At Least Santorum is Legitimate

Justice Dakota

February 8, 2012

At Least Santorum is Legitimate!

Senator Rick Santorum easily won the caucus states of Minnesota and Missouri and has earned "Contender" status. The fact that he won Colorado, according to the pundits, indicates a problem of "enthusiasm" for Governor Romney among the Republican "base." What is missing from the current analysis is that Speaker Gingrich is vanishing as a viable candidate. He seems to have ordained himself "Commentator and Chief."

After his smashing defeat in Nevada, Gingrich held a bizarre "Press Conference." He sounded more like a distracted Fox News analyst than a presidential candidate. How many viewers watching his "goofy" performance had a brief flashback to historical video clips of President Nixon's self-destruction?

The Speaker subsequently put his pundit hat on again and told the media that Romney would not do well in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri. Newt did not offer an analysis on his impending thumping. He was completely rejected in Colorado and Minnesota, and was he too intellectual to get on the ballot in Missouri? His campaign no longer seems viable -- not because he can't win future delegates -- but because he will become increasingly pissed off that Newt is not loved as much as Newt wants to be loved.

So, it appears that it is finally a legitimate two-man race between two conservative, Christian Republicans -- Romney and Santorum.

I mention the conservatism of Romney and Santorum because the Real Conservative Movement (RCM) is obsessed with the mythology that Ronald Reagan never compromised. Have they morphed Reagan into an anti-moderate for their own radical purposes, or do they just hate the subtle facts of history?

The RCM would be better off if they stopped applauding angry "Red-Meat" zingers mumbled by calculating, bitter, manipulative, core-less politicians -- and simply read more about American History -- and truly appreciated the greatness of President Ronald Reagan.

Case in point:

August 01, 2004 —

Review of Jack F. Matlock Jr.'s book, Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended.

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2004/0801russia_talbott.aspx

"Reagan himself went even farther. Asked at a press conference in Moscow in 1988, his last year in office, about the role he played in the great drama of the late 20th century, he described himself essentially as a supporting actor. "Mr. Gorbachev," he said, "deserves most of the credit, as the leader of this country."

This quotation was much cited at the time as an example of Reagan's graciousness, tact and self-deprecation. But Matlock's book bears out his former boss's judgment. The 40th president of the United States emerges here not as a geopolitical visionary who jettisoned the supposedly accommodationist policies of containment and detente, but as an arch-pragmatist and operational optimist who adjusted his own attitudes and conduct in order to encourage a new kind of Kremlin leader."

How does the word "pragmatist" sit with the RCM? In their tiny universe of ideas, being pragmatic is being a sell-out of Reagan Conservatism. Is it possible that Ronald Reagan would take the RCM to the wood-shed and tell them to grow up?

Those who care deeply about this country can hope that the Republican Primary race may soon get down to two rational, conservative, Republican pragmatists -- finally, hopefully!