Friday, November 25, 2011

Gingrich is Right, But SWNID Still Won't Support Him

Newt Gingrich is right about immigration. Namely, policies that would repatriate undocumented (or "illegal," if you must) immigrants who work, pay taxes, raise families and obey the law are unspeakably stupid.

SWNID has long insisted that economic law is more important than civil law regarding immigration, and the latter ought to cede to the former. Economic law says that available supply will somehow reach to meet demand. Hence, if one country has a demand for labor and its neighbor country has a supply, the supply will aim to meet the demand. If the United States has jobs that go unfilled and Mexico has laborers who want opportunity, the enterprising laborers will find a way to get to the jobs.

Meanwhile, Republican activists who dominate the early nominating process are utterly dominated by anti-immigration fervor that borders on the absurd--this despite their most recent political heroes' (Reagan's, Dubya's--also their most recent political goat's [McCain's]) championing of pro-immigration policies and their insistence on free-market principles economic salvation.

Gingrich has the audacity to state as much publicly, though he's clever enough to do so only after gaining some traction in the polls. We heartily affirm his bold move, one that Romney will also make, but not until September 2012.

But we will not support Mr. Gingrich, despite our warm feelings for his policy position on this and many other matters.

We will not support Mr. Gingrich because a President's fundamental role is not as a policy advocate but as an executive. And Mr. Gingrich is proved to be an inept leader who alienates associates, burns bridges, and overreaches in his supreme confidence in his own judgment.

Policy positions are easily changed relative to temperament. Gingrich lacks the foundational temperament of an effective political leader.

Mr. Romney demonstrates as much. He can change policy positions more easily than he can change his sacred underwear. And while he too has obvious flaws of temperament (i.e. too much confidence not in himself but in collective leadership of experts: witness RomneyCare), they are least among those currently running.

Hence, we metaphorically hold our nose, as we do every four years, not so much to throw him our support but gently to allow our support to creep in Romney's general direction.


Q said...

Why not Rick Santorum?

Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNID said...

Santorum is boring and so is unelectable. Santorum can't carry his home state and so is unelectable. And he's never held executive office, something that the Obama presidency should teach us matters a lot.

Tom_Ky said...

What about Huntsman? I don't understand why conservatives don't get behind this guy - he is dangerous to anybody with a (D) behind their name. What are the two big issues over the next 10 years? The economy and China - Huntsman seems to have a better grasp of these issues than any other candidate.

A vote for any of the other clowns on that stage keeps President Obama in the White House for 4 more years.

Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNID said...

Huntsman won't toe the party line on social issues, so he'll never get over 5% in the primaries. But if Gingrich is nominated, we won't be surprised if he picks Huntsman as veep.

Romney, of course, can't ever pick Huntsman. Two Mormons on one ticket will send evangelicals into the latter chapters of Ezekiel looking for signs of the end.

We'd argue that most conservatives believe that an economics-and-China "expert" is nice but not necessary. Anyone who is committed to controlling federal spending and reducing regulatory burdens will do better with the economy. It's not like what's wrong economically right now is a big puzzle. This also explains why BHO is sinking despite his perpetual likeability.

And China is only a problem if we make them a problem through protectionism and more deficit spending. So no expert needed there either.

Any President who wants Huntsman to bring nuance to the discussion can hire him into the cabinet.