Mitt Romney: Political Suicide on a Grand Scale

Mitt Romney: Political Suicide on a Grand Scale

By Joseph Andrew Settanni


As the nation so slowly fades, over time, to a well-deserved Third World kind of status, the country’s bemused, national political mind, dramatically, turns to the future, titanic, presidential-level contest between the so exciting, meaningful, momentous rivalry of Tweedle-dee-dee v. Tweedle-dee-dum. Oh, what joy! How well the witless weary world wends its wondrous way.

There seems to be a kind of political phenomenon fairly similar, in a sense, to the instinctual run of luckless lemmings to the sea toward their inevitable death, as the necessary consequence of a mass doleful drowning. It may need to be called “suicidal politics” and the Republican Party, especially its leadership or hierarchy, pugnaciously practices it too often, as if it ought to be, supposedly, a grave, formalized organizational ritual.

All true party faithful, the loyalists, on the hierarchical level at least do appear courageously committed as a kind of preposterous pledge of allegiance to their core principles. And, in fact, how can this be seen manifested politically?

The Romney GOP nomination, said to be absolutely (or nearly so) inevitable by a vast army of informed pundits, parallels closely the so solemn stupidity of the past nominations dutifully done for Gerald Ford, (the reelection attempt of) George H. W. Bush, Robert Dole, John McCain, and, now, Mitt Romney, of course. Those were clearly four and, most likely, five instances of presidential-level defeat that could have been totally avoided if, instead, a conservative nominee had existed as the GOP’s wise choice.

Political axiom: Whenever the electorate is offered the choice of a Republican running as a Democrat versus a Democrat, the Democrat usually wins; moderate-to-liberal Republicans alienate the hard-core conservatives in the national base of the GOP; Pres. George W. Bush, a neoconservative, it can be noted, barely was both elected and reelected; he had, of course, no Reagan-style landslides, to say the least. But, why has all of the foregoing been so confidently extrapolated and positively asseverated regarding Romney? Let a look be timely taken into the broad bowels of this maddening matter.

Analysis and Disquisition

Mr. Richard Viguerie, often and quite fairly referred to as the “funding father” of the modern American conservative movement, and thousands of such other significant conservative leaders do, truly, detest Romney; Viguerie has publicly stated, moreover, that he definitely will never, under any circumstances whatsoever, back him if he is the (unwanted) nominee. And, furthermore, let it be properly understood and profoundly comprehended that this is, in fact, no really minor matter that can be easily dismissed as being just meaningless or, perhaps, certainly inconsequential in terms of national politics.

Not just the majority of the hard-core, conservative GOP base will, however, so totally refuse needed allegiance to this Massachusetts politician, the majority, in addition, of the people connected to the Tea Party Movement will also NOT vote for him; he cannot but substantially and sickly recapitulate Ford, Bush (senior, 1992), Dole, and McCain by, consequently, losing. The GOP hierarchy/leadership must, therefore, surely know this for an obvious fact; history can, as may be noted, and does repeat itself; they cannot be really ignorant, readily unprepossessing, pertaining to political calculations.

So, the intriguing interrogative rightly remains here or, perhaps, is then astutely raised concerning the basis of this suicidal politics being deliberately and consciously practiced; the great and powerful urge, as it has been said many times, to (enthusiastically?) grasp defeat from the jaws of victory is mightily perceived. More to the salient point, the political/presidential, national, American history of the entire last 36 years is being absurdly ignored, which so represents two whole generations of time measured at 18 years per generation. What, one may fairly inquire, is actually going on?

The naughty, notorious leadership lemmings, true to their nasty nihilistic faith, would rather send the GOP over the proverbial cliff rather than to tolerate the nomination of a “conservative” or, at least, someone basically perceived as generally being politically conservative enough to the base of the party (and, also, to the Tea Party Movement).

It needs to be then appropriately understood, for those who do really not know, that the upper-class, country-club/yacht-club leadership, meaning the basic core of them, enormously detest conservatives. And, it is clearly more, much more, than just a merely visceral, epithelial, detestation at that.

They absolutely, without question, support Big Government because they eagerly want to control the money that supports the power involved; they do fundamentally favor, therefore, the Iron Triangle: Big Government, Big Business, and Big Labor that, constantly, pushes the Federal government, the political order, toward further and further degrees of statism (aka tyranny) and resultant greater national debt. No intelligent person should doubt the truth of what is said.

The Iron Triangle, furthermore, exists to help crush free-market economics/entrepreneurship/free enterprise in the entirely corrupt cause of helping Capitalism thrive, meaning State Capitalism, Crony Capitalism, or Neomercantilism, as it is sometimes called; these two systems of economics are, then, opposed to each other, not synonyms, as is often supposed.

Thus, there is a severe and integral ideological split, within the GOP, that forever naturally divides it against itself; it is an integral type of political schizophrenia, which necessarily cuts rather deep into the mind and heart of the party. This should be then recognized as a part of domestic political reality, not fantasy. Conservatism, not ever liberalism or leftism, is condemned as a form of ideological extremism (memories, still held by the party establishment, of Sen. Barry Goldwater’s 1964 defeat).

Each wondrous presidential season, this problem becomes, increasingly, most manifest and acute as the nomination process is supposed, from the obviously biased point of view of the hierarchy, to weed out all the unwanted conservatives to, therefore, result in a moderate-to-liberal nominee abhorred by the party majority, especially, of course, the hard-core conservatives. The latter are held to be contemptible rightwing miscreants, puerile political pariahs, whose only proper function is to be their loyal voting for, NOT ever actually choosing, the Republican nominee.

Yes, most GOP party members, on average, do still vote for the candidate nominated, no matter how unpleasant and distasteful the choice; however, the absolutely critical margin of needed votes often resides with those die-hard conservatives in the base who do stoutly refuse, on principle, to vote for the anti- or non-conservative nominee, as is plainly known by now. The GOP hopes, however, that enough trusting moderates/centrists, independents, and some Democrats will then make up the difference, which usually doesn’t happen, nevertheless. Most of them tend to usually vote for the Democrat, not for the anti-extremist, uncontroversial, moderate, centrist, middle-of-the-road Republican.

But, if one is not a collectivist and, in fact, opposed to such an ideology, then there is a form of de facto, if not de jure, disenfranchisement, especially at the national political level. The Republican Party represents the rightwing socialists and the Democrats are the leftwing socialists, which, thus, explains really how each substantially acts as the truly loyal opposition in that political sense of the term.

Political Game Plan Revealed

The rather devious Machiavellian strategy, for 2012, seems very clear on the petulant part of the Republican Party organization. Romney will be sacrificed by way of scaring enough people into voting for a US Congress, both Houses, to be dominated by the Republicans; the degenerate leadership then wants the dubious “honor” of assisting Obama in the troubled transition to a social-market economy for having it better integrated into a then European-style, demonic, social-democratic/collectivist State in America. Of course, to the inherently ignorant, on the surface, it all sounds too ridiculous and rather farfetched; but, it is all so politically correct: The GOP does not want to appear being responsible for the political defeat of the first African-American President in American history.

This is as to the American future, which will, thus, further help to consolidate State Capitalism and, consequently, the forced creation of an extensive black market (aka underground or free market economy, as, e. g., in Italy). Fantastic, supposedly, but still true.

Such an audaciously autocratic or statist regime will, therefore, logically put this numbed nation into the messy main flow of history because free governments are historical anomalies, aberrations; autocracy, by whatever name, is the general nauseous norm as to the ugly existence of the majority of regimes on earth. And, from that so natural and meanly Machiavellian point of view, the perplexed populace is best held as mere (oppressed) subjects, not free citizens, of the socially, politically, and morally corrupt American welfare-warfare State, the hardened Hobbesian Leviathan.

It may be thought, however, that Romney (aka Ford, Bush, Dole, McCain) is, perhaps, assuming that he can still get enough independents, moderates, and moderate liberals/Democrats to offset the balance of those who, simply, will never vote for him. That scenario is quite unlikely. It did not, in fact, work for Ford, Bush, Dole, and McCain, a not inconsiderable number of failures. The high probability of success, for this Mormon candidate, would then appear to be quite slim. The fabricated electability issue is a mere phantasm cunningly created by the leftist mass media, as was done, e. g., for McCain, meaning how they, later and deliberately, turned against him after he got the nomination.

It is an uphill battle bucking against American political history, meaning the almost last four decades. And yet, this must be surely one hellacious heck of an ego trip, by him, to so knowingly accept a major party’s nomination for the noted negative purpose of just achieving electoral defeat. Yet, Mitt “Ken Doll” Romney, of course, rationally remains unmistakably undeterred with his precisely polished facial features worthily expressive of his presumed electability.

What, in some ways, is even extremely more amazing to sadly observe, nonetheless, is how Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, Levin, Medved, Coulter, etc., the public exponents and champions of conservatism, will urge their fellow Republicans and conservatives to yet actually vote for Romney in the general election, regardless of any previous criticism of him or, perhaps, doubts about him. This now ought, however, to appear quite intriguing to contemplate, ruminate about, as to its deeper meaning.

The here overt presumption is that, in fact, these are certainly intelligent, politically aware people who have, in addition, superior access to information sources and resources manifestly beyond that of just ordinary citizens. They are, therefore, definitely not ignorant fools. The fairly proper supposition is, furthermore, that they ought to or, in fact, do really know more of what the Republican Party hierarchy deceitfully intends for this nation. They should then realistically know, full well, the both harmful and “necessary” negative consequences of a rightly ruinous Romney nomination.

What, among other interesting implications, does this mean? The disgusting horror is that so many Americans, too many conservatives, actually believe, thus, that these putatively “patriotic” people are morally good and, moreover, do always intend the best for their country. Can there be any other viable alternative, however, to this open accusation of deliberate treachery? The top talk show hosts and most prominent conservative and neoconservative pundits, in this now much troubled nation, are, without any serious question, highly politically sophisticated thinkers fully aware and profoundly cognizant of political reality. That is a proper and right assessment.

The fair thought, after all, is that they are truly not stupid, injudicious, foolish, unwitting, ignorant, insane, or irrational people. One must reasonably conclude that they are, thus, treacherous, meaning after all other rational and sensible possibilities are completely eliminated, properly eradicated, from both appropriate and just consideration. It would be utterly asinine to naïvely suggest that, perhaps, they are merely ill informed but still well intentioned political advocates nonetheless. One would have to seriously believe in childish fairy tales to blandly accept such a fallacious and laughable notion.

So, one may then here ask, why are they such willing servants of an inherently evil and devious cause, meaning the transformation of this nation’s political order into a statist regime, an anti-constitutional and oppressive tyranny? Something terribly strange or, supposedly, much too completely unbelievable, totally incredible, is going on in this country.

Could it be, therefore, that these seeming champions (Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, etc.) of freedom and American liberty, patriotism and free-market economics, are really NOT what they, on the surface, appear to be? This, significantly, helps to then explain better, with increasing intellectual and political clarity, their enormous and unyielding opposition, e. g, to Dr. Ron Paul, he being just a mere Texas Congressman, not even a US Senator.

The odds, honestly speaking, of his ever getting the nomination are simply astronomical; the political fix is in for Romney. And yet, e. g., Limbaugh hyperbolically and, one assumes, sarcastically said that Paul ought to run for the office of President of Iran, which proves, empirically, that Rush is willing to get into the deepest political gutter for his puppet masters at the GOP.

The deliberately most savage and extreme criticism, practiced by the vast bulk of the conservative and neoconservative commentators/pundits and talk show hosts, is always leveled against Paul, which, on the bare surface, appears inexplicable given his too often alleged lack of any substantive or substantial national support among conservatives.

He is, routinely, portrayed as being just a clear nonentity who will gradually fade from view sometime prior to the GOP Convention. The good doctor will, possibly, amass just a relatively few delegate votes amounting to nothing of any real importance. He has no real future as the nominee, according to the dominant opinions of the experts, of the assumed doyens of such knowledge.

Then, why the seemingly unremitting and ugly verbal attacks? Why has he, beyond all other candidates combined, been so thoroughly and unforgivingly demonized further than any rational political measure, meaning in light of his assumed total inability to get anywhere actually toward or near the nomination?

Why, then, the always absolutely disproportionate, extremely lopsided, hate and vilification, intense scorn and defamation? He is the only and most righteous, principled candidate not owned by the power establishment, the ruling class. Thus, he must be politically destroyed, now and for all time, beyond all proper reason—Why?—mostly because his critics, in the conservative movement, crave to be respected and accepted, esteemed and recognized, as a then valid and authentic part of the party establishment.

All the other candidates against Romney, a champion of corporate welfare, are acting as his stooges, so that apparent “opposition” may be seen, one assumes, to then supposedly exist, though they do, more or less, substantially agree with Romney, never with Paul, which needs to be here critically noted. It is curious, therefore, that the genuinely greatest contrast among the candidates is only and exclusively between Paul and all the rest; this is notable directly because he, fundamentally, supports the requisite restoration of free, American, constitutional, representative republican government qua governance.
The only real choice is between Paul and Romney (and all the other would-be Romneys who are, more or less, like Romney). They really want to manage Big Government and the welfare-warfare State, not attempt to cripple or destroy it, which, in effect, disenfranchises conservatives who oppose them. The bold US Representative from Texas, running for the office of Chief Executive, offers the only genuine hope for major change, for a much better future for America, which is exactly why he’s going nowhere. His yet significant political struggle, nonetheless, is certainly valiant and commendable, fearless and praiseworthy.

Generations from now, perhaps, intelligent and patriotic Americans will look back, in awe and wonder, that someone, actually, had dared to heroically stand up against the Big Government Behemoth, prior to the coming Dark Age, the Obama nation as the historical pattern. The only real choice between Paul and Obama, if such a vote were held nationally, would, thus, mark a definite change of direction for this country for generations to come; in sharp contrast, the vote for Romney, as to the political bottom line, is a vote for Obama, which is then readily known to the GOP leadership, though, of course, that sounds shocking to those who are naive.

Conclusion

But, the nauseating and repulsive, hideous and abhorrent, GOP practice of suicidal politics, as has been above already well examined and explained, is to disgustingly predominate quite strongly, in 2012; this is as the amazing man from Massachusetts, the horrific hero of raw political mediocrity displayed on a grand scale, assuredly rides, confidently, into the, thus, totally meaningless Republican nomination.

It is fairly hard not to genuinely feel profound despair and express a justified and reasoned pessimism, therefore, concerning the perceived and unfortunate econopolitical and sociopolitical future for the vast majority of the American people; and, the last vestiges of republican government will fade away, as if it were all a dream, for most of the people of this country will not fight to be free; they will accept tyranny. They are, significantly, what Aristotle had wisely referred to as being natural slaves.

Ron Paul and the rest of them are, therefore, going nowhere; and so, rich man Mitt Romney, thus, is decidedly destined to go down to his quite expected and then properly deserved defeat in November—end of story. [Though now, as ever, the author of this article (and many others) hopes he is totally wrong, especially as to any predictions.]

God save the Republic!