Is Mitt Romney Running For President, or Dog-Catcher?

Does He Understand?

I listen to the pundits. I ignore many of them, but the reason I do so is because so many are merely servants of an agenda, having abandoned the truth. I realize no commentator can be right every time, but it’s easier to be correct in one’s judgments if one cares even slightly about facts, rather than pushing an agenda. I’m a conservative, so of course, I tend to see things through the lens of conservatism, and what that means is that I sometimes err like anybody else in media who offers an opinion, because occasionally, I let my wishes come between me and the facts. I’ve been wrong about some things, and bluntly, I will be wrong about some more, but there are a few things about which I hope to be wrong, while being virtually certain that I am right. This is one of those cases: Even if conservatives manage to drag Mitt Romney across the finish line first, his presidency would be remarkable only in its mediocrity, but more importantly, I do not believe Romney can win since he is conducting the campaign of a man running for dog-catcher, rather than for the office of the President of the United States.

If you’ve ever lived in a small town, you know how the local elections there frequently go. They can sometimes become aggressive affairs, but more often, the candidates are only vaguely partisan, and mostly non-ideological because it’s generally more important to accommodate a larger proportion of the populace and thus ensure election than to take on difficult issues or matters that may have no direct bearing on the office. This is the campaign Mitt Romney is attempting to run, and he’s staying well away from issues and topics that could alienate this group or that, but that have no direct bearing on the immediate job of being President. The problem with this approach is not that it can’t work, but that it’s made for a different level of politics. The presidency is an office that ultimately deals with virtually every issue in one way or another, and since the President lives in a virtual fishbowl of news coverage, there’s almost nothing a president can say that isn’t examined, folded, spindled and mutilated as people look for deeper meanings, but because of this, a President must be aware of virtually every issue, particularly those that are “hot” in current coverage, because the press is apt to ask about them at some point.

The other significant difference is that when you’re running for dog-catcher in AnyTown, USA, you’re not expected to take a position on global warming, or to wax philosophic on the notion of manned space flight. They want to know if you’ll catch dogs, and why you’ll be better at it than the other guy, but there’s no real need to get into deep philosophical discussions about it. You’re expected to shut up and catch dogs. As President, a whole nation, and indeed, a whole world looks to you to stake out a position, and they expect you to do it in a timely fashion, when your position might hold some sway. When Barack Obama said nothing about the uprising in Iran until Iranian dissidents had begun to be slaughtered, part of the reason for Iran’s slightly delayed oppression was undoubtedly due to their waiting to see what the new American President might say. When it was clear he’d say nothing, and do nothing to bring down international heat on the regime, they felt secure to begin reprisals.

In much the same way, Mitt Romney has held his tongue on far too many issues, passing up opportunities to make greater philosophical points during the course of the campaign. He never failed to hammer away at his Republican opponents, but now that he’s facing Obama, it seems as though he’s gone weak in the knees. True, he has had his moments, but the problem is that’s all they’ve been: Fleeting, stillborn interjections of passion that only hinted at a deeper conviction on any subject. The American people expect more, and they fully expect that their President will stake out positions that are more substantially ideological than most pundits admit. It’s not “red meat” as so many condescending commentators contend, but instead that people want to hear the ideological consistency that takes one the full distance from A to Z. This is what Mitt Romney has lacked, and it’s going to hurt him come November, whatever the Republican pundits may say to the contrary. In short, the American people are waiting for Romney to make a solid, irrefutable case, and it must be about more than economics and statistics.

Most of the American people are not fools, and they know there is more broken with the country than what a litany of economic statistics will reveal. They know there is a moral crisis, but many of them are unsure about how to characterize that crisis, or to explain with any precision how it is to be addressed. They don’t know where or how to begin, and the problem has become so great that they have no confidence in politicians to fix it, and given the average of this crop of politicians with which we’ve been cursed, it’s easy to understand their misgivings. Mitt Romney, or indeed any candidate who would seek to oust Barack Obama must be willing to say what it is about Obama’s policies that is hurting the country, but also explain the philosophy that gave rise to those policies, comprising their central motive.

This is the problem with Mitt Romney’s line about Obama being “in over his head.” That is a vague expression that barely scratches the surface of the problem with Barack Obama. If only it were a matter of incompetence, it would be easier to retire him to Chicago next January, but he’s not Jimmy Carter. He’s infinitely worse, and he’s worse precisely because while Carter was a mix of nine parts of incompetence and one part malice, Barack Obama’s philosophy and the policies it spawns are 100% pure malevolence. When you are faced with a killer wielding a gun in random bursts of violence, you do not rally people to oppose him by claiming he had been merely incompetent to bear arms. You must tell the people the truth, and that truth is that “this guy is going to kill you, or as many of you as he is able, if you don’t take him down.” When faced with a killer, moral equivocation is not only a terrible strategy, but a lethal capitulation.

Barack Obama’s policies are killing America, and there is every evidence that it is being done with malice aforethought. That Mitt Romney continues to conduct his campaign solely on the basis that he’ll be better at catching dogs is an admission that he’s really not willing to fight for the country, and the reason for this can only be that he’s incapable or unwilling. Which of these do we expect will be acceptable to the great body of the American electorate? If Mitt Romney does not learn to make the case and make it unflinchingly, he is going to lose this election, and we will be faced with the ghastly proposition of four years of unparalleled malice directed at the American people. This is not the time for tepid leadership, and but for those rare moments, that’s all Governor Romney has offered. If he’s to defeat Barack Obama, he cannot do so by default. He must challenge the moral basis of Barack Obama’s philosophy, but since Romney will not even name it, I do not see how victory will be possible. After all, if he will not name it, how can the American people be expected to take him seriously, or to understand by hints what case Mitt Romney is trying to make?

Romney lives in fear of bad press and ridicule in establishment media, but if he’s to stand any chance of winning, he can no longer afford to mince words by way of “playing it safe.” Otherwise, he stands the chance of appearing afraid to make his case openly, and Americans will begin to wonder why. The old saying is “nothing ventured, nothing gained,” and if Mitt Romney doesn’t begin to venture outside his safe zone soon, this race will be over. You’d think a capitalist would know that.




Leave a comment ?

27 Responses to Is Mitt Romney Running For President, or Dog-Catcher?

  1. Mary Jo says:

    Mitt needs to take lessons from Newt Gingrich..His 7-31 speech to YAF 34th Annual Student Conservative Council packs more passion and attention to all of our current issues..with SOLUTIONS! This is worth a listen!

    • CC says:

      Ms. Mary, with all do respect, Mitt and the GOPE destroyed Newt with lies backed by Fox News and Wall Street. Are you saying that the PRESUMPTIVE nominee cannot stand on his on without first taking lessons from a REAL REAGAN CONSERVATIVE a.k.a. Newt Gingrich?

  2. chopchop2 says:

    Not all of us mind him being respectful.

    • Guest says:

       No only “severe conservatives” in name only with only this comment in their activity history who are obviously hit men from Etch-a-sketch Central.

      • chopchop2 says:

        I have been a conservative longer then you have been alive. It seems we have two choices, Obama or Romney. How difficult can that be for you? Would it be asking to much for some positive message for our side?

        • Vunderkint says:

          I’d rather understand the truth of the situation than engage in self delusion and candy coated the fact that Romney isn’t that much different than Obama, anybody who has done their due diligence in researching Romney’s record would know that fact. As far as how long someone has been a conservative that is meaningless if the person making it relies on their emotions and magically thinking that all Democrats are bad and all Republicans are good the sentiment completely discounts the Republicans roll in growing the government and the debt and passing reams of unconstitutional legislation have failed to hold one activist judge accountable. I mean no disrespect Chop chop but it’s this kind of pragmatism over principle by so-called conservatives that helped get us in our desperate situation we’re in now.

          Have you forgotten that it was Romney who single-handedly kicked the door open for same-sex marriage by unconstitutionally instituting it in MA when governor, that he was the father of what is now Obamacare, he signed into law taxpayer funding for abortion etc. etc.?
          If you want to cast a vote against Obama by voting for Romney that’s fine just as long as you don’t try to convince well-informed Christian conservative constitutionalists that he is a conservative and shares our principles is record clearly states otherwise.

          The Mitt Romney Report

          • chopchop2 says:

            First of all I never indicated that Mitt is the second comming. He is all we have and a hell of a lot better then O. So I presume you wont vote for Mitt which is really a vote for O. Wow, that’s just great, you show us. Get off the social issues and think about the economy. Isn’t that alone worth a vote for Mitt?

            • Guest says:

               I done with your guilt. It is you who is a sellout that should feel guilty.

            • Vunderkint says:

              Chop chop second coming? I never said you did. I stand by what I wrote but somehow you’ve gotten the idea that social issues and the economy are unconnected, I would put to you that it is a seamless garment that one affects the other, you cannot have economic prosperity and happiness built on a foundation of deception and I gave you access to the man’s record which I doubt you even looked at. I reject your assertion that not voting for Romney is voting for Obama, that’s the reasoning of a child.

              I intend no personal disrespect but there are those of us out here who value conviction over position and principle over pragmatism because we can see the fallacy in equating and where it has led. There are those of us out here who will not vote for a man who has violated his oath of office and aided an activist court and failed to hold it accountable or even try, and accept the assertion of the lesser of two evils is somehow good, I’m sure God would not bless that choice and maybe that’s something else you should consider, that being that we are getting the leaders we deserve In the form of divine judgment by the choices we make.

              The time for stopping Obama was in 2008 but the establishment Republicans and their constituents of pragmatism over principle had to have John McCain one of the biggest RINOs in the Senate as their nominee who the conservative base totally rejected so he brought in Palin to try to sucker the rubes and that fell flat, so now you want to double down on the mistake and offer up another RINO when times are even more desperate you had to have the candidate that Obama and his lapdog media wanted all along and as bad as things are Romney should be 10 to 15 points ahead at least and the fact that he isn’t should be a sobering wake-up call to the pragmatists in the Republican establishment.


              Judge Andrew Napolitano Speaking the Truth, what if it’s true? Will you dutifully keep plugging your dimes into the political merry-go-round or resolve to leave the herd of lemmings?

          • CC says:

            My friend, you are one of the voices we need in the destruction of the GOPE. You so elangantly espouse the frustration and the rumblings from the conservative base about the “Presumptive”! Stay tuned for Tampa! I have a feeling that it will be “velly eenteresting!”

        • oyster0302 says:

          Respectful or stupid?  Where was the respect in the Primaries!

          • chopchop2 says:

            What’s with all the anger on this site? I know Sarah dissapointed all of us but you need not take it out on Mitt. She left us with him. If you need to be angry take it out on the right person. We have no choice now. It’s most important we get that ahole out of office so please quit the Mitt bashing! We need to all be pulling on the same end of the rope!

            • Mark America says:

              We always have a choice.

            • Guest says:

               I’m using my money and time to elect constitutional conservatives. I’m done with the gopE. I have no allegiance to them. Mitt despises me. He is the one with the problem. Go tell your troubles to Tokyo Rove.

            • CC says:

              I’m angry at people like you who call themselves conservatives but you and the rest of the Republican Establishment just HAD to have Romno in there because Fox News told you he was the most “electable”! I submit to you that Mitt is the most “INELECTABLE”!That’s alright, we still have a slight hope for a Brokered or Open Convention.

        • Guest says:

           You are not on my side. You are on the side of “Big Government.” You are my enemy just as much as Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. Never forget it. I am not a conservative in name only. You should be ashamed of yourself. You are selling out your country.

  3. DrJazzB says:

    You can challenge a philosophy respectfully if you dare. Mr. Romney cannot summon the intestinal fortitude.

  4. Cbartlett says:

    Well said, Mark. I sure thought Romney would fight harder than he is, based on how he handled the primary. I think one of the biggest problems to overcome is how the media immediately makes ANY criticism of Obama solely about race. Team Romney is going to have to come up with a very good, consistent message to counter those kind of statements or this campaign will continue to be a wimpy one.

  5. Vunderkint says:

    I agree Mark, what really frosts my cookies is that we had Mitt Romney’s number in 2008 and knew the guy was a RINO and political chameleon but somehow the American people forgot and allow themselves to be bamboozled by the Republican establishment spotlighting Romney is a front runner from the get go with the help of Obama’s media lackeys Americans stupidly gave Obama the candidate he most wanted to run against and now we know why. We fell for the banana in the tailpipe again!

  6. Margaret J. Denson says:

    Must Maybe Gov. Romney will not win by a large margin, but it has been said for the entire 3  1/2 years that the next election we will vote for Anybody to get rid of the ILLEGAL ALIEN NOW IN THE WH playing like he knows what he is doing. and is called president, not by me.  We intend to also have a Conservative Senate which will help the citizens of the USA, not like the ones that let all of us DOWN by not serving the people that sent them up there.  IF those poor people that voted for BHO in 2008, don’t goof up and do it again, Maybe we can crawl ourselves out of the GRAVE this man has put us in.  The man can be charming lots of the time, is that what we need to get our country back into shape, NO, so vote for what the person can do for us, NOT on his looks and personality.  It is not that kind of election, we need someone who can lead us out of this grave.

  7. the unit says:

    Maybe an animal control officer is what is required.  Today it is more than local and nation state politics going on.  It is lifestyle and culture at stake.  See article below for what is coming to a neighborhood near you or maybe at you.  :,186375

  8. the unit says:

    What I read here is like reading Thomas Paine..’Common Sense.’  Not necessarily all comments.  But here is the difference…although many more folks can read it because of internet access…forget that…can you imagine getting a printed edition of ‘Common Sense’ when printing was far and few between? You got that and your Bible?  Forget that… cause most internet traffic is what?  Answer can be googled. Starts with P, not necessarily porn, but propaganda, maybe?  Google is both.

  9. Kathie says:

    Maybe our mistake is assuming that RINOs want to save the US from destruction, or that their agenda is different from the Alinskyites in power. Romney’s, Boehner’s and McConnell’s behavior makes sense only if we accept that they’re in league with the Democrats.

  10. CC says:

    Mark, your last post was 8/4/12. Today is 8/10/12. Come back Mark, we need to hear from our fearless leader!

  11. the unit says:

    Youse all seen the Chicago Regime/Machine attack Sarah and children.  Now Romney’s not only a felon, but a killer.  Allen West beats up old white women with red boxing gloves and steals their money.  Said it here before…say it again… live to fightwith votes and smarts another day…ABO. Period.