The Cast Against Mitt Romney: Mary Katharine Ham Should Trust Her Instincts (As Should We)
A more thorough approach to the key elements of the case against Mitt Romney will have to wait until the early part of this week, when there will presumably be a larger weekday audience.
In the meantime, let’s contrast Kathryn Jean Lopez’s fawning, hopelessly naive defense of Mitt Romney’s flagrant and frequent flip-flopping, taken apart at this BizzyBlog post yesterday, with this cautionary column from Examiner.com’s Mary Katharine Ham.
We should be thankful that MKH seems to have suffered no permanent damage from the time she spent second-fiddle blogging a few years ago at chief Romniac Hugh Hewitt’s place. Despite clinging to many popular conceptions about Romney’s credentials, and probably not having a complete handle on why her observations and instincts are reliable, she nevertheless “gets it” when it comes to his non-contribution to a GOP national ticket. Given how far into the tank for Romney other right-wing talkers and commentators have gone, I’ll take it — for now (bolds are mine):
I Am Not Brimming With Enthusiasm
….. But Mitt Romney is an “in theory” candidate. In theory, he was the obvious conservative alternative to John McCain. In theory, he hit all the fiscal con and social con marks in a way no other Republican did. In theory, he looked the part and could walk and talk the walks and talks, respectively. In theory, he had the money, the know-how and the headstart to crush all comers.
In practice, he had every advantage– money, early support from a small group of incredibly influential conservatives (notably National Review), great buzz, a competent organization, a veritable arch-enemy of the base to run against– but it simply did not translate into a swell of support for him among rank-and-file Republicans. It didn’t translate into a swell of support for him among conservative leaders until they were faced with the suddenly real spectre of a McCain candidacy just weeks before Mitt Romney’s campaign finally came to an end in front of CPAC. ….. (talk radio pundits’) relative lack of enthusiasm was indicative of a larger lack of it within the base. The evidence is that late support of Romney among many conservatives was much more anti-McCain than it was pro-Romney. Romney ‘08 was a rampart, not a rallying cry.
….. The best argument I’ve heard for a VP slot for Mitt is that he might be able to turn Michigan red. What with Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s depolorable economic leadership, McCain’s historic strength in the state, and Mitt’s obvious economic creds and hometown appeal, the chance at 17 electoral votes might be worth any perceived downside of giving Mitt the job.
All that’s true, in theory. But never since the day we saw Mitt Romney enter the primary race have we seen him capitalize on an “in theory” calculation. Why does anyone believe he’ll deliver now?
Give me Mitt as a close adviser on economic issues. Give me Mitt as a competent surrogate. Give me Mitt as a vanguard of Republican organizing and fundraising. Give me someone else as VP.
If influential types within conservatism and the GOP were as far along as MKH, we wouldn’t be facing the code-red threat of Romney becoming McCain’s running mate.
Others need to be taken there, and for more powerful reasons than those Ham just articulated. She, and many others, including the presumptive nominee himself, need to be disabused of the notion that Romney should have any kind of meaningful role in a McCain administration. I’ll work on that in the next few days’ posts.
