Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Now is not the time to settle


Reflecting on Levin’s discussion last evening on Colin Powell’s latest comments regarding the moderate notion of compromise



...and in light of renewed attacks on one particularly threatening conservative candidate, in which socio-political humorist AlfonZo Rachel discusses the broader implications of Republicans these days in their lack of stamina to defend conservatives who are being attacked, instead opting to throw their own under the proverbial train…yes, the ruling class chuckles are audible from on high.

This gives one cause to really pause for a moment and assess what’s currently going on in the GOP, particularly in regards to a potential leader.

Within the current top tier, many conservatives are finding themselves willing to forgive & forget much of Gengrich's past errs due to his solid debate performances and perceived aptitude, in some sense, reminiscent of much of Romney’s base and the way he’s proceeded thoughout the race. And while there’s perhaps some merit to garner from such reluctant acceptance, something else is occurring among the conservative electorate.

Disheartening skepticism, pragmatism, 'settling', call it what you will, pervades conservative sensibilities in response to the flaws, gaffes, myths, associations, etc., of many of the truly 'conservative' candidates, who don't come off as polished or 'perfect', but are inarguably more genuine or authentic. This 'imperfection', if you will, has been seized upon and exploited beyond what could have been imagined by the trumped up, distorted and overblown coverage of the mainstream media, acutely atune of course to the ruling class status quo. It has left many conservative voters scratching their heads in doubt and just ready to say 'yeah, Newt's the option to Mitt', thus giving us 'this-establishment-or-that-establishment' choice. The Beltway elite, pundits and media alike, are doing just as they've aimed to do all the while: guide the electorate towards the most polished insider orators of the bunch, then say, 'we've given you options, now pick one!'

I've been thinking long and hard about it, and while my frustration in the process brews, I'm finding it to be most unsatisfactory and unacceptable. In all honesty, I'd much rather have a Bachmann, a Perry, a Cain, an imperfect, yet principled-driven conservative at the helm, over the timidity that's certain to come with an establishment candidate's shifting into a lower gear when heading towards the cliff...yet still careening towards that inevitable ledge. So what else is driving this settling sentiment?

Impatience is the order of the day. I think many conservatives believed that at this perceived late date, we'd have a clearly defined, concise, and defiantly conservative leader to emerge by now. The strong head of the pack, if you will, not a 25-percenter. Add that atop the many unabashed conservatives who did NOT enter the race, and I think the impatience, while premature, becomes a little more understandable. I didn't say agreeable, but understandable.  Then also add our statist-enabling Orwellian media and some of the ineptness of campaign staff, advisers and sure, even instances of the candidates themselves, and you've got desperation on top of impatience for far too many. This is what conservatives cannot allow to permeate.

Mistakes or mishandlings will occur, imperfections exist. I’m guilty of being tempted to allow the frustration to overcome my sensibilities, but sensible we must remain, and a renewed resolve is what we must attain. Else, the establishment wins by default, and America, not just the Republican Party yet again, is at risk of defeat. We mustn’t allow that to happen, for ourselves, for our future or that of generations to come.

Don't allow that settling sense to win out, and don't allow the commentators, no matter how conservative they claim to be to deter you from supporting and defending 'conservative' victory!

"Compromise, compromise. No, damn it! Victory, victory and victory!" ~ Mark Levin

ADDENDUM: Here's some further thoughts that I had on this topic...

There's no doubt that Gengrich is capable of out-debate Obama, nor Romney either for that matter. But I can't help thinking that this election should be about not only ousting a statist like Obama, but also rejecting the status quo of establishment insiders...that is, if we really want to conserve the Republic.  I'm not so much questioning motives or loyalties, as I am dedication to rolling back both the statists Left & the all-too-common statist-enabling Right. I'd argue that the record of both of these top tier candidates demonstrate more establishment tendencies than some of the other contenders. Could this be why their candor and oratory appear better equipped to so many? Perhaps. Can they move beyond the establishment ties into a more conservative arena as their rhetoric implies? It's possible. But before we get desperate and impatient enough to only consider beating Obama with perceived 'perfection', might we also consider the consequences of settling for something less than authentic conservative principle to guide the Republic back to a prosperous path.

We were lucky to have had Reagan in the 20th century. He had both an air of confidence & competence, while remaining a staunch principled conservative...which I might remind folks, the establishment cared little for this particular statesman's qualities back then; instead, much like today, pointing out any and every infinitesimal flaw. Now we've seen this character splinter between either charasmatic establishment types who say they wish to return to conservative principles and then the less-than-perfect candidates who've maintained more principled conservative histories & experiences. Considering the lackluster and falling support for Obama, I'd say either is quite capable of defeating the current occupier. So, I guess with the abscence of a Reaganesque figure, it's up to Republicans to decide this primary season which record they choose to follow: a more moderate path or the bold colors of conservatism. I'd prefer to follow that which might lead us back to a more principled conservative Republic.