First off, my apologies for being absent for the last few days. I’ve been at ASSUMPTION COLLEGE in the Taxachussetts home of RomneyCare and others forms of soft despotism. (Assumption is actually quite a fine college, of course.)
I would vote for Romney if he would set his hair on fire. That stuff he puts in his hair is probably very flammable.
My view is that the Michigan result hurts Santorum somewhat more than Pete thinks.
Michigan was Santorum’s Battle of Antietam (or, more properly, Sharpsburg). He was poised for a decisive victory there, one that would make him a favorite in the war, get him a lot of support from allies, and make Romney’s various quantitative advantages insignificant. Certainly expectations for his win were high, and he would have won big on an earlier day. But a couple of missteps by Gen. Santorum, some really bad luck (on the timing of his really bad debate), and more resolution from the opposing general than some thought possible produced a very close but decisive defeat.
From now on Romney’s advantages in money and organization will likely wear Santorum down. A inconclusive split on Super Tuesday—with Romney walking away with the most delegates—would put Rick in a particularly weak position. So to continue the dumb comparison—Ohio is Santorum’s Gettysburg. He’d better win big to stay alive, but it might already be too late.
I am totally sympathetic with Pete’s disdain for Romney’s manner of making his opponents look bad without making himself look good. All of his attacks on Santorum (as opposed to those on Gingrich) were unfair, and Santorum’s answers were generally forthright.
On the other hand, there’s something to be said for the honest and unapologetic manner of slowly and methodically slugging one’s way to victory in the manner of General Grant.
(On the third hand, it was certainly whiny, as Pete says, for Romney to complain that Santorum invited Democrats to vote in the Republican primary. And it was ignoble for CNN to suggest that if Santorum did win in Michigan it would be because of that unfairness. It turns out, of course, that less than 10% of the voters in the Republican primary were Democrats—a very low number for an open primary in which the other party had nothing going on.)
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
