Posted on 09/23/2011 9:11:14 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Chris Adamo
September 23, 2011
It would be a mistake to believe that the “mainstream” media and press are only interested in boosting ratings as they play up the contest between Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in their quest for the Republican presidential nomination. While increased viewership is a definite “plus,” their ultimate concern is the re-election of Barack Obama. And they have made it abundantly clear that Romney would be their preferred candidate in a general election race.
Romney’s political philosophy bears a far stronger resemblance to Arizona Senator John McCain than does the thinking or track record of Perry. And this portends two possibilities for a liberal advantage. First, if Romney were to win next November, his frequently vacillating past stances on major defining issues would pose far less of a threat to the ongoing liberal agenda than Perry’s blunt and intransigent opposition to ideas with which he disagrees. Secondly, the mere fact that Romney bears so much baggage in this department makes him a far less formidable candidate than Perry. But while the leftists clearly know this, their ostensibly objective mouthpieces are determined to paint a distorted picture for the American public.
So, with each passing day, another attempt is made to chip away a little more of Perry’s initial momentum. Eventually, his liberal opponents hope they can sufficiently undermine him and neutralize his campaign, thus leaving the frontrunner spot open to Romney. Unfortunately, the entire field of Republican candidates is essentially participating in this ploy, apparently unaware that the nomination is in all likelihood already settled on one of these two. The realities of last week’s Florida debate, which devolved into a free-for-all almost entirely directed at Perry, reflect a dangerous myopia among virtually all of the other contenders.
In truth, the long term damage may have been done to themselves and not their intended target. The actions of those candidates made them appear petty and even lacking in their own merit, and the orchestrated nature of the onslaught served to reveal their own weaknesses. Each of Perry’s antagonists focused on a particular flaw in his past record or governing philosophy. Yet on an individual basis they each just as stridently avoided certain controversial areas, thereby telling volumes about themselves.
Michele Bachmann relentlessly focused on Perry’s admittedly misbegotten effort to vaccinate young girls against the human papilloma virus (HPV). In the end however, her actions appeared excessive and gratuitous. How many times can one play “gotcha,” repeatedly directing the discussion back to a single action which Perry readily admits was a mistake? Clearly, her aim was not to alert the public of a looming danger, but to garner as much political advantage as possible from the situation.
In stark contrast, Bachmann was comparatively delicate around Perry’s “Ponzi scheme” characterization of Social Security. While taking a few pot shots, she avoided denigration of Perry’s strident descriptor, since Bachmann is herself regularly criticized for being overly provocative in her comments on key issues. Instead, she allowed that duty to fall to Romney, who was likewise careful not to direct too much attention towards the HPV controversy, since he well knows that a single overreaching executive order by the Texas Governor is far more easily forgivable than the methodical destruction of personal liberty represented by Romneycare, and the Pandora’s box it helped to open, Obamacare.
Significantly, Bachmann was joined by former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, who likewise decried the excessive nature of Perry’s HPV vaccination debacle. Yet Santorum never approached the often repeated criticism of Perry for having supported the presidential candidacy of Al Gore two decades ago. Santorum would certainly not want the topic of past political alliances to go full circle, which would inevitably evoke discussions of his own support for the infamous Pennsylvania Senate RINO (since turned Democrat…officially) Arlen Specter.
From the onset of the debate, it was clear that the object of the entire production was not to learn what beliefs the Republican candidates upheld, or how their guiding principles might play out if one of them were to win the election next fall. Instead, the whole focus was how to cut into Perry’s current lead. And any lingering doubts that this might be the case were thoroughly dispelled in the ensuing days since the debate, with one “news story” after another trumpeting a possible dissipation of Perry’s momentum, only occasionally peppered with grudging concessions of the significant lead he nonetheless retains. In the same vein, polls showing that Romney might be gaining on him are jubilantly and prominently reported.
Unfortunately for the Republican contenders and America in general, the net result of the debate was to make Perry’s detractors look small. Their willingness to resort to the standard liberal media tactics and double standards shows an ominous alignment with current-day “ruling class” thinking from inside the Beltway that is fundamentally at odds with Heartland America. In the process, they undermined and trivialized the entire conservative groundswell of the past two years, which is an enormous price to pay for the possibility of merely getting “one up” on Perry.
America has already reaped the grim results of a presidential election decided with no more regard for its consequences than an episode of American Idol. It would be a crying shame for the Republicans to respond by making their determination of a nominee in a manner reflective of the reality show “Survivor.”
Admittedly, this chain of events could redound to Romney’s benefit, at least in the short term. Having gained five points against Perry according to some polls, the Massachusetts Governor presents by far the most likely candidate to be frontrunner in the event that Perry’s popularity dissipates. And this would suit the political establishment and their media minions just fine.
A Perry presidency constitutes an opportunity to fundamentally steer America back from the abyss of socialism and cultural collapse. At best, Mitt Romney in the White House would represent a “time out,” after which liberalism could pick up its agenda slightly delayed, but ultimately unabated. Leftists would caterwaul in either case, but they know that, in the long run, they could far more easily recuperate from the latter.
The end game will be next November’s showdown with Obama. The time to start considering that eventuality is now.
---
Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming. He has been involved in politics at the local and state level for many years. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com
*
LBJ Perry & Romney are RINOs. Rick Santorum is 10x better than both of them.
That would be because she agrees with him on that point, as do most of the other people in the race, as does anyone who is paying attention. It mystifies me that Romney bothers to dispute the indisputable.
Perry is not my favorite by any means, he doesn't make my list of "favorite four" in the race. But he is saying out loud what everyone knows and Romney makes a fool of himself every time he disputes it.
Perry for President? Why? He was horrifying the last debate. So not ready for prime time. Let him get some more experience because 10 years as Texas governor which is a weak position compared to other governors in the country. He would lose to Obama for real. I probably would not have made that statement before Thursday but he is trash.....giving bennies to illegals and telling us that we are racists if we don’t want too.....RIDICULOUS. You should be ashamed.
I don’t think I would want my SS money in the stock market after this week. My investments are down hugely and if we have ALL our eggs in one basket and the basket breaks than what?
You can always tell the people who live in gated communities.
Sarah Palin is the game changer.
I guess Adamo wrote this before the Orlando debate and Perry's "Pay-for-illegals'-university-tuition" plan.
Rick Santorum is far too busy campaigning for Arlen Spectre to be POTUS. Everyone remember ole Arlen, the one who swapped sides and made Obamacare possible?
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
His chance of becoming President is slightly better than yours.
Who applied heavy pressure to Santorum to support Specter? Karl Rove and Bush aka LBJ 2 and Perry is LBJ 3.
Santorum was the best one on the stage the other night. Herman Cain worked at The Fed - no thanks. Screw the Fed.
I'm not bashing Rick. I actually have had the pleasure of meeting him on numerous occasions, and I really like him.
If he is ever perceived as being a legitimate threat to Romney though, the establishment will rally around and destroy him just as they destroyed Perry. They are determined to run Mr. Moderate whatever the consequences.
Who applied HEAVY pressure to Santorum to support Spoecter? Karl ROve and GW Bush. The Rove and Bush who pushed amneesty like Perry will.
Willard can go to h*ll.
Boring, more like a rino race.
I'm sticking with NASCAR.
Nah, this isn’t a website interested in a sure thing like a record on JOBS when you can stalk for Romney. Nah. You are in direct opposition to those who can’t bear to hear a candidate say what everyone knows is true. Why are you trying to convince this base of Neanderthal thinking, and pipe dreams for what coulda’, shoulda’, mighta’ been, to go for a JOBS man dragging around TEXAS as EXHIBIT A?
“and Romney makes a fool of himself every time he disputes it. “
This is an example of why I don’t like Romney. He is speaking conventional wisdom because it is expedient, not because he believes it or it is true. He is like McCain alining with global warming.
Can’t we get a real leader? Someone who stand up for the changes that we need in this country and to hell with the PC garbage and lies of the left.
Previously admired Senator Rick Santorum, he had a splendid conservative voting record. Until Santorum stabbed conservatives in the back during the 2004 campaign cycle.
We were busy working towards kicking a slimy RINO Senator to the curb. Santorum could have remained neutral in the GOP primary race. But he didn't. Santorum chose cronyism over principal when conservatism really mattered, given the post-election GWB victory judicial appointment possibilities.
So I, and many other conservative GOP activists did not forget. The knife wound was still fresh in our backs.
Help Rick when he was up for reelection? NOT! An elephant never forgets, at least that's my belief why the GOP chose that icon.
Perhaps elephant memory explains why Citizen Santorum is not campaigning for President from a US Senate seat. I wish Santorum well, but he's on his own.
We can do better.
Representative Bachmann shot herself in the foot by hiring Ed Rollins. Choosing key campaign staff is as important of a governing characteristic indicator as, perhaps choosing future Supreme Court candidates.
Myth Romney and Ricardo Perry ain't cutting it either.
Yeah, I'd vote for any of them over 0bama.
Cheers,
OLA
How do you figure that? He is rock solid on abortion. No doubt. But we are already winning on that issue - more every year. Unrestrained illegal immigration however is an existential issue for America. It will DESTROY us. And Rick Perry is hopelessly ignorant about it. Even border security, which he lords over the other candidates (Santorum comes to mind) as if he and he alone is qualified to speak on it - despite the fact that his pronouncements on the border fence is dead wrong. In the debate he ridiculed a fence: "you say you are going to build a wall, a fence for 1,200 miles, and then go 800 miles more to Tijuana, does not make sense. You put the boots on the ground." UTTER NONSENSE. The wall is already built in S. California and the Yuma Sector of AZ, and it WORKS. That is precisely why smugglers and shifted to Pima and Pinal County, AZ and Texas, and the coastlines via boats...because the fence in place has massively reduced crossing in those areas. I have visted 15 border regions and filmed at each one for Stand With Arizona. I have interviewed agents there. Rick Perry is dead wrong about the border. I don't care that he is TX Governor. He is wrong on illegals, tuition, La Raza, and race-baiting the issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.