The Republican field for president has been volatile because no one individual has had the record or personality to articulate a real difference in their view of America. Newt Gingrich has come the closest, but he has his failures in record and personality that keep him from being a viable candidate. I’m not whining that one candidate should be the nominee over the Mitt Romney and that the voters are dumb for not seeing it. My disappointment isn’t with the failure of any candidate that has dropped out of the race. My disappointment is that there isn’t a viable candidate for me to pine for. There is no one on the sidelines for solid conservatives to draft. The thought of a brokered convention excites me for about five minutes. All four of the remaining candidates would be better than President Obama. I will work to get any of them elected (Yes. Even Ron Paul.) It appears however, that I will be working to get Mitt Romney elected.

The problem is that it is a hard sell.

I was wondering the other day what had happened to Ann Coulter and who was now impersonating her. She used to be on Sean Hannity’s show on a regular basis trying to get Chris Christie or some other person to run “because if we don’t, then we are stuck with Romney.” Now she is pumping him up every chance she gets. She’s a smart woman. What happened? Earlier today I realized what had happened. She realized the inevitability of Romney as our nominee. She decided that it was better to backtrack sooner than to decide after the convention that she had to support Romney.

This is where I am today. I will support Mitt Romney  to defeat Barack Obama. Reread that sentence. I will support Mitt Romney to defeat Barack Obama. This is supporting a negative. I am not necessarily for Mitt Romney, but I am “all in” when it comes to ending the Obama presidency. Unfortunately, this is the message that Republicans just may be taking for granted. Are Republicans counting their chickens if they believe anyone can defeat Obama and that is all that matters? There is a large group of Republicans that believe Mickey Mouse could beat Obama this year, but there is a greater number that hold on to this ambiguous concept of “electability.” It’s one of these concepts that you can’t define, you just know it. This group believes Mitt Romney has it. This is where you hear the argument that a candidate needs to be near the center of the political spectrum to have mass appeal and win.

I believe that the United States is a center-right nation politically. Trying to appeal to the center-center is a mistake. I believe that a Democratic candidate campaigning to ward the center picks up votes. I don’t think many people will argue with that point. Democrats try to present themselves as more conservative during election season. Depending on their district, they will advocate anti-tax policies, be pro-military, or be pro-life. A quick look at any Republican election will show you how important the conservative vote is. Mitt Romney spoke at CPAC this year for example. I believe that if a Republican goes too close to the center, and cannot provide enough of a contrast with the Democrat, then he/she risks losing due to apathy. If people believe that they are getting similar policies, then there is no incentive to vote. Partisans will vote, the middle will vote for something, but they are not voting for the letter next to the candidate’s name.

Romney is in danger of engendering that apathy. With Romneycare and being a “Wall Street guy”, Mitt Romney isn’t inspiring. He just isn’t. If anything, Mitt Romney will encourage the Occupy movement to participate and vote. It could be hard for most people to care enough to vote against a crony capitalist when they believe the alternative is a corporate.

I just hope I am wrong.

The Tea Party Movement has been a major political force since its inception. It has done a lot of good things. Most notably among them is that it has brought enthusiasm and people into the political process to reverse a trend of inactivity that has plagued America for years. With this strong positive is a small, but potentially fatal flaw: the Trojan Horse.

As candidates have courted different tea party groups, the groups have been conscious of and tried to avoid the criticism of being labeled as an arm, or worse yet, a tool of the Republican Party. This has created situations where previous failed challengers to incumbents have suddenly received a shot in the arm and led to several upset victories. Many wonderful politicians rose on this tide such as Allen West and Marco Rubio. On the downside were several flawed candidates such as Christine O’Donnell and Sharon Angle, but these flaws were the same flaws that the Republican and Democratic parties experience in their candidates. In the end, the support of the tea parties was an overwhelming force and brought many new people to Washington D.C. and our state capitals. Because of the 2010 success, many others are looking for some of that magical tea party pixie dust.

I’ve had candidates ask me “What’s this tea party ‘thing’ about?” on a Monday and see that some tea party has put out an endorsement for them on a Friday. Some groups are stringent, some are not. I have seen a local tea party back a candidate that has never been to a tea party meeting and thinks of its members as loose cannons. I have seen another local tea party circulate petitions for a Republican state rep candidate that was a standing Democratic precinct committeewoman. These are situations that not only have the potential to embarrass the tea party movement, but they will drive people from their ranks when they see how ineffectual their leadership is. That’s what created the movement in the first place: the impotence of the two major parties. Tea party groups are worried about losing their relevance. If they don’t act professionally and do their homework, they will have no one to blame but themselves.

When I asked one of the Democrats at Andy’s party why he had voted for the current administration he cited the following list:

I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.     I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.     I voted Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.     I voted Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.     I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.  I voted Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.  I voted Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits, and we should take away the social security from those who paid into it.     I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for distribution as the Democrats see fit.     I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.     I voted Democrat because I think that it’s better to pay billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle, gopher or fish.     I voted Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most wonderful country in the world, I was promised “HOPE AND CHANGE”.

Now I get it………………………CHANGE.

When we were all kids, some us said things like “I want to be a senator!” or “I want to be president!” We made these statements because we want to change the world for the better. We didn’t want to be president for the pension.  You can say I am being romantic about the idea, and you may be right, but the truth is that public service is supposed to be for serving the public. Public service is not for servicing ourselves. There are constant laments against the “career politician.” What a better way to discourage the potential “career politician” that makes decisions geared to assuring reelection and encourage the public servant that is making his or her neighborhood better for our children.

This is not to say that those board members that have not yet decided to support the elimination of their public pensions are all “career politicians” milking the taxpayers. Can you imagine going into work tomorrow and telling your boss that you shouldn’t get the benefits that they agreed to pay you? If you are like me, the answer is an emphatic “no.” This is why I have trouble saying that I won’t support a county board candidate that won’t sign this petition. It is easy to pass judgement on what another person makes, but difficult to hold ourselves to that standard.

County board members, and other elected officials however have that power to pass judgment on the benefits of other public sector employees. In these times where government budgets need to become leaner out of necessity our elected officials need to lead first by example. This is why I support the petition and encourage others to sign it. Below is a link to the petition, and I encourage you to give it a look and your signature.

“Eliminate Publicly Funded Pensions for DuPage County Board Members” http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/eliminate-publicly-funded-pensions-for-dupage/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=system&utm_campaign=Send%2Bto%2BFriend

Yesterday in Chicago Now the following blog/editorial/news story was posted:

Candidates’ petitions challenged by party insider

By Lucy Lloyd,            Friday at 5:39 pm

These tax breaks have naturally made for bad press as company after company has been exempted from the taxes that Governor Quinn and the Democrats have said that Illinois just HAD to have to survive. The latest companies are Sears Roebuck, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and the Chicago Board of Exchange. Last week, the proposed tax break deal for them was defeated in the General Assembly. Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate Majority Leader Tom Cullerton first made assurances that a new deal could be voted on in the Spring. When the companies said that they couldn’t wait until Spring, Madigan and Cullerton quickly acted to create a special session to address the issue. The Democrats need to keep Sears, the CME, and the CBOE to avoid anymore loss of political capital.

This is where the Republicans need to draw another line in the sand. They need to stay principled. They need to say “no” to any tax breaks for individual companies. It must be shouted from the mountain tops that Democrats, and ONLY the Democrats, are the ones engaging in corporate welfare. Make them own it. Furthermore, they need to change the narrative from discussing the merit of each tax break to stating that if tax breaks for one company are good for Illinois’ economic growth, why aren’t they good for all companies? The case needs to be made to forget individual tax breaks and push for repeal of the corporate tax increase. This naturally brings us to say that if a tax hike repeal is good for business, it is good enough for private citizens that can use their added purchasing power to fuel Illinois’ economic engine. Republicans, this is low hanging fruit. This is how you make an argument for control of the General Assembly. This is the cornerstone for your platform. This is your opportunity to take control of the conversation…if you’ll just take it.

With Herman Cain gone from the presidential race, a voice of the common man that is not an entrenched, establishment Republican has been removed. Herman Cain’s message was delivered in simple terms that attracted many independents that are fed up with the two parties and conservatives that are leery of having Mitt Romney shoved down our throats.

I never was sure that Herman Cain could win the nomination, but I was very hopeful that he could make it to the convention next summer. Barring any earth-shattering news, Mitt Romney is a lock to be one of the candidates to make it to the convention. The rest of the field seems to be positioning itself as the anti-Romney vote. The anti-Romney vote is not a vote against the person, rather it is against what it represents. For conservatives like myself, Romney represents the same weak Republicans that brought us Barack Obama. Romney brought Massachusetts government controlled healthcare, and he believes in the myth of global warming and the programs needed to combat it. Instead of being a candidate that calls for radical changes to our fiscal policy to avoid the collapse of our economy, he only gives us the feeling that he will slow its eventual demise. Herman Cain gave conservatives its purest voice. Gingrich, Perry, Paul, Bachmann, and the rest of the field (except for Huntsman) are certainly to Romney’s right, but none is a candidate that neither the polished conservative nor “Joe-Six-Pack” conservative can get behind. They all have their faults and inconsistencies. While Herman Cain wasn’t the perfect conservative either, he is “more perfect” in perception than any other candidate.

When Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, the headlines read that conservatism was dead. The Tea Party revolution and 2010 elections proved that wasn’t true. The ascendancy of Cain affirmed it. The end of Cain could have the effect of swinging the pendulum back in the other direction. Even if Mitt Romney wins the election we will not have a conservative in the White House. What we will have is someone assuming the conservative mantle, but enacting moderate policies which stains the conservative movement. It is possible (and my hope) that Newt Gingrich or someone else will pick up the ball and push conservative issues or be a mouthpiece for the conservative cause. With the loss of Herman Cain, that possibility is less likely.

If we don’t offer a clear differential alternative to Obama we will hear three words that would spell tragedy to our republic: “Four more years.”

Ok. I believe that Obama is a socialist and must be stopped, but I think that ignoring everything else happening around us and just waiting for the election is the wrong thing to do. The most logical way to see that what I say is true is to remember that President Obama was elected. A majority of voters believed that his vision for America was better than the one offered by John McCain. It can be argued (and quite well) that the vision Obama offered was false. It can be argued that the American people would never knowingly vote for a socialist America and fell victim to the largest case of “bait and switch” ever perpetrated, but that is not our purpose here. The point I am making is that the conditions were right for Obama to be elected. The conditions were right because we did what my colleague proposed; we ignored everything else to concentrate on the election.

In my home state of Illinois we have:

1. A Democratic governor that ran on a platform to increase our taxes.

2.This governor replaced a Democratic governor that was forced to resign for corruption.

3. A Democratic State House.

4. A Democratic State Senate.

5. A Democratic mayor in Chicago.

6. A Chicago city council where EVERY member is a democrat.

This has brought us over 10% unemployment, a 67% tax increase, and business after business leaving our state or cutting a sweet deal to remain within it. Barack Obama did not do this to us. We did it to ourselves. We did it by not being educated about what our governments want to do. We did this by being infatuated with political dynasties instead of good policies. We did this by thinking that other things were more important than what is happening at home. I’m sure that Illinois is not the only state this has happened to.

No. We need to pay attention to, and be involved in, ALL of it. We need to make sure we choose good leaders at home on the local level. These are our leaders of the future. We need to push for the implementation of pro-feedom and pro-growth policies at home so that their success will get them put on the national stage. We need to foster a culture where the election itself is not the end game. The election is the beginning of a new plan that will be monitored and assessed like all of us in our jobs. We need to remember that the defeat of President Obama is not going to signal the end of progressivism and we can all go home. It is just another day of waking America up.

In this world we live in today, can you imagine government taxing bodies that have a surplus? No? Well, you would be wrong. Such government bodies do exist. I happen to live near one that has millions of dollars in surplus funds. This group should be held up as a shining example. It’s administrators should be recruited as candidates for higher office, but these individuals have different ideas. They want to stay put (for now) and raise taxes and issue bonds to fund their ambitious and unnecessary projects…all while leaving that large surplus untouched. Can you imagine the audacity for a group to have millions in their back pocket and to still be telling their constituents that they need to contribute more?

More to come…