Last Tuesday evening I went to bed in denial, thinking that
there must be some mistake. I declined to believe that a majority
of the voters were stupid enough to re-elect a President whose
incompetence makes Jimmy Carter seem Washingtonian by comparison,
whose mendacity far surpasses that of a pathological liar like Bill
Clinton, and whose administration is so corrupt that it actually
evokes nostalgia for the Nixon era. I was sure that, when all the
actual votes had been counted, they would reveal that the
voters of Florida, Virginia, Ohio and Colorado had been sensible
enough to send this cheap grifter back to Chicago.
On Wednesday, forced to face the grim reality of the election
results, I became angry. My seething thoughts turned first to the
“news” media, whose behavior during this election cycle would have
brought a blush to the cheek of the most cynical Pravda
propaganda merchant. Then I thought of domesticated conservatives
like Ann Coulter, who
wrote that the media were pushing alternatives to Romney
“because they are terrified of running against him.” In reality,
the delusions of Coulter and the GOP establishment notwithstanding,
Romney was the man the media and the White House desperately
wanted to run against.
It was obvious to the Obama reelection team, its media toad
eaters, and anyone else with a grain of sense, that Romney could
easily be portrayed to the voters as an out-of-touch plutocrat
whose only memorable “accomplishment” as the Governor of
Massachusetts was the enactment of a health “reform” law that
rendered him unable to credibly denounce Obamacare. During the
presidential primaries, however, all serious challenges by Romney’s
competitors for the nomination were met by vicious and often
personal attacks from super-PACs funded by GOP establishment types
who believed Romney was “electable.”
By Friday, I had reached the bargaining stage. I told myself
that the House of Representatives was still controlled by the GOP
and that this would ameliorate the damage that Obama could inflict
on the nation during his second term. Moreover, I thought,
Republican control of the House might also mean that Darrell Issa,
the chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
might actually get to the bottom of the Benghazi blunder and the
Obama administration’s clumsily executed cover-up. If the facts are
as damning as many suspect, they might even provide grounds for
Obama’s impeachment.
I also reminded myself that Obamacare was still under siege in
the courts. The Obama administration is defending more than two
dozen lawsuits filed by Catholic organizations pursuant to the HHS
contraception mandate. And the state of Oklahoma has filed a
lawsuit challenging an IRS rule signaling its intent to issue
tax credits through federally-created insurance exchanges.
Obamacare stipulates that all such assistance must be dispensed via
state-run exchanges and its employer mandates can only be triggered
by assistance that originates from those state exchanges. The IRS
has decided to ignore the law.
These cold comforts fended off the depression stage until
Saturday, when I inevitably slid into a slough of despond. I found
myself agreeing with all the columns, blogs, and Facebook posts
that claim the “takers” now outnumber and therefore rule the
“makers.” More than half the electorate had morphed into a
collective vampire determined to suck the lifeblood out of the
shrinking and besieged cadre of producers. It was at that point
when I discovered the following quote from Edward Gibbon: “In the
end, more than freedom, they wanted security. They wanted a
comfortable life, and they lost it all — security, comfort, and
freedom.”
Then it occurred to me that the Gibbon quote was about Athens
rather than Rome. And, like many of his conclusions concerning the
latter, his conjecture about the loss of Athenian liberty was
historically inaccurate. The birthplace of democracy actually lost
its freedom by constantly starting wars with rival city states, a
bad habit that finally resulted in a resounding defeat. Remembering
this, I re-examined my view on why Romney lost and realized that it
didn’t happen because the country is going to Hell in a hand
basket, but because he ran a lackluster campaign against a wily
incumbent willing to tell any lie that would get him
re-elected.
Romney would have made a far better President than Obama, but he
was a weak candidate. His loss was entirely predictable. Indeed, I
did
predict it last January. However, like many early skeptics, I
learned during the campaign that Romney is an honest man who —
unlike the incumbent — understands how the free market economy
actually works. Thus, I hoped against hope that the voters would
confound my prediction, a thing they have frequently done in the
past. Sadly, this time, the electorate vindicated my original
estimation of Romney’s chances. In the end, the more intelligent
among them will regret it, but that won’t undo their error.
But it won’t do to blame the customer for last Tuesday’s
debacle. As Mitt Romney would no doubt tell us, if the product
didn’t sell, that tells us that that merchandise itself had some
defect or that it was not marketed properly. The good news is that
our system of government, like our economy, gives us second (as
well as third, fourth and fifth) chances. So, I think I’ll ignore
the advice offered by a recent commenter on my blog, “Well, Catron,
YOU LOSE … Time to shut down this web site. Good fight.” I guess
that means I have now reached the acceptance phase. We got our
butts kicked. That stinks. It is also a fact. Time to get back in
the fight.
