Why Romney Alarms Me

After listing al the admirable traits of Romney, and they are many, Victor Volsky asks:

So what's my problem?

My problem is that for all Romney's admirable qualities, the president must be a visionary, not just a picker-upper. He sets the course of the country and points it in a certain direction. Running for president, Barack Obama proclaimed his intention of radically transforming America. He has gone a long way toward keeping his promise and done a lot of damage. He has steered the country onto the road to socialist hell, and if his "accomplishments" are not undone, America will find itself in mortal peril.

Assuming that in 2012 Obama goes down to defeat, as seems increasingly likely, it is paramount that the next U.S. president be as much a counter-revolutionary as Obama is a revolutionary. Zeal must be countered with zeal, persistence with persistence. For the U.S. public, ordinarily cautious and wary of dramatic moves, instinctively grasps the gravity of the situation and clamors for boldness. The 2012 election will be that rare instance when the American people will tolerate -- indeed, demand -- decisive, visionary action to arrest the country's seemingly inexorable slide toward the abyss. Tinkering around the edges won't do. What is required now is an all-out counterattack to roll back the socialist onslaught. In short, what the country needs is a transformative president.

Does Mitt Romney meet the specification? I am afraid not. And judging by the fact that his electoral base stays narrow no matter how hard he tries to expand it, a lot of American conservatives share my apprehension, whether consciously or intuitively. Look at the program of action Romney has posted on his campaign site. A slew of corrective or remedial measures -- and not a single truly radical measure, nothing that would really rock the boat. Even on the paramount issue of Obamacare, thoroughly discredited as it is, Romney doesn't dare suggest repealing it; he would simply grant a waiver to all the states, allowing them to wiggle out of its bony grip, without attempting to get rid of it outright. Doesn't he understand that the vampire has to be killed once and for all, with a stake driven through his heart, to make sure he would never rise again? Leaving the legal shell of Obamacare intact for all practical purposes is an invitation to the left to try again after it recovers, regroups, and prepares to storm the ramparts once again. Maybe Romney does understand it, but the deeply ingrained habit of Republican establishmentarians to defer to the liberals as their moral superiors is apparently too strong to overcome.

Like an old janitor called to the frat house to clean up after a wild party, President Romney would dolefully peruse the disgusting scene, heave a deep sigh, and, indignantly muttering under his breath (it will be rude to aggravate the severely hung-over revelers, won't it?), proceed to clean up the gigantic mess left by the Bacchanal. But the country does not need a custodial president who will tweak here and there and apply some Band-Aids, leaving intact the structures put in place by his socialist predecessor. It needs a bold and daring leader who will extirpate the socialist poison tree root and branch.

Read the whole thing.