MASON CONSERVATIVE

Quick Note On The Romney Campaign

I must say as someone who has never either supported, or even cared for, Romney all that much thus far his campaign has been very good.  There doesn't seem to be any grudges or pushback against those of us who did not want to see him win and he has been very aggressive in his campaigning against President Obama.  

Romney went nuclear over and over against his fellow Republicans and my hope was he would be willing to do the same against the President and so far so good.  He's hammering on this issues and it has helped that Obama's campaign has completely bungled the Bain Capital attacks - exposed by Cory Booker, Deval Patrick, and President Clinton.  What was exposed was the Obama campaigns complete and utter ignorance to what private equity companies do and that frankly everyone thinks we need them.  Republican or Democrat.  They are fighting, responding to every attack, and most importantly they are fighting back.  I worried that Mitt's spine didn't have enough steel but so far so good.  

We still have a ways to go, but I'm feeling much more comfortable day by day with Mitt Romney.  A key moment for me is who he selects with his VP pick.  I don't want him to shy away from being bold.  Senator Tom Coburn was my top seed, but his rebuke by the Senate Ethics committee over the Ensign affair probably ends that.  Senator Jim DeMint remains, to me, his best choice of ensuring that we are all included in his campaign.  It will ruffle some feathers, especially among fellow senators who he worked to defeat in primaries.  That gesture, however, would bring so many of the tea party and constitutional conservatives over to his side.  DeMint even has his friends in the Ron Paul camp.

As Rush Limbaugh said the other day, "I'm telling you.  This is not the McCain campaign."

You Can Still Post Anonymously On This Blog

LOL . . . just having a little fun with the Bearing Drift guys and their new insistence on truth-in-commenting.  Good luck to them.  I personally hate that they are working to eradicate the great tradition of the Not >insert obscure Virginia political figure< handle.  But to each their own.

Why Is Bill Bolling Suddenly Pleading For A Primary?

Answer:  He needs other voters, not just Republicans, to have a prayer in beating Ken Cuccinelli.

This isn't a post about which way is better, what the merits are is what they are.  People who believe one way or another is fine.  But I am puzzled at how suddenly Bolling is gang-busters for a primary.  Just four years ago Bolling and his Richmond brethren rigged a vote for convention at State Central for Jim Gilmore.

What is funny is that all these moderates in Northern Virginia seemingly championing Bolling on this issue either don't know, or forget, it was Bolling and Gilmore and the rest of the Richmond crowd that screwed Tom Davis out of being our US Senate candidate by insisting on a convention.  Bill was actually the chairman of that convention in 2008.  

Trust me, all the moderates and NOVAans out there who truly believe they have a supporter in Bolling, he's a fair-weather friend at best.  Bolling and his Richmond crowd have always supporterd conventions because back in the day, conventions ensured that Northern Virginia was shut out and their candidates always won.

Its just funny the way things play out.

Is Ted Cruz Undoing The Tea Party?

I've been following this race closely, and the closer I looked at it the more nothing seems as it is.  When I think of the great tea party candidates of 2010 I think of two kinds of candidates . . . complete novices who were regular folks taking on the Establishment (Rand Paul), or a lower-level state or local office holder jumping way ahead in line to take on an entrenched RINO (Marco Rubio).

On the surface, Ted Cruz has the perfect pedigree for a classic Tea Party candidate.  Young, aggressive, conservative and an impressive career as a lawyer.  David Dewhurst, the incumbent Republican lieutenant governor since 2003, is the classic inside power-player.  In Texas, apparently LG is more powerful than governor because that office controls the Senate and its committee chairmen.  Dewhurst passes his own budgets, basically.  He has been, according to a couple of sites I've found, Rick Perry's key ally and voter-getter in the state Senate.  (Texas is weird because their Speaker is elected by the entire body, and the current GOP speaker overthrew an old bull with the help of Democrats).  

So everything is set up.  Cruz is the upstart, accomplished outsider fighting the incumbent RINO power of Dewhurst.  There is one problem, though.

His name is Rick Perry.

Among the Republican Tea Partiers (as opposed to the more independent tea parties that came from the Ron Paul movement), Rick Perry is very, very, very popular.  Its headquarters are places like RedState where Erick Erickson was the man that introduced Perry the day he announced for president.  These guys LOVE Rick Perry, think his tenure as governor of Texas is the model to be followed by all conservatives, and to this day are bitter about the way he was "treated" in his presidential run.  These folks on places like RedState are die-hard for Ted Cruz and have been since he started thinking about running for Attorney General (when it was thought that Perry might retire in 2010).  The irony is that these guys all despise Ron Paul and its Paul, not Perry, supporting Cruz.

Rick Perry has endorsed David Dewhurst and done it big-time.  Perry isn't doing it because he "has to," (like McDonnell and Bolling here in VA), but because he seems to really believe that Dewhurst is the best candidate for the job.  Dewhurst has been his first lieutenant in every major issue Perry has tackled since 2003.  Perry has cut ads and released a statement after the election last night that he still backs Dewhurst.  The Dewhurst campaign's line is that any attacks on the LG goes through him and right at the Gov.  For guys like Erickson, it’s hard to justify praising Perry for the last two years then turn around and tear down Dewhurst because they worked together on everything Perry accomplished.

The un-Tea Party aspect of Ted Cruz's campaign is its reliance to DC-based support and money.  It's needed, because Dewhurst is a gazillionaire rancher with all the money man could want.  He's also spent almost all his entire life in government . . . from law school to Supreme Court clerkships to being Texas solicitor general.  I don't quite remember DC-based groups being the sole financial supporter of candidates in 2010 the way we are seeing in 2012 with guys like Cruz, Richard Mourdock, and Don Stenberg.  Maybe they were, but Cruz has almost more support among the conservative intelligentsia outside of Texas than he does inside it.  

And lastly, David Dewhurst is NOT a Charlie Crist or a Trey Grayson or a Dick Lugar.  Dewhurst is responsible in the Senate for DOMA, Voter ID, and Tort Reform, a 1/3 cut in property taxes, and de-funding Planned Parenthood legislation.  He's not a squish.  Is he establishment?  Sure.  But he will surely be a very conservative senator.

This is what confounds the RedState types out there.  A person who held Dewhurst's positions on the issues would get their support normally.  Someone with Cruz's government background would generally be mocked.  The guy being supported by Perry would be cheerleader against the "wacko" endorsed by Ron Paul.  Yet here we are . . . the Republican Tea Party is turned into knots by David Dewhurst and Rick Perry.  

It is amusing to watch, but there are clues to the future here.  Are we seeing the Tea Party begin to over-shoot their targets?  Are Republican Tea Partiers falling prey to the identity politics that we claim to hate (his last name is Cruz, in case you didn't get it)?  Is David Dewhurst really worth this effort when there are so many other worthy targets?

I know it makes little sense for me to be blogging about this Texas Senate race, but it is fascinating.  I suggest people check out the Burka Blog on the Texas Monthly site to keep up.  There are reasons for all of this.  I personally love it.  I've grown tired of the Erick Erickson’s of the world telling us what the Tea Party supports and believes in while being employed by CNN.  To me, at its best the Tea Party simply hundreds (if not thousands) of groups all across the country rising up against overreaching federal power and deep anger about deficits.  Professional Republican hacks taking it over are a problem and we might be finally seeing that problem in Texas.  

That being said, I am rooting and rooting hard for Ted Cruz because he will be a senator more interest in liberty than Mitch McConnell.  It is a simple standard I live by.  But if Dewhurst does win, America gets a much more conservative senator from Texas than either of the two we have now, he will just become part of the entrenched power instead of working to fight it.

Romney Clinches GOP Nomination

The Thin Line Between Romney and Johnson

Shaun's post about McDonnell >heart< Drones over civilians got me thinking about what exactly is keeping me from supporting Gary Johnson.  I really do believe that voting for Johnson would be a vote for Obama, though I think that people shouldn't be pressured to vote against their beliefs by professional political hacks.

Comparing the two is jarring.  A look at Johnson's record in New Mexico against Romney's record in Massachusetts is like comparing a Republican against a Democrat.  Folks point to Johnson's support of drug legalization and pro-choice beliefs, and I get that.  Though his drug legalization argument is nuanced and does have some merit.  

The real difference is Johnson forces us to think about our beleifs and our reliance on the two-party system while Romney makes us feel nice and safe in our little Republican home where we will be good and moderate, and fight those dastardly Democrats!

Now, I'm not so dumb to understand that the two-party system is what it is and it works for what it does.  Voting third party IS a surefire way to ensure Obama Term II.  But I guess my point is that Romney is skating in very thin ice this election year, and all the professional Republicans that have pushed him for the last year.  There are a lot of conservatives who have swallowed and swallowed hard to support Mitt Romney, and its more than they think.  Let's hope he knows this.

Primary vs. Convention . . . blah blah blah

I love the silly season where we go back and forth on this meaningless issue.  Yes, I said meaningless.  Why is it meaningless?  Because I have yet to be convinced by anyone that one method over another ensures a stronger nominee for any office.  This new spat over military voters is an important one, don't get me wrong.  It is why I support our current system, an open primary.  Conventions are simply a pain in the ass all around, and closed primaries (or party registration) just further institutionalized political control in the party and not with the people.  Both keep new voters out, and do so on purpose.  

But on the merits, it's not like a primary is somehow without its own flaws - particularly the costs.  Primaries are front-runner favored and makes it harder for insurgent candidates to get a foothold because it costs so much to run statewide.  Now you might ask, "Chris, don't we want statewide candidates with money and resources?"  Sure, but primaries are, in my opinions, dominated by big money and its hard for candidates closer to the ground win.  It will be even hard if we have party registration and put the party in charge who can and can't vote.  Conventions are what they are.  A giant inconvenience, closed to new voters who don't know the procedure, and ultimately more difficult for every day folks to attend.

I fully expect SCC to change the method from primary to convention.  I hope only that they decide to change its location from Richmond to somewhere else.  I'd personally think Charlottesville would be good, as would Virginia Beach (just for me, since I'd like to visit).  

In the end, these exercises we do every year over this issue is just a way for the insiders to argue with each other and jockey for control.  It bears no real outcome in how our nominees will do because that is entirely up to the nomiee themselves and the campaigns they wage.  We did just fine with conventions in 2009 as we did with primaries in 2010.