Fred’s House supporters wondering where it all went wrong
posted at 6:52 pm on November 19, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
What’s funny about this piece is the occasion it provides to check our archives. Remember this? Ah, March — when the coming Thompson juggernaut cast its shadow upon the land.
Rep. Zach Wamp, who’s leading the Draft Fred movement, says he expects a decision sometime in May.
But May came and went and no decision was in the offing. Hope sprang again in July…
“My view is that he’ll enter the race at some point just in the coming days,” said Wamp, a key supporter of Thompson.
And so he did, if by “the coming days” Wamp meant “early September.” Now this. What are the odds, do you think, of Wamp being among the disaffected?
“I think he’s kind of done a belly flop,” said an estranged Thompson backer who indicated he will not pull his public support before the “Super Tuesday” primaries. “We’ll just wait till after Feb. 5 because I think he’s going to get beat.”…
“He seems to be perpetuating [his reputation for laziness] instead of defeating it,” another dissatisfied Thompson backer said. “I can’t see me bailing on him, but there’s some frustration.”…
Some of Thompson’s endorsers say they aren’t lifting a finger.
“I’ve kind of pulled back. I’m not not supporting him, but I’m not doing anything,” said a third lawmaker.
What could be even more troubling for Thompson is what that lawmaker said GOP activists outside the capital Beltway are saying: “Now they’re calling me and saying ‘What’s he doing?’ It’s almost like he doesn’t want it.”
The last time he was higher than fourth place in any Iowa poll was Rasmussen’s survey from early October, when he finished a point ahead of Huckabee for second. The new New Hampshire poll from CNN is downright gruesome. Exit question: If he washes out in Iowa, will his House supporters stick with him until South Carolina or abandon ship for Romney or Huckabee?
Update: I completely missed the fact that there’s a page two to this article. Wamp is quoted and notes that Fred’s right in the thick of it. Also: “Thompson’s staunchest supporters on Capitol Hill say his campaign is gathering steam. They note his recent endorsement by the National Right to Life Committee, which has the resources to spend heavily on Thompson’s behalf and the reach to activate grass-roots conservatives.”
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:
They stay until SC.
Spirit of 1776 on November 19, 2007 at 7:00 PM
He basically failed to seize the day when he had his moment. If he would have jumped in during late May or June when the anticipation was building to a fever pitch, things might be a lot different now. When you consider that the whole amnesty issue was creating a huge rift between the elites and the base, as well as the fact that the other top tier candidates were either undecided on the issue or decided to the wrong side (e.g., McCain), Fred could have entered running on a pro-enforcement platform and the groundswell of enthusiasm for his candidacy would have turned into a groundswell of support. For sure, some of it would have drained off by now, but he would have started from a stronger position than he did with his dilly-dallying around and entering the campaign late in the tepid manner as he finally did.
Often times in politics, timing is everything, and I just think Fred missed his opening.
thirteen28 on November 19, 2007 at 7:02 PM
Waiting too long took some wind out of my sail.
I’m still a fredhead [lower case]
TheSitRep on November 19, 2007 at 7:02 PM
AP-
There was also “more to the story” that you left out:
…Thompson’s staunchest supporters on Capitol Hill say his campaign is gathering steam. They note his recent endorsement by the National Right to Life Committee, which has the resources to spend heavily on Thompson’s behalf and the reach to activate grass-roots conservatives.
“I’m very confident in my support for his campaign and continue to believe he is the most consistent conservative in the race who can win both the primary and the general,” said Rep. Adam H. Putnam , R-Fla., who as chairman of the Republican Conference is the third-ranking member of the House GOP.
Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert , who remains a strong Thompson supporter, said the knock that Thompson is not campaigning hard enough is “a bit unfair.”…..
….Nonetheless, MacManus said the wavering support from some of the House Republicans who have endorsed Thompson matters.
“At this point it’s significant because he’s trying to win a come-from-behind race and he needs every bit of support he can get,” she said……
…Rep. Zach Wamp , R-Tenn., who has organized support for Thompson on Capitol Hill, said his man is building momentum and is well-positioned at this point.
“He is still in the thick of this, and it’s wide open,” Wamp said. “In no way at all am I discouraged about anything.”
From page 2 of the story
Nelsa on November 19, 2007 at 7:20 PM
I don’t think it was waiting too long- he was still strong in the polls for quite a while after announcing.
Basically he needs to engage the media much better if he’s to recover- a tough task since the right-leaning media tends to be based in NYC and thus more likely to be pro-Rudy. Thompson isn’t someone that is going to have as much appeal to the media elites in DC or NYC. All too often the media account of one of his appearences has been quite different than those given by bloggers who were in attendance.
Also, the pundit class has a tendency to overvalue polling leads in IA and NH and put more emphasis on style over substance- something that doesn’t play in Fred’s favor. Every post-debate analysis seems to be more concerned about who had the best canned laugh line or who hesitated a couple seconds rather than on what each candidate actually said.
Hollowpoint on November 19, 2007 at 7:21 PM
Whoa. I honestly didn’t see page 2. I’ll update.
Allahpundit on November 19, 2007 at 7:22 PM
Fred just proved that the lazy criticism is a dead on ringer. He is getting out of his campaign from the lack of effort he has put in.
paulsur on November 19, 2007 at 7:22 PM
I think somebody just needs to turn up volume on his microphone.
The New Hampshire polls are more important, I think.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/2008_republican_presidential_primary
Speakup on November 19, 2007 at 7:29 PM
How do you explain this?
bnelson44 on November 19, 2007 at 7:34 PM
They’re offended that he’s not kissed as many babies in NH. They believe that they’re so gosh darn important because of their early voting status that they’re owed constant attention. Anyone who doesn’t pay sufficient homage to their state gets punished.
Hollowpoint on November 19, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Ahem.
VolMagic on November 19, 2007 at 7:44 PM
Oh yeah.
Fred is inevitable.
VolMagic on November 19, 2007 at 7:44 PM
thanks for the explanation. guess he should have kissed more babies. didn’t he know this going in?
JiangxiDad on November 19, 2007 at 7:58 PM
Hahaha. Stick a fork in him. The only reason his campaign gained any steam in the first place is because a number of conservatives didn’t like Giuliani and were persuaded by the spinsters that Fred was one.
davenp35 on November 19, 2007 at 8:01 PM
Probably, but he’s probably better off spending time in states more favorable towards him. Even then, he needs to come on a lot stronger if he’s going to regain momentum.
Hollowpoint on November 19, 2007 at 8:03 PM
Thompson’s campaign sank because he had exuded (and his acolytes here at Hot Air) a sense of entitlement for the nomination and he wound up with all the cornpone charisma of the cast member of Petticoat Junction called “Uncle Joe.”.
Hilts on November 19, 2007 at 8:15 PM
Adjusted to reflect reality.
The mark of a failure is that he has better marks two months before he starts campaigning than he does two months after.
Just as I predicted: Fraud!’s star power would peter out, his corrupt, lazy, true colors will be shown, and he will tank spectacularly.
Fear the Fraud!
HA!
BKennedy on November 19, 2007 at 8:17 PM
LOL. Shows my age. Loved that guy.
JiangxiDad on November 19, 2007 at 8:17 PM
Once again, my fellow Americans want a jester instead of a leader….
We still have a year of this crap and I’m already sick of it and most of you.
unamused on November 19, 2007 at 8:18 PM
Still a Fred! fan. I like to read him and his opinions. I think he will do well.
Frankly, I want the office of the First Lady to remain as gracious as Laura Bush has restored. I disagree with her head scarf thing recently, but Mrs. Thompson would be a wonderful First Lady as well.
CrimsonFisted on November 19, 2007 at 8:19 PM
That’s how the game is played. If Fred hadn’t diddled around for months he too could have personally connected with N.H. voters.
Politics ain’t beanbag.
Buy Danish on November 19, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Well considering you go by the moniker of unamused isn’t that par for the course?
aengus on November 19, 2007 at 8:30 PM
Fred needs some mo here. The Huckster seems to be building steam.
Mojave Mark on November 19, 2007 at 8:33 PM
Simple. They know who he is now. They know he gave legal advice to terrorists, lobbied for a dictator, funneled campaign cash to his son, chased tail all over Washington DC and BRAGGED about it, and lied about always being pro-life.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 8:35 PM
I’m crushed I tell you. Crushed!
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 8:36 PM
Since Mitt has completely thrown “Wide stance” Craig right under the bus, maybe Fred can get an endorsement from him? He desperately needs all the help he can get. Heck, compared to the disgusting behavior Fred engages in, in his “personal life”, Craig looks like a saint.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 8:55 PM
Fred’s 20 hours of lobbying, is less then the time Mitt spent with Craig…which is more offensive?
right2bright on November 19, 2007 at 9:20 PM
It’s awfully early folks, awfully early.
commonsensehoosier on November 19, 2007 at 9:20 PM
Thompson is long gone. Perhaps gone before he (formally) began.
Vizzini on November 19, 2007 at 9:22 PM
I’ve been a Fred Head since day one. I’m still with him but I do think he’s had some missteps. The worst was his flat denial (by a spokeman) of working for a pro-choice group followed by his eventually admitting he’d worked for them once supporting documents were found. It wasn’t that he’d done the work (I’m all for changes of heart) or even that his spokeperson misspoke (it happens) but that he didn’t come clean right away.
Still bugs me.
John on November 19, 2007 at 9:34 PM
He just looks plain tired and comes across as someone who really doesn’t want it. I know Super Tuesday changes the dynamic, but if he finishes behind Paul in Iowa it’s all over.
sweeper on November 19, 2007 at 9:46 PM
said all these same things about Reagan as well even until he ran against Mondale
EricPWJohnson on November 19, 2007 at 9:57 PM
If you are “with him[Fred]” I’d hate to hear you if you were against him.
A lawyer who defends a murderer does not believe in murder..
Fred was just doing his job. You know…Working and stuff like that….. ;)
Nelsa on November 19, 2007 at 9:58 PM
You have consistently been anti-Fred because you are an old Jewish woman living in NYC. It is time for you to admit your anti-cornpone (sp?) bias. Oh yeah, and please don’t ban me for outing you.
Getting divorced and dating hot women is worse than anonymous toilet sex?
Bill C on November 19, 2007 at 10:19 PM
Ignore CSdeven. He has zero credibility.
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 10:29 PM
With 5 strong candidates polling has gone up and down except for rudy, it remains to be seen. fred has two things going for him
the power of Feb 5, and the fact that he’s still polling strong despite not campaigning and saying he’s ending social security which is why he’s no longer gpoing to win florida (whose delegates are not going to get to vote anyway)
Sooo, either he’s the laziest, most corrupt stupidist person in the world – or gee the pundits who predicted Howard Dean, Ross Perot, Gary Hart, Ted Kennedy, Mondale, Dukakis were all shoe ins for election are wrong again
I like my odds.
EricPWJohnson on November 19, 2007 at 10:31 PM
That isn’t all that “Dust Bunny” has in his history. He lobbied for a dictator and gave legal advice to terrorists. Yeah, that’s worse than having gay sex in a bathroom.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 10:41 PM
Bwahahahahaha!!!!
Like a turd on the lawn on a crisp autumn morning.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 10:43 PM
But they are EXPERTS! EXPERTS are NEVER wrong! Go Fred!
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 10:44 PM
Could it be that after this news was seen, Fred’s campaign manager started salivating at the thought of buying some more evening gowns with plunging neck necklines? I wonder how many $8 million would buy? I wonder if she’s got it all figured out?
6th place and 4%. Pathetic. But I’m sure there are those who still think he’s sitting in the weeds waiting for the right time to pounce!
Bwahahahahaha!!!
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:00 PM
Or maybe he understands that NH jumped the shark?
EricPWJohnson on November 19, 2007 at 11:02 PM
I, too, get the impression sometimes that Fred doesn’t really want the presidency…
…and that may be a really good reason to give it to him rather than to one of these other maniacs who’ve been craving the damn office since they were in diapers.
Kensington on November 19, 2007 at 11:10 PM
Iowa poll.
Fred. Tied for 3rd loser at 14%.
Oh, those weeds are deep.
Bwahahahaha!!!
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:13 PM
What gives you that impression?
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 11:16 PM
I guess the weeds in Florida are even higher.
Fred; Down 7 points, 3rd place with 16%.
Mitt; 2nd place up 8 points at 19%.
The more people get to know Fred, the less they like his lawyer and lobbyist ways.
The more people know Mitt, the better they like him.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:18 PM
If that is so, what is he doing raising all this money? I know he raised money for his last run for the senate, but he dropped out 17 days before the filing deadline. Then he converted all that money into a PAC and then “hired” his son to “administer” it. His son got the lions share of the money and hardly raised a dime of money. He isn’t so stupid that he thinks he can get away with that in a presidential campaign does he? I’ll tell ya, if I was a contributer, I’d be making some calls to find out what his plan is for that $8 million he sitting on. I mean is he even spending the money to campaign? Look at his last couple ads. Low budget ads shot in the same location on the same day. Just exactly when does he have to report his financial expenditures?
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:28 PM
I doubt anyone has ever said that about you.
omnipotent on November 19, 2007 at 11:29 PM
Why do you care? Are you scared people don’t like you?
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:45 PM
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07232007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/thopson_pac_coddles_son_opedcolumnists_dick_morris__eileen_mcgann.htm
This is an Editorial by dick Morris that CsDeven gets most of his information from
Note the words Editorial, Dick Morris, New York Post
Three things that don’t mean anything
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Here are some politicians who have paid 7 and 8 figures to relatives through PAC
Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, Jimy Carter, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Jesse Jackson, about 90% of Democrats who ever could raise enough money to have a PAC
Many Democrats retired and just kept the money
Thompsons son’s payments were mostly for travel and staff as they kept the Thompson name in politics at conventions and Republican forums 178,000 dollars is not much for a staff for three to go to a dozen events in two years not much money at all
It was a cheap smear and left the airwaves as soon as it appeared.
Thus ended another fake fact from CsDeven
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Here is one.
Another one.
And the hits just keeeeeep on coming!
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 12:18 AM
Fred’s PAC paid his son more than he helped conservative causes.
Fred, the fake conservative.
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 12:21 AM
No… Fred’s no fake… you’d have to be a true conservative to know that… some things… you just know. outsiders.
amend2 on November 20, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Real conservatives don’t lie about who they lobbied for.
Real conservatives don’t work for dictators.
Real conservatives don’t chase tail all over DC and brag about it.
Real conservatives do not give legal advice to terrorists.
Real conservatives don’t author McCain/Feingold.
Real conservatives don’t funnel campaign funds to their family while do little to nothing for conservative causes.
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 12:49 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/the_new_fire_in_freds_belly.html
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 1:36 AM
Cs(out of context) Deven
the WSJ article also said this
Mrs. Clinton’s HILLPAC has paid about $2 million in salaries since 2002, while contributing $2 million to Democratic candidates for office. Mr. Edwards’s PAC paid about $1 million in salaries while contributing $200,000 to Democrats when he used it during the 2002 and 2004 elections. Mr. Edwards primarily used his PAC to fund his political career, rather than to contribute to Democratic candidates. Mr. Obama, who only had a PAC for the 2006 election, paid about $500,000 in salaries and donated $770,000 to Democrats.
The fees to Mr. Thompson’s son were first reported by Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call.
Mr. Thompson is one of hundreds of current and former lawmakers who have such a political account, called a leadership PAC. Politicians use the accounts to raise money from individuals and companies in order to fund their political activities.
Leadership PACs are typically used by senior members of Congress in safe congressional districts to donate large amounts of money to colleagues facing tough re-election campaigns. Some politicians also use the accounts to fund their early presidential runs by dipping into the accounts to pay for their travel around the country.
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 1:39 AM
Freds son is active, very active in republican forums and policy and those were reinbursement for travel expenses to Republican functions
Also Fred gave away 150,000 the day he left office which is not counted in the totals so its 600,000 in donations to 224,000 in reinbursements to his son for Republican and lobbying activities, and the totals for Fred’s pac exceed well over 1 million dollars in donations to Republican causes
the Wall street Journal likes Rudy and Mitt
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 1:42 AM
Stop the nonsense!!! Check out the link provided by csdeven. Fred’s son was paid in 20 installments of $8,000, $6,000, $4,000 or $2,000 at semi-regular intervals over a 14 month period. You would have to be stoopid or delusional to think those regular fixed sums payments were reimbursements for anything. Fred was draining the account by funneling the money to his son. The WSJ liking Mitt and Rudy does not alter that fact.
tommylotto on November 20, 2007 at 2:47 AM
TommyLotto
Yes and he used those for reimbursement for time and travel
did you see the part where hundreds of other politicians do it too?
did you see the part where hillary spend 2 million in salaries and only 2 million in donations?
Why does anyone care, especially when they all do it?
Why didn’t the Wall Street Journal detail everyone else?
Cause they are pushing Mitt and Romney
This is why the Editorial board after 100 years has a new boss..
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 4:38 AM
You see what Fred did was legal and still is and is an accepted practice
What Romney did was lie about his legal residence and did not meet the residency requirements to run for governor
Lucky for him the Dems dropped the complaint
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9404E7DA163FF93AA25755C0A9649C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/R/Republican%20Party
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 4:45 AM
Tommy(distort)Lotto
Here’s Hillarys
I notice that she spends most of her stuff on herself and her close circle of friends
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/expend.asp?strID=C00363994&cycle=2006&sort=N&Format=&Page=6
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 4:52 AM
If Fred was made a Democrat, he’d probably be cruising into a nomination. If he loses the wind in his sails this time, he should get back in the game ( governor? senator again?).
Remember that Reagan was always active politically post-Hollywood. Because he cared. He cared about the fate of our country. So he worked in the vineyards until he went for the Big Enchilada. He failed in 76, losing to loveable Jerry, the anti-conservative! At this time in 1980, he and his aides were staying in sleazy motels, living on PBJ sandwiches, while George Herbert Walker Bush was calling his supply-side economics philosophy “voo-doo economics.”
If Fred cares like he says he does, then if he loses this time, it won’t be the last we hear from him. If he fades away, it proves his critics right.
silverfox on November 20, 2007 at 5:01 AM
CsDeven and Tommylotto
Well according to open secrets Hillpac collected millions upon millions of dollars and gave out thousands upon thousands of dollars in a ratio worse than freds
But what was interesting was the Tax and Election Fraud that Romney engaged in while being the bestest best smartest besty CEO CFO EIEIO in the world
Why on earth would you declare Utah your home to evade higher Mass taxes and then try to run for governor the next year? Knowing that there is an absolute 7 year residency test. Why, if you are the smartest bestest best CEO in the world would you declare yourelf a Utah resident on your Mass tax statement declare yourself a non-resident and then run for Governor of Mass?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm….
And the WSJ just now discovered that PACs are not used by politicians they way they like but turn their backs on Fraud?
Imagine that!
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9404E7DA163FF93AA25755C0A9649C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/R/Republican%20Party
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 6:11 AM
I love the responses of “Hillary does it too!”. Yeah that convinces me. This country has never elected a lobbyist and we certainly will no elect a lobbyist who hides behind the letter of the law to break the spirit of the law by funneling campaign cash to his son.
And that is just the tip of the iceberg. He still has to convince us that giving legal advice to terrorists and lobbying for a dictator is behavior we are A-OK with.
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 6:21 AM
Everyone (dems and reps alike) got their fair hearing and the Massachusetts State Ballot Law Commission ruled that Romney was eligible to run for governor. Does that little fact even matter to you?
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 6:32 AM
I’d rather listen to someone who clearly states his positions than someone who hyperventilates and makes do with sound bites.
Stay the course Fred, keep talking straight. You’re doing ok in my book.
Texas Nick 77 on November 20, 2007 at 7:23 AM
WHOA Allah- SO anxious to bash Fred that ya MISSED page 2??!! Dude
Ex-tex on November 20, 2007 at 8:05 AM
CSdeven
caught red handed in half truth number 3164
The Massachusetts Ballot Law Commission, composed of three Republicans, a Democrat and an independent, unanimously ruled that Mr. Romney had maintained his residency status in Massachusetts while serving as head of the Salt Lake City Olympic committee.
(The independent was a republican)
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B03E0DC173EF935A15755C0A9649C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/D/Democratic%20Party
some questions on Romneys Truthfullness in fact the reason the commission ruled in his favor is he went back and amended his return so he could be eligible (in golf its called a mulligan):
So he lied, really, the bestest best besty CEO in the world forgot that he was a resident of Utah, stayed in Utah, moved his banking and home and furniture to Utah but was at heart at Mass resident forgetting that he brought up the same thing while campaigning against Ted Kennedy
The only way Romney could run if he returns with penalties and interest all the tax breaks he took pretending to be a Utah Resident
Shows a little of his character
So another missed trees in the forest for CSDeven
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 9:08 AM
CsDeven
Also apparrently the MSBC is a toothless institution – both the Republicans and the Democrats couldn’t remove a guy from the ballot who falsely claimed he was in the service and also faked the signatures required
MASSACHUSETTS MAN MAKES BALLOT BUT PARTY SHUNS HIM
By FOX BUTTERFIELD, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
The Massachusetts Ballot Law Commission today upheld the candidacy of Gregory S. Hyatt, the only candidate still running in the Republican gubernatorial primary this fall, whose nominating petitions had been assailed by both Republicans and Democrats
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 9:27 AM
So Lets Recap
in 2000 Romney defrauds the State of Utah by knowingly and willingly claiming he was a resident – depriving the state of 27,000 dollars in taxes on his 1999 return
consequently he defrauds in 2000 the State of Mass of 5.7% income tax on his 6 million or so in earnings or over 300,000 dollars (ironically the same tax he refused to lower later as gov apparently the good people of Mass can pay taxes but not Mitt)
Now in 2001 Romney repeats his frauds in both states
In April 2001 Romney’s told that he is inelible to run, in May to beat out a commission ruling in June Mitt amends his returns for 1999 and 2000 stating he falsely claimed tax deductions that he was totally aware of and makes 7 figures in restitution to become eligible for the race
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Ron Paultards are spending their days creating phony anti-Fred websites, then google-bombing them. They also bomb articles about other candidates to push them above Fred on Google. They are creating havoc and false impressions.
Connie on November 20, 2007 at 10:07 AM
What are you inferring? That everyone is corrupt? I would like to see proof of that. Is the democrat and the independent corrupt also?
I don’t have any sympathy for your accusations. The fact is that ALL this has been properly vetted by independent review and he was found to be eligible to run for governor. If you are going to set yourself up as judge, jury, and executioner for the commission and judge them guilty, you need to understand that that position is contrary to the public record.
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 11:13 AM
CsDeven
case in Point
Romney signed an affidavit in UTAH under penalty of Perjury to get his homeowners exemption. He then knowingly and willingly moved his personal banking (not that easy to do in those days) for several years to UTAH. He then filed two tax returns each year in 1999 and 2000 falsely.
What does false mean to you?
He blamed it on his accountants
so did Ken Lay he blamed his accountants too.
So regardless of the commission and his residency you need to focus on the question:
Why was Romney so eager to be a Utah resident?
Because Mass has a much much higher income tax rate for top bracket earners than Utah.
So focus on why he lied to two states at least two years defrauding each
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 11:25 AM
He was not vetted he had to pay penalties and interest
Romney had to make restitution
also The Mass commission does not vett they allow or disalow chalenges to Ballot questions
The Tax issue is outside their jurisdiction, had Romney not confessed and redo his taxes he may have gone to jail in one or both states
Deven – its a serious serious matter to lie for tax breaks guy, its not an oversite – it was several documents over a period of time.
Not some forgot to put a stamp on it or sign the third page of a deposition – it was a serious serious matter.
He had to testify for several days – usually the testimoney is not requested or is kept to a minimum
Nice dodge
EricPWJohnson on November 20, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Chill on the Fred! funeral. Open that casket. See Rudiani and the GOP inside.
saved on November 20, 2007 at 12:24 PM
What’s Fred’s House? A recovery center for failed candidates and their families?
saint kansas on November 20, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Mitt went through the process required. You don’t like the outcome. I get it. But he went through it just the same and was found eligible to run for governor.
But just like your insinuations that the commission was corrupt, all the arguments you are making are unfounded and based on a preconceived desire to find something wrong.
csdeven on November 20, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Comment pages: