aintsobad

Imposition 2012-Newt Shoots the Moon

   Newt Gingrich, speaking in Florida, announced his second term as president would see 13,000 Americans, minimum, doing new manufacturing jobs.

   On the moon. 

   Mr. Gingrich is in Florida, where, coincidentally, a state wide primary will be held shortly for the purpose of apportioning delegates to the GOP national convention. Which, will be held, I believe, this year in Narnia.

   In between lecturing impotent media members about what they may question him about (Newt is appalled they would are ask him about his three marriages and equally apopoleptic about their willingness to ask him about the things he says about Mitt away from the rostrum), Mr. Gingrich spends his time promising potential voters the moon. 

   Florida, you may have noticed, has a large, suffering aerospace industry. When he promises Floridians the moon, Mr. Gingrich is like unto the man who comes out of syrup in Maine.

   Left unsaid is what Lincoln called "the terrible math." Mr. Gingrich's presidency, he claims now, will give America an unstoppable military, which he will never use, deep tax cuts for the top tier of earners and a balanced budget. If he can do all this in just two terms, sending 13,000 Americans to live and work on the moon should not be much of a problem.

   Next up will be Newt's promise to find new sources of ceyenne pepper in Louisiana, repair the retograde dissimilation of Mt. Rushmore in South Dakota and get Jerry Jones out of the football business in Dallas. Newt is demonstrating two things: how much more effective he would be if no one listened to him speak and why the Democrats spend all their time running against Mitt now in hopes Newt can keep him out of the nomination. 

   Floridians, polls say, are now turning their attention to what Newt says. This is usually bad news for Newt. He is such a good politician he can play to the crowd in front of him nimbly, only to discover the next crowd wants its moon pie too. 

   Oh, well, It was fun while it lasted.

 

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012-I Pick My Candidate for President

   Since so many are asking (ok, no one actually asked, but when did that ever stop me?), I reveal today my chosen candidate for the general election in November.

   SEAL TEAM SIX-ALL OF THEM

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012-State of the Union, Mitt Romney, Mitch Barnett

   I have grown very weary with Warren Buffet's secretary and her tax issues. The woman needs a better CPA.

   Humor alert.

   The last time a secretary got this much air time her name was Della Street and she worked for Perry Mason. I think he did her taxes.

   Humor alert.

   Soooo, last night was the State of the Union address. Listening to the last ten such speeches, I have begun to long for the days when the President wrote out his speech (or had his secretary write it, in between runs to H & R Block), then deliver it to the House, where the Clerk of the House, who, presumably, did his own taxes, read it in a sonorous monotone. The only exception in the last forty years were Reagan's speeches. Carter went for pith, Clinton for distance. The Bushes assayed the role of the clerk. There was not a lot of there there.

   Reagan was a happening. 

   The problem with making the State of the Union address a live, televised event is striking. To put a politician in front of other politicians and an audience of millions is the same as putting Homer Simpson in league with a plate of pork chops. The result will be messy, gluttonous and predictable.

   Last night, Mr. Obama did Mr. Mitt Romney a great favor. He never called attention to Mr. Romney's tax reports, recently released, which showed Mr. Romney paid an effective tax rate of 13.9% on an income of just over $43 millions. Mr. Obama did not mention this fact. He only pointed out Warren Buffett's secretary pays a higher effective rate than Warren Buffett.

   Mr. Romney, answering this shadowy blow, announced he pays every penny the law requires and not a penny more. He opined that the "American people" would not want a president who pays more taxes than he is required to pay.

   No, Mr. Romney, but some of us do want a leading class who understand how very, oh, I don't know, wrong, it is that fabulously wealthy people leech off the public dole. Please do not lecture us about risk versus opportunity, Mr. Romney, because the government you lobbied so effectively and want now to lead bailed you out when you got in trouble. 

   If any GOP leader wants to point out weaknesses in Mr. Obama's speech (and his policies), please take  a moment to read and compare it with other State of the Union speeches. Mr. Obama's speech was more Benjamin Henry Harrison than Franklin Roosevelt or Harry S. Truman.

   That is, Mr. Obama spent the night talking about community and linking our American community to the eventual destruction of Bin-Laden. He talked about manufacturing jobs, though, before the Long Bush Recession started, the manufacturing industry in the US had shrunk up from 40% of the work force in 1943 to 9% in 2007. He never talked about how we dithered away the IPhone, IPod industry, though Americans developed the idea for each of them.

   In fact, the President's mostly effective speech was so 19th century, one might have thought Sinclair Lewis had written it. Where was the future? Only in the past, according to Mr. Obama.

   He never mentioned bandwidth. Infrastructure repair was left for bridges and roadways. We need those infrastructure repairs, as well, but the future is in technology. If the Chinese, who were curiously absent from Mr. Obama's speech last night (think Iran and how badly we need them there; if anyone invades Iran, it will be the Chinese, who are nearby and not overly scrupulous about human rights) can get information three minutes ahead of us, they can rule the world. Band-width decideds who finds out fastest and that is only one illustration.

   Our technology infrastructure needs development. It is our one chance to have a middle class again. Yet, I did not hear anything about last night.

   Then, the GOP let Mitch Barnett, governor of Indiana, give their response. If I were anyone in the party out of power, I would make certain I was deathly ill during the State of the Union. The setting the responder gets makes certain he will look like an extreme clown in comparison. 

   Mr. Barnett drew the short straw last night. His speech was stupefyingly out of touch with history. He praised Social Security and Medicare, Democratic programs (FDR. FDR. FDR) and damned Obama's "trickle down economics" theories, which was the Ronald Reagan-David Stockman transfer of wealth theory, failed in the 1980's. Mr. Barnett's speech was revisionist history at its worst.

   The winner last night? Mr. Romney got a twenty four hour reprieve from talking about his taxes. In a presidential election year, twenty four hours is a life time. In twenty four hours, Newt Gingrich could get married again or Joe Biden could be found to have plagarized something else. So, Mr. Romney gets credit for releasing his tax records at the most effective time. That is, when peopel will be looking elsewhere. By the time the media get back to Mr. Romney's taxes, it will seem like old news.

   So, Mr. Romney wins the night.

   And Warren Buffett's secretary, who should get a book deal, at least.

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

 

 

Imposition 2012-Gingrich Wins and Now for a Republican Primary

   What do Republicans think in 2012?

   Where is Ronald Reagan when you really need him?

   For that matter, where is John Kennedy when you need him?

   John Kennedy may have been the last great Republican president.

   I know. I know. Just listen.

   Kennedy wanted a balanced budget, deep tax cuts, a strong national defense and a global war on terrorism, which, at that time, was Communist. Communists. Remember them?

   Balanced budget, tax cuts, strong defense, war on terrorism. You cannot judge him on the compelling social issues of our day because Roe V. Wade happened on Nixon's watch, not Kennedy's. Gay marriaage? Nope, not for JFK.

   Pro-business, pro-life, pro-defense. His Attorneys General wire-tapped everybody. His CIA cooked up a scheme to kill a foreign leader with a bomb in a shell set to explode while he was scuba diving. If that failed, they would get him with a poison cigar.

   JFK. What a Republican.

   He is gone, though, along with Reagan. Reagan hated the death penalty, was pro-choice, cut actual military spending, increased taxes every year in office and tripled the national debt. Along the way he weaponized space, toppled the Berlin Wall, brought an end to the international Communist threat and armed the Afghani Freedom Fighters, called the mujahaddeen. One of them was a tall, Saudi kidney patient named Osama Bin-Laden.

   I miss them both. Kennedy and Reagan, not Bin-Lden.

   The current crop does not seem likely to topple anything but America.

   Mr. Gingrich won the South Carolina primary Saturday. It is the last one for awhile where cross-overs can skew the results. To vote in Florida's GOP primary you have to be a Republican. In Florida you must be able to hang Chads, or you will not be counted, unlike Iowa, where you can vote and still not be counted in eight counties. This is odd, to me, because there are only about twelve counties in Iowa.

   But I digress. In Florida we will get a better look at what Republicans are buying this year. It is a huge, diverse state. Politics go from retail to wholesale. The evangelical vote is not as large, proportionately, so the Republican candidates will have to run away from their base to other issues people actually care about. Mr. Paul should finally falter out of the race. Mr. Santorum will probably finish third.

   The Romney-Gingrich contest will be center stage. I compare Mr. Romney to Wile E. Coyote, who spends enormous amounts of money with Acme, trying to catch the Road Runner, only to have his own weapons attack him though clumsiness of use. (Question-Why doesn't he just use that money to buy a Whataburger? Answer-It is personal now. I think it is personal between Mitt and Newt now, too). If Mr. Romney spends another eleventy million PAC dollars (he had spent $2,000,000 through the campaign or the Super PAC as of the weekend), only to lose or even finish within one or two percentage points of Newt, he completely loses his already sagging air of inevitability.

   I have a hard time figuring this one out. Mr. Romney is once married, very religious, free of the taint of any personal or professional scandal. When he releases his IRS data we will see he gives an enormous amount of money to his church and family. No one can say anything bad about him personally. Newt is thrice married, talks constantly and often has to apologize in the next breath, is a big baby (he once threw a tantrum over his seating and exit on Air Force One) and has never met a doughnut he didn't like.

   And people flock to him, while they compare Mitt to a vulture and a cigar star Indian figurine. People just hate Mitt. I personally do not know where he stands on much of anything other than he wants to be president. This bothered me about both Bushes, George I and George II. Each of them knew he wanted to be president, had a strategy to win the election and no clue about how to govern.

   Mitt looks the same way to me.

   Mr. Reagan, tear down this wall! Where is JFK, a real Repubican, when you need him?

   Or, for that matter, give us a Harry Truman, and let the buck stop here.

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012-Gingrich Takes South Carolina

   Newton Leroy Gingrich, the thrice married former Speaker of the US House, apparently swept to victory among interested voters in the Palmetto State Saturday. Gingrich gobbled up 41% of the reported vote.

   Since Thursday of this campaign, we have learned several things, all of them fodder for the ruminator.

• Rick Perry was not viable as a national candidate. This is, to my thinking, not a reason to decide Mr. Perry is finished in state politics or done with national politics. He has been humbled but the man is not used to losing.
• Mitt Romney actually lost in Iowa but someone in that super-slick state forgot to keep ballots from eight counties. We cannot find them. I would suggest searching a nearby corn field where the lost ballots are doubtless consoling the now defunct ethanol subsidy.
• Mitt Romney actually lost in South Carolina, where they do apparently keep ballots. In two days, Mr. Romney has gone from the Inevitable Candidate to the Unenviable Loser. We can actually say Mr. Romney has spent eleventy billion dollars through his Super PAC attacking Mr. Gingrich, only to see Mr. Gingrich shoot past him with the voters. Mr. Romney is starting to look like Wile E. Coyote, with his Acme destruction gadgets, trying to catch the Roadrunner. All of his death devices come back to land on him after he falls off the electoral cliff.

    The Big Conclusion from these facts, after minutes of analysis, is this. Republican voters want a real, honest to goodness Tory politician. They will not countenance another John McCain, God bless his courageous, curmudgeonly soul. No, they want a down to earth, down in the dirt, man in the arena, who will not answer questions about his own taxes with words like "maybe, historically, April, I guess, if someone keeps bringing it up, shucks, they did not tell me this would come up, I have a lot of money in the Cayman Island banks..."

   GOP voters want a Tory so bad they will turn off their evangelical filters to vote for a thrice married, open marriage advocating, over weight, groovy kind of guy like Newt. Newt has more baggage than Burlington Northern. There is some evidence he may be toxic to wives. Still, Republicans so far prefer him or the arch-Tory Rick Santorum to centrist Mitt. 

   These things we know.

 

 

Opinions here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012: Governor Perry Goes Home

   Governor Rick Perry got his hat handed to him in his abbreviated run for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. He could not remember things his handlers told him, disregarded what the voters said, spoke badly and debated worse. At no time did he seem to be the stuff of which presidents are made, not even the mediocre kind of presidents Americans make these days.

   One of his early supporters called Perry's campaign the "worst, most mismanaged presidential campaign in American history." Newt Gingrich had said of Perry, "if he can hit major league pitching he will win hands down." Mr. Perry hit below the Mendoza line, a baseball reference (sic) referring to the slick-fielding, no-hitting Roberto Mendoza of MLB fame. Mendoza could catch anything hit anywhere in the park. He  never hit above .200 in his career. Hence, the Mendoza line. 

   Perry had a scratch single or two. His bigger blows were in batting practice.

   And I still ended up admiring his growth in the race.

   I do not mean I thought he should be president. The rich preachers who pushed him for awhile dropped him just as fast when he showed the holes in his swing. When they were gone he was done.

   The same rich preachers will soon be left with two choices. There is a portly, thrice married rich man who abandoned one wife when she had cancer and another just as she was diagnosed with MS. Come to think of it, does New Gingrich cause major illnesses? He reportedly wanted one wife to agree to an open marriage and just generally cheated on all of them.

   He has since repented of his evil ways. 

   Editor's Note: Mr. Gingrich loudly denies the assertion by his ex-second wife that he wanted an open marriage. He just as loudly decried the media outlets who dared to run her story or question him about it just before a major primary. 

   This will not work for the general election. "How dare you ask that?' will not suffice.

   The other choice for the rich preachers and their richer adherents will be a member of the LDS church, which one of them has branded a cult. Mr. Romney will also lose a lot of votes for practicing socialism in Massachusetts so egregiously Mr. Obama borrowed from Romney's social programs to envision America-Care. Mr. Romney will also lose some votes for being what Governor Perry called him, correctly; a vulture capitalist. Mr. Romney will also lose some votes for being endorsed by Senator John  McCain, who lost the 2008 election to Mr. Obama for being too soft on various social issues.

   You get the idea.

   Mr. Perry, meanwhile, returns home to the Lone Star State. He looks ten years older and clearly exhausted. He has been demeaned as a moron and caricatured as Foghorn Leghorn. Jon Stewart had a great time with him.

   No, Governor Perry could not hit the major league pitching this time around. He lost some support nationally along the way. Also, along the way, I thought I saw and heard the man do some serious soul searching and growing. Texas has been too easy for Governor Perry. He has not had a major loss here. He has not  been questioned much or pushed hard. The national scene noted his good hair and solid profile. They decided he did not ring true with them.

   So, we get our governor back home. He will be a better governor for the race he put on. He may decide to work on his delivery, build a machine and take another run in 2016. He will be a better candidate then.

   I came away from this race admiring him for his tenacity. He is more than I thought going into the race.

 

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012-Newton Leroy Gingrich

   In May of 2007 I sat in a small coffee shop with my friend and instructor, Dr. Wallace Roark. Roark spent a lot of time telling me about God, the world and all subjects related to the first two. Roark is a former Army Ranger, poultry judge, photographer, philosophy professor and logician. 

   Roark has been around. I got him on the internet, which increased the intellect of cyberspace and the burden on Roark, who is a contrarian's contrarian.

   Roark asked me, "Who will be the candidates for president next year?"

   This question was about the 2008 presidential campaign. I had a few ideas about the Democratic nomination, which I thought might come down to Hillary Clinton and Al Gore Redivivus. Mr. Obama was being urged to run but his absorption into American national politics was turgid, at the time.

   "As for the GOP," I told Roark, "Newt Gingrich can have it if he wants it. He could beat McCain, though it is McCain's turn in the hierarchy and, due to his age, probably the last time he could be nominated."

   "Gingrich?" Roark sniffed. "Gingrich is off the national scene."

   "He will be back," I told Roark. "He is the last intellect in the GOP. He can make an argument for their arguments. He will not sit quietly among the platitudes."

   I have no good reason why Newt did not run in 2008 but did decide to run this time. His baggage is no less weighty now. Newt himself is no less weighty come to think of it. 

    There are those who think Newt ran because he needed to get his brand out there again. His speaking fees and opportunities were dwindling. This is no small matter when you consider the size of the speaking fees these people command. Mr. Romney laughingly says he is not paid much for his lectures but reported $374,000 in fees in 2010 alone.

   I would do it for half. I would make more sense.

   This is an offer and a promise.

   Mr. Gingrich, the wisdom says, is the candidate Romney decided to shoot at in Iowa with his Super PAC attack ads because Newt was close to Romney in the polls, had the most negatives and was the one many  thought would drop out at the first sign of real trouble.

   Mr. Romney is particularly good at raiding American companies in the form of venture (for the word "venture" here, substitute the word "vulture." Thanks, Governor Perry!) but terribly flawed in picking weaklings. Newt hit back, took money from a fellow who runs gambling casinos in China (no, really, seriously, look it up) and hung on through the winters of New Hampshire, while Huntsman and Perry floundered their way out of the race. 

   Now, Mr. Paul and Mr. Santorum remain. Mr. Newt believes he can beat either of them and take their crowds by Super Tuesday. If Mr. Newt gets Governor Perry's money along with the nine delegates, Mr. Newt will throw yet another wrench in the works.

   If he survives the interview his second ex-wife will give tonight on ABC. Again, the timing, forty eight hours prior to the South Carolina primary, is somewhat suspect. However, the American people have the right to know about their presidents. 

   Mr. Lincoln never belonged to a church. Mr. Cleveland fathered a child with a much younger girl to whom he was not married. Mr. Wilson had a stroke so severe the country had to be run by his second wife and Secretary of State.

   I don't know if you know this but Mr. Roosevelt (Franklin) was a crippled man in a wheelchair. Mr. Reagan was divorced from a lovely actress named Jane Wyman. When he remarried it was to an actress/showgirl who held seances and followed astrology.

   We all know a great deal more about Messrs. Kennedy, Johnson and Clinton than we might like to know. I personally wish Mr. Clinton had stopped talking at the moment he was asked about his underwear preference.

   Today, when Governor Perry ends his campaign, he will ask his supporters to get behind Newt Gingrich. If all nine of them follow his instructions, Newt will get yet another bump in the South Carolina polls. If Newt wins South Carolina, Mr. Romney really loses his air of inevitability, his chance to begin to define himself as a national candidate instead of someone running to regional preferences (for "preferences" in this sentence substitute the word "prejudices") and any semblance of neo-con support.

   Newt could throw a severe wrench in the works shortly. Now, one of his ex-wives, who has previously declared she could "end his political career with one interview," has gotten ABC to broadcast an interview in which she promises to "tell all." I imagine she will tell just enough to get a book deal and out on the lecture circuit but the timing is a bit of a stretch.

   This should be good.

 

Writer's Note: Why do I spend so much screen time here on the GOP and mostly leave the Democrats alone? The Democrats are not running yet. Mr. Obama/Biden are happily entrenched inside the Beltway, with no need to say a word in their own defense. The market is up, unemployment is (slightly) down (until the next report when it will tick back up, since seasonal hiring is over and since more people will return from the "not looking for work" force) and the Republicans are making absolutely certain all their reputations are in ashes by Super Tuesday.

When the Dems come out, perhaps we can talk about the Senatorial campaign in Illinois that catapulted Mr. Obama to Washington, the plagarism of Mr. Biden and, oh, a hundred other things. Meanwhile, this news/political junkie (me) will continue to write.

 

Opinions here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012: Nut Groups

   They call us one of the nut groups.

   Evangelicals.

   Nut groups are single-issue groups who form as a voting bloc around one party that will pay attention to their issues. Nut groups are expected to deliver large, consistent numbers of votes without much encouragement.

   Evangelicals.

   We are thought to be easy to manipulate. Show up at church during election season, sponsor a Prayer Rally in a stadium somewhere, meet with the mega-church preachers a few times, talk the way we want. We will get our people to the polling site for you.

   We are a nut group.

   Get a few nut groups stored up and get elected.

   Now, you can imagine how it hurts to be called a nut group but the "nut group" designation refers more to storing up for the winter of primaries, as in something you can count on, than lunacy. Or, so they say after we are safely stored in the hollow tree.

   My dad was an elected official for 28 years. He was Constable of Precinct Two, Johnson County, Texas. He had to run for office every two years. So, every two years, we got religious. The entire family went to church for a couple of months prior to the election.

   And, I mean, we went to every church. Every one. We had the preachers over for fried chicken and mashed potatos and sweet tea with chocolate cake. We were thinking of joining his church. We really meant it. We might join him at any time. It could happen. You watch.

   Dad would win the election with a coaliton of veterans, red-necks and the churches. Then, we went back to business as usual.

   "Those preachers can sure pack it away," Dad would say. "They nearly ate every chicken in the coop."

   Years later, I became a preacher. I still am a preacher. I look with some amusement at the candidates who show up in my church a few months prior to the elections. I fear I have not been all that nice.

   "We are thinking of joining your church," one told me. He was running for mayor.

   His family nodded their enthusiasm as I recall.

   "That is wonderful," I cried. "We have the baptistry full and ready to go. Let's baptize you all right now."

   We didn't and I wouldn't have done it but, well, you know.

   The family did not seem so enthusiastic.

   "Well, we ain't made up our minds yet," the prospective mayor told me. "We are still praying through it."

   The family was fired up again.

   "No! No! No!" I cried. "Today is the day. This is the hour!"

   The family ceased to beam.

   As I recall, he lost the election and his concern with religion at about the same time. He went back to selling used cars out of his house.

   What is the use of having a  nut group if you cannot count on them?

   And what is the use of being a nut if your whole lot in life is to be manipulated, deceived and used? And at what point are evangelicals going to realize there are a lot of them, they are not really represented by the mega-guys or the TV preachers and the parties they coalesce around use them for a voting bloc, give them a judgeship or two and then forget about them until the next election cycle?

   Nut groups, your party of choice or candidate of choice actually needs you more than you need them. You can carry on without them. They must have you. They do not need you for money. For that they have huge-dollar Super Pacs. They need you for votes, which are the coin of the realm in democratic elections. Since you have what they must get you could insist they take you seriously.

   Nut Groups of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your nuttiness.

 

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

  

Imposition 2012-South Carolina, Minus Huntsman

   Jon Huntsman moved to New Hampshire to take on Mitt Romney. There he said Romney was too much of a" waffler" and had" electability" issues. He crowed about finishing third and called it "a ticket to ride."

   Apparently, forty year old rock lyrics notwithstanding, Mr. Huntsman decided third place was a ticket to ride home. He dropped out of the race and threw his endorsement to the "unelectable" Mr. Romney. 

   Thus, the crowded field of GOP candidates is now down by one more. Rick Perry, who was shorn of his Christian Right support at a meeting on a private ranch near Brenham, Texas, now believes the voters in South Carolina will turn to him because of his economic message, rather than his evangelical credentials. Rick Santorum now has the support of the Christian Right leaders who met on Judge Pressler's ranch last weekend.

   Apparently, your name has to be Rick to get their attention. I wonder why I was passed over so quickly. I had the name Rick before any of those fellows and I have better evangelical credentials.

   One wonders.

   Moving on, look for Newton Leroy Gringrich to be the Grinch who stole the fun until Super Tuesday. Mitt Romney should have the nomination sewn up by then and be on his way to a solid second place finish in the general election in the autumn. Mr. Paul or Mr. Santorum will probably not end up running on a Third Party ticket but someone will carrry the conservative banner and siphon off enough votes to put Mr. Obama back in the White House until 2016.

   If one of the losing GOP candidates decides to run a Third Party campaign, look for it to be Mr. Paul, who may think he does not have time to wait for the nomination to come around to him. No, he is not afraid of the Mayan calendar. He is just 76, that's all, and these things do not come around every year or so.

   Mr. Trump or Mrs. Palin might yet be summoned to the forefront by voters who want a true conservative. Mr. Trump has more baggage than the UPS. Mrs. Palin seems to enjoy her status as rock star of the GOP and not vote-getter. She is a better speaker than she was four years ago. She does not look in the camera and wink now but she also cannot look forward to sitting down with Katie Couric again. 

   On the other hand, Mrs. Palin's candidacy would give Tina Fey something to do after NBC drops "30 Rock."

     While we are taling about it, consider the upcoming 2016 presidential election. What will the top of the tickets look like in 2016? Here is something not at all out of the realm of possibility.Sarah Palin vs. Hillary Clinton in 2016. Mr. Obama unable to run again, Mr. Biden would be, well, Mr. Biden, and the rest of the democratic field would consist of...of...oh, my. Four more years of Democratic rule, Mr. Romney having lost, Mr. Santorum still being unelectable and then what? Mr. Paul at 80? Mr. Perry?

   Get your bumper stickers ready. Palin vs. Clinton in 2016. 

   You read it here first.

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.

Imposition 2012-RomBama

   Mitt Romney will win the GOP presidential nomination because there is enough difference between Romney and the rest of the field. Mitt Romney will lose the general election in the fall because there is not enough difference between himself and the current occupant of the White House.

   Senator John McCain lost to Mr. Obama in the 2008 general election in large part because there was no compelling reason to vote for him. He inherited the nomination for finishing second in the GOP in the previously contested GOP race. Mr. Romney finished second to Mr. McCain in 2008's GOP contest. The hierarchical GOP will nominate a centrist candidate like McCain and Romney but they will not elect him.

   The prior wisdom of American politics was you would run from the Left (Democrat) or the Right (Republican) and then govern from the center (American). Now, you run from the Far Right or the Anemic Left and govern barely, with a Far Right Congress and a Far Left Judiciary (so far). The Roberts court Far Right actions will be ameliorated by Mr. Obama's current standard bearers and the ones to come during his second term.

   When Mr. Romney's opponents attack him now, it is from the Left. He was a successful Venture capitalist, meaning people got fired and wealth got transferred. People may look with envy on the rich but not affection. Mr. Romney has too many negatives for undecideds. He can win but it is not likely. Please note the difficulty he is having with winning the nomination. He is not Republican enough for the Republicans, certainly not Democrat enough for the Democrats and not likable enough for the Undecideds. He can still win if the economy tanks during the next six months. 

   Who wants that?

   Probably not even Mr. Romney.

 

Opinions expressed here are mine alone.