Frightening sympathy 6

The British Conservative James Delingpole, with whom we usually agree, writes at the Telegraph about the dismal view he takes of the Republican Party candidates in this year’s presidential election.

His assessment of them is so dismal that he thinks that letting Obama, “the POTUS from hell”,  wreck the country for another four years would be a better choice than electing any of them.

We cannot wholly agree with him this time because we think no one on the political horizon could be worse for America than Obama, but we like his article and see his point:

Let’s get one thing clear: Obama unquestionably ranks among the bottom five presidents in US history. In terms of sublime awfulness he’s right up there with our late and extremely unlamented ex-PM Gordon Brown – which is quite some doing, given that Brown singlehandedly wrought more destruction on his country than the Luftwaffe, Dutch Elm Disease, the South Sea Bubble, the Fire of London and the Black Death combined.

Agreed: the damage President Obama has done to the US economy with everything from Ben Bernanke’s insane money-printing programme, to his cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, to his ban on deep-water drilling to his crony capitalism hand-outs to disaster zones like Solyndra to his persecution of companies like Gibson is incalculable. And, of course, if he gets a second term the damage he and his rag-bag of Marxist cronies at organisations like the Environmental Protection Agency manage to inflict on the US small businessman trying to make an honest buck will make his first term look like Calvin Coolidge on steroids.

So why do I think this would be preferable to a presidency under Mitt Romney? Simple. Because I’ve seen what happens, America, when you elect yet another spineless, yet ruthless, principle-free blow-with-the-wind, big government, crony-capitalist RINO squish. His name is Dave Cameron – and trust me, the cure is far worse than the disease.

Of course it may not seem that way at first. You’ll be so busy dancing round in circles singing “Ding Dong the witch is dead!” that euphoria and relief will completely overwhelm your intellect and your powers of observation. You’ll read endless articles by David L Brooks, the New York Times’s pet pretend-conservative, telling you how Romney is just the kind of uniting, post-partisan, pragmatic POTUS America needed. And you’ll believe it because you’ll want to believe it. This may last for some considerable length of time. In Britain, many Cameroon conservatives … continue to perform this auto-lobotomisation even now.

But then, little by little, something rather unpleasant will begin to dawn on you. The label on the can may have changed but the contents taste remarkably similar. Similarly emetic, that is.

Yes, I know from the other side of the pond David Cameron may look just the kind of stand-up conservative you’d like running the US. But that’s only because the stories you hear about him are extremely selective. For example, I’m constantly surprised by US talk show hosts telling me how tough on militant Islam Cameron is because of some speech they heard Dave give once about the problems of multiculturalism.

But surely we should judge our political leaders by what they actually achieve rather than (Tony Blair-style) by what they tell us they are achieving.

Here are some of David Cameron’s achievements so far:

He has prolonged the economic crisis …

He has urged quotas for women in the boardroom, apparently in the belief that the State has either the knowledge or the right to decide how business conducts its affairs.

He has presided over a massive wind-farm building programme which, besides destroying the British countryside and enriching his father-in-law, is causing energy bills to soar to the point where old people are dying of hypothermia.

He has surrendered at almost every turn to the Carthaginian terms offered to Britain by the European Socialist Superstate.

He has proved himself incapable of expelling the Islamist hate-preacher Abu Qatada. [See our post The tale of a Muslim terrorist parasite, January 18, 2012.]

The list is by no means exhaustive. I would go on but, actually, this was never meant to be a “collected examples of the unutterable crapness of David Cameron” blog. Rather, it’s supposed to be a more generalised warning about the dangers of short-termist thinking.

Yes, of course, conservative/libertarian America, I fully understand how desperate you are to rid yourself of the POTUS from hell. But what you need to ask yourselves – and I don’t believe many of you are: you’re a bit like an hysterical woman who’s just had a tarantula drop on top of her in the bath, you just want to GET RID OF IT NOW! – is what ultimately you’re trying to achieve.

I’m presuming what you really want is stuff like: smaller government; a genuine – as opposed to an illusory, QE-driven – economic recovery; sensible environmentalism (ie conservation but not eco-fascism); liberty; an end of crony capitalism; a diminution of the power of Wall Street; a resurgence of American greatness; a renewed sense of confidence and purpose.

You’re not going to get any of that from a Romney administration.

But you will, provided you’ve got the patience, get it in 2016 from President West or President Rand Paul or President Palin or President Ryan.

Only it might be TOO LATE.


(Hat-tip Andrew M)

  • Liz

    Interesting window into Britains “parallel universe” with us.  I don’t think Romney would take things back the other way far enough, but it would still be better with him (or any of the others) in there than Obama.  At least the tarantula would be off of us!!! 

  • Jack

    Yes, of course, conservative/libertarian America

    This is the problem. Libertarianism, ie Classical Liberalism updated with better economics and Rand, is radically different than Conservatism either in its original or in its modern version (which are different). I wish there were a Randian or VonMisean libertarian movement in America, but there isn’t. All that exists is modern Conservatism’s mushy semi-Christian, semi-libertarian-but-not-in-a-serious-way-and-please-don’t-take-away-my-social-security crap.

    There is no serious challenge to the Left today coming from the big tent of the “Right”. IMO, unless you are willing to reject on principle the confiscation and redistribution of wealth and economic intervention then you simply can’t challenge the Left. Conservatives are not up to the job and I don’t think they ever could be. If they were to take conservatism seriously what they would agitate for is a Christian authoritarian state or something close to it.

    This is sad state of the world in which we live. We’re doomed.

    • George

      Hi  Jack  , I get more and more depressed each day as I see what is going on around us  ( especially in the political “arena” ).   I joined the Libertarian Party long ago when Andrea Mareau was running for president and he was promoting  back then what is known as the Fair Tax now.   I have many complaints towards libertarians now which makes me  wonder if there is any group that represents my sentiments fully. Unfortunately , their aren’t. You share quite a number of my own sentiments on this matter and I keep asking myself — Where do we turn ?   As a freethinker , I recognize we must get away from “group think” , however  I also recognize that the reality of the matter indicates that we must have a large organized group support to have any true political clout and influence.  You make good points. What scares the %$#@  out of me is the nightmare that Obama may get re-elected .   If that should happen———- It’s over.  Goodbye FREEDOM !   

  • Anonymous

    We know what a poor crop the Republican field is, because during the summer every new candidate immediately lept to the top of the polls (Bachmann, Perry, Cain).  That Rick Santorum survived the attrition shows how empty the group is.

    I think Romney will be an unsuccessful president for a completely different reason — he reminds me 100% of George Bush the Elder.  A competent, forthright, nothing.

    I can think of worse things for the Republican party  than letting Gingrich or Santorum lose a winnable election, and force some re-thinking and re-tooling.

    • Keith

       I agree with letting Gingrich or Santorum lose a winnable election as long as we make sure we hold the house and possibly win the senate.

      The republican elites don’t want to win because Obama is bad for the US. They want to win because they miss the power. There isn’t a lot of difference between the elites of both parties IMO.

      I don’t get the “electability” of Romney. I have never liked him as a candidate and it appears that 70% of republicans don’t either which is why his number don’t go up.

      I am tired of holding my nose and voting for whoever the elites decide we should have as our candidate.

      Gingrich has baggage but I for one would love to see him debate Obama and get down in the gutters with him.

  • Frank

    Bottom line – Romney has a good chance of beating Obama. Santorum and Gingrich have no chance of beating him. Moderate Democrats and Independents will not vote for theocrats. But Moderate Democrats and Independents are absolutely critical in winning back the White House.