NOTE: The guest editorial that accompanies the table below is absolutely outstanding. Due to the length of this “Experience Comparative,” in order to read the whole editorial, you will need to click the “CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE READING…” link at the bottom.
In 2006, a close friend of mine introduced me to David Parker, a personal friend of Governor Mitt Romney. I was contemplating doing some grassroots work to promote his run for President and wanted to know more about the man. Candidly, I was skeptical. How could a governor of such a liberal state be a Republican, let alone a conservative? David met me for lunch at Strawberry Farms and laid out the high points of Governor Romney’s strong conservative action, from his record of protecting life to his hundreds of vetoes. I was sold!
David organized this amazing matrix, comparing the leadership experience and skills of the four remaining Republican presidential candidates. In my opinion, this table — along with the accompanying Op-Ed piece by David — should be published in every major newspaper in the nation, including the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal! I honestly believe that if every literate voter were to carefully study this table and Op-Ed, the nomination would be over now.
As you compare each candidate below, add Obama to the list and subject his experience to these points — the results of his trial and error leadership are dismal indeed. Most impressive to me is the comparison below of leadership experience in the private, public, and philanthropic sectors — Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul simply don’t measure up to Governor Romney’s extensive background of executive leadership. Why any person would consider voting for a candidate without proven executive experience — after voting for Obama the community organizer — I will never understand. (there is good reason it is extremely rare that a congressman or senator is ever elected as POTUS)
You can make a big difference in this elections season. Please pass this Op-Ed piece by David Parker to as many people you know as possible.
“No Apology, the Case for Mitt Romney” — by David Parker
Are we so blind in our pursuit of our conservative ideology that we fail to recognize needed pragmatism? Our nation, a center-right nation, is not conservative, nor liberal, but an amalgamation of many people, each with individual agency, thought and perspective that leans center-right in the majority.
[ editorial continues below the table ]
Yes, we are clumped together at times in ideological conclaves, but to impose or dictate our conservative ideology in absolute myopia is a failed and fractured model, just as it is with those on the other side of the aisle. We cannot win and they lose, nor visa versa. We are one Nation under God, and thus we need to be sufficiently pragmatic and persuasive to win the majority, and lead those who believe in contrary principles of liberal thought to the more conservative Promised Land — America, an exceptional nation!
Accordingly, leadership and governance, and ideological advocacy demands pragmatism over some perceived capacity of force majeure.
In fact, we live in a nation of moderation and not extremes, a nation that demands and respects majority rule — we don’t vacillate in wild swings. (Although with Obama, it has been more of a swing to the wild extremes of liberality than any of us had thought possible.) There are nations that do abide the wild swings, whereby they find themselves ruled by the radical contingents; such as what we see in the Middle East with minority dictating to the majority — it doesn’t work. However, with some of the recent incantations out of Washington and President Obama, we are leaning more to the extremes of governmental rule thereby trumping the freedoms granted under our Constitution, wherein “we the people” govern, not the sovereign.
Yes, things need to change and they need to change NOW! That said, we can win with advocacy of conservative principles with measure and pragmatism. We needn’t divide and fracture in our myopia, nor capitulate to the contrary or subordinate that which matters most — our freedoms and beliefs. We just need to do it responsibly and with measure! The question is who is it that can best lead us in this manner? Who is the most electable that we can trust to lead with principle? Who is it whose life experiences have exhibited a willingness to subordinate personal interest to the greater good?
There are some in the conservative movement that argue they are the one with “bold ideas,” or the “consistent conservative,” and we need to“contrast” starkly with the liberal Obama. Really, let’s appeal to one segment of conservative thought and ignore the majority. Surely we can win on that ticket? Think again. How did that work for Rick Santorum when running for re-election — I think he lost by 18%? Or, Newt who imposed personal interest over the common good, and found himself “leading” but no one following, thus ending in his resignation.
The basis of the argument is the need for bold change in Washington — throw the bums out! As much as I agree, there is also a need for pragmatic measure, the need for an adult that can and will lead our nation to a brighter future based on fundamental conservative principles. And, we can’t throw the bums out by nominating those from within. That said, we can win without compromising our conservative principles; we can win, by and through effective leadership and persuasion. Such is what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts, leading a pragmatic conservative cause amid a left-centric Commonwealth, not a center-left Commonwealth. Look at the real record of what was accomplished amid the adversity of liberality. Romney led as an advocate for life, traditional marriage, personal responsibility and individual and religious freedom, when the winds blew contrary. He successfully exercised fiscal responsibility, cut spending without raising taxes, resulting in balanced budgets, rainy day funds, and smaller more efficient government. Facts are stubborn things, and they are proven in the real record, not the spin of the left, or the spin of those who would seek to paint Mitt Romney as a “moderate.” The agenda of the anti-Romney’s are founded in personal interest, self-promotion, and a mis-guided belief that they are the sole and stark advocates of conservative thought and freedom, at the exclusion of the majority that leans center-right, not right.
When choosing who we want to lead our nation, look at the core beliefs of the candidate; look at their life’s work; look at who stands with them and why; look at what drives them and shapes them — look to their experience and success! Look to their competency and actions over words. Look to their real record!
Mitt Romney has the support of many who have had experience with him over the past 30 years, whether in his personal relationships, private enterprise, the Olympics or as Governor. They not only stand with him, they are passionate about their support, because they know him. Comparatively, Newt and Rick have few, if any, who have worked with them over their Washington careers that stand with them; further, they seem to have alienated those with whom they have worked. Their rhetoric and/or intransigence have made them ineffective or damaged goods as “leaders.”
Now is the time for conservatives, independents and moderates to stand against the Obama agenda – to coalesce and stand with Mitt, the most electable, experienced, and successfully conservative leader in the race! Now is the time to bring the depth of conservatism and pragmatism together to save our Nation and restore our future to the greatness of its past! Now is the time put aside our myopia and look at the realities before us — this is America’s defining moment and we cannot afford the risk of losing this election; the most important in our lifetime. We cannot continue our current course, for if we do, we will lose more than we can imagine. We cannot nominate failed leadership or lack of leadership, again. Rick Santorum has never led, nor has Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich failed miserably. The temptations of power and influence can be corruptive, as in Newt’s case, and blinding as in Rick’s case. Mitt has stood the measure of time and experience and not suffered the allure of power — he has proven such in his life of service without seeking the spotlight and accolades. He has led in meekness and principle. We must nominate the most electable, competent, capable and proven conservative leader to stand against the Obama machine, Mitt Romney.
[emphasis added by Lundquist]
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams