The Drive-By Media and the Republican establishment has gone out of their way to once again try to select our nominee for us. This time the official "establishment candidate" for the GOP is former Massachusetts Governor Mitt* Romney. Yet the conservative base of the Republican party clearly does not want Romney. He's not my first choice either. That said, I think it's fair to clear up a few things about Mitt.
Mitt's Not a RINO: I know, I know, I can just see the slams coming in now. He's not as conservative as someone like Herman Cain or Michelle Bachmann, this is true. However, you can be both a non-RINO and not a dyed in the wool conservative. Mitt Romney is one of these. He's a Rockefeller Republican. He's a genuine fiscal conservative who won't be as focused on the social issues. I want someone better than that, but Mitt's not Olympia Snowe or John McCain either.
Politically Speaking, Mitt's Mormonism will align with mainline Christian beliefs: I know this is a big issue for a lot of Evangelical and Pentecostal Christians. For the record, no, Mormonism is not a Christian denomination. It fails three of the eight Essential Doctrines of Christianity, because Mormons deny the monotheism of the Godhead, the person of Jesus, and the saving work of Jesus on the Cross. (1) That being said, Romney is strongly pro-life and pro-marriage. While Romney arrives at his faith-based reasons for standing on our side, he does concur with our beliefs.
Romneycare is not Obamacare: There are significant differences between Romneycare and Obamacare. I don't like either one, but Obamacare is, as Romney has said, a one-size-fits-all solution, Romneycare legitimately dealt with only the people who were uninsured. Most imporantly, however, Romneycare has an option that Obamacare does not: Self-Insure. The mandate in Romneycare was about personal responsibility. It said "either buy insurance or agree to pay your own way." That's a huge difference. Romney has promised to repeal Obamacare, and I do believe him.
Now that I've defend Romney a bit, time to say the rest: We can do better than Mitt. A lot better. Friends, in 2010, we in the Tea Party swept the GOP to a historic victory. We didn't do it with moderates and we didn't do it with Rockefeller Republicans. We did it with conservatism. True, no-nonsense, dyed in the wool conservatism. Now the Drive-By Media and teh Republican establishment will tell you that you can't win with no-nonsense conservatism. I'm telling you they are wrong. History proves that they are wrong. In 1980 the same type of Republicans said Reagan couldn't win. And they were proven right when Jimmy Carter won a second term right...wait a minute....that's not what happened at all! Reagan ran on genuine conservatism then put it into practice and BINGO! we had one of the most prosperous decades in history!
The reason Reagan won is because real conservatism wins every time it's effectively communicated and it works every time it's tried. The reason we won in 2010 is because real conservatism wins every time it's effectively communicated. We have the kind of once in a generation opportunity in 2012 that we had in 1980 to elect a history changing conservative. The question is will we take it? If we nominate Mitt Romney, the answer is likely no.
Would Mitt Romney be a better President that Obama? Absolutely. He'd be a better President than John McCain would be either. But my friends, we can do a whole lot better than Mitt Romney. We have an opportunity to get a real conservative. Let’s use it.
* Actually, Mitt's real name is Willard. Just in case you were wondering.
(1) Is Mormonism Christian?