The Farce of “Somehow”

I’ve had a few comments from sincere people who have argued in response to my last post that we must focus on defeating Barack Obama until after the election.  I still wanted to know how we were to hold Romney’s feet to the fire.  It’s a simple question: “How?”  A number of my longtime readers responded to some of the Facebook comments by repeating my simple query.  Naturally, there’s no answer, or if the proponents of this theory know one, they’re not offering it.  Time after time, I’ve been berated by ostensibly conservative people who tell me that I must “focus on Obama,” as if by looking at that awful picture, it will relieve me of the awful truth about Mitt Romney.  Again and again, I ask them to explain how Romney will be bent to a more conservative direction, and time and again, I am told to focus on Obama.  This sort of redirection hints at the desperation so many feel about this election, but it also demonstrates a willingness to dissemble and it’s surprising to see it coming from conservatives.  At the end of it all, if you can corner them into an answer, it amounts to an undefined, unexplained “somehow.”

“Somehow” is the retort of leftists when you tell them that the budget cannot be sustained as it has been, and that by simple mathematics, it’s not possible to continue.  You might ask them how they’ll pay for it all, and when they’ve exhausted all of the ludicrous ideas about taxing the rich, their last resort is almost invariably the same: “Somehow!”  Somehow?  My paycheck doesn’t come to me “somehow.”  My taxes don’t pay themselves “somehow.”  Food doesn’t leap onto my table “somehow,” but when you ask them for the concrete steps that must be undertaken to pay for all the spending they propose, it always comes down to “somehow,” which in the short run means “some one,” but in the long run means they haven’t a clue, and worse, don’t care enough about it to bother with the details.

When you ask a liberal about their latest environmental scheme, their energy-limiting, anti-industrial, pathologically anti-human schemes, they are no less evasive.  First, they hurl insults. Next, they tell you how important it is for future generations(a.k.a. “the children”) to save our planet by the measures they propose, but when you show them the math, and the undeniable truth of the insufficiency of wind, solar, and hydro-electric or geothermal resources, and you want to know from them how you’re to maintain anything like your current standard of living under their scheme, they might utter something about “shared sacrifices” but if you’re insistent, they will retreat to “somehow.”  In this context, the “somehow” they’re imagining is one they’d prefer not to name, since it comprises entirely of reducing the human population of the Earth, and the standard of living among those who remain(except them, naturally,) but since they’ve been less than successful at convincing the Third World of this goal, they’ve switched their focus and will begin with you.  That’s the essence of the “somehow” they dare not name, and it consists of reducing you to the state of a hut-dwelling refugee in some barren wasteland.

All of this is to be expected from liberals or leftists, since it signifies the dishonesty and delusion enabling their philosophy, but what has happened that heretofore conservative Americans resort to similar language?  I have seldom heard such an amazing collection of otherwise conservative Americans adopt the language and argumentation of the left.  Apart from the intellectual laziness implied, there’s something horrifying about the proposition that good and serious Americans would offer us “somehow” in answer to anything.  I hope it is a temporary affliction, but alas, I don’t see it as such.  I don’t know how one can go from “somehow” back to concrete answers at the drop of a hat.  It usually ends badly, in more rationalizations.

I asked how it could happen that Mitt Romney’s feet could be “held to the fire,” and the first thing I was offered was that I am guilty of a treason against the country.  After that, I was told I need to focus on Obama, but when I would not relent, and instead focused on the answer to my question, what I was given, if anything, is “somehow.”  How will we maintain our principles while supporting a man who doesn’t share them?  “Somehow.”  How will we protect our values if the nominee we’re supposed to support thinks they’re fungible?  “Somehow.”  How will we get Mitt Romney to make conservative appointments to the bench if John Boehner has already engineered it right out of Congressional oversight?  “Somehow.”  How will we get Mr. Romney to do anything at all, such as the complete repeal of Obamacare, if he’s already abandoned that position and now speaks of his fondness for some portions of it?  “Somehow.”  How will Paul Ryan’s position as Vice President have any bearing upon the kind of legislation Mitt will sign into law?  “Somehow.” How will we exert pressure on him by running a challenge to him in the 2016 primaries, since the RNC has essentially amended the rules to make that almost impossible?  “Somehow.”

No, the truth of the matter is that the only way we have available to exercise any control over Mitt Romney is now, here, at this time, before he’s elected, and the fact of the matter is that if he is, he will not cater to our wishes.  He can only be controlled if we exercise that control this moment.  Since we have no control, many of us having departed the party proper in disgust, there is only one method of control we can exercise.  Only one.  Exercising it may lead to Mitt Romney’s defeat.  Exercising it could, in a backward sense, contribute to Barack Obama’s re-election.  Why is that the fault of people who rightly ask these simple questions about Romney?  Why is that the fault of people who simply want to know how it is that Mitt Romney is to be controlled by those who are being asked to entrust him with the presidency?  Maybe I’m stubborn, or maybe I’m out to make a point to all of these who have in desperation leaped onto the Romney bandwagon:  You can’t trust him, and even if you elect him to oust Barack Obama, there will be no end to this fight. Or, will there be?

When they get around to “somehow,” what I suspect is that either they haven’t the foggiest idea and haven’t considered it, or they do not care to throttle Mr. Romney’s liberal tendencies.  Either way, it’s unacceptable to me. 

 

Like 7 People Liked this
avataravataravataravataravataravataravatar
  • booger10

    How do we hold Romney’s feet to the fire? We continue to vote conservatives in to the Senate and Congress. Initiate changes to the executive powers to use executive orders as they should be.. In times of emergency. Impress newly elected officials to their representation of the people, why they were voted into office as the newly elected 2010 congressmen are trying to do, (most) Take the Executive branch to task making legislation is the responsibility of the Congress.. We have to vote in the right people to get the right decisions.

    First… OBAMA MUST GO.. First above everything, above anything, first! Beyond that, now, I can not see anything beyond…

    • JRD1

      Romney will reward his crony capitalist K Street and Wall Street buddies just like Obama. Romney’s ego is as bad as Obama’s. Romney has no core principles. Keep drinking the gopE Kool-Aid. Romney just wants to be POTUS.
      Romney as POTUS is the death knell of conservatism.

      • kilt1iron

        What, Romney plans to come and kill me, you?

  • carl

    well! I have no clue what you are writing about, all I know is that some how we must elect anyone but Obama. Yes the key words here are anyone and somehow. and somehow and someway you have missed the point of anyone but, which brings us back to somehow we must convince someone that anyone but Obama will do. Now this is taught in logical reasoning 101 just ask anyone who somehow managed to get the money to attend college, and somehow this comment has gotten completely out of control much like the conservative anyone but Obama people.

    • http://markamerica.com markamerica

      LOL Carl!

    • Kathie

      The “anyone but Obama” argument covers way too much territory. Hugo Chavez is not Obama, nor is Eric Holder, Nancy Pelosi or Richard Trumka. Are we so degraded that ABO is the new standard? People forget that four years ago, Obama had actually less legislative baggage than Romney does now. What Romney will be four years from now, we can only guess by what we’ve seen from him, and that’s disturbing.

      • the unit

        Obama never had more than a carry-on. Perhaps his luggage was lost at the airport in Pakistan or Indonesia. Since then and as president he has only needed a “dopp kit” , like one night tonight in Colorado. O is all those you named including Reid, kindred spirits all. No America First folks even on the horizon.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Phil-Arnold/100000263615569 Phil Arnold

    Mark, I agree with you completely, and I believe that you have stated your case very well!

    I believe that far too many consertavites do not understand that Obama is just one symptom of our problems rather than the cause of them. They have forgetten that when Bush 43 was in office, his adminstration and the GOP elites in Congress governed so poorly that they paved the way for Pelosi, Reid and Obama to gain power. Obama woke many of us up and actually gave rise to the Tea Party.

    I am afraid that if Romney gets elected, too many people will think we have won and the GOPe will be empowered to crush what remains of the Tea Party. Then when Romney fails to prevent the crash that is coming, we conservatives will get the blame just like we got the blame for the stupid liberal things Bush did.

    I believe the only way we can bring about the real change our nation needs is to either take over the GOP and turn it into a truly conservative party, or to do what we can see Romney and the GOPe get crushed this November and begin immediately to build a third party that is truly conservative. As I se it, if Romney wins, we will have no chance of doing either. However, if Obama wins and continues as we expect he will, enough of his present supporters might wake up and join us.

  • C Bartlett

    Posted this below article on Mark’s article this morning: everyone – please consider watching and sharing this short video. http://youtu.be/EW5IdwltaAc
    This is a very basic, non-partisan, factual explanation of how much trouble this country is in economically. No way we’re going to get out of this without a lot of pain. I think there is a chance of a little less violence if we get can get Obama out of there.

    Also saw the “2016″ movie this weekend. Shocking accumulation of information. My husband summed it up: Obama is not just interested in re-distributing wealth in this country – he believes that America is guilty of taking advantage of the world and he is working toward worldwide re-distribution of our wealth and our liberty. No way should he get another 4 years to drag us farther into that hole. I don’t care how desperate it looks. I will support ABO (Anybody But Obama).

    “All that is needed for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.”. That sentence haunts me. I do not want my children to ever say that I did nothing.

    • http://www.markamerica.com/ Mark America

      I understand. I’ll not chastise you for it. My only point to you and others is that we ought not pretend that we won’t have a fight with Romney. It doesn’t seem to me as though you are taking anything for granted.

      • C Bartlett

        Thanks – and no – I definitely don’t take anything for granted. Romney was close to the bottom of my list of choices but I have decided that this country will never elect a true conservative in the White House again. At least not without another civil war. Overcoming the lack of voter education and concern, coupled with the growing number of people protecting their government jobs and entitlements will be a constant challenge for many decades to come. Obama and Romney are merely obvious symptoms of the problem. I cannot make idiots in Ohio and Florida or California do anything – I’ve decided to concentrate on attempting to increase the number of true conservatives in Congress to the best of my ability. I’m afraid it will be a very slow, painful process.
        Keep on writing – we need to ring the bells of truth as loud and long as possible. Someday, people may wake up and listen, even if it is out of desperation.

  • http://twitter.com/politiJim PolitiJim

    Mark – keep on what you are doing. The lack of diligence and naivety by conservatives in general is astounding regarding Romney, taking the “i’ll worry about that later” attitude. What they don’t understand is that the MANDATE that incoming conservative congressional candidates have is DIRECTLY proportional to the the awareness the Romney camp has of people like you continuing to fire across his bow.

    To the uneducated they think it is Romney OR Obama. The real option is George HW Bush Romney vs Severe Conservative Campaign Promising Romney vs Obama.

  • Kathie

    One danger I foresee to those supporting Romney in this election: having carried him to victory, will they be able to fight him if he implements anti-constitutional policies–or will they be invested in him, and persuaded to “give him a chance–he’s only been in office X months”? If the latter, the RNC will have effectively neutralized a large part of the Tea Party movement.

  • the unit

    Well. Questions in this article and previous one will be mute if Obama wins again. Only Florida pizza guy has held Obama.

  • I.M. Kane

    Whether people like it or not, the only chance to get the country back is to vote Republican. Those who vote Democrat are voting for a socialist regime and dictatorship. Those who vote third party or sit out the 2012 election are actually helping Obama and the Democrats by not voting them out of power.

    There are some Republicans in Congress who believe in traditional values and in the rule of law, and want to uphold the Constitution; but no Democrats. The Democrat Party has been taken over by radical leftists and progressives. Although RINOs and neocons are in control of the leadership of the Republican Party, the party base is made up of evangelical Christians, Goldwater libertarians, and Reagan conservatives.

    The contrast between the platforms of the two parties proves this. Republican delegates didn’t remove God or Jerusalem from their party platform, or boo when they were reinstated. The Republican Party platform affirms that “the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed”; supports the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and marriage as the union of one man and one woman; endorses “American military superiority”; and calls for repealing Obamacare; and these are just a few distinctions.

    If Obama and the Democrats are not removed from power this November, America’s republican form of government ends and totalitarianism begins. There’s no neutral ground in this election. Simply put, this election is a referendum on Obama and the Democrat Party. You either want them out of power or you don’t.