Most of this was written prior to NY-26 vote yesterday, which only serves to accent media-Establishment post-election response today.

Bob Dylan wrote, “The times, they are a’changin…”

Watch for the media, the Washington establishment, and that corps of Beltway political consultants (who took a bath last November) to try to march these changin’ times backward, looking for one last chance to dictate the terms of the coming election campaign and recapture their lost luster.

They see the stakes in 2012 entirely different than we do. This is not Left-Right, but Them vs Us.  But this is their last chance, folks. They know if we win a back-to-backer, gaining the White House and the Senate along with the House, then this phase  of the counter-revolution against the Left, Taking Back the Government, will be over, and the next several elections will be nothing more than fine tuning the legislative work to undo what the Left has done the past 50 years.

And they will not be a part of it. A new type of ruling governance will emerge if we can win in 2012. Sounds almost biblical, huh?

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin (Dan 5) “The Writing is upon the wall.”

I said this last year:

The old rules of getting people elected will no longer apply, because the same type of people need not apply.

Seeing this the ruling elites are doing their dead-level best to make those old rules work for them in 2012. This includes the elitist wing of the GOP, who would much prefer that Obama win if it means not losing the original seating arrangements around the national dinner table.

So don’t look for any of this news in the media.

In 2010 the GOP broke all sorts of records for 1) raising less money and 2) turning away small donors. We won big anyway. Still, look for their “Have Tux, Will Travel” fundraising efforts to miss out on the bulk of GOP candidates again this cycle.

Ignore this early handicapping from a desperate media, who this week, behind the curtain will begin pushing John Huntsman as their latest Republican blue-plate special, now that other so-called first team candidates have stepped away. (To say that Mike Huckabee ever was a first team anything is to say Obama is a scratch golfer, but I digress.)

Huntsman may be a good man, I can’t say since I’ve never heard of him. That’s how first team he is. Conservative handicappers like Krauthammer have to be sent special briefing papers and video just to know what he looks like and be brought up to snuff on what an all star he’s been all this time. No matter, it will not serve Huntsman well to have the MSM out in front of his chariot tossing posies as he enters the arene de combat.

They (and you know who they are) use the same old tired templates they have always used to select the same type of candidates they have always pushed, because they continue to believe the voters want the same attributes in candidates they’ve always wanted, despite failure after failure after failure.  And they think all this because they are a small coterie of perhaps no more than 2-3 thousand who think they are the sole determiners of who is “electable”  and who is not.

But November 2010 was not a fluke. The People did not step up the brink, peer down, then step back to simply repeat that process. The People know “broke” when they see it. They know “broken,” too. And they know bankrupt in all its generally accepted meanings…finance, government, and moral.

By December 2012, if we win, the new status quo will represent a new paradigm in American politics that will last for forty years, if I know my law of generations. That’s the truth, and these self-appointed electors will be no more. They will be vending hot dogs outside the Smithsonian and the Met.

What Does This Mean to Us?

Our job now is to stay focused on the things we want most from our candidates, the WHAT, rather than the Who.  We can’t pre-select one to the exclusion of all others based on personality or red open-toed pumps.  My greatest fear is that we will end up bashing a lot of good people simply because we have our own personal Number One already picked out. The human tendency often is to turn every candidate who isn’t our guy into Newt Gingrich or Mike Huckabee. We must avoid that, for the electors will be marshaled against us twice as hard as they did in 2010.

The Playing Field

To our advantage, certain die have already been cast, and I doubt the MSM or ruling establishment can change it, thanks to the tone of the first South Carolina debate. The tone of this race has already been established, which (I think) is the real reason Mitch Daniels backed out and why some others won’t get far. This campaign will be about Obama, his failures and his misdirection of our country, our economy and our moral compass. And this campaign will extol the positive themes of governance rather the tawdry themes of slick advertising and hype.

Thanks to Mssrs Cain, Johnson, Paul, Pawlenty and Santorum, second stringers all, the WHAT of good governance will be compared to the WHAT of bad governance, side-by-side.

How we size up the WHAT of our Candidates vs How the Establishment sizes up the WHO of theirs.

It’s as simple as H2O

Water is water because of that “two parts” of hydrogen. But make one little switch, to HO2, and you have something entirely different…and something that cannot sustain life.

I won’t debate it here, but there is an implied “formula” in the Constitution and Federalist Papers as to what sort of people are best suited to lead, just as there is in H2O. We all know we’ve lost our way. And we lost our way simply by replacing the major attributes for success and long life with attributes more likely to kill us in the end.  We have changed the formula by a simple juxtaposition of values and principles which no longer can sustain life or liberty. From water to whiskey.

With just a little bit of common sense, and all the things we’ve seen and done in our lives that tell us what works and what doesn’t, we all can make a list of the top ten (10) qualities we want to see in a candidate…which would track remarkably well with what the Founders had in mind as well.

Then just rank them, 1 to 10.

I’m going to list only five of my top ten, alongside five of what appears to be the top attributes of the Establishment’s more electable candidates. Compare.

Mine are :

1) Constitutional Fealty 2) Morality 3) Honesty/Integrity 4) Leadership 5) Competence

While top among the establishment gurus seem to be:

1) Name Recognition 2) Political Experience 3) Communication Skills 4) Photogenic 5) Money Raiser

Harry Truman was the last Democrat to even to measure up to my Top Five. Since then, starting with JFK, like “sincerity,” their mission has been merely to fake these things with slick marketing.

This is how far apart the People and the Establishment have become.

How you arrange the Top 5 is your business. You can even throw in some more; Courageous, Reverent, Well-Mannered, yes, even Charitable, or how about Can do Simple Math, Think Critically, Logical…and still not come close to any Democrat we’ve seen for several years.

And for good measure, throw in Spit in the Devil’s Eye, which I may bump up to #6 if some candidate can only find a proper use of the word “Liar” as witnessed by the lie-campaign about the Ryan Plan and Medicare launched by the Dems and AARP leading up to the NY26 vote.

No Democrat or Establishment candidate can get within 20 feet of these attributes. Try Cunning, Mendacious, Scheming, Back-stabbing instead…

This is what it is all about, folks. Those bottom five qualities will come into play, but first we must keep them in their proper order. They are second tier which augment the top tier. Money should come to a candidate naturally if he can display qualities 1-thru-5, not because he has a good marketing firm. That is the natural order of things, and things we need to restore.

To date we have plenty of these sorts of men. To date, even Charles Krauthammer has none.

Despite what the Establishment gurus want, I think the People will do well in this season of choosing men and women best qualified to be president.

vassarbushmills
Citizen With Bark On