Romney flashback: “I’m not running as the Republican view or a continuation of Republican values”
posted at 4:15 pm on December 14, 2011 by Allahpundit
Another day, another brutal clip salvaged from C-SPAN’s archives by 22-year-old college student Andrew Kaczynski, who’s been killing Romney for weeks with footage taken during Mitt’s Massachusetts Moderate incarnation. You can thank him for yesterday’s video of Romney declaring his views “progressive” back in 2002 and for the one last week of Mitt’s surreal attack on John Kerry in 2004 for … flip-flopping. This one’s an old Democratic attack ad; expect to see these soundbites again in the general election if Romney gets that far. Serious question: Except for Huntsman, has any candidate hit Romney as hard in his or her ads as Kaczynski’s clips have? Perry’s devoted most of his ad time to trying to restore his own image and Gingrich has vowed to run a positive campaign apart from the occasional aside about how Mitt should give back his Bain earnings. (So far, Newt’s even given Mitt a pass on their respective records circa 1994.) Maybe their oppo research teams think this sort of thing is unnecessary, that Romney’s identity as a soulless opportunist is already so well known to the base that they don’t have to risk being branded as “negative” by attacking him for it. But the clips play awfully well online; our readers, at least, seem to pay them close attention even though most are already solidly opposed to a Romney nomination.
Lefty Jon Chait draws an interesting contrast between Romney’s brand of flip-flopping and Gingrich’s brand:
The negative interpretation [of Romney's conservatism since 2005] is that Romney is essentially running a con, though it’s impossible to tell if he was conning Massachusetts then or is conning Republicans now. (My guess, based on Romney’s admiration for his moderate father, is that he’s conning conservatives now, but I can’t really be certain.) When you’re running a con, of course you stay consistent – you have to keep up the front, no matter what.
The robotic consistency of Romney’s newfound conservatism does contrast sharply with Gingrich, who lurches between hysterical right-wing paranoia and bouts of bipartisanship. And yet the erratic character of Gingrich’s swings suggests that they’re unplanned, and thus that they spring from actual conviction, albeit momentary convictions. Gingrich actually believes what he is advocating at the moment he is advocating it. Nobody can plausibly say the same of Romney.
Romney is the handsome swindler who plots to win your mother’s heart and make off with her fortune. Gingrich is like the husband who periodically gets drunk and runs off to spend a week with a stripper in a low-rent motel but always comes home in the end. Which one would you rather see your mother marry?
Romney’s steady yet unprincipled and Gingrich is principled yet, er, “zany.” Whose finger do you want on the button? Good lord: Second look at Romney?
Exit question: Was this Fox News graphic a mistake or a “mistake”? C’mon.
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: « Previous 1 2
so let me get this straight. You Romneybots are claiming Romney can beat Obama because he is not seen as extremist. Doesn’t that tell you that you have been supporting the wrong party all a long?
If a man as left wing as Romney is putting up a fight against Obama, what this tells me is that America has become a CENTER-LEFT country because Romney sure aint no conservative.
liberal4life on December 14, 2011 at 5:10 PM
The wages of loyalty in GOP: somebody who is a life long republican is treated like a pariah, someone who was never a republican runs to the left of what most of the party believes is treated like its king.
promachus on December 14, 2011 at 5:11 PM
A. Why didn’t Romney know that the legislature would override everything he vetoed. Why didn’t he know that the legislature would twist “Romneycare.”
B. The basic premise of Romneycare is not conservative.
I think A is very telling because so many of Romney’s supporters keep saying that he did X.Y.Z to get elected in Mass.
So apparently he forgot what Mass was all about when he became governor? He didn’t realize democrats dominate the legislature?
Come on.
J.S. Kline on December 14, 2011 at 5:11 PM
I will let Romney explain it.
“I support the subsidy of ethanol.”
“It is now my pleasure to introduce my collaborator and friend Senator Edward Kennedy.”
‘I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.’ “
“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” Romney said. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
“I think instead that if you want to get something done in Washington, you don’t end up picking teams with Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other entering into a contract saying, ‘OK, we’re all going to do this,’ and then of course if that works, then the other side feels like they’re the loser. But if it wins, they feel like the winner. I don’t like winners and losers in Washington. I’d rather say let’s get together and work together.”
Mr. Romney joined activists outside an aging, coal-fired plant in 2003 to show his commitment to the emissions caps. “I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people,” he said.
On Dec. 7, 2005, the Romney administration unveiled the final orders. “These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress in the battle to improve our environment,” then-Gov. Romney said in a press release touting Massachusetts as “the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.”
Under Romney’s Car Ownership Program, the state paid out one year’s insurance, inspection, excise tax, title, registration, repairs and a AAA membership for cars that were donated to welfare recipients. Under the plan, those who lost their jobs and ended up back on welfare were allowed to keep their free wheels.
“There will be children born to same-sex couples, and adopted by same-sax couples, and I believe that there should be rights and privileges associated with those unions and with the children that are part of those unions.”
sharrukin on December 14, 2011 at 5:12 PM
But that’s just it. Obama is uber vulnerable which means we don’t have to settle for a moderate like Romney.
mike_NC9 on December 14, 2011 at 5:13 PM
to continue
next Romney supporters will claim that “he had to do things like Romneycare in Mass so that he could keep a high approval rating” or “come on people, mass is such a liberal state so the governor had to govern as one too!”
J.S. Kline on December 14, 2011 at 5:14 PM
Um, sorry, but I don’t give one whit about the fact he is a Mormon. None. I’m glad he seems to have a strong religious faith. He has that going for him.
I do care that his views are chameleon-like and that there is plenty of evidence out there that he will say anything and everything to get elected. In that respect, he’s like our ex-Senator Arlen Specter, who went from Democrat to Republican and back again. Ask anyone from Pennsylvania how much he was trusted.
PatriotGal2257 on December 14, 2011 at 5:15 PM
I wanna see that establishment tool Ann Coulter defend Romney on this on Hannity’s tv show and make the two of them look even more pathetic. Please defend him Ann, pleeeaaaase!
apocalypse on December 14, 2011 at 5:15 PM
I think Romney is great fun. Today I agree with him, tomorrow I disagree with him, day after tomorrow I agree with him, the day after the day after tomorrow I disagree with him…ad infinitum.
Much more fun than that Elmer Gantry character from Texas…who is that?…Oh yeah, Ricky “Head ‘em up, Move ‘em out” Perry. Yeeee-hah!
Of course there is always Newt “I will not have sex with other women” Gingrich.
Somber times.
Horace on December 14, 2011 at 5:16 PM
I know, right?!?! They just cannot see it, liberal.
2013…free healthcare and more EBT cards, we will ALWAYS have a majority.
BedBug on December 14, 2011 at 5:17 PM
Let me sum it up for you guys.
Romney is trying to run from the center in hopes of getting enough people behind him to win the nomination.
Newt is trying to run from the right in hopes that there are enough people to hand him the nomination.
So the question becomes: Are there more people with center-views than there are with right-of-center views? Or the other way around? Romney is banking that there are and Newt is banking that there aren’t.
Keep in mind that history has shown that the Right are much more likely NOT TO VOTE for a waffling, Democrat-pleasing, stand-for-nothing RINO than the other way around.
Mahdi on December 14, 2011 at 5:18 PM
I’m sure there are some honest, decent Democrats that care about America and want her to get back on her feet. In fact, I know there are.
Newt will engage the blue dogs in real reform and let the bi-partisan political ruling class wither on the vine.
mike_NC9 on December 14, 2011 at 5:19 PM
I just can’t believe that this is what we’ve come to.
The great conservative pushback of 2009 and 2010 came about because of Obamacare….and we respond by setting up our two 2012 frontrunners as:
- A man who once supported the individual mandate
and
- A man who implemented the individual mandate
No wonder Democrats are laughing at us. Nominating either of these clowns discredits the last couple of years of conservative progress we’ve made. Sadly, we have little choice in the matter.
mintycrys on December 14, 2011 at 5:20 PM
Thought you wanted a second look at Huntsman, Allah?
nicktjacob on December 14, 2011 at 5:20 PM
The answer for most people is, “neither.” That’s the danger; the people will reject both the swindler and the drunk, and stay with the devil they know.
cabbie25 on December 14, 2011 at 5:22 PM
Don’t believe all of the “frontrunner” hype. 2012 will be the year pundintry was humbled.
Spirit Crusher on December 14, 2011 at 5:22 PM
It doesn’t take much to understand Romney as the quintessence of the conventional, risk-averse and crushingly unimaginative power-seeker. But he is also a perfidious conservative in the deepest and most destructive ways.
Look no further than this cycle. He used a hoary, conventional leftist fear-mongering slander to attack Perry for his daring and quite accurate remark on Social Security. He then attacked Gingrich for an interesting and totally sensible remark about introducing the work ethic to inner-city young people. Romney in this case lifted from ghetto of leftist slurs: that Gingrich wanted “to repeal child labor laws.”
This is very interesting. That is, not only can he not summon the risk to introduce any sort of unconventional, thoughtful or narrative-busting ideas or commentary of his own into the conservative colloquy, but he actually attacks those who do, and with the attack language of the enemy.
He is now attacking Gingrich as “zany,” once again replicating a conventional meme used by establishment elites and the Left.
This is just one reason I find him supremely detestable.
rrpjr on December 14, 2011 at 5:24 PM
Let’s all not try to live a dream world where Romney is a “real” conservative. He is a technocratic (and I say that in the most positive sense possible) CEO who brings a businessman’s approach to political office, namely efficiency. If he lays off as many government workers as he did at Bain, we’ll be just fine. You can argue that this makes him superior to the other GOP candidates (an interesting question), and I think its unquestionable that this makes him superior to the current Oval Office resident. Since it is Christmas, I’ll stick to my belief in Santa Claus over Romney’s conservative convictions.
HTnFBCoachnTX1980 on December 14, 2011 at 5:24 PM
I want Newts boot on congress’s neck.
boogaleesnots on December 14, 2011 at 5:25 PM
I’m really not that sure he has a strong faith – and this is perplexing to me because I always thought Mormons were pretty “gung ho” and non-compromising in their faith.
However, Mitt Romney and Harry Reid make me reevaluate that notion.
Mormons are “pro-life” – from the moment of conception. If you believe that God created that life – how can you possibly … EVER … be Pro-Abortion? Yet, for most of his life – Mitt Romney was a man who advocated that abortion should be legal.
I’m sorry – I just can’t reconcile that. Sure, I can see where you would allow gambling even if you had a religious opinion against it – but that’s not HUMAN LIFE. Human Life is the ULTIMATE creation of God – isn’t it? So how do Mormons in the political sphere ever resolve this?
Additionally, aren’t Mormons anti-gambling? Yet Romney sure did whip out that “bet” on Perry real quick didn’t he?
Next thing we’ll see – is a YouTube of Romney swigging on a bottle of whiskey and singing dirty limericks!
HondaV65 on December 14, 2011 at 5:26 PM
Yea, seriously AP, where’d the Hunstmania disappear to? Tis the season of miracles…
HTnFBCoachnTX1980 on December 14, 2011 at 5:26 PM
I’m really not that sure he has a strong faith – and this is perplexing to me because I always thought Mormons were pretty “gung ho” and non-compromising in their faith.
However, Mitt Romney and Harry Reid make me reevaluate that notion.
Mormons are “pro-life” – from the moment of conception. If you believe that God created that life – how can you possibly … EVER … be Pro-Abortion? Yet, for most of his life – Mitt Romney was a man who advocated that abortion should be legal.
I’m sorry – I just can’t reconcile that. Sure, I can see where you would allow gambling even if you had a religious opinion against it – but that’s not HUMAN LIFE. Human Life is the ULTIMATE creation of God – isn’t it? So how do Mormons in the political sphere ever resolve this?
Additionally, aren’t Mormons anti-gambling? Yet Romney sure did whip out that “bet” on Perry real quick didn’t he?
Next thing we’ll see – is a YouTube of Romney swigging on a bottle of whiskey and singing dirty limericks!
HondaV65 on December 14, 2011 at 5:27 PM
Tristin Huntsman knows a lot about China…!
Seven Percent Solution on December 14, 2011 at 5:27 PM
I don’t like Newt or Mitt, but having lived through the Clinton impeachment there’s just way too many bad memories with Newt, not to mention his post Speaker years which have been nothing but opportunistic self promoting, so i’ll take Mitt because there just isn’t any other choice. It really is amazing what a sorry bunch of candidates the R’s have this year.
clearbluesky on December 14, 2011 at 5:28 PM
Why is HA giving a podium to a 22 year old looking through old YouTube clips again? I’m pretty sure you guys could find embarassing YouTube clips of all the candidates. Why the focus on Romney? Oh thats right — you are hell bent on letting anyone but him get the nomination.
Take a page from Newt’s book and focus on constructive aspects please, there is a general election after this and there is a good chance Romney will get the nomination.
kmalkows on December 14, 2011 at 5:29 PM
+1000
lovingmyUSA on December 14, 2011 at 5:33 PM
What are the alternate choices, though? I doubt that a brokered convention is likely.
Here’s some food for thought: Why not re-elect Barack Obama?
The man has done more to help the conservative movement than any person since Ronald Reagan, while simultaneously doing more damage to the left in mainstream Americans’ eyes than any person since Jimothy Carter. People don’t like the man because of his attitude and penchant for base politicking. His ego won’t allow him to change course. If Romney and Gingrich stand a chance against Barack Obama, imagine what a solid candidate could do! Or we could give him another four years to finish sinking the liberal/progressive movement, relegate them all permanently to the sideline hecklers class. While I’m all for saving America by getting rid of Obama, why stop at Obama when we can give the left enough rope to hang themselves (or give Obama enough bus to throw the rest of his party under), removing them from the political class for years to come?
That’s why electing Newt or Mittens is such a poor idea. We want conservatism to have a charismatic defender to see it through all this. Besides, how else are we going to run Christie/Ryan/Rubio/West in 2016 if either Romney or Gingrich holds the presidency? Gingrich won’t give it up; he’s got an ego like Obama, so it is said. Romney? His platform is just like Obama’s in that he….just wants to be President. Neither of them will step aside in 2016, and the party won’t allow either of them to step down, since the media would cast it as a failure.
Just a thought.
mintycrys on December 14, 2011 at 5:34 PM
I seriously doubt that. The people are pissed; right now they’d vote for a rabid ferret over Odumbo if the Repubs nominated one (and at this point, I would’nt be surprised, imagine the debates!)
squint on December 14, 2011 at 5:35 PM
great post
JStew on December 14, 2011 at 5:37 PM
Delusional?? Guess you would know….you new here?
lovingmyUSA on December 14, 2011 at 5:39 PM
QFE
What makes Romney a moderate? Will someone explain that to me? Is it only Romneycare that gets him that label? It seems like every single say he’s explaining to people how conservative he is. So why does the media continue to describe him as moderate?
allahpunditfanclub on December 14, 2011 at 5:01 PM
I will let Romney explain it.
“I support the subsidy of ethanol.”
“It is now my pleasure to introduce my collaborator and friend Senator Edward Kennedy.”
‘I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.’ “
“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” Romney said. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
“I think instead that if you want to get something done in Washington, you don’t end up picking teams with Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other entering into a contract saying, ‘OK, we’re all going to do this,’ and then of course if that works, then the other side feels like they’re the loser. But if it wins, they feel like the winner. I don’t like winners and losers in Washington. I’d rather say let’s get together and work together.”
Mr. Romney joined activists outside an aging, coal-fired plant in 2003 to show his commitment to the emissions caps. “I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people,” he said.
On Dec. 7, 2005, the Romney administration unveiled the final orders. “These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress in the battle to improve our environment,” then-Gov. Romney said in a press release touting Massachusetts as “the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.”
Under Romney’s Car Ownership Program, the state paid out one year’s insurance, inspection, excise tax, title, registration, repairs and a AAA membership for cars that were donated to welfare recipients. Under the plan, those who lost their jobs and ended up back on welfare were allowed to keep their free wheels.
“There will be children born to same-sex couples, and adopted by same-sax couples, and I believe that there should be rights and privileges associated with those unions and with the children that are part of those unions.”
sharrukin on December 14, 2011 at 5:12 PM
chasdal on December 14, 2011 at 5:40 PM
I’m a Romney supporter, but I too am troubled by the RomneyCare situation. That said, you have to look at the history of RomneyCare. In 2004, the Massachusetts Senate President introduced a bill that would have expanded MassCare (i.e., government provided insurance) to lots of state residents and required employers to either provide coverage or pay a surcharge designed to subsidize MassCare. In other words, it was an individual mandate plus a “public option” designed to crowd out state insurance–just like what the Democrats initially wanted to do with ObamaCare.
Romney, in an effort to keep private insurance alive in Mass, then pushed the individual mandate idea. At the time, the individual mandate was the (admittedly misguided) conservative policy answer government insurance, as Newt Gingrich has said. It’s wrong, and it’s stupid, but it was the dominant play Romney had to stop a government takeover of healthcare in Mass.
So yes, RomneyCare is a mess… But in a state that’s uberdominated by liberals, it was about the most market-oriented thing he could have done. What frustrates me is the extent to which Romney continues to defend it as having a good policy outcome when, in fact, it doesn’t.
Outlander on December 14, 2011 at 5:41 PM
polls showing where candidates are in the primary are gonna be more accurate currently. those are based on people who are actually running. until we have a candidate the ones pitting republicans against 0bama mean nothing. there are lots of people that wont say newt because they dont want him as nominee but when push comes to shove they’ll vote for him in a general against teh socialist.
chasdal on December 14, 2011 at 5:41 PM
But Ann said he was the most conservative person in the race.
boogaleesnots on December 14, 2011 at 5:43 PM
If you loved Bush 41, you’ll go crazy for President Romney.
That’s the best case scenario.
jjshaka on December 14, 2011 at 5:43 PM
HE’S RUNNING FOR OFFICE FOR PETE’S SAKE!
liberal4life on December 14, 2011 at 5:45 PM
I note that MSNBC openly acknowledges that they use a “progressive” web site for their political hit pieces on Mitt.
fred5678 on December 14, 2011 at 5:49 PM
Well here goes my first comment on HotAir (hopefully I’ll survive it!). Let me say first, that I was an active Sarah Palin supporter up until the day that she opted not to run. So, obviously, personally I’d prefer that the Republican candidate be someone more along the lines of her as opposed to Romney: more conservative, a better record of reforming and reducing government, more deeply wedded to principle. Politically, I think it’s safe to say that Mitt Romney is a human weather vane. But as things now stand (and I am still persuadable), I’m voting for him in my state’s primary.
The reason: there ain’t nobody else running who’s personally worthy of the position. When we elect a President, we don’t elect a set of policy ideas; we elect a person. First and foremost, that person needs to have the character, temperament, and intellect for the job. A “check the box” conservative who turns out to be an ineffective leader, a scandalous lout, a corrupt scoundrel will do us no good. Neither will a conservative who can’t communicate, provide leadership or who is not likeable, etc.
And when you put Mitt Romney the person up against any of the others, in my opinion, there’s no contest. He’s above reproach in matters of marriage and family. He’s not a career politician and was successful in business, without relying on government handouts. He’s an intelligent person who is able to articulate a clear understanding of the issues and his positions. He’s financially prosperous and stable. He’s a man of faith and personal commitment. He was an effective public executive who held the line on taxes and balanced a budget in a blue state. In short, I can’t really deny that despite his somewhat moderate and shifting political views, he’s a better person than anyone else running for the Republican nomination.
If there were a person of that quality further to the right, or more Tea Party-friendly, then I would support them. I’m sure that we can probably all name a few that aren’t running. But of those who are running, he’s the only one who appears to me at this time to be worthy of the nomination.
Progressive Heretic on December 14, 2011 at 5:49 PM
Looks like mittens has been drinking the same cool-aid as Bari, just maybe not as much!
Newt 2012
angrymike on December 14, 2011 at 5:50 PM
You ever wonder how the capitalist market becomes the public enemy to so many people? Maybe Romneycare can give you a hint.
astonerii on December 14, 2011 at 5:50 PM
Yeah, that’s not something I can answer. Which is why I still don’t even know who I hope will win the primary.
Esthier on December 14, 2011 at 5:58 PM
Massachusetts didn’t think so. Their economy was terrible after Romney was done with it. Romney was at something like 34% approval. Romney actually increased taxes on individuals and small businesses by hundreds of millions of dollars.
Well that’s great if you are electing Best Fishing Buddy or Husband Of The Year. Its actually a vote for president, and most people are worried about the economy, and Romney’s track record is terrible on that.
sharrukin on December 14, 2011 at 6:02 PM
Horrible field….not anybody worth voting for. Huntsman is starting to look good even though he’s a dove.
therightwinger on December 14, 2011 at 6:07 PM
Funny, you don’t see Bachmann, since Tea Party friendly seems to be a priority.
The only reason he is not a career politician is that he loses, loses a lot.
You talk about him raising fees, or you said he didn’t raise taxes, no, he raised “fees” which is worse, since with taxes at least there is a vote, with fees it’s just a signing of a bill, no debate.
I could go on, but it is obvious he is not worthy.
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 6:11 PM
Just as I can’t reconcile the fact of the many politicians — Nancy Pelosi leaps to mind immediately — who profess to being Catholic, but are also as rabidly pro-abortion as you can get.
I remember hearing Rush say that for these people, Liberalism is their true religion.
PatriotGal2257 on December 14, 2011 at 6:32 PM
Bachmann? No executive experience. Looks crazy. No thanks.
Progressive Heretic on December 14, 2011 at 6:40 PM
Heh. If Romney was not a Republican he would be being praised by the MSM as being a “flexible, non-dogmatic pragmatist”.
If things keep going like they are now, we may all have to hold our noses and vote for Kodos. So don’t blame me….
ClassicalTexan on December 14, 2011 at 6:43 PM
Well, considering the fact that mainstream Republican values are pretty much as corrupt as mainstream Democrat values, I don’t see what the problem is here.
Next.
nukemhill on December 14, 2011 at 7:36 PM
Damn. That’s funny!
nukemhill on December 14, 2011 at 7:37 PM
PLEASE tell me you just forgot the /sarc tag!!! Actually, you don’t have to because there is no way that this post was meant to be taken seriously. Any of it.
Just Sayin on December 14, 2011 at 7:57 PM
The Cult of St. Mitten the Victimized can’t fathom that there’s any legitimate reason anybody might dislike him (how can anybody not like him?), so the default reaction is to whip out the identity-politics-victim card. It’s like Al Sharpton with religion instead of race.
Walter Sobchak on December 14, 2011 at 8:11 PM
A one party system does fail. It failed when Republicans had full control under GWB and when Democrats had full control afterwards. It breeds corruption, complacency, and causes politicians to ignore accountability. If politicians simply dedicate themselves to party causes, they are simply a puppet.
Also, the “liberal Democrat” said he’s a good leader. Leadership goes beyond political ideology. Romney has proven his leadership capabilities in various organizations whether it be the private or public sector. This attack ad was more of a support ad for me.
Kriggly on December 14, 2011 at 8:26 PM
What it shows is that the media has a pronounced leftwing bias and that the “independent” voters who decide general elections are limited by the information the media gives them.
This is a reality that is highly unfortunate, but that we must accept at least in the short term. For this reason my vote will be for Mitt Romney. He’s the only candidate with a decent shot at beating Obama, which is absolutely critical. Also, while he’s no hard core conservative, Romney is at least an improvement on that front over McCain, the last nominee.
netster007x on December 14, 2011 at 8:37 PM
Guess it proves the old adage once again: denial is more than just a river in Egypt.
PatriotGal2257 on December 14, 2011 at 10:17 PM
This is why every independent voter you know should be gently directed to as many alternative political sites (i.e. this one for openers) as possible to show them that there is more out there that is authoritative than just the MSM’s take on things. If they are the least bit open to doing so, it might make them realize eventually how much they are being lied to by the legacy media.
PatriotGal2257 on December 14, 2011 at 10:36 PM
Wow ever notice Romney supporters are all spin and excuses? It’s Massachusetts fault Romney passed Obomneycare. It’s a blue state he had to dis republicans like that senile Reagan. Really everything he said in any interview before 2007 was a lie to fool the liberals into voting for him. His policies while in office where just more camo to keep them from catching on. Really its true just ask him, he is done lying now you can believe him honest.
The other argument is that Romney is our only hope in the general election where independents will flock to his banner in droves. Don’t believe me? Why just look at what the mainstream media says in their polls a year from the election. Forgetting of course the source of most of these polls I mean the American media is so credible these days. But consider the accuracy of 400 randomly chosen *wink* independent *big honest grin* voters a year from the contest. If this is the strong argument for Romney backers what if it begins to unravel? Will you then abandon this sleazy unscrupulous hack to the ash heap of failed wanna be’s where he belongs and join us in picking a “Republican” nominee?
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Romney-Gingrich-Obama-electability/2011/12/14/id/420961
For those of you arguing electability yet again this cycle. Apparently a ton of us didn’t learn the Mccain lesson of 2008. Let’s keep something in mind here. While we have to defeat Obama to right our country. Defeating Obama in itself does not right our trajectory. We need a bold candidate that has experience leading an economy through these hard times successfully. Romney isn’t it. 47th in job creation during good economic times, billions in deficits, tens of thousands of jobs lost which all contributed to his 34% percent approval rating. It is this utter failure that like another failed executive LBJ led Romney not to run for reelection. He knew he would be beaten like a clanmember at a rap show. Romney like Mccain before him is the media’s proverbial sacrificial lamb ment to provide the illusion of democracy while ensuring Obama’s victory.
iidvbii on December 15, 2011 at 12:10 AM
Death to RINOs.
Coronagold on December 15, 2011 at 12:21 AM
Not hardly. If a conservative is on the primary ballot when it gets to our state, I’ll vote for him or her. If not, we’ll see.
swinia sutki on December 15, 2011 at 5:47 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2