Romney hits Gingrich on Pelosi love seat appearance in new ad
posted at 9:45 am on December 14, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
I guess Mitt Romney isn’t going to agree to Newt Gingrich’s proposal for an entirely positive primary campaign. Gingrich has already called this moment “one of the single dumbest things I’ve done in years, but that hasn’t entirely defused the issue of his appearance in a TV spot with Nancy Pelosi on the need for “dialogue” on global warming, and Romney knows it. It was inevitable that Romney would play this card if things got tough — and they have:
Note that this is not something put out by a super-PAC. As the ad states, this is “paid for by Romney for President, Inc,” so this attack comes directly from Mitt and his team. It’s effective, too, as any ad would be that factually links a Republican candidate with Nancy Pelosi, and by only a small step to Al Gore.
However, this also leaves Romney open for an attack on the same grounds, as well as hypocrisy. As governor, Romney imposed the kind of carbon caps that Barack Obama has been trying to implement through the EPA for the last three years based on their finding of carbon dioxide as a dangerous emission. Romney also hired Obama’s current science “czar” John Holdren, a longtime Malthusian crank, to create those caps. They had the predictable effect of increasing the need to purchase power generated outside of Massachusetts, thanks in part to price caps that Romney imposed as well.
Gingrich is certainly vulnerable on this point, but at least he’s apologized for his love-seat sojourn with Pelosi. We still have yet to hear from Romney about his carbon caps, his hiring of Holdren, and the conservative rationale for price caps.
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 3 Next »
Good for Governor Romney for trying to implement the same carbon caps that President Obama has been for. The man gets it. People come up to me every day saying we need to do something about greenhouse gasses causing climate change. The science is settled \
Thanks for allowing me to join the family
Been a lurker for a looooong time and am looking forward to the opportunity to snark on some libs every now and then.
P.S. Probably my first….and last sarc tag
LiberalGenius on December 14, 2011 at 10:41 AM
Gotta love the Newt/Pelosi association tactic. I suppose we are also to think that Newt goes to lunch with Nancy all the time and they talk on the phone all the time. They even must have put up their “Holiday” tree together too. (insert sarcasm).
Obamacare and Romneycare are much closer. Did Romney come out and say Romneycare was the worst thing I ever did? I didn’t think so. Romney is a phony and I’d take Newt over him anyday.
EveGem on December 14, 2011 at 10:41 AM
The ad is like being reminded over and over again about dancing with the lampshade on your head at the Christmas party, after you’ve already apologized for it.
We got it the first 10 times. Nagging is never attractive.
TWP on December 14, 2011 at 10:41 AM
Man I gotta say, am loving this GOP elite establishment shindig. I mean this is their barbecue and it taste good. Newt said this, did this, sat on a couch; Mitt puts out an ad. Mitt said this, did this, birthed socialist healthcare; Newt goes to youtube.
Come that November night should be trip!
HerneTheHunter on December 14, 2011 at 10:43 AM
Is that what Beck said…FRANCE!!! Hahahahaha…he really is a joke now. Beck would rather vote for the self proclaimed “Progressive” Romney?? Beck…please do move to France..you’ve marginalized yourself to being a “useful idiot”.
1_more_opai…..Your points above are RIGHT ON!!
coach1228 on December 14, 2011 at 10:44 AM
And he never goes above 30% support among conservatives. How can he deride Newt for supporting what Romney believes about the AGW hoax?
JAGonzo on December 14, 2011 at 10:44 AM
I am so sick of Republicans eating their own. Why can’t they just lay out their positions without attacking each other and let the people decide whose position they agree with? This beating each other up 11 months before the general election just gives Oblahblah and Axelgrease fodder for the campaign.
And FTR, Mitt Romney gives me the willies. There is something just plain creepy about the guy.
AmayasNana on December 14, 2011 at 10:45 AM
This and Newtons love affair with FDR, Teddy R, and Andy Stern, his wanting National healthcare mandates, and moral failings make the Newton the worst of the GOP field.
The man is a flake.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 10:46 AM
RHINO!!!!
Jim D on December 14, 2011 at 10:47 AM
Sitting on the park bench with Pelosi to gain enough street cred with a group that otherwise wouldn’t listen only to slay Al Gore a short time later and make an impact isn’t all that “dumb”. It’s politics. Instead of Newt saying “I won” and proceeding to alienate everyone, Newt says “ok, I’ll play your game and hit you with your own fist.” Out of context it looks like pandering, but it’s chess. Where is the evidence that Romney’s pandering and alignment with the left is actually chess toward any goal other than to get elected?
MechanicalBill on December 14, 2011 at 10:47 AM
MB said that Newt-Romney has been in favor of :
1. Mandates. Rommey still defends Romneycare and Newt supported the individual mandate May 2011.
2. Global warming: Both have waffled alot on this. Newt said in 2007 he’d support cap and trade and may have a book with a global warming chapter coming out in 2013 (how convenient).
3. Amnesty: both have supported it. Sorry but the law is the law. I don’t buy Newt’s argument on this at all.
4. TARP: both supported it (Newt waffled on it).
That’s what MB said during the debate. All of it is true. SHe could’ve also said that Newt voted for the Dept of Education ( it was a very close vote too by 3 or 4 votes) toured with Al Shapton promoting education reform, voted for the Fairness Doctrine, and is an admired of Teddy Roosevelt and FDR.
Newt is alittle better than Romney, but we must do better. MB gets credit for exposing both of them.
Anyways, I have to run off.
Catch you all later.
LevinFan on December 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM
Yeah, but is it bad tactics to bleed votes from your closest competitor even if those votes don’t go to you? Let Bachmann or Perry take them, especially since neither are close enough to pose a serious threat. I like Perry but I’m even more opposed to a Gingrich candidacy in the general election. Apply enough pressure and Gingrich will show his true face: petulant, childish, easily bruised, whiny and vindictive. That’s the Newt Gingrich I remember. I know he’s under there. You’ve just got to bring him out.
Besides, I want Romney and the other candidates to go negative early. They need the practice. The MSM has whitewashed the consequences of every bad decision Obama has made, covered for him, concealed the truth at every turn. Whoever wins the primaries needs to get vicious. Make it personal because it is personal. Show them the truth. Those warm and fuzzy, soft-focus, Muzak musical flag-waving and family values spots just won’t do the job.
troyriser_gopftw on December 14, 2011 at 10:51 AM
I am so tired of the “Romney is the only one who can beat PBHO” argument. He can’t even beat Newt. He needs to spend more time attacking PBHO and less time attacking the other Republican candidates. The more I see him the more I despise him, but better him (or anyone) than PBHO.
dmn1972 on December 14, 2011 at 10:51 AM
BREAKING NEWS:
Newtmentum turns Glenn Beck into an Obama supporter!
mattonrac on December 14, 2011 at 10:51 AM
I hear you brother, got my new shoes right here next to my billystick, good to go. Once we do have a nom I’m fairly certain we will all rally behind them. At least we can then start to focus on taking out the 0ne. OMG! Good to see ya! And nice to be seen.
Bmore on December 14, 2011 at 10:51 AM
jp on December 14, 2011 at 10:40 AM
I don’t think so. Other than in her ultra-liberal corner of California , Miss Nancy doesn’t endear herself to many Americans.
Sharing that couch with Nancy really WAS one of the dumbest things, politically speaking, that Newt has done in his inconsistent career.
Longing4Lincoln on December 14, 2011 at 10:51 AM
Romney will never get my vote. Perry will get my vote. Rick Perry has been underestimated before and emerged victorious — even against an old fighter like Karl Rove. Perry just keeps getting steadily better as he calibrates his Texas persona for a national audience. Gov. Perry has an unmatched record of job creation and the most substantive reform platform of all the candidates. He is a true leader who inspires supporters with his bold ideas, unwavering principles and strong moral character. Presidential leadership should NOT be defined solely by the ability to respond to complexity in a sixty-second sound bite.Resilience, moral courage, and grace under fire, are far more important character traits for America’s Commander in Chief.A genuine sense of humour, and humility, are also helpful.
I look forward to voting for him in 2012. He is the only candidate I truly want to vote for. If he runs with Marco Rubio, the Electoral College map will be a sea of red with a couple of tiny blue dots.
Perry 2012!
nancysabet on December 14, 2011 at 10:52 AM
this is where we part….I do not like Bachman..AT ALL. Your points to what she did on the 999 comment and the Perry issue were game changers for me. Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and in that order are my choices. I’ll take any combo of them….
More importantly…is taking back the Senate and holding the house.
With that…more will get done for the good and all this Bashing will be meaningless. Without the Sentate…NOTHING WILL GET ACCOMPLISHED!!!
coach1228 on December 14, 2011 at 10:53 AM
And the demorats sit back and rub their hands with glee as the repubs eat their own.
‘Nuff of this crap…lay off each other.
GCStateConservative on December 14, 2011 at 10:54 AM
The difference is Masscare is for the state and the Newton mandate is for the nation, 10th Amendment be damned.
Advantage Romney.
The difference is Romney never made a commercial with Pelosi.
Advantage Romney.
So no, the Newton is not better than Romney.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 10:54 AM
Romney’s desperate. The more he attacks, the more opposed I am to him.
COgirl on December 14, 2011 at 10:55 AM
And how can we forget the Newton and Deedee S?
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 10:56 AM
ConcealedKerry – Spot on. I hate to disillusion any of y’all but, seriously, Bachman continuously states she is the only true conservative running.
But WHAT has Bachman done while she’s been in Congress? One piece of legislations that she sponsored? crickets.
And Santorum – hey, not all of us have forgotten that you backed Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey and again, what have you done since that horrible “error” on your part?
While its true that Mitt has used Bain Capital to save some companies (with some concomittant lay offs) and made the Salt Lake City Olympic Games the ONLY time the host city has made a profit, what the HELL does Mitt stand for?!
Ron Paul……………………..well, he’s just an old crank.
Newt Gingrich: yes, personal flaws, mistakes made in the 15 years since he’s been in politics and yes he was censored by the House in a move pushed by Denny (“Have I got some Land for you”)Hastert who wanted Newts job AND by the Dems.
BUT:
Newt: four consecutive years of balanced budgets. Welfare Reform (Welfare to Work) was the first item on Obama’s hit list and was the first E.O. issued by Obama.
C’mon folks, there is NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT CANDIDATE, but at least we can go with the candidate with some ideas, and a track record of fiscal restraint (see,again, four straight years of a balanced budget while Clinton was in the WH).
realwest on December 14, 2011 at 10:56 AM
Odd…I thought Romney was all about bridging gaps, not being one party or the other because it makes one side feel like losers, etc etc. Why would he criticize another candidate for doing the same….?
:)
JohnTant on December 14, 2011 at 10:56 AM
You’re just PO’d cause the last used car he sold you was a lemon.
swinia sutki on December 14, 2011 at 10:57 AM
The reason so many candidates have struggled to take off is the issue of trust. My foremost concern is that they be able to beat President Obama. That concern has made me shy away from some of the candidates, even though I like and agree with what they say.
I think either Newt or Romney could defeat Obama. However I am concerned that the person who ran for office would be the same person who shows up to be sworn in. With so many changes in positions it raises the issue of trust. Romney attacking Newt doesn’t help him because he has the same weakness.
At this point I would go with Newt but I hope I don’t regret it.
AnotherJones on December 14, 2011 at 10:58 AM
Spoken like a true optimist. __________in 2012! I’m in. OMG!
Bmore on December 14, 2011 at 10:58 AM
And how can we forget about the Newton and big Al Sharpton?
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 10:59 AM
I’ve always wondered if this is as damaging to Pelosi on the Left as some seem to think it is for Newt on the Right.
mankai on December 14, 2011 at 11:01 AM
Sorry to post this link again, but how many of the other “conservative” candidates could deliver this kind of energy/global warming smackdown? Can you see Romney doing this? I can’t.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7VUg7nG3lw&feature=youtube_gdata_player
MechanicalBill on December 14, 2011 at 11:02 AM
When Mitt was questioned about his views on FDR, TR, or Andy Stern, what did he say? Can you post the link so we can bask in his conservative responses?
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 11:02 AM
Fair game
jake-the-goose on December 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM
But, but, but… Newt is so smart and all.
And that is the problem with Newt, he is so “smart,” he outsmarts himself.
And this hurts Newt more than it would Mitt if it boomerangs back at Mitt. This is because everybody knows and accepts that Mitt is a flip-flopper. The reason why this is more damaging to Newt is because he is currently seen as the anti-flip-flopper-Mitt.
If I wanted a flip-flopper, I’d go with Mitt over Newt. Just like if I wanted a socialist, I’d go with Obama over Mitt.
But let the healthcare mandate twins continue to tear each other down while Perry mounts his comeback. Yeehaw!
IcedTea on December 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM
I agree. It seems that Newt is the only one stating anything specific…On the first day x number of EO’s..eliminate the czars etc.
The other candidates seem to want to toss boogers and old spitballs back and forth.
I like the moral commitment of Perry Bachmann and Santorum, but we can see how much weight that is given with the electorate. Regardless of the validity of those stances, they provide waaay too much fodder for the MSM driven NeoComs.
Mimzey on December 14, 2011 at 11:05 AM
I detest Newt Gingrich, but fair is fair. Since when did Republican President Teddy Roosevelt become anathema to the Republican Party? It’s a sad state of affairs when admiring one of the most dynamic chief executives this country has ever known is somehow a reflection of bad judgment. This is a man who–aside from being President–led the charge at San Juan Hill, mapped the Amazon, drove the building of the modern US Navy. Keep in mind, too, that the Gilded Age of rampant corruption ended with Teddy Roosevelt, and that the railroad and banking trusts he faced down were, in fact, running roughshod over communities and buying whole state legislatures outright. Roosevelt did the right thing when he busted the trusts. Teddy Roosevelt was brave and noble and love this country more than he loved anything. Would to God we had anyone on the current GOP slate even remotely comparable.
troyriser_gopftw on December 14, 2011 at 11:05 AM
Not in her district anyway. The left thinks 180 degrees differently then we do, so it probably has been a boost for her. They know it damages our guy right?
Bmore on December 14, 2011 at 11:06 AM
I should be ashamed of myself for posting this but-
I wonder if Newt made a pass at Nancy while he was on the couch with her.
He doesn’t seem to discriminate
gerry-moderate republican troll
gerrym51 on December 14, 2011 at 11:07 AM
Let’s remember how patriotic the Newton is, he cheated on his second wife to save the country.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 11:07 AM
How ’bout last decade?
As Gingrich himself has said, the loveseat ad with Pelosi was a dumb thing to do. But Romney himself has supported Cap and Trade, and McCain waffled on the issue in 2008, while the Global Warming alarmists blasted skeptics with claims of impending disaster and “the science is settled” and comparing skeptics with flat-earthers and geocentric deniers of Galileo’s time.
Challenging Global-Warming propaganda was politically unpopular as recently as 2008, until the “hide the decline” Emails were publicized in November 2009, and it became clear to a large slice of the electorate that Global Warming theory was unproven science at best, probably an overhyped threat, or a massive fraud at worst.
We now have the Prime Minister of Canada publicly backing out of the Kyoto Protocol, and even its supporters in Durban, South Africa can’t reach a new agreement, because of resistance from the largest emitters of CO2–China, the USA, and India. Gingrich may have made a mistake with Pelosi in 2007, but at least he now admits it was a mistake, in the face of new evidence. Is that a reason to vote for Romney, who has not yet admitted HIS mistake?
Steve Z on December 14, 2011 at 11:07 AM
Ha ha. I thought at first glance that said massacre. :)
dmn1972 on December 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM
The scope of policies, actions and deeds of Gingrich, Romney and Obama.
L——–M——–R
—-GGGGGGGGGG—–
——RRRRRR——-
OOOOOOO————–
This is why I will vote for Romney if I must.
shick on December 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM
I paraphrase, “I prefer Ronald Wilson Reagan.”
Sorry, but I don’t have the link.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM
That didn’t work right.
___
GGG
RRR
OOO
—
test
shick on December 14, 2011 at 11:10 AM
Well that settles it.
I’m voting for that!
Mimzey on December 14, 2011 at 11:11 AM
Sounds to me like Mittens is a little jealous
KornKing on December 14, 2011 at 11:12 AM
I’ll take a stab at it.
Here’s what we have: Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry, are only viable choices.
“They’ll (Iowa Conservatives)see that the media have given them a choice between an ideological conservative who lacks the needed temperament to lead (Newt), and a temperamental conservative who lacks an ideological core (Romney).”
And that the only choice for a effective “conservative” is Rick Perry.
In terms of both a social conservative (not as important in this election) and a fiscal conservative (pro-job growth, balanced budget, and the out right rejection of Obamacare). Perry is our man hopefully (fingers crossed) Iowa republicans.
He’s moving up. Its slow, but hopefully, in the ballot box staring down the barrel with the names of Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, the dodge those two and pick out Perry’s name.
Rick Perry / Condi Rice 2012
Conger on December 14, 2011 at 11:13 AM
Mitts audacity has no bounds…amazing, a man who coddle liberals for years, never was a leader in any conservative movement, instituted RomneyCare, is concerned about Newt sitting on the couch with Pelosi.
Here
Try that link for a little reality check…
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:13 AM
Already old news. Newt calls the ad a mistake now.
That’s the whole point of a long primary . To get the attacks out early and over.
Gingrich will be clear of them once he gets the nomination.
Romney doesn’t have a chance, but he will make a great spokesperson for Newt in New Hampshire during general election.
LeeSeneca on December 14, 2011 at 11:14 AM
Non sequitur.
Mimzey on December 14, 2011 at 11:14 AM
If you can’t figure out what you want government to look like then you can’t figure out who to support.
If you want an end to the EPA which candidate will do that? Not modify it, reformulate it, adjust it… just end it.
If you want an end to the Federal Reserve, which candidate will do that?
End the Dept. of Education, which one?
Put the US on some track, fast or slow, to withdrawing and ending the entitlements, which one will do that?
Getting the borders secure and enforcing the existing laws on immigration, which will do that?
These are not hard questions to ask but they are hard ones to get answers to. If you think the 2nd Amendment has been abused since FDR, and now exploited to try and remove gun rights, then much of that has to go… which candidate will do that?
On these topics I’m not talking about nibbling a bit here and there, saying this or that candidate ‘supports’ these things but in a ‘modified’ way or one that is done with heaping spoonfuls of government added, but one who stands up against authoritarian government now going totalitarian and says: ENOUGH!
Rollback is the word and I do not hear it, yet it is what the Nation needs on all fronts.
And which one will also stand by our friends and allies in this world, something we so desperately need after the enforcement of foreign policies that have seemed to isolate them from us and to antagonize them? America like any person needs good friends to be with, talk with honestly and openly, and trade with so that free people can prosper via their liberty and be bolstered by it. Gots one of those on tap?
Who is going to call terrorism for what it is: piracy? That has a whole set of military and legal tools available that have been described for, get this, CENTURIES. Can we get some conservative backing for things our Founders and Framers understood as they are true due to the nature of man, not due to his society? An understanding that to be considered civilized one must act in a civilized manner and not go to war without the OK of a Nation State? We do have powers and rules and laws to do that… if we but dared to use them… can’t do that! Very un-PC to call barbarians for what they are, you know…
Right now the best thing to happen to Gingrich and Romney are: each other.
They deserve each other.
The Nation deserves better.
ajacksonian on December 14, 2011 at 11:15 AM
I have a link for you:
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 11:15 AM
Maybe this link is what you are looking for.
Here
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:16 AM
Hey Ed, I feel the need to point out to you the bind this puts Gingrich in. If he even DARES attack Romney on this issue it will be the second time he has gone back on his word to run a positive campaign. Romney attacks and Gingrich just allows it to sit out there unchallenged.
Gingrich’s mouth has put him behind the eight ball again. Is this the type of idiot we need dealing with Putin, Akmadinnerjacket, and the Chinese?
csdeven on December 14, 2011 at 11:17 AM
Hey, get out of my head…..it hurrrrtzzzz….
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:17 AM
So someone show me what conservative movement Mitt has led?
So far no one has come up with one…well one, he was a gov. of a liberal state, as if…
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:19 AM
So what Mitt is saying here is you can vote for a liberal or vote for me, King of the RINOs?
Good messaging there.
Levin stole my point last night. Romney has a bunch of published policy positions and some of them sound good. But does anyone think, for a moment, he’ll adhere to any of them in office? I think he’d smash Obama’s ‘broken promises’ record to pieces.
CorporatePiggy on December 14, 2011 at 11:20 AM
I believe the correct term is “willards.”
Ventura Capitalist on December 14, 2011 at 11:21 AM
I hope the opposition research and sniping that these two fling at each other helps Perry pull of an upset. So far Perry has seen some movement in his direction, but he’ll have to put in a strong performance in the upcoming debate to really gain meaningful momentum. Perry’s last few national appearances have been assured if not commanding, but I think he’s shaken off the bad performances and knows that he has a strong if somewhat muted base of support. The fat lady hasn’t cackled a note yet.
Spirit Crusher on December 14, 2011 at 11:21 AM
I thought the 11th commandment had a self defense provision. So running a positive campaign means you can’t defend yourself, even to point out that the person making an accusation against you is guilty of the same?
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 11:22 AM
And I thought Romeny was a seroius mature candidate , this Ad.is silly and beneath him . will he run ads like this against Obama ? no if he is the nominee he will be just another McCain( my freindsh letsh be nish).
evergreenland on December 14, 2011 at 11:22 AM
Perry can’t beat Obama because Perry can’t remember what he stands for unless he can do a TV ad that allows him to shoot take, after take, after take, until he gets it right.
Americans will NEVER elect a guy who thinks Putin, Akmadinnerjacket, and the Chinese will allow him to deal with them with previously recorded answers.
csdeven on December 14, 2011 at 11:23 AM
csdeven: So the current Marxist is better than Gingrich in dealing with the said above? Seems like your talking out the sides of your mouth…like Romney. You make no sense….
coach1228 on December 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM
I will vote for Mr. Romney if he is the eventual nominee. Heck I will vote for Ron Paul if he is the eventual nominee.
I for one think Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich would help themselves if they work on giving Republicans reasons to vote for them and to remind people day in day out what Mr. Obama and his minions are doing.
My first choice is Perry. I am of the opinion Mr. Perry knows that the reason things are going well in Texas is because of the people of Texas, and the people of Texas are proud of Texas. Not because the state government. Governors will come and go. It is the people of Texas that make it great. A smart governor trusts the people to do the right thing.
DVPTexFla on December 14, 2011 at 11:26 AM
Hi everyone – I’m new to Hot Air.
I’ve been a viewer/reader for a few months now, and although I think of myself of a “in the middle” kind of gal’ (not ideologically, but instead, I am conservative on fiscal issues, but a centrist on social issues), my appreciation and respect for this blog only grew by the visit.
Looking forward to great conversations!
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on December 14, 2011 at 11:27 AM
It always amazes me when so-called conservatives (Mitt in particular) use state’s rights to justify big-government initiatives. The reason conservatives support federalism is that it limits the damage done by bad government policies to a single state. That doesn’t mean we WANT states to implement bad policies.
updog on December 14, 2011 at 11:28 AM
That would be fine but Gingrich is trying to convince us that he was really wearing a crown.
csdeven on December 14, 2011 at 11:30 AM
I’ll bet you $10,000 he keeps running these type of ads…
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:32 AM
Exit question:
Better or worse to sit on the couch with Pelosi, or calling Ted Kennedy your dear friend…
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:34 AM
Exactly. Mitt has been blowing smoke on this very issue for months, and I’m somewhat stunned that one of the other candidates has not hammered him about it. Take the fight to Mitt, and then kick him while he’s down because federalism is too serious a concept to allow Mitt to abuse it this way. Limited government principles and safeguards should not be used as shields to cover up for bad public policy decisions.
Spirit Crusher on December 14, 2011 at 11:39 AM
Can you be in the middle? NO!
Just kidding. Welcome
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 11:39 AM
calling Ted Kennedy your dear friend…
Bmore on December 14, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Sorry, but the Newton is the least conservative candidate in the GOP race.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKTOCP45zY
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 11:42 AM
I’m very comfortable comparing the conservatism of Newt’s actual accomplishments against Mitt’s.
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 11:46 AM
So you guys have to go all the way back to 1994 to find something bad about Romney?
WE all know that he has become more conservative since then. The problem you have is that the Newton has recently stated that FDR was the Greatest President of the 20th Century.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 11:47 AM
You mean like these?
Embryonic Stem Cell Research:
On July 19, 2001, Newt Gingrich on the “O’Reilly Factor” said that embryonic stem cell research ought to be federally funded.
On July 8, 2001, On ABC News’ “This Week”, Sam Donaldson asked: “So the president should approve stem cell research on embryos?”
Gingrich answered: “On embryonic cells that, that are pre-fetal.”
Partial Birth Abortion:
Gingrich helped destroy an effort to deny Republican Party funds to candidates who opposed legislation outlawing partial birth abortions, according to a Jan. 21, 1998, article by the Associated Press.
The Republican National Committee at its winter meeting that year wanted to deny party campaign funds to Republican candidates who opposed banning most late-term, or partial-birth, abortions.
Gingrich addressed the RNC meeting on Jan. 16, 1998, calling for tolerance of candidates who support partial-birth abortion, saying he would campaign for them.
Just wondering.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 11:49 AM
I heard the whole book was on “green” business. I think Newt wants to keep this whole thing vague so he can flip flop on it in the general, but the attack ads about consistency we’re seeing now are mild compared to what the DNC will come up with.
TXGOP on December 14, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Hey, at least Newt understood and supported Reagan ieals, Romney ran from him.
Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Nothing is ever new in politics — Ronald Reagan’s “Eleventh Commandment” parallels the advice of Aesop, the ancient Greek statesman, in this fable:
A father had a family of sons who were perpetually quarreling among themselves. When he failed to heal their disputes by his exhortations, he determined to give them a practical illustration of the evils of disunion; and for this purpose he one day told them to bring him a bundle of sticks, ordering each son in turn to break it in pieces. When none of them were able to do so, he took the bundle apart and gave them the sticks separately, which they broke easily. “My sons,” he said, “if you are of one mind and unite to assist each other, you will be as this bundle, uninjured by all the attempts of your enemies; but if you are divided among yourselves, you will be broken as easily as these sticks.” (“The Father and His Sons”, following Townsend’s translation.)
Neither sage, alas, says anything about the quality of the sticks in the bundle.
AesopFan on December 14, 2011 at 11:52 AM
A lot of difference between talking about stuff and enacting legislation.
Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Really?
The Newton, “the era of Reagan is OVER.”
Need I say more?
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 11:53 AM
Iam a Romney supporter, i live in massachusetts, and I have voted for Romney for senate,governor, and president. I also think he has always had these conservative opinions but emphasizing them will not get you elected in massachusetts.
gerrym51 on December 14, 2011 at 11:53 AM
No. I mean like helping Republicans take the house back for the first time in 40 years, balancing the budget and ushering in welfare reform.
I know you can paste list of Newt’s heresies. How about a list of Mitt’s? Heck, I will settle for a list of Mitt’s conservative aaccomplishments in the public sector.
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 11:55 AM
Tough to accept Newt, who supported Rockefeller against Goldwater, as a guy who supported Reagan’s ideals .
TXGOP on December 14, 2011 at 11:56 AM
And that is fact, not words…what many don’t seem to want to face.
Mitt has the “words” but no works.
What is one of the Mormon favorite versus…”Faith without works is dead”
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 11:56 AM
And who has been helping Republicans get elected for the last 3 years (and thus is getting more endorsements than any other candidate)?
Not the Newton, he has been too busy feeding at the public trough.
Who balanced the budget in Mass without raising taxes while fighting a veto proof Dem legislature?
Not the Newton, who had the help of enormously increasing revenue from the .com growth.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:00 PM
Who endorsed and help fund the teaparty candidate Christine while the Newton was supporting the liberal RINA Deedee?
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:03 PM
Endorsements? Like Lisa Murkowski and Christine O’Donnell? Or Pawlenty who endorsed to have him campaign debts paid off? Impressive.
Were any “fees” raised? How are those different from taxes? Sounds like someone was pissing on his constiuents and telling them it was raining.
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 12:04 PM
Ironic that you brought up Newt’s stand on embryo’s research…I am still trying to understand Mitt’s stances, there are so many, along with his stance on abortion.
Depending on where he is, who he is talking to, it seems to change.
Quite frankly, I would rather debate someone who I know where they stand, at least I have a chance of persuading them…but someone who isn’t forthright, you have no idea what to convince them of, since they don’t know either…
Other words, I will take my chances with someone I don’t agree with and who forthright and truthful, against someone who is deceitful and I think I know but not sure where they stand…
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 12:04 PM
Who asks “how high?” when Karl Rove, official torpedoer of the COD campaign, tells him to jump?
Kataklysmic on December 14, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Yup, in 1994 while running against Kennedy in the very liberal state of Mass, Romney ran away from Reagan. But he has been running toward him ever since.
While the Newton was for Reagan before he was against Reagan before he was for Reagan.
The Newton is the Biggest flip flopper in the GOP field.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:07 PM
Wow Romney a hypocrite? No way! /s
rightConcept on December 14, 2011 at 12:08 PM
I don’t think him being gov. of one of the most liberal states is any real resume builder…he could have ran in most any state, but he chose a liberal state because he felt at ease.
Well he did finish the “big dig”, of course his gran supporter Bechtel was found complicit in the murder of a woman through poor workmanship, and he fined them, a few hundred dollars, than gave them a multi-million dollar contract the next year.
I think I would keep the “he was gov” out of the debate if I were you…
right2bright on December 14, 2011 at 12:10 PM
I can understand why that might be hard for you. It does take reading skills.
Maybe if you quit drinking you wouldn’t see so many.
You know, most candidates actually have web sites explaining their positions. But then again, a minimal amount of skill is needed.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:12 PM
Defending oneself is fine. I am speaking of attacking Romney on his hypocrisy.
csdeven on December 14, 2011 at 12:13 PM
Bain capital is based in massachusetss and he was a long time resident. would you have preferred and he capetbagged to another state to run(say like Hillary Clinton)
gerrym51 on December 14, 2011 at 12:13 PM
Who said that?
Get your head out of your @ss and listen and things will start making sense.
csdeven on December 14, 2011 at 12:16 PM
Yeah, he could have been a carpetbagger and moved to a different state to enter politics, thus taking the EASY way.
Or maybe, it was his home state, and it needed his help the most.
I suppose governing conservatively in a very liberal state isn’t as good on the resume as governing as a moderate in a conservative state.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:17 PM
You mean a few hundred MILLION dollars don’t you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:23 PM
Yes, some were raised to bring them in line with the actual cost of services.
Hey, paying for the services you receive is conservative isn’t it?
WOW!!! Some remedial training needed here.
Gunlock Bill on December 14, 2011 at 12:35 PM
40 Plus Years of Brand Name Electable Parties & Career Professional Politicians..The 2 Party Cult Factions. Allowed The Enmeshing, Manifestation of these Many Anti-American Regulatory Alliances in our Federal Buildings. Promoted, Endorsed & Enabled with Tax Dollars & Borrowed Money.. Now, they throw crumbs & tokenism, of what is actually needed & required, for this Nation as a whole, to Position itself, Save itself, Stabilize itself & Resurrect itself…! 40 plus years of the destructive philosophies & agendas of Big Gov-Ism Insanity..! The deliverance of America, to this Economic, Financial, Social, Spiritual, Political Abyss & this Shameful, Demonstrative, Dangerous Epic Debt..! Find our American Flag Waving in the Wind & Feel your Eyes, Fill with Water..! God Bless America
Jeff Johnson on December 14, 2011 at 12:41 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »