We're Not in Kansas Anymore

So you like Newt?  Or you hate Newt?  I remain ambivalent. At the moment, this is not what concerns me, no, not in the least.  I can see the writing on the wall.  As The Daily Caller launches hit-piece after hit-piece, including Sunday evening’s column by Ann Coulter, I see what’s going down.  One after the other, Republicans are being put up and knocked down, because to fall from the first rung of a ladder is of little consequence but perhaps a temporarily bruised backside, but to plummet from its top rung may land you in political rehab or worse.  Certainly, it’s clear to me that this systematic approach to eliminating opposition has been underway for some time.  It’s not that I was particular to Gingrich, or Cain, Perry, Bachmann or anybody else who fell from the top, as my own preferred candidate never entered the race, but it is the manner in which this is being done that seems so transparently dishonest to me.  The permanent political class may have their fix in, but it may yet backfire on them. There are many irregularities looming in the 2012 election cycle, and it promises to be quite unconventional indeed.  It may get even uglier.

It’s not that the candidates who have risen and fallen have been without their flaws, some decidedly worse than others,  but something about this just seems all wrong.  It’s as though we’re being guided step-by-step through every one of them, and just when they begin to show promise, they are clobbered by gaffes or scandals or something.  I have a feeling the next one to be put up for display will be Rick Santorum.  I already see signs moving in that direction.  After Santorum?  Huntsman?  Is there enough time?  You see, the only one who hasn’t been run up the flag-pole in this fashion so far, apart from those mentioned, is none other than Willard “Mitt” Romney.  If you’re like me, you look at that bit of information, and you take it to heart, because if any of them have been due an undressing on the basis of their record, who have been at or near the top for any substantial period of time, it would have to be the Mittster.  He seems to be following the notion of remaining steady, while avoiding “peaking early.”

Since it’s clear that whomever is driving this wagon-train has a batter grip on the reins than either you or I might have suspected, I have a suggestion for conservatives and Tea Party patriots, and you might want to think about this intently: If you’re tired of seeing your candidates go up in flames, and since time is running out, we’d better do one of two things, and do it fast:

  • We must choose one and coalesce behind that candidate with the best record and fewest warts, or:
  • We must find a new candidate, already vetted.

Otherwise, prepare the way for Mitt.   If you won’t choose one, a candidate will certainly be chosen for you.  The “inevitable candidate” will live up to that billing after all, and the permanent political class will have its man, and we can all join hands and watch Willard’s election night concession speech next November, an outcome I firmly believe will be just fine with the establishment that claims not to exist.  If that’s okay with you, I don’t suppose there’s a single thing we can do but accept it.  So many of us are already disheartened by many factors in this election cycle that one can almost see the layer of discontent building within the Tea Party and conservative base of the Republican party.

As all of this goes on, we also have the growing plot of Americans Elect.  I’ve told you about my concerns with this group before, and frankly, there is a new Salon.com article that confirms some of my earlier concerns, but also  magnifies them. It now turns out that they won’t be telling us who their contributors are, and to make that possible, they’ve changed the the organization in order to avoid those disclosures.  From Fred Wertheimer at HuffPo:

Americans Elect was registered as a federal political committee until last October, when it switched and claimed it was a “social welfare” organization under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code. The reason for the switch appears quite clear: to keep secret from the American people the donors supporting its political activities.

To be clear, I still don’t know what this means, except that I’ve been seeing their ads pop up more frequently around the Internet including DrudgeReport and TheBlaze among many others, but I don’t think any sane American should buy into an organization trying to elect a candidate to the Presidency that will not even disclose its contributors, and actively moves to change its legal form to avoid said disclosures.  Additionally, there are some apparent irregularities in its process, identified by the left-leaning but nevertheless thorough(at least in this case) Irregular Times.  Also from the Salon piece, they’ve set up a committee that can overrule what the on-line vote tells them anyway:

So they’ve reserved for themselves the power to overrule it,” says Rick Hasen, a professor at UC Irvine law school and author of a lengthy critique of the group.

Ladies and gentlemen, I smell rats – several of them.  I don’t know where this is all leading,  but I know this much: All of the ongoing machinations are intended to fool the American people, one way or the other, and whatever the particulars of the motives behind the scenes, you can bet that they are not benevolent.  You conservative and Tea Party folk had better figure it out fast, because I think your time is nearly up.  This process has led us on a wild goose chase in search of one non-Willard “Mitt” Romney after the other, all to leave us with…Willard?  Is that the deal? If you’re satisfied with that, so be it, but if not, whatever you may do, look not to Americans Elect until they’ve given full disclosure.  The four top candidates they’re tracking include Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Buddy Roemer, and Barack Obama.  If that doesn’t tell you something about the direction of that organization, nothing will.  Caution, my friends, extreme caution, but also, I believe, it is coming down to it.  Don’t be so quick to fight among yourselves that you’re divided and thereby easily conquered.  Don’t say things in haste to your fellow conservatives and Tea Party brethren that you damage your ability to fight side-by-side.  If you want to defeat Barack Obama, and stand any chance of restoring the country with a real conservative, it’s going to take all of you.  In just more than three weeks, we will have the Iowa caucus, and if you haven’t coalesced behind a candidate by then, or at least very shortly after, we’ll likely take what we’re given.  We’ll be stuck, again, but this time, “being stuck” may well mean: Obamacare forever.

Or worse.

Advertisements