That is the title of Ann Coulter's weekly article, released yesterday. I'm still thinking about what she said. Perhaps I can make more sense of my thoughts as I write. In essence, she says that conservatives' opposition to Mitt Romney - though they uniformly supported him in 2008 - comes from a feeling that the 'establishment' wants Romney this time around. She says:
"I'm not sure what part of the Establishment supports Romney. Is it Romney supporter Christine O'Donnell, erstwhile tea party candidate for the U.S. Senate from Delaware? Am I the face of the Establishment? (If so, the country is going to be just fine.)
"I would think that the pristine example of the Republican Establishment is Weekly Standard editor and Fox News contributor Bill Kristol. But he wants anybody but Romney, even proposing that we choose someone not running by means of a contested convention.
"Who are we trying to get nominated in a contested convention, anyway?
"Without having seen this mystery candidate in action, how do we know he won't be another Rick Perry? You'll recall that Perry was the dream candidate until we saw him talk."
Certainly food for thought. I honestly don't remember reading any 'establishment' pro-Romney positions, I heard that elsewhere. As usual, Coulter talks about all of Romney's strengths and how he of any candidate would be in a prime position to defeat Barack Obama. But back to this idea that the establishment wants Romney. Do they? I hadn't really pondered this point before - I accepted it as a given. The GOP in Washington certainly seemed to think the nomination should have been wrapped up by Romney by now, and have seemed rather nervous and jittery that he hasn't. I'm not worried about that, as you know. A longer process ensures the best candidate wins because they're all well vetted. Let's continue.
Later on in the article, she says:
"Conservatives scratch their heads wondering how the NFM can convince millions of unemployed and underemployed Americans paying $3.57 for a gallon of gas that the economy is improving simply by repeatedly saying so.
"But then a large minority of those same conservatives are completely convinced that Romney is an Establishment candidate simply because they have heard that repeated so often."
She might be right about that. Certainly the image of Romney as a 'flip-flopper' or 'liberal' or the like is promoted by the left and copied by conservatives who accept the premise that liberal media is accurate. I think that the Washington GOP establishment probably do want Romney or did initially, but I'm not sure about that. It's the repetition elsewhere (talk radio and Foxnews, for example) that has drummed it into our skulls. Just like with a month-long break from debates, I was only reading media reports on the candidates and even though I have a deep distrust of the media - trusting only their blantant bias - I was still feeling more depressed about the primary season by association. It's not like I don't like Romney every time I hear him speak. On the contrary, he's my favorite candidate every time I hear him speak! I certainly agree with Coulter that Romney has what it takes to cream Obama - though any of them could win. Sure, Obama has the media on his side, but once the nomination process is behind us, I sincerely doubt that the GOP will have difficulty unifying behind Romney to defeat Obama regardless.
Again, a quote to leave you with:
"This strange new version of right-wing populism comes down to reveling in the feeling that you are being dissed, hoodwinked or manipulated by the Establishment (most of which happens to oppose Romney) the same way liberals want to believe that "the rich," the "right-wing media" and Wall Street Republicans (there are three) are victimizing them.
"It's as if scoring points in intra-Republican squabbles is more important than beating Obama. Instead of talking about the candidates' positions -- which would be confusing inasmuch as Romney is the most conservative of the four remaining candidates -- the only issue seems to be whether "They" are showing respect for "Us."
"Striking a pose as the only true fighter for real Americans may be fun, but this is no way to win elections. This is Sharron Angle on a national level."
I hope this means she's suggesting that these suggestions and hopes of an open convention are out of the question! I completely agree that a hasty decision is regretable and would be regretted. This lengthy primary season, on the other hand, allows us to know the strengths and weaknesses of a candidate better than any other election season in my memory.