The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

National Review has an editorial up about Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. The editorial argues that "Conservatives should hope Romney's campaign does not fizzle" because being open to converts in the past has "given ideologically malleable Republicans an incentive to adopt conservative positions." It argues that "his conservatism will likely continue to sound tinny until he gives it an overarching theme of his own" and he should "figure out a distinctive way to apply his conservatism to the challenges of our time."

After all that NR has done to tout the candidacy of Romney, now we get to the point where the editors argue that he needs an "overarching theme" to his conservatism. The problem is, any "overarching theme" at this point is likely to be the result of long deliberation among his talented lineup of political consultants--the same process that was responsible for producing his "tinny" checklist conservatism in the first place. Yes, he has ten months until the first primary, but he has been essentially running for president for over a year and has already hired talent, toured the country, locked up endorsements, and launched TV ads. So, it actually does seem a bit late in the day to be deciding why he's a conservative or what the rationale is for his candidacy. Also, it's difficult to understand how his experience will prove relevant to our times. If the major crisis facing America were economic, then perhaps there would be a rational for choosing an accomplished businessman and successful turnaround artist. But this time around, no matter what the outcome in Iraq, America will be choosing a wartime leader. Is helping to launch Staples relevant to this? Is rescuing the Olympics relevant? Is turning a deficit into a surplus in Massachusetts relevant? I don't see how it is.

topics:
Business, Iraq, Conservatism