IS MITT ROMNEY'S FAILURE TO ATTRACT THE MOST CONSERVATIVE PART OF THE GOP ALL THAT BAD?
I say no! Sure, they'd rather have the more extreme conservatives, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Both of these men are far enough to the right to please the Tea Party and Christian Coalition and everyone else on the socially conservative right of the GOP. They are also far enough right to turn off many of the moderate voters who either win--or lose--elections for candidates. Neither of them have the leadership credentials of Romney either.
Conservatives who have withheld their support from Romney need to ask themselves this question:
--Who would you rather have in the White House? Mitt Romney or Barack Obama?
I believe Mitt Romney is smart enough to choose a conservative VP (I like Marco Rubio, but Rand Paul rumors are out there too, and there are others.) Romney is also smart enough to give plenty of influence to the more conservative wing of the party--especially if it can hold or grow its influence in Congress. Let's unify the GOP behind the candidate who has the best chance of beating Obama and the man who has the strongest leadership experience and credentials, and get ready to do battle with Barack Obama.
A LUKEWARM RECOVERY IS UNDERWAY--BUT HOLD OFF THE CELEBRATIONS FOR NOW--JUST HOPE NOTHING DERAILS IT
True unemployment--not the bogus numbers published by the BLS--is still enormous and crippling to millions of Americans. Part of the natural response to several years of very weak growth and an outpouring of Federal "giveaways" (2% Payroll tax reductions, and endless unemployment benefits), combined with the natural capability of American business to compete is--voila' a recovery of sorts. However, this is a fragile recovery, threatened by $4-5/gallon gas thanks to Obama's "Fantasy Land" Energy policies, and the looming Iranian nuclear situation, to which no one has a good solution.
(The best example of media's sheer lunacy was when "debate moderators" asked candidates to explain how they'd deal with the threat of Iran/Nukes/Israel's position in 60 seconds. Are you kidding me?)
Good news: IF growth can creep up to 3% the US economic decline will stop. It will take more than 3% growth to "rebound," but after 3 years of Obama's failures, even a lousy growth rate looks good. Ironic, isn't it? If you are bad enough, you can make poor results feel like an improvement. Interest rates are still being held unnaturally low, and sooner or later, that has to stop. The question is when.
A CONUNDRUM: NO EASY WAY OUT OF THE DEFICIT/BIG GOVERNMENT MESS
No matter who is president, and what Congress does, there is a terrible dilemma. If government spending is cut hard enough to start bringing down the deficit--which is what needs to happen--it can also crash the economy back into no growth, and perhaps near-recession condition. Why? Because all the government money also feeds into private sector jobs, and states are already cutting jobs trying to solve their own budget problems. Combined, this could easily turn a 3% growth rate into a 0.3% rate. Housing is not going to come back anytime soon either. Thus that problem continues to impact employment, investment, lending and real people all over America.
The best approach is to not slam the brakes on spending but to keep tapping the brakes (like when you are on ice, and don't have anti-lock brakes) to slow down spending. Most important: selectivity on which places to cut, what to cut, and understanding the ripple effects. The means it takes a skilled, experienced executive at the helm. (You know who--and his initials are not BHO.)
WE LIVE IN STRANGE AND CONCERNING TIMES
Candidates from the party that doesn't occupy the presidency must be so preoccupied with pointing out each others failings, that how they'd solve the immense problems IF elected is only occasionally covered in any detail. Worst of all, they are providing ammunition for the incumbent president who is--depending on whose opinion you agree with "the second coming, and the best president in years", or the "most ridiculous, and ineffective charlatan and the worst president in years." I think you know where I stand on that one, and what I am most concerned about is that the candidates free-for-all to be nominated my assure that whoever "wins" the nomination is in danger of losing the election.
After the large undecided group of Americans listen to the mainstream liberal media trumpeting the worst of the GOP primary campaign slurs, will they decide that Barack Obama isn't so bad after all? I hope not--but I am concerned. Ironically, all of this so-called "weak field of candidates" (a name coined by the opposition's liberal media friends) is better qualified to be president than the narcissistic, inexperienced, pretender that was elected in 2008. However, when his mistakes and missteps are covered up by the mainstream media--or worse yet--justified for the most outrageous of reasons…keep reading and watch the video clip.
MEDIA DOUBLE STANDARD IS ALIVE AND PERVASIVE
GOP CANDIDATE GAFFES AND EXCESSIVE STATEMENTS
The great joy of the liberal mainstream media is to point out statements by GOP hopefuls that indicate how inadequate they are compared to "The Chosen One" that they got elected in 2008. The liberal media has this amazing double standard.
--If one of the GOP candidates, say Rick Santorum said he had visited all 57 states and just had one to go, he'd be crucified for that mistake. But that was Obama's gaffe in 2008.
--If Newt Gingrich claimed that his election would be the moment when "The rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal," he'd be vilified as a delusional fool--but that was Barack Obama's claim as he defined the importance of his victory.
--And if Mitt Romney commented "Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?" His rich guy persona would be blasted into a headline event, but once again, that was what Obama observed about how tough times were.
--Then there was the massive widespread criticism of George Bush when gas prices shot up to $4 per gallon, citing his failed policy, personal shortcomings, and so forth. Now gas is again at $4/gal., and the liberal media has gone stone silent about any responsibility for it on Barack Obama's part. Of course his bans on all forms of exploration and drilling while wasting hundreds of millions on failed green energy projects never gets associated with "failed energy policies" in the media (except, or course, on Fox News and in the WSJ)
I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO RANTS...
THE AMAZING OBAMA BUDGET--WAS THE WSJ EDITORIAL HEADLINE
I certainly agree. Obama's latest budget is outrageous. It is irresponsible. It is deceptive and misleading too. Worst of all, it continues his managerial failure of throwing money at his pet projects and penalizing American taxpayers. Obama supporters still insist on blaming George W. Bush for this flagrant spending spree, instead of the real culprits--Barack Obama and the Democratic Congressional leaders form 2007 to date. Just look at these two charts, compare the years and tell me who was president when the "train went off the tracks."
JOHN MAULDIN SAYS IT CORRECTLY:
In his newsletter of Feb. 11 (mailto:[email protected]) Mauldin says a lot of very insightul things, the most concise of which is: "This election is ultimately about dealing (or not dealing) with the deficit, and putting the country on a path to a sustainable budget deficit, one that is less than the growth rate of the country." He goes on to point out that the bond markets will ultimately lose faith in a country that cannot get its financial house in order, and essentially force a massive restructuring (ala Greece, et. al.) to resolve that issue.
IF Barack Obama wins reelection, two things are certain: 1) He can no longer blame Bush for his mess; 2) He will face the worst financial crisis in US history before he can escape at the end of his second term. Of course knowing how Obama works, he will find someone else to blame for his mistakes--probably the Republicans in Congress.
THE TIME IS HERE FOR CHOOSING, AND MAKING BIG DECISIONS--THEN FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THEM
Remember: "Postponed perfection is the enemy of planned progress." Get elected first, then govern.
Best, JOHN
**********************
NEW BOOK COMING SOON:
HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency, co-authored with D. M. Lukas, available March 2012 in paperback & Kindle editions at www.amazon.com
GO SEE NEW WEB SITE: http://www.hopeisnotastrategybook.com
Author of the Award Winner: THE COMPLEXITY CRISIS, and the exciting novel: THE CHINESE CONSPIRACY. Come see my blog posts on Forbes.com
John L. Mariotti, President & CEO, The Enterprise Group, http://www.mariotti.net, http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/
Comments