Thursday, February 23, 2012

You Know, Maybe This Mitt Fellow Can Win After All...

Jim Geraghty speaks with tongue firmly implanted within cheeks when discussing the 2011-2012 debating season, but his point is spot-on:

Romney is...pretty shameless about going after opponents’ inconsistencies and unpopular positions that he himself held earlier in his career – but the audaciousness of it tends to leave the opposition flustered and infuriated.

Last night, he jabbed at Santorum, “When I was fighting to save the Olympics, you were fighting to save the Bridge to Nowhere.” Really, after lines like that, people doubt Romney’s willingness to go after Obama? If nominated, Romney will probably lacerate Obama on the individual mandate, not cutting spending, insufficient support for drilling, demonizing the wealthy, and so on. Obama may coolly point out Romney’s past support for those positions . . . and I suspect Romney will just ignore it and point out that those positions are the wrong ones, and the American public opposes them. Would voters prefer the consistent man who stands for ideas they oppose? Or will they prefer a flip-flopper who currently holds the positions they support?

That's an interesting question, and I think we'll get our answer on the morning of November 7th.  But while many on the Right have complained  - justifiably - that Romney goes negative fast, hard, and often, I would like to remind them who our candidate will be running against in a few months.

Billion-dollar Barack, the biggest liar in the pack, with the media in his pocket and our freedoms on the docket.  Or if analogies suit you better...let's say one last epic battle will determine your freedom.  Who would you prefer wage that war:  Some crisply-pressed armchair soldiers spouting conventional wisdom and politically correct platitudes, or a hard man, unshaven, with a filthy uniform, holding a cold heart and a warm gun?

Mitt Motherf*cking Romney?  Hmmm...

Well, like him or not, Mitt has been campaigning to win.  Lots of us on the Right are miffed because he's defeating our guys.  But maybe he's the best man to send up against  theirs?

I realize Mitt is half a loaf, at best.  But we're in danger of dying here.  Are we really going to turn away what could be our last chance at survival because we're insulted by being anything less than being entirely satiated?

Let's go to war with the army we've got.... 

1 comment:

LibertyAtStake said...

... all of which is why we need the competitive primary to go down to the wire. Mittens still needs a lot of sparring work before he's ready to step into the ring for the main event.