There Will Only Be One American Running for President In 2012

 

A Populist Agenda?

There will only be one American for president in 2012, and I am not talking about President Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

The 2012 election is in effect a Referendum on American Capitalism. If the Republicans choose Mitt Romney, as they surely must, he will represent American Capitalism. President Barack Obama will represent Europeanized State Capitalism. Go ahead America, make your choice.

President Obama wants the decision about who is too wealthy and who is not to be made by government. He wants a universal healthcare system. He wants a government-sponsored state capitalism to engineer poverty reduction. His “populist” agenda is nothing of the sort, it merely appeals to the lowest common denominator and will lead to European-style dependency and an entitlement culture.

What he doesn’t seem to want to do is create wealth. Who will create the wealth? His program can in no way be financed by the current parlous state of the nation’s finances, after all you can only print so much money and make so many promises. Look at the current state of Europe, do you want an America where states will be forced to bail out other failing states; a new republic of economic basketcases?

In President Obama’s “State of the Campaign” address, he sought to deflect from the campaign that on his watch there are now more than 13 million people out of work and the government debt stands at a record high of $15.2 trillion, up from $10.6 trillion when he took office. State? A complete mess!

Yet, conservatives in America have joined the baying OWS crowd in calling for equality, but in so doing they are asking the government to control the economy. There is a cultural shift which lies behind the attack on “big business”, “Wall Street” and “Fat cats.” This shift is best described as “resentment,”a well known emotion in Europe.

Whoever you support for the GOP nomination, the attack by conservatives on Romney’s wealth is the most absurd aspect of the current debate. I always thought doing well was to be admired in America. There was a good piece by David Brooks in the New York Times recently, where he made the wise observation of Romney: He may have character flaws, but he does not have the character flaws normally associated with great wealth. His signature is focus and persistence.The wealth issue is a sideshow.

Indeed, it is a sideshow! Front row spectator, with a wide grin, is President Obama. Think on that my friends.

The practical outcome is that “big business” becomes state-owned business instead, as it is in China, Russia, and the Middle East. The free market if not reaching an end becomes state-controlled markets. Who will defend the world against this State Capitalism if America, the paragon of liberal Capitalism, does not?

President Obama, OWS, and conservative attacks on Mitt Romney are all part of weakening America’s ability to ensure free markets, but, hey, if that’s what you want America, it’s a free country…but not for much longer.

The issue at the heart of the 2012 election will be whether America wants to continue with American Capitalism, in spite of its flaws, or embrace the intellectually flawed and alien European style State Capitalism. Get it right folks, President Obama is not a Socialist, and Europe is not Socialist. Communism and Socialism have failed, and they have been replaced by coalitions of single issue groups and state power interests.

President Obama is a statist. Europe is statist. The economy is the tool of state power and control over our lives, not in the interest of the working classes, and certainly not the middle class, but in the interest of the elite statists who “know better”.

The Italian Marxist writer Antonio Gramschi stated: “The revolutionary forces have to take civil society before they take the state, and therefore have to build a coalition of oppositional groups united under a hegemonic banner which usurps the dominant or prevailing hegemony.” What he argued was that leftists don’t need a revolution, they need to get their hands on the levers of power, which they have done in Europe for a number of decades…and now in the White House.

The constant whining “civil society” approach of Leftists is the tactic they use, and it is being used to usurp American Capitalism. President Obama has been reading Gramschi’s playbook, and conservatives are falling for it.

 

Gingrich Steps Back and Romney Steps Up

Bookmark and Share    It is most likely too late to make a difference for Newt, but the one time Republican presidential frontrunner has walked back his class warfare inspired attacks on Mitt Romney from the left and denounced a Super PAC for their use of an over the top anti-Romney mini-drama that went after Mitt for his days at Bain Capital.

I previously explained that despite my endorsement of Newt Gingrich, I could not deny my disappointment in his decision to focus more on taking Mitt Romney down with a typical liberal argument, than he was to build himself with conservative oriented, savvy solutions.  The tactic was so disturbing that I considered withdrawing my endorsement but in the end decided that the reasons for my endorsement of Newt have not changed.  However I did make clear that Newt needed to denounce the pro-Gingrich Super PAC airing the anti-Romney movie and the movie itself.  I even went so far as to claim that his unfortunate decision to go the route he did, signaled the end of his campaign and stated that  “I don’t mind defending the candidate I support, but when I have to find good reason to defend my own reasons for continuing to support that candidate, that candidate’s campaign is over.”

Newt apparently came to a similar conclusion.

After opening a campaign headquarters in Orlando, Florida, Newt announced that he was  calling on Winning Our Future, the Super PAC behind the movie to “either edit out every single mistake or pull the entire film”.

Two days earlier, Gingrich publicly stated that his own attack on Romney’s business record were not appropriate.  He told an audience in south carolina that given the backdrop of President Obama, it is impossible to legitimately challenge free market conduct without it being taken out of proper context.

I for one am glad that Newt realized and publicly acknowledged his mistake.  At some point in the future, when the issue is less fresh on the minds of voters, when it comes up again, it will be easy to squash by simply reminding people that even Newt agreed the ad was a dishonest portrayal of Mitt Romney.  However, the damage this did to Newt is undeniable.  It is a hit that he can hardly afford.  And while his numbers in South carolina are looking a tad better than they were a day or two ago,  nationally Newt is still taking hit.  But a new Rasmussen poll shows in South Carolina alone, Newt may be recapturing the momentum.

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll finds Romney ahead with 28% support and Gingrich back on the rise with 21% of the vote.  Rick Santorum on the other hand is trending downward.  He has fallen 8 percentage points and is now tied for third place with Ron Paul at 16%.

If this trend continues, South Carolina will offer Newt Gingrich his very last chance to become an enduring challenger to Mitt Romney.  A win by Gingrich, or anyone else other than Romney in South Carolina will dramatically change the course of this nomination contest.  And if Gingrich can defeat Romney in South Carolina, it will be a new race in Florida and beyond.

Meanwhile the Republican attacks against Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital have prompted the Romney campaign to launch its first ad defending that record. In addition to reasserting the claim that Bain Capital created far more jobs than may have been lost in any one venture, the spot also takes a jab at Gingrich and Texas Governor Rick Perry for their attempts to attack Governor Romney for his work at Bain.

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: