Romney and Christie: Elect Us First, Then We’ll Talk

A spate of articles surfaced over the weekend that are a little telling of the liberal media.  Yet, members of the GOP establishment seem willing to jump on board without asking themselves a very logical question: Why would liberals want to help conservatives win elections? 

Two of those articles can be found here and here.

The latter showcases comments made by Chris Christie and Mitt Romney:

The Washington Post reported on comments Christie made on his campaign bus last week. Christie said he told the Republican National Committee: “I’m in this to win, because if you don’t win, you can’t govern. If you can’t govern, you can’t move the country, the state, the city — whatever you’re running for — in the direction it needs to be moved in.” Christie went on to say that he thinks too many Republicans have “become less interested in winning an election and more interested in winning an argument.”

Christie isn’t alone. Mitt Romney appeared on Meet the Press on Sunday, and his stance on the Republican Party was in step with Christie’s. When asked about the tactics of Republicans in Congress, notably shutting down the government over the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, Romney said: ”The shutdown was not the right way to go, in my view. But the right way to replace Obamacare is to elect Republicans to the Senate and the House and ultimately the White House and repair Obamacare, replace it, and put in place something that’s going to do a better job for the American people.”

[…]

Romney stuck to his belief in electability in his response. “I just happen to think that you want to combine conservatism with the ability to get elected,” he said. “You want someone who can garner the support of people across the country to say, ‘This is a person I trust,’ who will implement the kind of conservative approach that I think America is looking for.”

So if Romney stuck to his “belief in electability” then why wasn’t he elected president?  Yes, it’s true that in a land of liberals, Romney was elected Governor of Massachusetts and the same with Christie in the case of New Jersey, but in both cases, they did very liberal things like Romney’s healthcare mandate or higher property taxes under Chris Christie.  In other words, they “go wobbly” on the party’s principles.  Therefore, it compromises the party on a national level and because much of the nation’s wealth surrounds D.C. (seven of the ten wealthiest suburbs in the nation as Governor Palin has noted) and exists in the northeastern part of the country, the majority of grassroots conservatives are shunned along with the values which are important to them.  That small section of the country should not dictate what the rest of us stand for.

What good does it do to “win” if we’re just going to sell out to the left?

Flashback to the 2012 election.  Governor Christie enthusiastically endorsed Mitt Romney and for a while there Speaker Newt Gingrich was creaming Mitt Romney in the polls.  As such, Team Romney and their pals like John Sununu and Governor Christie lied about Newt Gingrich’s time spent in the House of Representatives.  Christie told David Gregory that Gingrich was “an embarrassment” to his party and mentioned a hefty volume of ethics charges brought against Gingrich by one Democrat.  What he didn’t mention is that all but one of those was dismissed and after investigation by the IRS, that final charge was also dismissed.  Gingrich was completely vindicated.

While Gingrich isn’t a saint, it needs to be noted that in comparison to the ones that were attacking him, he was able to make some big changes before he was sold out by his party.  In the government shutdown that occurred while he was Speaker and Clinton was president, we got a balanced budget and major welfare/entitlement reform.  These cuts and reforms led to major economic success that many credit Clinton’s liberal side for.

The way some of these New Englanders ganged up on Gingrich in the 2012 primary was sort of similar to the way some Alaska-Republicans have teamed up to slander Governor Palin.  When stubborn party insiders make their investments (in the form of campaign cash) to politicians, it’s to heck with the people and on with business as usual too often dressed up as “compromise” with the left.  And while these “experts” preach about the Tea Party disrupting their worlds, it’s a fact that nobody attacks their own more than they do when they’re up against the ropes.  (See Governor Palin’s terrific note on GOP Cannibalism during the 2012 primary).

The next stop on their list of “compromises” with Democrats is amnesty.  Christie supports it, Rubio, McCain, Boehner, and many others just cannot wait for it either.  The GOP establishment have fat cat donors to reward with opportunity for cheap labor and the Democrats just cannot wait for a few more million voters to count on virtually setting up the future of our country as follows: no conservatives, all “progressives,” and if you’re nice maybe we’ll let you elect a RINO every couple years.

That recipe serves special interests, it pays back favors, and it may make for some crafty headlines by a state-controlled media that doesn’t give a damn about conservatives winning elections.  Yet, it betrays our freedom, our liberty, and it undermines our founding documents and the kind of country our founding fathers envisioned.

Mr. Romney, you had your chance and you blew it.  Mr. Christie, stop pretending like you’ll have something different to offer.  Your track record of higher taxes and senseless rhetoric pretty much speaks for itself.

 



(1302 Posts)

Leave a Reply