Here’s something to factor as GOP, GOP sycophants, and media lapdogs who would prostitute their teleprompters, and sell their souls for an interview or invitation to a political dinner, are not discussing – but that you should be factoring into your canditorial choices.
I submit that one of the key considerations that should be weighed in choosing and/or vetting a presidential candidate, must be the question of whom he/she is most likely to bring them with as cabinet members and advisors.
One of the complaints of liberal democrats and Bush haters was that he brought recycled war mongers and Republican “has-beens.” They complained the Bush people were out of touch with the American people. And to a greater or lesser extent they were right. What they conveniently omitted however, is that Clinton had done the same thing. Interestingly enough the president who went furtherest away from recycling was Obama and look how that worked out. He has selected the most extreme radicals and far left of the liberal progressives and Alinsky-Lenists.
A personal admission here: in 2000 I voted for Bush in part because I ignored the very visible signs and warnings that that he wasn’t what he seemed. I wanted to believe he was the second coming of Ronald Reagan. I neglected my own understanding that just as Babe Ruth, Winston Churchill, Thomas Jefferson, and the Ford Mustang only come along once in every so many lifetimes – so too is true of Ronald Reagan. Bush was a globalist and big spender Republican, he spoke of compassionate conservatism, but we never stopped to question what that was. Obama spoke of hope and change and that has turned into what could be expected if the Charles Manson family, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Andrei Chikatilo all intermarried and had a nationwide family reunion.
We have been witness to steady decline in presidential performance and actions that are in the best interest of the people since Ronald Reagan. Which brings me to this election cycle. If hindsight as they say is 20:20 then foresight is 40:40. Romney is the chosen one of Karl Rove, the Republican Party hierarchy, party insiders, and the media. What that tells us is that he is one of them, no matter what he tries to project, and even though he denies said associations by very adroitly not bringing them up.
Romney is the Republican Party puppet. I don’t believe he has a snowball’s chance of winning the general election should he get the nomination. But we need to consider who he will surround himself with if the unimaginable happened and he was elected. Regardless of what he tries to convince people of by not bringing it up – Romney would be a cross of Obama and Bush. Globalist, spender, regurgitation of failed policies of the past/present and someone we absolutely could not trust. Ask yourself, how close do you want Karl Rove, Reince Priebus, and the remnants of Bush/Republican past to the next president?
Do want another presidency staffed and advised by the same people who have are responsible for where we find ourselves today? Do you want a White House controlled by “K Street,” i.e., lobbyists? As I survey the political field, I honestly see only one person who I am confident would choose outside the beltway. The telltale sign for me are Wall Street big money supporters. They are liberals and in 2008 they paid the way for Obama. This time around they are paying the way for Romney. Prevailing political opinion is they would give some money to Newt Gingrich should he get the nomination, but that there isn’t a chance they would finance Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, or Ron Paul (albeit I have thoughts about their support for Paul in the highly unlikely event he got the nomination).
Wall Street big money donors give money to those they believe will work with them and those they believe will be advocate legislatively in their best interest. They obviously do not have that confidence in Herman Cain, and to a lesser extent nor do they have it in Bachmann or Paul.
But it is Herman Cain who is clearly the political outsider. One glimpse of his campaign team and staff shows us he is an outside the beltway candidate. One of the reasons he is criticized is because he refuses to run the cookie cutter, slip and obfuscate campaign we are so accustomed to.
No matter who your choice as a candidate, it is important to determine who they will bring with them and who they are likely to surround themselves with. Someone like Romney can claim to have concern for us, but when we look at who is promoting them and who surrounds now, we get a clear picture of what to expect if they are elected. And that should give us all cause for concern.