Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Quote of The Day: Romney or Obama?


It's Romney or Obama. Take your pick:
ABO.

At least Romney isn’t Obama and can be pressured into doing some of the right things. No hope for Barry, he’s rotten to the core.
As bad as Mitt Romney is, can anyone say that he'd be worse than Obama?


Update: I know conservatives are supposed to fall in line for Romney now that he's truly the inevitable nominee, but I cannot lie. To paraphrase a great leader, I'm not willing to light my pants on fire to try and get support for Mitt Romney. I am who I am...

As a conservative, I can't pretend to be keen on what Romney is selling.

This article is a few weeks old now, but I think it provides a timeless lesson on the folly of the rudderless, unpricipled "compromise" (and the rigidity and intolerance) of the standard moderate.


Update II: Another oldie but goodie: On conservative compromise, via Peggy Noonan, a yardstick metaphor...
Imagine that over at the 36-inch end you’ve got pure liberal thinking—more and larger government programs, a bigger government that costs more in the many ways that cost can be calculated. Over at the other end you’ve got conservative thinking—a government that is growing smaller and less demanding and is less expensive. You assume that when the two major parties are negotiating bills in Washington, they sort of lay down the yardstick and begin negotiations at the 18-inch line. Each party pulls in the direction it wants, and the dominant party moves the government a few inches in their direction.

But if you look at the past half century or so you have to think: How come even when Republicans are in charge, even when they’re dominant, government has always gotten larger and more expensive? It’s always grown! It’s as if something inexorable in our political reality—with those who think in liberal terms dominating the establishment, the media, the academy—has always tilted the starting point in negotiations away from 18 inches, and always toward liberalism, toward the 36-inch point.

Democrats on the Hill or in the White House try to pull it up to 30, Republicans try to pull it back to 25. A deal is struck at 28. Washington Republicans call it victory: “Hey, it coulda been 29!” But regular conservative-minded or Republican voters see yet another loss. They could live with 18. They’d like eight. Instead it’s 28.

For conservatives on the ground, it has often felt as if Democrats (and moderate Republicans) were always saying, “We should spend a trillion dollars,” and the Republican Party would respond, “No, too costly. How about $700 billion?” Conservatives on the ground are thinking, “How about nothing? How about we don’t spend more money but finally start cutting.”

No comments: