Conservative Mitt?

As my fellow grass roots conservatives and I light our proverbial candles for Rick Santorum, we need to face the reality that in all likely-hood, Mitt Romney will be our nominee.  He now has the endorsement of most conservative groups and although Santorum pulled three simultaneous victories in those caucuses, the delegation out there is minimal and the consensus is Mitt is the most-likely to defeat Barrack Obama in November.  Pundits continue to ask if Mitt is conservative enough for us Republicans.  Mr. Santorum along with the conservative media such as Rush Limbaugh think he is most-likely to beat Obama because he is the most like Obama—a race between two liberals puts the focus on the fact that one of the two liberals has shown too much failure to lead.

As we age (myself included), we tend to forget the ninth grade Civics continuum:

Radical—–Liberal—–Center—–Conservative—–Reactionary

Taking a good look some thirty-six years later, we are reminded that there is something to the right of conservative, the term reactionary.  As someone who considers himself Republican Establishment, not Tea Party, it seems to me that we are the conservatives and the Tea Baggers are the reactionaries.  The term reactionary implies being overactive, panicking  at the thought of change and reacting by taking action to take us back to the past; alas, the term reactionary is not a marketable term to the general public so they elect to label themselves conservative, which is marketable.  Undoubtedly, Mitt Romney is not a liberal or a centrist; he may be conservatively deficient in some areas, but placing him right of center makes him conservative, which by default places the Tea Party on the reactionary part of the continuum.  He is definitely conservative enough; and if elected, would have to make some concessions to conservatives (and reactionaries) backing his campaign.

This is in no way to discount the views and visions of people farther right such as Mr. Santorum.  The Tea Party vision of limited government must be seriously considered in our quest for a balanced budget.  As stated in an earlier blog article, limited government has become a Hobson’s Choice.  It is important that whomever we send to Washington in both the executive and legislative branches this November, they must work with a keen awareness that we have to make a difficult choice between limited government and national bankruptcy.  Though I will always consider myself a Ronald Reagan Republican conservative establishment, i.e., right of center at about the dividing line between conservative and reactionary, I support the vision of those farther right than me for limited government to get a balanced budget as the ultimate reward, which is a main ingredient for creating the twenty-first century American Dream and making American once again, the land of opportunity.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: