Romney in 2002: “My views are progressive”

posted at 10:30 am on December 13, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Hey, we get it.  Republicans don’t win office in Massachusetts by proclaiming themselves as Ronald Reagan conservatives.  When running for governor in 2002, Romney needed to sell himself as a Republican that represented the mainstream of liberal Massachusetts, which is why he told reporters in this clip that he was a “moderate” Republican who was “not a partisan,” and that “my views are progressive.”  He told them what he needed in order to win the election.

The question is whether that was his strategy then and he was a secret conservative all along, or whether that’s his strategy today and he’s really a progressive:

Is it possible that Romney had a wide-ranging transformation from “progressive” to conservative?  Of course it is; it happens quite a bit.  Usually that entails admitting that one was a progressive prior to the conversion, however.  With the exception of abortion, Romney has argued that he’s always been a conservative thinker on politics and policy, and pushes back hard on the idea that he’s a flip-flopper.  Clips like these, however, are going to make that argument a tough sell.

I believe Romney’s not really one or the other, but instead a political pragmatist who has no problem packaging himself well for the circumstances.  That’s not an entirely bad thing, either; a pragmatist can get things accomplished, and a successful pragmatist can bend enough to get elected, as Romney did in Massachusetts.  But in a cycle where conservatives want some authenticity even from a flawed candidate — like Newt Gingrich, for instance, or Rick Perry — these kind of statements are not going to instill confidence in Romney’s conservative credentials, and will have the grassroots continue looking for the most effective Not-Romney to support.

Update: Unabashed progressive David Corn at Mother Jones relates what Romney wrote in 2010 about progressivism:

In his 2010 book, No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, Romney huffed, “progressives…rejected the notion of universal truths, objective judgments, and, ironically, progress itself, embracing neutrality among competing belief sets and rejecting the primacy of Western civilization, the great thinkers of the ages, and the principles espoused by the Founding Parents of the nation.” Yet Romney once proudly declared himself a fellow of progressive views. Maybe he should apologize.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rove just pissed himself and Romney is in tears

boogaleesnots on December 13, 2011 at 10:35 AM

America is not Massachusetts.

fossten on December 13, 2011 at 10:35 AM

Why don’t journalists or bloggers on the right actually take a look at how Romney governed in Massachusetts?

Aside from Romneycare, they literally almost never report on or look into if he governed as a conservative. Who he took on in that state. The battles he fought against the hacks on Beacon Hill. Think you’d be suprised.

AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people

MNHawk on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

America is not Massachusetts.

fossten on December 13, 2011 at 10:35 AM

Thats right. You’re outta here Mitt.

Flapjackmaka on December 13, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Windsock 2012

Bishop on December 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Ok smartass, if not Mitt, then who? Newt?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:39 AM

I am so afraid for 2012

Newt is flawed and inconsistent, Romney, is well, Romney

Sigh
Why do I have this nasty feeling the Zero(TM) will win

/runs away in tears

JMG

Gauthijm on December 13, 2011 at 10:39 AM

zOMG, HotAir writers are all in the tank for Romney Perry Cain Romney Newt Perry Newt Romney!!!1!

Abby Adams on December 13, 2011 at 10:39 AM

Neither the clip about praising FDR about 20 times, calling him better than Reagan, nor the clip about Newt’s OWS comments about capitalism make the front page…

But a 10 year old comment from a guy running as a Republican in Massachusetts dismissing party labels does.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69204.html

http://www.breitbart.tv/newt-fdr-was-the-greatest-president-of-the-20th-century/

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Ed fairly asks, “The question is whether that was his strategy then and he was a secret conservative all along, or whether that’s his strategy today and he’s really a progressive.”

He’s neither, Ed. He’s the kind of politician who will say whatever it takes to get elected. Romney CHOSE Massachusetts (hardly many more Leftist in America) to be Governor, not a distinctly more conservative state.

Now, he says, “that was then and there, this is here and now.” Uh huh.

Compare what he (or Gingrich, for that matter) did, and then compare that to Obama.

No sale, Mitt.

Czar of Defenestration on December 13, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Mitt is neither a “progressive” nor a conservative. He’s a careerist. (And so is his opponent.)

Scriptor on December 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Aside from Romneycare…
AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

“Aside from, you know… how was the show, Mrs. Lincoln?”

rrpjr on December 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM

But a 10 year old comment from a guy running as a Republican in Massachusetts dismissing party labels does.

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Maybe Willard can team up with former Bush hack, Mark McKinnon, and run on the No Labels ticket? :-)

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Squish.

JeremiahJohnson on December 13, 2011 at 10:43 AM

So what. Reagan was a democrat before becoming one of the best Republican Presidents.

rich801 on December 13, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Thats where we are at now- pick from who’s running. Its Mitt or Newt. So you want to say Mitts no good because he lied to libs in MA, then you get Newt who cozied up to the devil herself in 2008 when Nancy was screwing the nation over, or this summer stabbed Paul Ryan in the face. So thats your choice, conservatives.

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:44 AM

“Yet Romney once proudly declared himself a fellow of progressive views. Maybe he should apologize.”

It’s too late to apologize, it’s too laaaate…..

Sorry, Mitt. It’s why you got no base outside the 24% who already think you’re great.

Harbingeing on December 13, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Aside from Romneycare, they literally almost never report on or look into if he governed as a conservative. Who he took on in that state. The battles he fought against the hacks on Beacon Hill. Think you’d be suprised.

AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

Exactly, one need look no further than Romney’s flagship legislation and major accomplishment … ROMNEYCARE – to see just how “conservative” he was.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Ah…thank you Ed for posting that.

Now…in his own words..GLENN BECK!!! Useless Idiot…

You thought Newt was/is a Progressive??
Makes Newt look like Thomas Jefferson.

Where are the actual…”in his own words” on Newt???

Bye Bye Romney!!!

coach1228 on December 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Thats where we are at now- pick from who’s running. Its Mitt or Newt. So you want to say Mitts no good because he lied to libs in MA, then you get Newt who cozied up to the devil herself in 2008 when Nancy was screwing the nation over, or this summer stabbed Paul Ryan in the face. So thats your choice, conservatives.

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Thanks, I’ll take Newt please. :)

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM

I seem to recall another Republican managing to win a statewide election recently in Massachusetts without describing himself as Progressive or Liberal.

If Brown can manage it, I don’t see why Mitt couldn’t have.

DominusNovus on December 13, 2011 at 10:46 AM

So I’d like to hear from all the dipsh!ts- if not Romney, why is Newt ok? The serial adultery do it for you? How about the fact that Newt hates capitalists?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:46 AM

So what. Reagan was a democrat before becoming one of the best Republican Presidents.

rich801 on December 13, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:47 AM

I would say there is a big difference between a progressive and someone who is republican who has progressive views. I don’t think “progressives” would talk about kids being left behind by urban schools.

Zaggs on December 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I was with Newt for a while, but I’m reluctantly back with Mitt – I don’t see anywhere else to go. He could lose to Obama, but I think he’s a lower risk than any other candidates. If I’m going to gamble another 4 years of this clown, it would have to be on someone like DeMint, and he’s not running.

The Count on December 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

Your first paragraph says it all…
Liberals and elite, moderate republicans can frame it as dragging their Neanderthal racist, far right social conservative base away from the fear of Romney’s religion but, the true is…who is he and who will he be after he’s elected.

rebekahhuang on December 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

So I’d like to hear from all the dipsh!ts- if not Romney, why is Newt ok? The serial adultery do it for you? How about the fact that Newt hates capitalists?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Serial adultery doesn’t bother me a bit.

All it means to me is Newt is “alpha” and I want an alpha in the Oval Office – what do I care if he works his stress off with his secretary? It’s a stressful job.

But I want the most conservative guy we can get – and that’s Newt. It’s not Mr. RomneyCare Progressive.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Questions to ponder: If Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, Huntsman or Paul were enjoying Newt’s current poll numbers:

1) Would they be weathering the frontrunner scrutiny any better than Newt is?

2) Would establishment Republicans treat them with any less disdain than they do Newt?

3) Would Romney supporters be any less hysterical about the prospects of them winning the nomination as opposed to Mitt?

Kataklysmic on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Its all about beating Obama and he can do it.

k2comp on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Oh hondaV65 you adorable fool. It was only a matter of time! So, Newt gives you the warm fuzzies cause he can’t keep it in his pants? Or because, like you, he hates capitalism? Oh no, it must be the fact that he’s incompetent, and allowed Bill Clinton to screw him over. No no, it,s that he’s Catholic! Is that it?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

So what. Reagan was a democrat before becoming one of the best Republican Presidents.
rich801 on December 13, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Even as a democrat, Reagan was one of the best republicans.

rrpjr on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Where are the actual…”in his own words” on Newt???

coach1228 on December 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Where? Everywhere. You must be deaf, blind or in wilful denial. Romney’s comments are stale and mild next to Newt’s attack of capitalism, lavish praise of FDR, and proud proclamations of of his Rockefeller heritage.

Newt wasnt even running for office, never mind running for office in a blue state. He’s just a guy who think FDR is the greatest thing since the wheel was invented.

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Oh hondaV65 you adorable fool. It was only a matter of time! So, Newt gives you the warm fuzzies cause he can’t keep it in his pants? Or because, like you, he hates capitalism? Oh no, it must be the fact that he’s incompetent, and allowed Bill Clinton to screw him over. No no, it,s that he’s Catholic! Is that it?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Newt presided over a Congress that produced a balanced budget and treasury surpluses.

Mitt presided over RomneyCare.

Nuff said there.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM

zOMG, HotAir writers are all in the tank for Romney Perry Cain Romney Newt Perry Newt Romney!!!1! Arnold Huntsman!

Abby Adams on December 13, 2011 at 10:39 AM

Dr Evil on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Romney is whoever he needs to be to win.

I’ll stick with the Aggie Governor from Texas…He can govern. He can beat Obama and Texas has jobs, a balanced budget and a surplus.

Gig Em’
Perry 2012

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

What does Beck have to say about this?

Is he going to host Romney on his show and question him about it?

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Alternate headline “Romney: Your A-typical Politician”

NWA Conservative on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

An “Alpha”. Wow. So the fact that Gingrich is to the left of Obama on his disdain for capitalists doesn’t bug you, because Newt shags his secretary?
By the way, real men don’t screw subordinates, they find equals.
I knew you weren’t a real conservative.\
There’s alot for conservatives to hate about Romney, but your embrace of Newt shows you are a liberal.

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

The question is whether that was his strategy then and he was a secret conservative all along, or whether that’s his strategy today and he’s really a progressive

That is the crux of the matter for me, and there is no objective way to tell.

I believe Romney’s not really one or the other, but instead a political pragmatist who has no problem packaging himself well for the circumstances.

From the perspective of a political campaigh, this another way of saying Romney tells people what they want to hear. In other words, Romney’s political philosophy is whatever it needs to be to serve his personal ambition. That isn’t very flattering.

I agree that there is value to pragmatism – once someone is in office. After all, politics is often referred to as “the art of the possible,” which is just another way of saying that half a cake is better than none when it comes to accomplishing ideological goals.

Romney’s “pragmatism” is only about getting himself elected. If he were to achieve that goal, who knows what he would be – the progressive governor or MA, or the johnny-come-lately conservative presidential candidate? I suspect it would be the former, because the latter Romney incarnation is only a function of the audience he is trying to convince – and the difference between the two shows he has no principles in the first place.

DRayRaven on December 13, 2011 at 10:53 AM

He was lying then or he’s lying now.
In either case he’s a liar.

angryed on December 13, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Newt>Romney. Romney bots cry over his bad debate last week. I gotta go to work now, so fight back the horde most of the hotair population.

Flapjackmaka on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

And I’m supposed to not vote for Gingrich and show up for this guy?

JB-STLMO on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Its all about beating Obama and he can do it.

k2comp on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

So are you conservatives finally coming to the realization that America is a center LEFT country?

I arrived there a long time ago….

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:40 AM

That barrage of “FDR is the greatest president of the 20th century” quotes is alarming.

FDR was horrible for America. In the short term and the long term.

beatcanvas on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

What do people think about someone who constantly changes support on topics from one side to the other? What does that say about them in general? That says that person has no principles.

If you are going to run in Mass as a tamed progressive, then accept it and go with it. Does Mitt Romney really consider himself a died in the wool conservative?

We all saw Little o run on cutting taxes, removing government from daily lives and allowing America a chance to prosper. Hope and Change. I think candidates know what the formula is for winning and are trying to stick to that as best as they can. Even though they have history that says otherwise.

If Mitt had run as a straight up conservative or a semi-strong conservative AND governed that way then he would be more acceptable to conservatives now. This goes for all the candidates.

Not to start anything but I wanted She who shall not be named to run.

JAGonzo on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Newt presided over a Congress that produced a balanced budget and treasury surpluses.

Mitt presided over RomneyCare.

Nuff said there.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Actually, Romney presided over a state that produced balanced budgets and treasury surpluses.

Romney presided over a veto-proof liberal legislature that was intent of passing single payer socialized medicine and saved private care in Massachusetts.

FTFY.

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Slip Sliding Away

God only knows
God makes his plan
The information’s unavailable
To the mortal man
We’re working our jobs
Collect our pay
Believe we’re gliding down the highway
When in fact we’re slip slidin’ away

Dr Evil on December 13, 2011 at 10:55 AM

Hey honda, why don’t you have a listen to what those he “presided over”. Why won’t any of them endorse him? Why are they all saying he is a horrible leader? Just food for thought.
Seriously Ed, its crunch time. We gotta pick from the hand we got dealt. Newt or Mitt?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:55 AM

Republicans don’t win office in Massachusetts by proclaiming themselves as Ronald Reagan conservatives.

Reagan won Massachusetts. Twice.

portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 10:55 AM

Just like Newt.

blatantblue on December 13, 2011 at 10:55 AM

What does Beck have to say about this?

Is he going to host Romney on his show and question him about it?

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Don’t hold your breath. Even if Beck had the desire to shine a light on Mitt’s progressivism, the odds of Mitt entering a forum like that are slim to none. Someone who gets pissy with Bret Baier isn’t ready for Beck.

Kataklysmic on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 10:52 AM

WHOOP!

txag92 on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

And Romney is a self-described “Progressive”. You can’t bang on Newt for his statements without also banging on Romney for his stupid statements.

Or his stupid positions – one of which is that RomneyCare was a good thing.

I look at actions – and Newt pretty much produced the GOP majority in ’94. He also produced a balanced budget and treasury surpluses while working under a Democratic POTUS. That’s no mean trick there hoss.

Also – at least Newt is RUNNING as a Conservative now. Romney – not so much. At least Newt has spoken to Tea Party cells and Conservative groups – whild Mitt runs from them.

Get your boy to stretch his legs and sit down with Conservatives – and then we’ll talk.

But Mitt won’t do that – he’s too busy alienating Conservative media and pandering to the LSM.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Aside from Romneycare, they literally almost never report on or look into if he governed as a conservative. Who he took on in that state. The battles he fought against the hacks on Beacon Hill. Think you’d be suprised. AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

Don’t confuse Hot Airheads with facts.

Neither the clip about praising FDR about 20 times, calling him better than Reagan, nor the clip about Newt’s OWS comments about capitalism make the front page…

But a 10 year old comment from a guy running as a Republican in Massachusetts dismissing party labels does.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69204.html

http://www.breitbart.tv/newt-fdr-was-the-greatest-president-of-the-20th-century/

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Ed Morrissey can’t hide the fact that he doesn’t like Mitt.

Basilsbest on December 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

So are you conservatives finally coming to the realization that America is a center LEFT country?

I arrived there a long time ago….

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

How do you explain the results of the 2010 election?

Kataklysmic on December 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

I was really hoping Perry, with all his faults, could have done it. He would have, if he could speak cogently. But hes Palinized.

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

So are you conservatives finally coming to the realization that America is a center LEFT country?

I arrived there a long time ago….

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Yeah, a full 20% identify as liberal. Whatevs…

The Count on December 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

So I’d like to hear from all the dipsh!ts- if not Romney, why is Newt ok? The serial adultery do it for you? How about the fact that Newt hates capitalists?

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:46 AM

drdips*t,

Why don’t you tell us pros for voting for Mitt, instead of railing on about Newt’s marital status.

portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Aside from Romneycare…
AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM
“Aside from, you know… how was the show, Mrs. Lincoln?”

rrpjr on December 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Great but that’s lazy analysis. Romney didn’t want to do Healthcare, it was Teddy’s baby but Mitt insisted on the mandate (given it was a Conservative notion at the time) and not raising taxes, which he accomplished.

Why don’t enterprising regurgitators like you look into how Romney dealt with the corrupt people who ran the state and ran over Bill Weld. Look at how he held people’s feet to the fire over the Big Dig, how he ousted Billy Bulger from UMASS. How the House Speaker (the most powerful man in the state) just happened to be ousted when Mitt was there too. Truth is, you don’t have a clue how “conservative’ of a governor he was.

AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

People alarmed by this ten year old comment must truly be horrified by the one week old comment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y36HeSMNZuQ&feature=player_embedded

swamp_yankee on December 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Peoples views change. At least he wasn’t making commercials with Pelosi

ObamatheMessiah on December 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Is this waiting for us in the general if Romney is the nominee? It is history but could ding and dent his clean capitalist image.

An article from 2002 on Bain Capital company where Romney was on the Board: In 1996, Damon pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge of defrauding the government of $25 million between 1988 and 1993. The company paid a $119 million fine.

http://www.boston.com/news/daily/10/mass_gov.htm

Another article re FDIC bank bailout in 1994,The Bain & Co. story was reported in the Globe in 1994. Romney basically negotiated about a $10 million reduction in the $38 million the firm owed failed Bank of New England, which had been taken over by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., a federal agency funded by insurance premiums paid by banks. The $4 million represented interest the firm did not have to pay as a result of the loan forgiveness, the Globe reported. Other Bain & Co. creditors also agreed to debt reductions.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2011/07/14/romney_faces_criticism_over_bain_bailout_ad/

momoftxmomof3 on December 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM

There is something that I admire about Mormons…
It doesn’t matter that Romney has no principles and he changes position everyday, Glenn Beck will never through him under the bus.

Mormons really do stick together..

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM

Aside from Romneycare…
AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM
“Aside from, you know… how was the show, Mrs. Lincoln?”

rrpjr on December 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Heh.

Vince on December 13, 2011 at 11:00 AM

All it means to me is Newt is “alpha” and I want an alpha in the Oval Office – what do I care if he works his stress off with his secretary? It’s a stressful job. HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Pretty much nails it for me too.

Harbingeing on December 13, 2011 at 11:00 AM

I look at actions – and Newt pretty much produced the GOP majority in ’94. He also produced a balanced budget and treasury surpluses while working under a Democratic POTUS. That’s no mean trick there hoss.

Also – at least Newt is RUNNING as a Conservative now. Romney – not so much. At least Newt has spoken to Tea Party cells and Conservative groups – while Mitt runs from them.

Get your boy to stretch his legs and sit down with Conservatives – and then we’ll talk.

But Mitt won’t do that – he’s too busy alienating Conservative media and pandering to the LSM.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Good gravy, I’m agreeing with Honda.

But how embarrassing is it to have said on umpteen occasions that FDR is the greatest president of the 20th century… you’re just not a smart person if that’s really your conclusion.

beatcanvas on December 13, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Mitt’s rather pathetic, but in his defense, he said his views are progressive not that he is a progressive. Who doesn’t think one’s own views aren’t “progressive”?

Besides, it’s such an immature label. “We’re for progress so we’re ‘progressive’!” I’m glad it’s out of style. Every GOP candidate should claim that of course conservative views are progressive!

That aside, at least Mitt won as an R in the the most liberal state in the union. What’s Newt’s excuse for embracing big government?

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 11:00 AM

AYNBLAND on December 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

you tell em!! like the way he conservatively signed a ban on assault weapons!!

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

Least everyone forget ..Reagan was a DEMOCRAT Hmmmmm. Stop abusing Mitt.BO has been and always be a LIBERAL !!!

Cincy Conservative on December 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

But Mitt won’t do that – he’s too busy alienating Conservative media and pandering to the LSM.
HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Republicans are too busy spewing hatred against the Mormon and ignoring Romney’s splendid record as a businessman and as a conservative governor of the most liberal state in the nation. Romney will make a phenomenal President if given the chance.

Basilsbest on December 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM

its “throw” not “through”. they arent even homonyms!! as for beck if you paid any attention tot he hotgas headlines you would see he said yesterday he could vote for ron paul as an independent.

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

you tell em!! like the way he conservatively signed a ban on assault weapons!! chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

It’s pure lunacy to allow people like you to get their hands on AK47s.

Basilsbest on December 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

There is something that I admire about Mormons…
It doesn’t matter that Romney has no principles and he changes position everyday, Glenn Beck will never through him under the bus.

Mormons really do stick together..

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM

Not every Mormon supports Romney. And some Mormons are not pleased with Beck over his “sins of omission” in this case.

Kataklysmic on December 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

“Newt presided over a Congress that produced a balanced budget and treasury surpluses.”HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM

“I’m willing to lead but I’m not willing to preside over people who are cannibals. My only fear would be that if I tried to stay, it would just overshadow whoever my successor is. Frankly, Marianne and I could use a break…..I think Marianne and I will probably take six months off and go collect dinosaurs or something.”
Newt Gingrich November 08, 1998

(Following are excerpts from a conference call on Friday between Speaker Newt Gingrich and several Republicans, including Representatives Joe L. Barton of Texas, Rob Portman of Ohio, Fred Upton of Michigan and Jim Nicholson, chairman of the Republican National Committee. Mr. Gingrich refers to his wife, Marianne. The call was transcribed by The Associated Press.)

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/08/us/the-speaker-steps-down-excerpts-from-phone-call-about-gingrich-s-future.

Americans don’t elect Quitters to the presidency

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 11:06 AM

And Romney is a self-described “Progressive”. You can’t bang on Newt for his statements without also banging on Romney for his stupid statements.

Or his stupid positions – one of which is that RomneyCare was a good thing.

I look at actions – and Newt pretty much produced the GOP majority in ’94. He also produced a balanced budget and treasury surpluses while working under a Democratic POTUS. That’s no mean trick there hoss.

Also – at least Newt is RUNNING as a Conservative now. Romney – not so much. At least Newt has spoken to Tea Party cells and Conservative groups – whild Mitt runs from them.

Get your boy to stretch his legs and sit down with Conservatives – and then we’ll talk.

But Mitt won’t do that – he’s too busy alienating Conservative media and pandering to the LSM.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

This!

AmayasNana on December 13, 2011 at 11:06 AM

Windsock 2012

Bishop on December 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Windsocks have more integrity.

RickB on December 13, 2011 at 11:06 AM

Anne (Chubbies-R-Us) Coulter could not be reached for comment.

Western_Civ on December 13, 2011 at 11:06 AM

As bad as he is as a true conservative, Romney still has a better chance to beat O’Bummer than Newt.

jagdpanther on December 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

HondaV65 on December 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM

thats a crock, it never happened, newt never balanced any budget, ever

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

I truly want to thank the editors of HotAir for opening registration.

We have had more people with wide-ranging opinions on the primary than we’ve ever had. Sometimes it’s messy and contentious, but it should never be boring from here on out.

It’s good to see a new influx of Romney supporters, Romney haters, Newt haters, Newt supporters, etc.! I mean this with sincerity. Debate has increased and been awesome this past week.

That being said: Brokered Convention 2012! ;-)

Abby Adams on December 13, 2011 at 11:08 AM

spewing hatred against the Mormon

Basilsbest on December 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

My wife and in-laws are all Mormon – absolutely salt-of-the-earth people. But really – Mitt is a huge phony. Has nothing to do with his religion. Has everything to do with the fact that Mitt put his signature and name on RomneyCare – and proudly!

ignoring Romney’s splendid record as a businessman and as a conservative governor of the most liberal state in the nation. Romney will make a phenomenal President if given the chance.

You know, Mitt never thought that he had to earn our trust and mingle with us in the cheap seats. He just thought he had to buy endorsements.

What a putz.

beatcanvas on December 13, 2011 at 11:08 AM

drballard on December 13, 2011 at 10:46 AM

You don’t like Newt. We get it. But why is Newt’s past indiscretions any of your damned business and why should it matter in Presidential politics? Clinton pretty much killed the idea that infidelity disqualified one from the Presidency.

Why do I get the feeling that if your guy isn’t nominiated you’re not going to get behind the party’s candidate. It is all too clear that you are only a team player when it suits you. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a perfect candidate. Deal with it without calling candidates serial adulterers!

Happy Nomad on December 13, 2011 at 11:08 AM

its “throw” not “through”. they arent even homonyms!! as for beck if you paid any attention tot he hotgas headlines you would see he said yesterday he could vote for ron paul as an independent.

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

Its hard to type on my smart phone sometimes! of course I know the difference between throw and through

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 11:09 AM

@txag92 on December 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

New Ad to go with your bagel.

Politically Correct
http://youtu.be/QzUIJVerqN4

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Basilsbest on December 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

maybe so, however romney aint no conservative!! and maybe he can beat obama, but only in a democrat primary since romney’s no republican!!

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:10 AM

thats a crock, it never happened, newt never balanced any budget, ever

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

I think he balanced his personal budget with the $1.6M he made from lobbying for FANNIE.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Not every Mormon supports Romney. And some Mormons are not pleased with Beck over his “sins of omission” in this case.

Kataklysmic on December 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

Some Mormons vote Democrat.

Dr Evil on December 13, 2011 at 11:11 AM

So are you conservatives finally coming to the realization that America is a center LEFT country?

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Democratic Socialism is dead, Lib — it was smacked to death by economic reality in Europe. You’ll be OK, Lib, since Mark Warner will revive the DLC and drag your nutty party kicking and screaming back to the center RIGHT. :-)

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 11:11 AM

I’m no fan of Romney, but when he made that comment, in lefty Massachusetts in 2002, ‘progressive’ had not taken on the wholly negative meaning for Republicans it has now, and probably meant nothing more than a sort of general shout out that he wasn’t a social conservative troglodyte.

Nail him for stuff that’s meaningful, not bs like this.

CatoRenasci on December 13, 2011 at 11:12 AM

The conservative messiah has not appeared; hell, he/she hasn’t even tweeted!

Oracleforhire on December 13, 2011 at 11:12 AM

Happy Nomad on December 13, 2011 at 11:08 AM

if a candidate wants my vote i decide what about him is and isnt my business, simple as that! as for and standard clinton set, thats irrelevant. i wont vote for someone w/ those types of character flaws. if he’s willing to cheat in teh area of marriage he cant be trusted.

chasdal on December 13, 2011 at 11:12 AM

Ruh roh

cmsinaz on December 13, 2011 at 11:12 AM

The problem with Romney is not just he is flip flopper. He is truley arrogant guy. Just look at him in debates. We all know that Romney is a big lair and I don’t have to bet to prove he is a huge flip flopper. Perry was right and I am glad he did not take the bet. Romney, a rich East coast boy, was condescending and arrogant towards Perry, a Southern man who grew up poor in a farm. The message was clearly obvious and Romney could not hide it. People saw it and did not like it.

nancysabet on December 13, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Everyone who tries to equate Romney to Regan through the old “Regan was a democrat before he was a republican” should keep that in mind when bashing Newt for FDR comments/Piglosi couch scene or whatever you can think of. You negate a good deal of your own arguments that way.

JAGonzo on December 13, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Anne (Chubbies-R-Us) Coulter could not be reached for comment.

Western_Civ on December 13, 2011 at 11:06 AM

Tofflers!!111!!

/Ann (Can’t find a man) Coulter

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 11:14 AM

So are you conservatives finally coming to the realization that America is a center LEFT country doomed?

I arrived there a long time ago….

liberal4life on December 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Yep…if this is the best we can do, we are doomed. A guy who gave his state $50 abortions (yeah yeah…I know, the evil Court made him do it!!!/bs) or a serial adulterer who thinks too much…I know which I’d hold my nose to vote for, but we need more. We are at the fork in the road, there are two paths and we need a clear choice. None of the front runners give it.

Rick Santorum 2012! Come on Sarah; endorse him and give him the boost he (and we) desperately needs.

pannw on December 13, 2011 at 11:14 AM

I really think someone should produce an ad parsing together statements like these from Mitt. Starting with “There are a lot of reasons not to elect me,” and listing one at a time things like “Healthcare” while a narrator intones about each listed item. Ending with “I’m running for office for Pete’s sake, we can’t have illegals” and then “my views are progressive.”

OneGyT on December 13, 2011 at 11:15 AM

Comment pages: 1 2