We are not, we just want them done right. But here we are on the night of the Florida Republican primary vote and we cringe at the prospect of the primary campaign carrying on longer in the manner it has devolved to. A solution? Given the predilections of the dominant media I am reasonably confident the quickest way to hear less from the Republican candidates seeking the nomination is for them to spend at least three fourths of their debate performances articulating their understanding of the mess the country is in because of the Democrats and the Obama administration and their solutions to righting the country.
Surely that would end the sponsorship and coverage of the debates by the likes of CNN and ABC and others of their ilk as they would not devote much time focused on a demonstration of conservative thought and criticism of Obama. But as it stands now the liberal press is happy to propagate the blood letting and distortion we are witnessing. They and Obama hope that the accusations and distortions rolling off the tongues of the Republican candidates during the debates, and other Republican operatives in the horrendously negative ad campaigns being aired, will create a set, and save them millions of dollars in the PR battle this summer and fall.
It is true that the Democrats will raise some of the same issues against our eventual nominee as raised by the nominee’s primary opponents. Certainly our nominee has to be well vetted and well prepared. But the adversarial press (when it comes to Republicans) has been the usual avenue for out of context distorted analysis regarding Republicans. It is just not necessary to serve as an echo chamber for their analysis or spending time defending oneself from unforgiving fratricidal distortions. Attacks from Obama’s surrogates in the press can be responded to in a manner that draws blood from the Democrats. Firing back against the real enemy is better for the cause than shooting compatriots. Demonstrating a superior ability to articulate conservative solutions and the malignant implications of big government is what is needed.
Is this sort of thing inevitable? Well once somebody starts it, it does tend to escalate. One would think that such a no win inevitability would give one pause at least as to the edge they put on a campaign. Now there are comparatively more innocent parties in this mix. And we suppose in some scenario the fratricide the others partake in could help the least vulnerable target, who kind of keeps his or her head down, letting the big kids duke it out and refrains from pot shots. But the problem remains that the collateral damage of the heaviest hitters impacts the Republican brand thereby handicapping the eventual winner and the thoroughness of the down-ticket results.
By no means is this a call for anemic campaigns, just more integrity. And the problem is not the existence of independent so called Super PACs, however noxious the distortions in some of their ads have been. They have not put out substantially anything more distorted than the candidates have. It makes no more sense to condemn them than it does the candidates for improprieties. We have no objection to the amplification of truth that they provide, when they provide it. That will be needed in the general election. We certainly do not want the arbitration of truth limited to the predominant liberal media.
One thing we do have going for us is that however bad we make ourselves look, the horrendous truth about Obama’s and Democrat’s job performance will be hard for them to defend against once we are not singing discordantly.