The Tea Party Is Our Only Hope!

With my beloved Notre Dame Fighting Irish gunning for and achieving the number one ranking in the BCS, my son’s hockey games, miscellaneous tasks at home, etc.,  I haven’t found the time to blog since the election.

I barely make enough money on this site to pay the web hosting fees (though I’d love to - *hint – check out an ad or two*), therefore daily posting is not presently a priority for me…unless…see previous hint!

Ok, enough of the shameless plugging!

While I didn’t immediately post my opinion on the election results, I have listened to the flurry of pundits critiquing Romney’s campaign, the Republican Party (what’s left of it), and offering their insight as to why President Obama was elected to a second term.

Mitt, himself, came out and blamed his loss on the “free stuff” offered by Obama to the masses. He was, of course, chastised by the Republican Machine for having the audacity to make such a claim…though it was a prominent argument during his campaign.

Bill O’Reilly concurred and dedicated several segments on his show to prove the point. He’s now been labeled a racist (his words) for agreeing with Mitt. Though, despite the label, I’m sure his ratings haven’t suffered!

I hate to say it (and I’m not bragging – well maybe a little), but I predicted Romney’s loss well before the election. I tried to help, but Mitt wouldn’t do what had to be done. Though, in hindsight, I don’t think Mitt could have done it anyway, at least not in a manner that would come across as believable.

Put bluntly, Mitt Romney was a moderate at best and could do nothing to change that image. Just like Obama, he too had a record. And, to campaign contrary to his past did not go over well with conservatives.

Far be it for me to correct the Bill O’Reilly, and others, but Mitt didn’t lose the election because of the ‘free stuff” offered by Obama. He lost the election because he was unable to motivate enough conservatives to “hold their nose and vote for him because he wasn’t Obama!”

The proof lies in the vote tallies. While Obama was unable to repeat his 2008 performance as expected, Romney garnered approximately 3 million less votes than McCain did in his run against Obama.

Did we lose 3 million conservatives in the last four years? Not likely. In fact Republican registrations were up in 2012. They simply didn’t show up at the polls!

And, they won’t until the GOP stops pitting a liberal (moderate) vs. a liberal in Presidential Elections!

The problem is that the Grand Old Party mistakenly thinks moderation is the only way to make inroads into the growing Latino and African American populations. And, they’ll never relate to women unless they soften their stance on social issues.

That, my friends, will spell the demise of the Republican Party. They’ll exist in name alone but will lose all relevance.

It’s already started with discussions to avert the “Fiscal Cliff” looming on the horizon. To show the country their ability to “compromise,” they’ll ultimately cut a deal with the Democrats…and, yes the deal will include increased revenue in the form of tax increases.

Oh, they’ll fight and scream that increased taxes on the so called wealthy - $250K? – is not the way to go, but in the end they’ll give Obama what he wants. Because, non-compliance will go against their misguided efforts to moderate the party.

Ultimately, they’ll realize the “Fiscal Cliff” was unavoidable, despite any efforts to stave it off. In fact, they’ll likely realize the plunge was necessary. But, by then it will be too late…the Republican Party of today will have already moderated itself into nothing more that a conservative wing of the Democratic Party…save a few holdouts.

I think Mark Levin says it best, [the Tea Party is our only hope]. By take-over of the soon to be irrelevant Republican Party, or their emergence as a legitimate third party. I prefer the latter, but either will do.

Ironically, Mitt Romney would probably have won the election had he asked for their help, but pride prevented him from doing so.

While the “Tea Party” would have preferred Romney over Obama despite Mitt’s shortcomings, they hate to be ignored…and ignored they were. Better stated, Mitt took them for granted. 

Live and learn, I guess. But, a tough lesson nonetheless. Was the petty squabble with their leader worth it?

Now, don’t fret. All is not lost as many of the pundits would imply. The sky has not yet fallen.

The United States remains the greatest Country on earth, and will be for some time despite efforts by our friends on the left to diminish her stature.

That shining light on the hill can still be seen, though it’s starting to flicker.

We still have the 2014 election cycle to make a difference. Let’s hope the “Tea Party” can produce as they did in 2010. But the preparations need to start now, though I’m sure Sarah and her minions are already on task.

Then it’s on to 2016 when maybe, just maybe, we learn from  past mistakes and provide a clear conservative choice to the Democrat’s nominee - - Chris Christie?

You don’t really think he wants to run against Cory Booker in 2014, do you? Despite his bravado, Christie too is a moderate. So why not switch parties to stave off a challenge from a popular up and comer. The "Sandy" polling bump won't last forever.

Thoughts on who the conservatives should nominate for 2016?