Mitt: “I … speak for the Republican wing of the Republican Party”; Flashback video: McCain stumps for Mitt in 2002
posted at 10:28 pm on October 13, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Recognize that formulation? He’s borrowing a phrase from Howard Dean. Really. I thought it was odious in 2004 when Dean-o coined it as an expression of his own alleged authenticity and ideological purity and I think it’s odious now, but Dobson et al. are practically begging for this sort of rhetoric vis-a-vis Giuliani and Mitt needs them to win. So, it’s come to this:
The former Massachusetts governor, who espoused moderate views in his 1994 bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, said that when Republicans act like Democrats, the nation loses.
“I believe conservatives across the nation and particularly in states where I have been able to take my message, like Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina and Michigan and Florida and Nevada, that conservatives that have heard me time and again recognize that I do speak for the Republican wing of the Republican Party,” Romney said…
“When Republicans act like Democrats, America loses,” he said. “It’s time for Republicans to act like Republicans again.”
Asked later whether he thought Giuliani was a Democrat in Republican clothes, Romney declined to answer.
This is an awfully strange time in American history to be trying to make the Republican tent smaller. Go read what McCain had to say about Mitt’s qualifications as the “real Republican” in the race in response.
Update: The Romney camp parries McCain’s thrust by posting this video from 2002.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Sorry Mitt, but you do not.
You barely speak for the RINO wing of the Rephulican party.
If there is any REAL Republican in the race, it is Duncan Hunter.
LegendHasIt on October 13, 2007 at 10:34 PM
Mitt Romney, a Republican acting like a Democrat.
tarpon on October 13, 2007 at 10:35 PM
In what manner?
Has Mitt lied? No. Has Mitt ever given kickbacks to his buddies for political power? No. Has Mitt ever accepted bribes or shown any sign of corruption? No.
Mitt is the furthest thing from a Democrat. Mitt does not view the presidency as a nice title to put in front of his name, nor is he seeking the position to lord power over all of us like Hillary and the Democrats.
You might not like the fact he wasn’t always conservative, you might be shaken by how recent his conversion seems to be. However, Mitt has always proven himself to be trustworthy.
BKennedy on October 13, 2007 at 10:49 PM
I realy don’t care anymore. As long as Hillary is NOT elected, I will vote for whoever goes against her just ot keep her and the Dems out. The Dems are too connected to the media and other socialist/communist idealist folks and their fundraisers are more and more getting busted or investigated for illegal activities.
At least Mitt has some business experience and hopefully knows that higher taxes will eventually drive away businesses instead of attracting them to move in, and that experience is a LOT more succesful than GW Bush’s failures in his corporate past. See that libs!? This is not the “I love Bush site” that you like to label us as.
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 10:50 PM
We NEED Newt, but dm he is gone!
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 10:59 PM
allrsn I am thinking Newt will be a behind the scenes kind of guy (advisor). Like Scooter Libby, but with better memory.
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Its OK if Mitt has received the memo isn’t it?
The reason Republicans didn’t win last Nov. was because they weren’t Republican enough and Democrats promised that they would be.
If Mitt is sincere that’s a good thing, right now he and Duncan Hunter are the most interesting.
Speakup on October 13, 2007 at 11:03 PM
Yes EI that is his plan, has been and just stated he will continue to be. Ty Newt for that!
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:06 PM
That said, I wish he was running, we have no viable candidate as I see it.
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:07 PM
Oh please. You are so very in the tank for Rudy.
Yet if a female songstress had Rudy’s record with the opposite sex (a cousin!?) you’d be screaming SLUT 8 days a week.
Stephen M on October 13, 2007 at 11:13 PM
hmmm. I don’t know why but, I’m just have never been impressed with him and he’s not doing much to fix that. I think the Republican party is in trouble. I just have not seen any leadership other than Rudy and he’s too liberal for my taste. Perhaps things will change as time goes on.
boomer on October 13, 2007 at 11:14 PM
Oops. Him being Mitt.
boomer on October 13, 2007 at 11:15 PM
allrsn
I loved it when Newt stated, “The difference b/t Clinton’s affair and mine was that he lied under oath about it thus breaking the law, and I admitted to it when not under oath. This therefor does not make me a hypocrit for wanting to impeach him for lying.”
*SMACK!*
I have a VERY hard time respecting and trusting any man who cheats on his family (I wonder who else will he betray?), but he got some cool points back for that and eased some of my fears.
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:15 PM
Newt is toxic and a class A-1 LOSER!!!!
Hilts on October 13, 2007 at 11:19 PM
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:15 PM
a old star trek quote:
I agree with you again EI
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Newt has a phd in history, he loves politics, he is the wisest man I know, he is great speaker, he has solid leadership abilities, he does come with a handicap so did Roosovelt as I recall. I want Newt.
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Hilts
This is a site where if you make allegations, one typically supports it with proof, via web links. *eagerly waiting*
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:23 PM
hilts
yep lets see what ya got
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:25 PM
well that is the leftie way
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:27 PM
whine and cry, with nothing behind
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:27 PM
I like Newt. But I don’t know that he is wise. Smart – very. Wise? eh…
Spirit of 1776 on October 13, 2007 at 11:28 PM
Good point. Of course, Tom Tancredo is a real Republican, also, as is John Cox, the latter of whom the powers that be have basically blackballed from appearing in any of the major debates.
The powers that be have anointed the top four: Giuliani, Romney, McCain, and F. Thompson — none of whom is a rawboned, hard-core, gut-level Republican on the entire range of issues.
I suspect all four are members of the CFR (as is Huckabee), which means nothing to the man in the street, but means EVERYTHING to the powers that be. I hardly view that as a plus, but rather as a doff of the hat to the “elites.”
Of the top four candidates, I think all of them are pretty strong on national security. On economic issues, I think all are sound except for McCain. On social issues, the only one of the top four with a proven record is McCain. On immigration: None of them are sound.
Go Duncan Hunter!
sanantonian on October 13, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Spirit of 1776 He was behind the Republican Revolution. He has to have “lessons learned” from that.
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Ok I accept that spirit smart yes, wise I say yes
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Huh? Marrying cousins is a time honored tradition. Eleanor Roosevelt’s maiden name was…. “Roosevelt.”
sanantonian on October 13, 2007 at 11:33 PM
LOL I did not know that
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:34 PM
Yep, and I for one hope he has a large impact on the future. I anticipate he will.
Spirit of 1776 on October 13, 2007 at 11:34 PM
sanantonian OK what is CFR?
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:36 PM
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:36 PM
Campaign finance reform! Heh, here I think San means the Council on Foreign Relations. They lately inducted Angelina Jolie if that helps:)
Spirit of 1776 on October 13, 2007 at 11:42 PM
At least Angeline is actually going to Africa and other places to wittness first hand the attrocities and actually adopting kids and whole villages, while at the same time NOT accusing Bush of being a terrorist and us servicemembers of acting like Nazi SS, or endorsing dictators who silence free speech and advocate violence.
El Guapo on October 13, 2007 at 11:46 PM
CFR Consertive Frost Roster
allrsn on October 13, 2007 at 11:53 PM
Quite. I wonder if Bush will ever get his due for all the work and money this administration had done in regard to Africa. Historical footnote for Americans probably.
Spirit of 1776 on October 14, 2007 at 12:01 AM
Even though Newt wasn’t really running, when he said he wasn’t going to run I got a Perot type chill up my spine.
I still don’t quite square with his excuse.
Speakup on October 14, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Oh, come on Allah, you know better than that. He and every other candidate are aiming for primary voters, who happen to be on the far side of the spectrum.
You’re right about the shrinking tent, but the primary season will never be the time to worry about it. It’s just too bad the Republicans blew this election immediately after the 2004 election.
Free Constitution on October 14, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Spirit of 1776
He will be like Reagan. 10 or 20 years later they will see, even with a war on terron on multiple fronts (we are more places than Iraq and Afghanland folks), that his tax cuts and other economic policies not only dug this country out of a recession that was taking hold from the left over Clinton Admin policies, but also kept us out of a recession and depression due to battleing a world war, hurricanes (though not near as many as the global warming alarmists predicted) and other natural disasters, aid to Peru and other coutries, etc….
But his original appointees for the war on terror, as a service member, I have to complain, Donald seems to have had it all wrong the more i deploy and the more i learn from it. But at least he isnt appointing convicted felons or impeached judges!
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 12:09 AM
CFR = Council on Foreign Relations
And I doubt that history will be kind to GWB if only because the left is rewriting history as we speak.
Buzzy on October 14, 2007 at 12:15 AM
Not to meantion he also is responsible for collecting record levels of tax revenues, even after adjusting for inflation, due to his tax and economic policies!
Why can’t libs see and learn from history, or even the game SimCity (for the most dense)!? If you raise taxes, you drive away businesses and lose jobs, if you lower taxes or keep them low, you attract business and create jobs. De-De-deee!!!
Why are libs trying to make us more like Europe when more and more of Europe is trying to de-socialize and de-regulate everything due to failures and loss of $$? Haven’t libs ever had an older sibling to learn from their mistakes?! LOOK AT EUROPE AND LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES! afterall, that is why we migrated here in the first place. on that note, also take note of their problem of islamic extremism – it is 10X that which we undure here. Pandering and accomodating only empowers, it does not secure anything.
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 12:17 AM
And my closing comment for the night. I find it highly amusing and a little irritating the reference to Europe all the time by the libs and the comments about how we are the new nation on the block, we need to learn from the elder civilizations, etc. So ridiculous! Our system has lasted longer that everyone over sans Britain. How many Republics has France gone through now?
Spirit of 1776 on October 14, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Spirit of 1776 The question now is, will france’s new conservative actually crack down on the rioting muslims, whom hte MSM refuses to identify as African Muslims.
Europe is so heavily taxed. Ask any service member who was stationed there and tried to live off base. We are the least taxed and most capitolistic nation, barely. That canquickly change. I sure as heck dont want my extra $$ going to someone else. I am saving that for my God children, someday my own children, and my retirement. here that Hillary? I am under 40, and enrolled in TWO (2) retirement plans, without gov’t help! and i live like a lower class income since i am military and stationed in a place where you need almost $300K to get out of the ghetto (Las Vegas). If I am to help anyone financiall,y i will do it like the bible states, by my own will and heart to love nad help they neighbor and stranger. But i need to know him/her to be sure they really need help.
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 12:33 AM
There’s a big difference between CNN’s headline and what Romney said. AP shouldn’t have taken the bait.
pedestrian on October 14, 2007 at 12:48 AM
Anything new to report? Only when CNN adds Glan Beck from Headline News to their main channel will I ever watch them. They are like the NYT. They just dont get it, the ratings are not a “vast right wing conspiracy”. It is marketing 101, and also where the listeners/people are, thus so are the advertisers so they can reach the biggest audience.
HELLO!? This is why Air America cannot survive without donations from far left ignoramuses.
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 1:02 AM
Thanks Senator McCain for the Saturday night humor:
Now.
Just how many years does this hearing-aid-encumbered, illegal immigration supporter, all knowing stooge, need, to win our respect?
Would seventy (70) more years be sufficient, Oh Magnificent one?
Thanks for the comedy McCain, thank you very much.
Mcguyver on October 14, 2007 at 1:06 AM
Mcguyver Given what I know about Hillary, especially her disdain for the military from comrads i have served with, and her and Bill’s involvement in controlling the media, I would never vote Democrat. And I used to be a Democratic conservative (if there was such a thing).
Thank you Michael Moore for waking me up with your Farenheit 9-11 documentary. If I had not watched that flick before PCSing for the left coast, I would have never listened to Rush Limbaugh (out of curiosity and personal research) or Air America during that VERY LONG drive from coast to coast.
It was then in 2005, during my cross-country drive in the desert with no FM stations b/t cities but I could still pick up AM (Rush and Air America) that I realized just how stupid and ignorant liberal radio and hollywood was and was liberated from the left wing lies (also thanks to the internet and alternative media)!
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 1:17 AM
I have been able to take my message, like Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina and Michigan and Florida and Nevada,
Yeeearrrrrghhhhhh!
To continue the Dean theme.
Krydor on October 14, 2007 at 1:19 AM
Hey buddy, we are still waiting! I will check back on the morning assuming you are east coast time.
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 1:21 AM
We all, Sean Hannity and et al, rejoice.
Mcguyver on October 14, 2007 at 1:30 AM
Mcguyver
Nothing happens on your link.
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 1:36 AM
I wonder if a Mormon is any position to suggest the narrow tent of a party. I know I’m not alone in considering Mormonism a strike against a candidate. But it’s not an insurmountable strike. It’s not Islam.
I’m becoming increasing aware that not voting out of extreme antipathy towards both sides is an option. People who appeal to the Kossacks or to Dobson will have to try hard to win my votes on other grounds.
thuja on October 14, 2007 at 2:08 AM
Trip report – Conservative Leadership Conference, Reno, NV
Speakers included Mitt Romney, Duncan Hunter, and Alan Keyes.
Ed Morrisey won the Conservative Blogger of the Year;
Gov. Mark Sanford, accepting the Goldwater award, looked and sounded like a GREAT presidential candidate.
http://www.clc07.com/speakers.html
fred5678 on October 14, 2007 at 2:13 AM
Mitt..so close, so far. It’s like his NASCAR car has a flat tire, but he doesn’t have a pit crew to change it. (They’re probably getting all their shots so Yankees won’t get sick when they deign to bless us Southerners with their prescense).
SouthernGent on October 14, 2007 at 2:20 AM
I told you guys the other day that they would make their moves very soon. Well, Mitt is making his move. He has established his socially conservative bona fides and will start pressing Rudy on his social liberalism that he is standing pat on. Mitt will start (well he already has) working on building the bases confidence in his toughness on Islamo-fascism so as to make social stances the only difference between them.
McCain has figured it out and I’m sure Rudy is right behind.
Now we come to Fred “What’s a dollar?” Thompson. JUST WHAT IS THE GUY DOING? He has taken 4 days off from campaigning. Not one single public appearance. Ya know, I read someone here the other day had sent MORE money to him. What is up with that? Is Fred doing everything he can to scuttle his own campaign? Why is that? Is it possible that he is going to take his…well his supporters $8 million, and convert it into another PAC so he can funnel it to his family? For someone who has been involved with the biggest scum on the face of the earth, he sure acts clueless. Hmmmmm, CLUELESS. There’s a thought. He is acting like he is being controlled by a 40 year old who is just old enough to think she knows it all, but not yet old enough to realize she hasn’t a clue.
Well, the point is that Mitt is taking the initiative and challenge the other candidates on their weaknesses.
Grab the popcorn. This is gonna start getting good. The funding for weaker candidates will soon dry up and they’ll start dropping like flies in short order.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 2:22 AM
Why is his faith even an issue? The only complaints about his faith have come from bigots.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 2:24 AM
csdeven
Faith will be an issue. Especially if Obama beats Hillary. Personally, I look at taxes and the war right now more than anything, and ANY Republicna thus far has every democrat beat in those fields.
El Guapo on October 14, 2007 at 2:37 AM
Values are the issue, not specific faiths. Conservatives would elect an atheist if he/she held conservative values. I think AP is pretty close. I don’t know him personally, but except for his excoriations of Ann Coulter, he seems to have all the right values.
Well, sex with robots and iphones are a little out there, but hey! If billy jeff can abuse cigars while talking on the telephone, AP can hump a few robots while surfing the net on his iphone. :-)
(The values of atheists are much less likely to be shaken by the unfairness of the world. A religious person could blame God and have worse values after, while an atheist could only be converted to God and that, as AC put it, would make him perfected.)
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 2:53 AM
Sorry, Mitt (and you too, csd), but there are other “real Republicans” that I support because they share the most ideas in tune with mine.
I still feel it impossible to get elected in NYC or Taxachusetts if you are truly a conservative.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 6:31 AM
BREAKING NEWS!!!
Angelina Jolie to adopt all remaining children in Cambodia. “I’m such a softie when it comes to children,” the semi-talented actress said as she signed formal adoption papers. After she made the announcement, a very long queue of middle aged men formed at the Cambodian department of records, each man trying to get registered as an under-aged resident.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 8:33 AM
Go read what McCain had to say about Mitt’s qualifications as the “real Republican” in the race in response.
Like McShamnesty has anything to say about anyone’s Republican qualifications.
Shay (from Arizona)
Shay on October 14, 2007 at 9:48 AM
I don’t know that much about Hunter and Tanc, but they are getting no support. Why waste money and support on them when they can’t even get support in their own neck of the woods?
Huckabee, I heard the other day, is an open borders type? If so, he’s done in my book.
Others noes: McCain, Brownback, “What’s a dollar?”, and Paul.
That leaves 4 acceptable candidates and two of those aren’t going anywhere. That leaves Rudy and Mitt to battle it out.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 9:55 AM
It’s a silly line, and I’m far from sure that Romney is the true conservative in this bunch, but he’s right about this:
Republicans spent like crazy, increased the size of the federal government and its entitlement programs, got involved in sex scandals, and got soundly trounced in 2006. In other words, they acted just like the Dems, and the voters made them pay for it.
Dudley Smith on October 14, 2007 at 10:22 AM
This the same guy who said a few years ago that he didn’t want to be seen as a “Republican candidate” at all. Now all of a sudden Mitt Romney IS the Republican Party?
Well, I suppose he’s making progress. He’s no longer trying to distance himself from Republicans — now he just wants the other 90% of us to quit identifying with him and his supporters.
I have a funny feeling he’s going to get his wish.
logis on October 14, 2007 at 10:25 AM
That line reminds me more of a Dan Quale malapropism…
Mitt might be a Republican, and a better one than Giuliani, but I’m much dissatisfied with all the choices. Huckabee doesn’t have a snowman’s chance to get elected, against Hillary. Truthfully, probably none of our boyz do.
Is it too late to draft Dr. Condoleezza Rice?
Serr8d on October 14, 2007 at 10:34 AM
So we are stuck between the choice of two liberals to compete against a democrat liberal?
Heaven help us.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 10:38 AM
90%? Really? Would you like to back up that claim with some pertinent numbers somewhere? And don’t use national polls. Those are mostly about name recognition and not policy issues.
Curiously, Jim Demint,(R-SC) has endorsed Mitt. I guess you know better than anyone else huh?
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Last year I was hoping she would run. But after all the bad decisions she made this year, I would hate to see her get the nomination.
But in the very unlikely event she is drafted, I would pull the lever for her. The alternative would be *gag* the other woman.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 10:48 AM
It would be ok with me if Mitt got the nomination. Of late, I have been receiving mailings from Romney, Giuliani and Thompson. There are platforms I really like with all of them and points of view I don’t like with all of them. So, I will have to fall back on my earlier plan and vote for whomever I think can keep Hillary out of the White House. Fiscally though, both Mitt and Rudy are unbeatable from my point of view and very much alike in their basic premises.
jeanie on October 14, 2007 at 10:54 AM
It appears so. Though Rudy and Mitt are conservative on many issues (Mitt more so than Rudy) their socially liberal pasts are troublesome. I think the support they are getting is a result of what folks are focus on. Security and economics. The war is a very uncomfortable topic because almost everyone is frustrated by it in one way or another.
All these polls mean is that a percentage of the base is pragmatic enough to see that we are limited in our choices this time around. MOST people in Iowa are ready to vote for Mitt. About the same in NH between Rudy and Mitt. Most in Michigan are supporting Mitt. Most in SC are supporting Fred. Many of the big states, California, New York, etc are supporting Rudy.
The difference is this. Both Rudy and Mitt have led as CEO’s according to their constituents wishes. That, in my mind makes their promises to govern as they have campaigned very credible.
So, with Rudy we will get a candidate that is tough on national security and a very social liberal who says he will nominate strict constructionist justices.
With Mitt we get the same thing except that he has promised to govern as a social conservative.
Once (and more importantly IF) Mitt can convince the base that he is telling the truth, the choice will be quite clear. Mitt is the guy.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 11:00 AM
I have to agree with that. Condi doesn’t have the credibility NOR the money to mount a viable campaign right now. And she has said she is not interested in it. Now, if Condi can pull a ME miracle out of her bag of tricks, the conservative nominee would be absolutely STUPID not to run her as the VP. Her color trumps Hillary in the absolute moral authority area with blacks and women.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 11:04 AM
As I said before, I will vote Republican next year. How hard I hold my nose when I pull the lever, depends upon the candidate. Mitt would be a squeeze, rudy a very tight squeeze.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 11:05 AM
No viable candidate would consider her now. Too tainted by her boss.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 11:10 AM
I am a single issue voter. And that issue is the supreme court. That pretty much includes all the reps and eliminate every single dem.
So, I’m with ya on that.
As far as Condi goes, that is why she would have to pull off a miracle in the ME. If she did that, I’d bet her connection to Bush wont matter. Especially since they have been at odds lately.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 11:13 AM
I am a multi-issue voter. The SCOTUS is a major issue, which in turn will protect (or remove) another issue with me: the Second Amendment. The issue of leadership, and consistency of the stands on issues, is also important to me.
Condi was considered by me to be a conservative at one time. Not now.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 11:21 AM
I think this is a REAL good take on the GOP Race coverage and authenticity. A point of view ya don’t hear much.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/10/14/the_real_actors_on_the_gop_stage/
Ex-tex on October 14, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Hey, csd, off subject I know, but I am having connecting to a search engine. From what country does the band AC/DC originate? (Next drink is bet on your answer.)
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Aren’t you the same idiot who keeps saying that polls of most likely primary voters and polls of self-proclaimed conservative voters are the work of the Devil?
And now all of a sudden national polls are verboten too?
So what does that leave, just polls of Iowa? Where Romney has outspent everyone else by a factor of ten for six months now… Oh yeah, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with name recognition.
And what’s he up to even in Iowa – 29%? Respectible, sure. But even within that ridiculously narrow context, he’s still nowhere near the level where can safely start declaring who is, and who is not, a “real” member of the Republican Party.
logis on October 14, 2007 at 11:29 AM
He’s only skimmed the surface. What about specifics? Does he know about the dhimmi tax? Taqiya? I know none of the other candidates have done any better but still.
aengus on October 14, 2007 at 11:38 AM
The Republican wing of the Republican party doesnt need to consult with no stinkin’ lawyers before bombing the crap out of Iran’s nuclear program.
Always Right on October 14, 2007 at 11:44 AM
Quote fodder for the lefties, son. We should be above that.
Texas Nick 77 on October 14, 2007 at 11:50 AM
I speak from a Candidate that is still dropping and trailing three people in the polls despite millions and Millions of dollars
EricPWJohnson on October 14, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Condi would be an excellent VP choice. There’s enough separation between George Bush and just about everybody on the planet to allow her to be viable.
Not that GB is wrong. He knew going into this that his reputation, popularity and legacy was on the line, and still had the ‘nads to proceed. Unlike that small, small man Jimmy Carter.
BDS is a political phenomena, something unlike any we’ve ever witnessed before. But we’re going to need something similar, if Hillary gets on board.
Maybe HeaDS will roll?
Serr8d on October 14, 2007 at 12:05 PM
It’s a Quick Time music clip player ♫♫♫♫♫♫♫
It worked for me, just now.
Mcguyver on October 14, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Well, let’s see… she’s black, she’s a woman, she has lots of name recognition, but the only thing we really know about her beyond that is that she was an abominable Secretary of State. You can’t tell me a damn thing about what her position on tax cuts would be, or whether she thinks universal health care is good/bad, or what kind of judges she would want to see on the Supreme Court, or anything else.
Watcher on October 14, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Who’s AC/DC?
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Context, context, context. Learn it. Live it. Love it.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Still pinning your opinions on national polls I see. Tell ya what, c’mon back and spew that tripe when we have a national election for president.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Demint seems to be convinced. Maybe you should call him and tell him he’s stupid, because calling me names doesn’t damage Mitt in the least.
The guy has established his social conservatism and the wisest of the evangelicals will vote their values and not their faith when push comes to shove. Fred is a scumbag lobbyist who gave advice to terrorists and Rudy is adamant that he is a social liberal.
Whine all you want, call me names all you want, but those are the facts no matter how you try to rationalize them into non-existence. You can fool yourself, but you can’t fool Hillary. If Fred gets the nomination, she will mention his associations with scumbags and terrorists and that’ll be it for Fred “What’s a dollar?” Thompson.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 1:06 PM
Exactly! Her slate is clean and she can take just about any position she wants barring some history in the contrary.
I agree that her abominable tenure as SofS is her greatest weakness. Do you think it is so bad that if she pulled off a miracle in the ME that people would still see her unfavorable?
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Check out the updated video everybody:
McCain’s own words about Romney, “A man of unimpeachable character”.
Take it from the wise one. I wonder if the all-knowing McCain stooge will drop out and support Romney at some point. He might as well, since he has a hard time hearing/listening to people.
Mcguyver on October 14, 2007 at 1:39 PM
Liberal in Mormon robe.
saved on October 14, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Well, I doubt that she could do anything to rehabilitate herself to the point where I could vote for a ticket with her on it… and I doubt that I’m the only one who would see her as a huge minus on the ticket rather than a plus.
Watcher on October 14, 2007 at 2:18 PM
CSDeven
Put a fork in Romney, his support is softer than Hillarys ethics
EricPWJohnson on October 14, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Bla, bla, bla. You got some proof of that other than his leads in Iowa, NH, Michigan, etc?
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 3:02 PM
That depends on strategy. If you are talking old school Republicans, equal rights under the law, federalism, free markets, etc tht makes the tent bigger. The fastest growing political party is independent. Punt social issues to the states via Federalism. Gain the independents at the national level.
Social issues go to conservatives on the state level. Liberals simply do not have the boots on the ground to enforce their views. their constituents consists of small geographic areas with large populations. Planned parenthood does not have the resources to mobilize nationwide at the states level should Roe v. Wade fall.
This is why Fred is my choice. Giuliani’s pleas to then Repulican primary electorate amounts to “Please ignore my past positions, hold your nose and vote for me. I can beat Hillary.”
Theworldisnotenough on October 14, 2007 at 3:18 PM
So, what do we do when Hillary tells the entire country that Fred gave legal advice to terrorists, lobbied for a dictator and against victims of asbestos poisoning?
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 4:03 PM
I’ve just spent a month discussing this exact topic in my National Security Law class, and you are NOT “Always Right”. Consultation of lawyers is not only wise, but necessary. The decision to bomb Iran is fraught with considerable nuance and depends on a myriad of factors. If any President decides this issue without legal consultation, HE/SHE IS AN IDIOT AND SHOULD BE IMPEACHED!!
The conservatives on this blog espouse a love and admiration for the Constitution of the United States, and a President who does not realize the implications of their actions in preemptive strikes is a loose cannon. I’m am not, by any means, saying that a President doesn’t have the authority to utilize preemptive strikes, but they better have every “t” crossed, and every “i” dotted before they do.
Troy Rasmussen on October 14, 2007 at 6:47 PM
Australia.
Troy Rasmussen on October 14, 2007 at 6:49 PM
We would do the exact same thing we’d do if Hillary Clinton accused Sam Brownback of kidnapping the Lindberg baby: point out that she is the gibbering victim of a major psychotic breakdown.
But I seriously doubt we can count on having that kind of luck.
logis on October 14, 2007 at 6:54 PM
Good point. If we are thinking about a preemptive strike on a nuke plant in Iran, the president would be wise and would have the time to consult his lawyers before acting. Any situation that required an immediate response would be of the nature that we would clearly be in our rights to retaliate without checking with attorneys.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 6:57 PM
As long as you are going to deny the facts about Fred’s history, your comments are required to be rejected out of hand.
csdeven on October 14, 2007 at 6:59 PM
I agree completely with your entire post.
I wonder how long before an IDIOT comes along to disagree with you?
Only idiots misunderstood what Romney was saying.
We want our Candidates/elected officials to be honest, but then when they are, the idiots cry foul.
Mcguyver on October 14, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »