Mitt Romney for President

Mitt Romney was definitely not my first choice for GOP nominee.  In fact, I believe I would have preferred Tim Pawlenty, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul & Newt Gingrich over him.  I always had this nagging suspicion that he had no core and that once the nomination was locked up, he would drop all pretense and all of his supposedly "severely conservative" beliefs.  But that isn't really what happened now is it?  In fact, he actually seems to sound more conservative now than during the primaries.  Here is Mitt in St. Louis:

Our example – and commitment – to freedom has changed the world. But along with the genius of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, and our Bill of Rights, is the equal genius of our economic system. Our Founding Fathers endeavored to create a moral and just society like no other in history, and out of that grew a moral and just economic system the likes of which the world had never seen. Our freedom, what it means to be an American, has been defined and sustained by the liberating power of the free enterprise system.

That same system has helped lift more people out of poverty across the globe than any government program or competing economic system. The success of America's free enterprise system has been a bright beacon of freedom for the world. It has signaled to oppressed people to rise up against their oppressors, and given hope to the once hopeless.

It is called the Free Enterprise System because we are both free to engage in enterprises and through those enterprises we ensure our freedom.

But sadly, it has become clear that this President simply doesn't understand or appreciate these fundamental truths of our system.

...

I don't want to transform America; I want to restore the values of economic freedom.

So for every government-spending proposal, I will ask the following question: "Is this program so important that it is worth borrowing more money from China to pay for it?"  With our nation facing 16 trillion dollars in debt, most times the answer will be an easy and unqualified "no."  We've seen how fast our debt can grow.  It's time to see how fast our economy can grow, and the first step is spending discipline.

Instead of throwing more borrowed money at bad ideas, I will lower tax rates, simplify the tax code, and get the American economy running at full strength.

This speech could have been given by Steve Forbes, by Ron (and Rand) Paul, by Newt Gingrich and even Ronald Reagan.  The fact Mitt Romney is doubling down on his conservatism to such an extent even after he has wrapped up the nomination is very reassuring (maybe he isn't the etch-a-sketch candidate).  What really crystallized it for me was this poster from the Occupy Wall Street folks that I posed yesterday.  It very succinctly pointed out one major impact that his election is going to have on the future:  the makeup of the Supreme Court.  With Scalia, Kennedy and Ginsburg all in their mid-late 70's a second Obama term could see three new justices.  If all three of them are liberal and they have a 6-3 majority, you can pretty much kiss the America we know goodbye (what's left of it after almost four years of Obama).  There will be no further limits to any government largesse.  They will be able to regulate everything, tell you what to eat, how you spend your money and you will have no recourse.  Sure, you can sue, but then you'll just be appealing to a liberal kangaroo Supreme Court which will tell you that "government is always right". 

Then there is the issue of Obamacare, if it isn't completely struck down by the Supreme Court in the next couple of weeks.  Under a second term of Obama, that monstrosity will be imposed on the American people despite the fact that the majority have said repeatedly that they don't want it.  Our taxes will go up, our premiums will skyrocket and our quality of healthcare will go down.  Romney, who fathered Romneycare, is not the guy I'd want in office to repeal Obamacare, but I think that even he would try to repeal the most harmful aspects of it.  After all, Romneycare was only about 70 pages long while Obamacare is over 2000.  I'm sure there is plenty in that difference that he doesn't like. 

I realize that I had previously said I was going to vote for Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate for President.  In a perfect world, if it were a real three way race, I would be fully behind him.  But even he himself admits he has no chance so what exactly is the point?  Sure it would make me feel good, in a way, to vote for the guy who is closest in philosophy to myself.  But I think I would feel worse if a close state went to Obama thanks to people who would normally vote Republican voting Libertarian.  Also, if people like Rand Paul and Newt Gingrich can endorse Mitt Romney, despite having great excuses for staying on the sidelines, why am I throwing a temper tantrum at the party which I've called home since I was a kid?  If the Democratic candidate  were Bill Clinton or an Evan Bayh or a Jim Webb, I'd probably be more likely to vote Libertarian since the future of this country would be less at stake.  But they aren't running, the anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-private sector Barack Hussein Obama is the other choice and he must be stopped in November.

It looks like after everything, I'm voting for Willard.  I hope he doesn't let us down.