Having Your Cake And Eating It

Recently, Pajamas Media posted an article discussing who would most likely be Mitt Romney’s running mate against President Obama. As I read it, I found myself growing angrier and angrier. Not a single vote has been cast yet for the nomination, and yet here we have the GOP ruling elite telling us who is going to win. And next November, it will be Mitt Romney and Bob McDonnell against Barack Obama and (presumably) Joe Biden.


How nice of them to save us all that anguish of making up our own minds. I guess those of us who don’t particularly want that ticket can just go pound sand.


But as I read the article, and subconsciously compared it to my own arguments about Newt Gingrich for vice-president, I started to notice something: most of Ms. Adams’ arguments revolved around what McDonnell would do to help win the election, and very little about his suitability to carry out the office.


I was reminded, of all things, of the board game “Risk,” and one of the most important lessons I ever learned in — and from — that game: “don’t take more than you can hold.”


In this case, it demonstrates something that has bothered me for some time: how much weight is placed on what a prospective veep “brings to the ticket,” and little about how much he or she “brings to the administration.” The best example of recent years is (forgive me) Sarah Palin, whose suitability for vice-president was dwarfed by what she provided in a boost for the McCain campaign.


And let me clarify: “suitability” does NOT mean the same as “qualifications.” Palin was more than qualified for the job, but I saw it as a waste of her strengths. Further, the only prescribed duty for the veep is “preside over the Senate,” and in that sense a career political executive is at a bit of a disability. The last veep who had never served in Congress was, I believe, Spiro Agnew — another governor. (Lemme see… Senator Biden, Representative Cheney, Senator Gore, Senator Quayle, Representative Bush, Senator Mondale, Senator Rockefeller, Representative Ford… yup.) McDonnell spent 14 years in the Virginia legislature, but that’s not quite the same.


On the other hand, Gingrich doesn’t bring much beyond his own supporters to the ticket… but could be a tremendous asset to the administration. As a former Speaker, he knows how things are done on Capitol Hill, still knows a lot of the people up there, and has a lot of good will he can draw upon. (A lot of ill will, too, but he wouldn’t be Newt if he didn’t.) Gingrich is also a hell of a potent speaker, and his history of a walking idea factory who often fails on follow-through would actually serve him well in a job where he has no official powers and duties beyond what the president deigns to bestow upon him.


The one concern I have is that Gingrich is an exceptionally strong-willed individual, and would need a very strong president to keep him in check. For example, he would steamroll right over Obama or Carter or Gore, and I think even the first President Bush would have had troubles with him. Luckily, if there’s one trait the current crop of leading Republicans have in spades, it’s force of will — I think that Romney, Cain, or Perry would all be able to keep Gingrich from going out of control.


And come on, folks, think about Gingrich the debater. As delightful as it would be to see him totally shred Obama, it would be almost as satisfying to see him destroy Biden.

Color Me Green With Envy
"It makes eminent sense"
  • Chip

    I swear if they freaking give us Mitt Romney, I will sit at home on election day and let the GOP have 4 more years of the current disaster! I am sick and tired of the media and the elite telling me who to vote for, they can “pound sand” for all I care.

    • herddog505

      Tough call.  Which is worse for the country: four more years of Barry, or four years of Barry-lite?

    • I agree considerably with you – but I’ll hode my noze and vote for Romney IF he makes it through the primaries.  We seriously don’t need another 4 years of Obama’s hand on the tiller. I don’t care how pissed you are at the political elite, it’s not going to do you much good when Obama succeeds in crashing the system after he gets elected for another 4 years.

      I won’t vote for his anointed ass in the primary, however.  He’s not someone I want to see as President – but he’ll be better than Obama.  Cain? Gingrich? Perry? A. Concrete Block? Yeah. But Romney’s the last I’m likely to vote for.

      I’m really getting tired of ‘American Idol: Presidential Edition’ myself.

    • Chip

      You guys do what you want but, what good is the freedom to vote for who you want if all you get is who “they” pick? Voting for the lessor of two evils just doesn’t sit well with me any longer. I held my nose and voted for McCain and look where that got us.

      • Anonymous

        Think about it this way, the only thing that holds Obama back is reelection with that off the table who knows what he might do. I think we’re see the best we can expect from Obama not the worst. Like Newt says Mitt is 10 times better than Obama.

      • Sotomayor.  Kagan.

        The next President will appoint another Justice or three, and 200-300 lower federal judges to lifetime terms.  These judges will be affecting America for the next 25-30 years or more.

        If you believe there is no difference between the judges Obama would appoint and those Romney or any other Republican (including all those you don’t like) would name, you’re just not very bright.

        Not to mention the regulations and Executive orders and the Justice Department and all the U.S. Attorneys.  Not to mention there can be no repeal of ObamaCare with him there to veto it.

        You don’t always get what you want, Francis.  It’s a democratic process; voters participate in primaries and caucuses.  Nobody tells me who I can vote for.  There is no “Elite” there threatening, cajoling, or persuading me to vote for or against anyone.  But sometimes my guy doesn’t win.  So then I suck up the disappointment and vote for the winner.  Because I am a Republican and the Democrat is always much worse.

        But if you were the sort of spoiled little brat who threatened to take his toys and go home the first time the game didn’t go your way, I get it.  You are a RINO.

        • jim_m

          Regardless of how much a big government conservative Romney or any other candidate may be, they will not have the same anti-American, anti-capitalist ideology that dominates the obama admin.

          If it comes down to choosing between a government that may not be up to the task of fixing America’s problems or one that is bent on destroying this nation I will vote for the former.

          One thing is for sure: Romney would not have stiffed the Canadians this week on the pipeline and forced them into the arms of the Chinese.  That move by obama cost this nation billions of dollars and 100,000’s of jobs.

          SO go ahead and stay home Chip. You are just as much my enemy by helping reelect obama through your apathy as all the lefty idiots in the OWS movement.

          • Chip

            You guys are assuming Romney can beat Obama. I’m not not going to make such an assumption. There were those that said that there was no way Obama could beat McCain because of the experience gap, yeah, that worked out well. I haven’t really made up my mind on who I’m going to vote for in the Texas primary elections, my list isn’t that short yet. I’m still evaluating the current crop, I do know that Romney isn’t on my list and no I’m not a Ron Paul supporter, he’s wayyyy down near bottom of the list. Romney is simply too much of a risk to do the bidding of the democrat party, IF he manages to win. At least Bush (sort of) held his own when the Democrats won the majority. I just think Romney would be too much of a wimp to stand his ground.

          • jim_m

            Romney is not on my list of favorites either, but I will not stand idly by and withhold my vote.

            Hell, I’d vote Cthulu rather than obama in 2012 if I thought Cthulu had a chance of winning.

          • Anonymous

            I am not going to say you shouldn’t stay home,but I would ask that you take into consideration that there may have been a lot people saying the same thing in 2008 when we got Obama. I held my nose as did everyone else that voted for him. Maybe all those people would have given us McCain. Who knows. Anyway. Something to think about.

          • Anonymous

            Chip if all conservatives take your attitude then your right he can’t win, sort of self fulfilling right?

          • Chip

            Jwb10001, I don’t just want a warm body to occupy the Presidency, that’s what we’ve got now. I want someone with the right ideas and the right attitude. If you just want someone to win, hire an actor that can make you believe anything you want and says what you want to hear, that’s what you’ve had for generations; aren’t you tired of that?

          • Anonymous

            Yes I am tired of it,  but your plan gives us worse than a warm body it gives us an active leftist with nothing to lose. If too many of us opt out our best hope is that the democrats lose both houses of congress because by the time Obama’s done liberals will own the courts.

        • Chip

          Well I’m not threatening to “take my toys and go home” and I don’t consider myself a Republican, I’m Conservative and the bottom line is that, just as I didn’t trust Obama, didn’t trust McCain, I do not trust Romney. Hell, can’t really say I “trust” anyone running for public office, but I trust some more than others and I feel better about a lot more of the people running, including Ron Paul,  than I do Romney.

          • jim_m

            Don’t trust them. They don’t deserve it.

            But use your vote rationally.  Consider not just who the candidates are but what the ramifications are for the next 4 years in terms of policy, national security, the justice system and the economy.  obama has stood for wrecking the economy, destroying the heathcare, insurance, oil and financial industries; abandoning our allies; weakening the value of the dollar and ending the rule of law.  Go ahead and use your vote in a way that will ensure that he remains in office. 

            I doubt that you will find any GOP candidate, however flawed they may be, that will be worse for this country than another four years of obama.  It will take years to undo the damage that has already been done by obama.  Reelect him and it will more likely take decades.

        • Anonymous

          Good point. It’s hard to describe how unqualified Elena Kagan is for the SCOTUS (at least Soda-my-oar had been a judge, albeit a very stupid one). With enough of these looney-toons on the court, the Constitution as we understand it will be forever gone.

          • Anonymous

            …. hard to describe how unqualified are Elena Kagan and the low-iq lezbeen latina for the once supreme “court?” 

            And then there is the ACLU’s scrawny old commy crow – Ginzberg. 

            Describe that!

  • Anonymous

    I am bothered also by the incessant memo that Romney will be the nominee but when I pause from my rage I do know he has the money (which is what it takes) and some hefty experience.

    Newt cannot be VP due to what you cited. He is a strong personality. He is a leader not a follower and worse, not a ‘sit by and idly watch what happens’. Newt would deliver Virginia. I wrote him off earlier when his staff imploded and his funds were drying up but damned if he didn’t impress me in every debate. No doubt he has the width and breadth of knowledge at his ready. I also think Romney is impressed with him if you watch Romney watch Newt debate, he nods his head.

    The way we select candidates is frustrating but I am an ABO voter. Anyone but Obama. So please Chip, do not sit out the election. Bad move.

    JT, New Hampshire will go Romney in a big way. Just saying. ww

  • Anonymous

    This country will not survive 4 more years of Barry Obama.

    • Oh, it would – but at the end of it we’d be in pretty sorry shape, and the Democrats would be dead as a political party.  They’re already hurting badly – I doubt many, if any, will be looking for Obama to ‘help’ them in their campaigns.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah, Barry has come a long way from “Don’t worry, you’ve got ME!”

        • You forgot the second part of that.

          “Now, let’s take a shower and I’ll drop the soap, and you’ll bend over and pick it up.”

      • Not so fast.  Barry won’t allow the cuts we have to make.  That will mean more downgrades.  The only reason our bonds haven’t dropped like stones already is that Europe is even riskier.  But four more years of Barry, and even the Chinese won’t loan us money cheap. 

        When interest costs rise, the deficit does, too.  It will quickly become impossible to dig out of the hole.

        Democrats will never be dead as a political party as long as there is a parasite with his hand out willing to trade his vote for other people’s money, or a radical who hates the idea of capitalism and “corporations” and thinks life in “the state of nature” was somehow idyllic instead of nasty, brutish, and short.  Or as long as they control public education to make sure the young people are full of stupid, false socialist concepts instead of real knowledge.

        • They may not be dead – but as a political power they’re going to be ‘pinin’ for the fjords’. 

      • Anonymous

        If he were to be re-elected it would be with majorities in both house and senate for republicans. They would pass enough stuff that would end up making him look good his last four years. Democrats would raise him to the status of Reagan. 

  • Check out today’s article in the Spectator comparing Newt to Churchill. It is a good read. Churchill was not popular among many of his peers. He made more than a few mistakes. Many of the same criticisms leveled at Churchill can also be said of Newt. I’m still trying to work out what I think of Newt’s shifting positions. He claims that they are a result of his maturation process and newfound faith. Whether this is true, or whether they are the pragmatic manipulations of a master politician, the voter must decide.

    • I know my attitudes and positions aren’t what they were 30 years ago.  Time and experience changes people – if they’re open to learning from their mistakes.

      Obama?  Hey, he’s perfect – no mistakes and nothing to learn, ever!  He came out of Chicago and hasn’t changed at all!

      (/sarc, if you couldn’t guess.)

      • “I know my attitudes and positions aren’t what they were 30 years ago.”

        Mine neither. Not even five years ago. Everyone should continuously reevaluate themselves.

        • I’ve noticed that introspection is lacking among the left.  They don’t examine what they believe, they don’t particularly care if what they believe actually works or not as long as it’s a palatable belief system (see the ever new insistence that Communism CAN work – you just have to do it right!) and they never see a mistake causing millions of deaths as a reason to re-evaluate or even question in the least way their belief systems.  They are dreamers, believers in a perfectable humanity that (regretfully) needs to have the errant branches pruned off, and then we’ll be perfect.

          Ain’t gonna happen, of course – but when has that ever stopped a true believer?

          • In the rare instance that a leftist gets introspective, you get a David Horowitz.

    • jb


      Newt = Churchill?? OMG, you guys are killing me.

      • I suggest you go to the Spectator site and school the ignorant author there. I know he will be dazzled by your rebuttal.

        • jb

          Why argue? Arguing with an opinion that extreme is like arguing with a flat-Earther.

  • herddog505

    Given Newt’s strengths and the precedent set by Barry, perhaps Newt could be the “legislation czar”, appointed to write the legislation that the “dysfunctional” and “broken” Congress won’t pass.

    What an idea!  Who needs a Congressional majority – or even a Congress – when all the president needs to do is appoint a czar to write what he wants and sign it into law as an executive order?

  • Anonymous

    Are you kidding me, an a-hole like Gingrich?

    Chico already told you that Marco Rubio would be the VP pick for Romney.  That works on so many levels.

    • Can Chico tell me what I’m going to have for lunch today?

      • Whatever is on the government menu. Soylent Green, perhaps?

      • Anonymous


        • Nah. I had that for breakfast.

          • I was wondering who stole my crispy squirrel bits…

            Had to make do with pineapple, and I didn’t have the time to let it grow a good coat of fur.

          • I never eat Crispy Squirrel Bits. I know what bits of the squirrel are in it.

    • Anonymous

      Better an “a-hole” then a progressive in Republican clothing like Romney.

      But more importantly everybody should go over to intrade and sell Rubio short on the VP nod ’cause if Chico believes something you ain’t gonna get a better bet that it is wrong.

      • Anonymous

        So far, Chico’s doing pretty well on his “Cain will not break 10% in NH or SC” prediction.

        • How was your prediction on the number of deaths, rapes, assaults, diseases, and public defecations in the OWS movement, Chomsky?

          • retired.military

            In case you hadnt noticed Chico has apparantly taken a Hiatus from the threads where we talking about the murdering, rapist, child molestors, want a hand out, unwashed, drug dealer, drug taking, dont want a job occupy crowd.

          • Anonymous

            Chico sometimes has to do other things than comment on Wizbang, like work, travel and going to bars.

        • Anonymous

          You also think Ron Paul is leading the polls so maybe you’re predictive powers are better than your ability to see and understand current events?

    • “Are you kidding me, an a-hole like Gingrich?”

      What does that make the inside-trader and serial liar Pelosi? Oops, I gave it away…

      • Anonymous

        There is more than one a-hole in the world.  Gingrich and Pelosi are just two of them.


  • So Myra Adams is now “the Republican Elite,” huh?

    Funny thing.  I’ve participated in Republican primary contests for President, Governor, Senator, Congress and local offices for forty years.  NEVER once has some “Republican Elitist” or “Establishment” figure attempted to dictate to me who I should vote for in any of those contests.

    Not once.

    It’s a democratic process – far more democratic than the Democrats use.  They reserve a large number of delegate seats for their “Establishment” figures – elected officials, party bosses and activists, former Politburo members – and that is in fact what gave Obama the nomination last time.

    Republicans are all about the voters.  Primaries and caucuses determine almost every delegate at our convention.  No back room deals.  No bosses telling anybody who they have to vote for.

    The “Republican Establishment” is just the name used by conspiracy nuts who can’t elect their nutty candidates.  They want an excuse to desert the Party’s nominee, so they fabricate a fictitious entity to serve as bogeyman to justify their faithlessness, disloyalty, and betrayal.

    Turns out the same punk losers who throw the “RINO” label at everyone who doesn’t toe their line on every single issue are, in fact, Republicans In Name Only themselves, who would desert the Party and the nation as a matter of personal pique because their candidate didn’t win.

    Grab a tissue and cowboy up, Sparky.  Stop blaming others for your own failures.

    • jim_m

      I disagree with the characterization saying that there essentially is no such thing as the republican establishment.

      My understanding is that when someone refers to the GOP establishment they are referring to those people involved with the party on a national level and people who are influential within the national party organization.

      In that sense I think that it is a legitimate belief that those people do have a vested interest in electing long time political timeservers such as Romney because their own personal self interest is best served by doing so.  By working to ensure that those with the strongest party relationships are the ones who represent the party they ensure their own influence and ability to increase their wealth through leveraging that influence.

      Such people put party politics before what the country needs.  We end up with tragic candidates like Bob Dole and John McCain because they have been around forever and “it is their turn”.  Today the party elite are circling the wagons because it is “Romney’s turn” because he has paid his dues and has hung around stroking the party bigwigs for the longest time.  Is he really what the country needs?  Is he really the best candidate they could put forward?  Probably not.  But he is the safest candidate for those who want to maintain the same culture of influence peddling and cronyism that currently exists in DC.

      I’ll agree that the use of the label “RINO” has been debased from it’s original meaning which designated GOP politicians who were affiliated with the GOP but voted with the dems on most significant issues.  People like Chafee, Snowe and often McCain (especially for his tendency to get involved in schemes which were primarily focused on undermining the position of a GOP President) were/are correctly characterized as RINO’s.

    • Anonymous

      She’s not part of the elite, but she’s tuned in to the message. And that message? Romney is to be the nominee. Since it’s inevitable, you just might as well lie back and enjoy it.


  • retired.military

    “How nice of them to save us all that anguish of making up our own minds. I guess those of us who don’t particularly want that ticket can just go pound sand.”

    Well if that is the ticket I will vote for it.  I wont campaign for it, donate to it, or help it in any way.  And every time I am asked I will let them know in no uncertain terms that the establishment selected Romney let them work to get him elected.

    • Exactly. And to those who would call me a RINO for not voting for Romney next November, I would simply point out that in Georgia the only way to be a Republican “in name” is to pay dues to the local party organization — which I haven’t done in years.

  • Anonymous

    Ahh, the VP discussion.  Brings back fond memories of a certain speech in 2004 that one Super Committee member hopes would be forgotten …   http://bit.ly/qVdDUt

  • Doc

    Anyone notice that Romney maintains a steady percentage of around 30%?  There is an ebb and flow whenever another candidate rises or falls, but Romney remains stable.  That would indicate to me that he does have a pretty rock solid constituency of 30% (probably the Republican Old Guard).  It would appear that the 70% realize that Romney is a business as usual politician and are awaiting the emergence of a final challenger in the party.  It would appear that the established platforms of BOTH parties has crumbled:  democrats because of the disastrous events of the past 3 years as well as the continual exposure of the arrogance and wanton disregard of the Constitution and laws of the United States and the republicans who have been (until recently) sitting on their asses allowing the dems to, pretty much, do it as long as they get a piece of the pie.  The TEA Party took the lid off the garbage can and the smell of it has permeated the nation waking the apathetic members of the majority to the fact that someone has to take out the trash and has sent the first load to the dump.  This resulted in an even more overwhelming odor and most Americans smell it and realize that air freshener will no longer suffice, and that a garbage man is needed.  While Romney probably will take NH, I look to the 2nd and 3rd place finishers there for the next President.  The bounce that results from the first one or two primaries will drastically change from;historical patterns, as much as the dems would like to see Romney be the challenger, I don’t believe that majority of the public want him.  Look at the radical changes the other contenders are presenting – that is the HOPE and CHANGE the American people were looking for last presidential election, and I believe they will DEMAND it this coming election.,   

  • Anonymous

    ….  think about Mr Gingrich the debater. As delightful as it would be to see him totally shred Obama, it would be almost as satisfying to see him destroy Biden ….

    In 2008 the then soon-to-be President-Elect Palin destroyed Plugs Biden every which way but loose for all the darned good it achieved. 

    In that the slobbering lickspittle Obamania Media simply lied about Mrs Palin’s quite remarkable destruction of the senate’s biggest ego — and most miniscule IQ.

    As they would if Mr Gingrich God-forbid got the gig as vp-nominee.

  • jb

    Guys, face it.

    a) Bachmann’s too crazy; Perry’s too stupid and crazy; and Cain’s too stupid.
    b) Ron Paul’s smart enough but in his own ways even crazier.
    c) Huntsman is too smart and too moderate to win the primary
    d) Mitch Daniels is apparently too smart and too moderate to even be invited to the debates!

    Only Romney is smart enough and not crazy enough. And look at all the pretzel bends he’s had to go through, to deny moderate ideas that worked.

    And it’s going to be HILARIOUS fun when Romney gets the nod, and has to attack Obama’s health care – which is based on a plan that Romney instituted first in Massachusets.

    And? Conservative GOP members have only themselves to blame. Because they have decided they want candidates who are anti-abortion, anti-climate change and pro-trickle-down theory. Which puts them on the outs with modern society, accepated science and established economics.

    And that’s how it is. Watch the election and see if I’m wrong. Taking bets for push-ups as we speak.