Approximately half a year ago, I wrote this bit about the people who the media expected to run in 2012 for the Presidency of the United States and while many of my opinions have not changed and many of my predictions proved true, this topic needs re-visited, specifically, because of the media.
The mainstream news media would like nothing more than to pick the next Republican candidate who will contend with President Barack Obama in the 2012 Presidential elections. After all, the media get to report on who won debates, decide who is likeable and who is not, along with being able to question and scrutinize the experience and qualifications of any candidate presented to the American public.
While the mainstream media would have us believe that President Barack Obama is victim of a bad economy and Republican attacks, it is his incessant attacks on capitalism and refusal to reign in Federal spending that is making him vulnerable.
Federal Departments, directly under his control, involved in scandals such as: gun running, refusing to deport illegals, insider trading, contempt of court charges, and the unaddressed problems associated with the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act are making him vulnerable.
His questionable foreign policies and inability to distinguish friend from foe, his antisemitic attitude and remarks while accusing others of racism, his endorsement of the Occupy movement and class warfare are making him vulnerable.
Unfortunately, for Democrats, President Barack Obama has become a referendum for their Party and many Democratic lawmakers, who are nothing like this man, are paying a heavy price during State and Local elections, making them vulnerable as well.
Despite evidence of foul play by the Obama Administration, most disturbing is the mainstream media’s lack of scrutiny and investigation into this President. But, perhaps, even more appalling and disturbing is Congress’ willingness to abandon the check and balance system by allowing him to get away with bypassing them.
Sarah Palin was openly ridiculed by the media for every political gaffe she made and spent the better part of three years under intense media scrutiny. The media violated her privacy, portrayed her words as calls for violence, and dragged her children through the mud because they thought that she would run for the Presidency in 2012. But as I indicated [in part 1 of this article], Sarah Palin is doing what she has always done, she is recruiting and rallying the conservative base of the Republican Party. Her interests in pursuing the Presidency ceased when certain conservative candidates officially declared their candidacies and once she officially announced she was out of the race, much of the media abandoned their relentless onslaught.
The reason many conservatives identify with Sarah Palin is because she stands in the face of extreme adversity and voices her opinion about the political corruption within Washington D.C. as well as the news media. As a result, much of the mainstream news media, along with many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, exposed themselves by viciously attacking her in a personal way that went beyond the scope of normal politics or news coverage.
Now, these politically biased news media outlets wonder why their ratings have dropped and no one is watching, Republicans wonder why their incumbents are increasingly losing to TEA Party chosen candidates, and Democrats are wondering why their base is no longer energized.
The answer is simple, most Americans, regardless of political affiliation, are sick of the slimy political games of Washington D.C. and what happened to Sarah Palin (like her or not) revealed, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that most of the mainstream media outlets are a sick part of the slimy game.
Mitt Romney, a leftover from the 2008 Republican primary, is the obvious choice of the GOP establishment as well as the mainstream news media. Beginning the week he announced his candidacy for President, Mitt Romney has led the pack (so to speak) in fundraising and name recognition. He is a polished candidate who is well-known in the political field with the ability to debate and the experience to take the GOP leadership where it wants to go… to the center of the aisle.
Romney has changed many of his political stances on gay rights, abortion, stem cell research, fiscal conservatism, and government-run health care to appear post-partisan. But his views on man-made global warming, education, and permissiveness of social issues are anything but conservative.
Mitt has proven he is willing to do and say anything to push the Republican Party agenda to abandon its conservative base and principles for a more centrist position that, they think, will attract Democrat voters.
Democrats hate Republicans with a passion and no amount of bipartisanship will change that fact. They are the “problem solvers”, looking for crisis after crisis to solve and when they can not find one to solve, they will create it and blame it on Republicans. This country needs a truly conservative leader who can stand against the mainstream media assaults that we all know are coming, not some spit-shined, establishment elected, political figurehead whose actions, despite his rhetoric, do not display conservative values or principles.
Herman Cain, definitely, the most interesting person in this election because, despite his lack of any previous political experience, his name recognition and 9-9-9 tax plan have the support of grass-roots conservatives nationwide. He is bold and unafraid of the mainstream media, oftentimes, using their own class warfare tactics against them.
But now, Mr. Cain faces allegations of sexual misconduct by some, rather, shady characters who did not see fit to come forth until he leaped forward in the polls. Now, the accusations stink of scandal for both, the accusers and the accused. Herman claims he did nothing wrong but there is no proof to support or discredit his claims of innocence except the payoffs and gag orders.
If Mr. Cain is guilty of past sexual misconduct, he needs to discuss it honestly, stress that it happened over ten years ago, apologize to people involved and the people he lied to, and end or salvage his campaign. If he is innocent, he needs to send a clear message that his accusers are ‘gold-diggers’ who ain’t messin’ with no broke… (you get the point). Regardless, Herman Cain now faces the same media slander that has plagued Sarah Palin for the better part of three years and, if selected, he’d better be ready for a lot more.
Ron Paul, a hardcore conservative Libertarian whose message, since the 1980’s, has not changed a bit. He is all about smaller government, less Federal spending, abolishing taxes, and empowering the States. His stances on social issues are clear and concise but extremely disconcerting to Democrats, the mainstream media, and the GOP leadership.
Although Dr. Paul seems like the candidate of choice among conservatives, the Republican leadership have shunned him and branded him “unelectable” because they do not want a smaller government or to have their own funding removed. So they join in with the mainstream media and Democrats to make his “long-term goals” sound completely unreasonable and unattainable. But, the truth is, Dr. Paul has shown a pragmatic attitude toward his goals and has set the bar high because, if he doesn’t, conservatives have gained little to nothing upon achieving the goals of a smaller government.
Despite the claims of Ron Paul’s political and media detractors, he remains VERY electable. His aggressive grass-roots strategy combined with an intense internet campaign have raised the eyebrow of many conservatives, as well as independent swing voters, who tire of the same old “Democrat/Republican Party games”.
Personally, I have no doubt that Ron Paul, if elected President, would do a fine job representing the United States of America while, simultaneously, throwing a wrench in the machinery of Congress.
Debating the likes of Newt Gingrich is akin to debating a walking, talking, breathing encyclopedia. He has an intimate knowledge of the political process and a knack for recalling successful programs and policies at the drop of a dime. This, combined with Newt’s fiscal conservative background and sensible approach to Federal spending cuts are enough to give any opponent reason to pause.
Mr. Gingrich has been the target of both, the Democrats and mainstream media’s attack machines on both a personal and professional level. As Speaker of the House, during the Clinton administration, Gingrich went head to head with Bill Clinton over balancing the Federal budget. History shows that the Federal government shut down and Clinton agreed to Gingrich’s demands. Ironically, Clinton claims the budget surplus passed to the Bush administration was “all his doing”. Then came the Democrat induced ethics charges and the mainstream media generated scandals that followed, forcing Newt to resign in 1998, but not before balancing the Federal budget.
Mr. Gingrich’s short temper and unapologetic attitude toward the mainstream media are working in his favor and his clear stances on fiscal and social issues are, finally, beginning to outshine his “baggage”.
Texas Governor Rick Perry has a proven conservative voting record – on both a fiscal and social level, a State that is doing well under poor national economic conditions, and a strong political following.
Perry employed a ‘style’ over ‘substance’ technique to aggressively launch his campaign and his outspoken and confrontational approach to the debates quickly garnered him favor among Republicans. Now, that support is waning because of a gaffed during a debate and the high expectations he set upon his opponents have turned full circle to “bite him in the ass”. This is a classic political mistake that, oftentimes, makes a candidate’s rhetoric and expectation look hypocritical and insincere to the conservative voter.
Conservatives already understand what needs to occur and Rick Perry needs to get off his high horse and focus on debating plans of “practical implementation”. If not, the Perry campaign will continue to implode upon itself and all of his accomplishments, as governor of Texas, will have little bearing on his political aspirations for the Presidency.
Originally, Michele Bachmann launched an aggressive campaign by touting her fiscal and social conservative principles. She an extremely smart woman who is unembarrassed by her conservative social stances and she understands the realistic cost of government-funded programs.
However, Mrs. Bachmann has allowed the mainstream media to use her religious beliefs to portray her as a lunatic, she has allowed the same media to goad her into nitpicking at her opponents, and she has allowed her opponents to question her relevancy.
Again, conservatives already understand the issues that lie before them, they understand that spending cuts will hurt THEIR generation, not the current one, and they are looking for a candidate who has a plan of “practical implementation” to secure the future for the posterity of the country.
If Michele Bachmann wants to stay relevant in this race, she needs to gain control of her campaign and steer the discuss, and not follow the discussion.
The last two candidates that have bothered to show up during the Republican caucus debates are Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman.
Rick Santorum is… well… unknown and he has failed, thus far, to garner much political recognition or support from the conservative grass-roots or lobbyists.
Jon Huntsman is a self-proclaimed Republican centrist that is irrelevant to this Presidential primary because conservatives, on a grass-roots level, are looking to reclaim the Republican Party, not feed it more liberal philosophy.
Discounting the campaigns of Santorum and Huntsman, conservatives are left with six potential candidates to choose from: Romney, Cain, Paul, Gingrich, Perry, and Bachmann. Of these six candidates, five show fiscal and social conservative principles and only three of them have presented conservative plans and ways to carry them out in a practical and efficient manner: Herman Cain, Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich.
Quite honestly, I am tired of allowing the Republican Party and its lobbyists to dictate who is eligible, who is electable, who won a debate, and who can defeat Barack Obama in 2012. Conservatives, across America, are fed up with the GOP’s centrist attitude and their political pandering to liberal voters because these people, eventually, wind up betraying their conservative constituencies and introduce even more problems into an already broken system. In 2008, John McCain lost soundly to Barack Obama and it wasn’t because conservatives, suddenly, had a liberal epiphany. It was because conservatives either voted for Ron Paul or stayed home. In 2012, conservatives face the same dilemma with Mitt Romney. He has the backing of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and its lobbyists, all of whom are virtually ignoring and burying his history of “bad policy” and “left-leaning” tendencies.
As a political independent, who votes for people based on their conservative values and not party affiliation, I would be remiss to warn my fellow conservatives, as well as the RNC and its lobbyists, that unless they want to see a repeat of the 2008 elections and a complete fracturing of the Republican Party they had better listen up.
It is NOT GOOD ENOUGH to beat Democrats and Barack Obama in 2012.
This country is in trouble, both fiscally and socially. Its education system is now a costly indoctrination system, fed and funded by a centralized government structure. Its legal system, turned upside down and corrupted by political affiliations that should have no bearing on justice. Its economy, in tatters while government spending, on the frivolous, continues unchallenged. In the meanwhile, both Republican and Democrat lawmakers hype manufactured crisis after manufactured crisis so they can dodge the problems and pass them down to the next generation. Supporting this type of political leadership does NOTHING to credit conservative principles upon which the Republican Party was founded and I will be damned before I am cajoled into voting for the lesser of two evils!
Therefore, the RNC, along with its lobbyists, had better get it through their thick skulls that conservatives, such as myself, are on to their schemes and reject their endorsements of Mitt Romney in the same way they rejected the RNC’s endorsements of John McCain in 2012. They had better quit playing nice and get their collective acts together or the Republican Party WILL permanently fracture and conservatives WILL abandon Republicans in the same way they abandon us.