that what arises from those ashes will be a tyranny such that we long for the days of the Blue State.
Post a Comment