Republicans in Washington need to stop acting like Democrats, says … Mitt Romney

posted at 9:00 pm on February 16, 2012 by Tina Korbe

It was a veiled swipe at Rick Santorum and a bit rich coming from him, but Mitt Romney is right: Republicans in Washington do need to stop acting like Democrats.

At the business roundtable in Monroe, Romney did not mention surging rival Rick Santorum at the roundtable, but his critique echoed the charges he’s been leveling at Santorum in their pitched battle to win the Feb. 28 primary in the state where Romney grew up.

When the GOP held majorities on Capitol Hill, he said, “Republicans started earmarking like crazy. Republicans spent too much money, way above the rate of inflation. Republicans didn’t send programs back to the states. Republicans didn’t eliminate programs, we added programs. We were doing exactly what the Democrats have done. And we can’t keep doing that.”

He had to ruin it, though, with this:

By contrast, said Romney, “I’m going to Washington not as the next step in my political career, because I don’t have a political career. My life was spent in the private sector.” He said he would make Midwestern states, including his home state of Michigan and neighboring Ohio, into destinations for entrepreneurship and innovation.

Come again? I knew Mitt Romney was running on his private-sector experience — situational competence and all that — but I didn’t know he now claims he hasn’t had a political career. What was his 2008 campaign then? His run as the governor of Massachusetts? His bid for the Senate?

Yuck. He’d be better off to stick to his reminder to voters that Republicans have betrayed conservatives in the past and they’re liable to do so again. Then again, that also just reminds voters that his all-purpose excuse for his every past misstep is, “But, but — I was the governor of Massachusetts.”

The bigger question (and my exit question) is this: What will it take for Republicans in Washington to act like Republicans — or, better yet, conservatives?


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 3

The weasel has no shame.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Should’a done that in 2002.

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:02 PM

On spending Romney is as bad as Santorum.

Bluray on February 16, 2012 at 9:03 PM

You’re in trouble now, Tina.

Enter the Mittbots in 5…4…3….

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:05 PM

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/16/santorum-tells-michigan-of-strict-opposition-to-bailouts/

Santorum stands up to auto-bailouts… in Michigan. Santorum stands up to ethanol subsidies… in Iowa, and wins! Seeing a pattern. Don’t worry about this overhyped contraception flap. No big deal at all!

Plus, his “Made in the USA” plan is winner, election wise. Calling Obama an elitist snob, his anti-O rhetoric is striking a chord (see polls). Santorum appeals to the base ($$$), and the working man. Not Romney.

anotherJoe on February 16, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Levin said he’s something like 6 for 24 in running for offices, and he’s an outsider?

HopeHeFails on February 16, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Step One: ABR
Step Two: ABO

Marcus on February 16, 2012 at 9:05 PM

The weasel has no shame.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Name calling? Sounds more like a liberal talking point.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Okay, I get it.

The anti-Romneybots here and elsewhere constantly say “Oh, if Mitt had only TRIED TO WOO US by SAYING THE STUFF WE WANT TO HEAR, then he wouldn’t be having so much trouble right now! Why doesn’t he court our votes?”

And then, every single time he says those sorts of things, the unvarying and universal response is “oh, that lying scumsucking weasel, go to hell.”

He can’t win with these people. It’s not rational anymore.

Esoteric on February 16, 2012 at 9:06 PM

“But, but — I was the governor of Massachusetts.”

Where he had a Republican veneer while acting like a Progressive Democrat.

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

And poor Mitt is on Hannity right now saying that Santorum started the negative ads against him.

BooHoo!

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

“[B]ecause I don’t have a political career.”

Take the hint, Mittens.

Kent18 on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

The bigger question (and my exit question) is this: What will it take for Republicans in Washington to act like Republicans — or, better yet, conservatives?

That’s the key, all they do is act like conservatives at election time. Acting is for Hollywood. Answer to your question is to vote every damn one of them out and elect conservatives. Short of that, burn the place to the ground to get rid of the stench, and tar and feather the scum.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

OT but baseball great Gary Carter died at age 57.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/remembering-kid-gary-carter-dies-age-57-231403315.html

RIP

CW on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

If he did a good job as governor, you’d think he would rather play that up.

IF, that is.

Dongemaharu on February 16, 2012 at 9:08 PM

By contrast, said Romney, “I’m going to Washington not as the next step in my political career, because I don’t have a political career. My life was spent in the private sector.”

Not for lack of trying, Mitt. And running for president wasn’t the next step? Good grief, what a lie. It’s been the next step ever since 2006…when he passed up on running for a second term knowing that he’d get blown away. LOL

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:08 PM

It was a veiled swipe at Rick Santorum and a bit rich coming from him

Actually, I thought it was Mitt revealing that he’s self-loathing.

Stoic Patriot on February 16, 2012 at 9:09 PM

That’s the key, all they do is act like conservatives at election time. Acting is for Hollywood. Answer to your question is to vote every damn one of them out and elect conservatives. Short of that, burn the place to the ground to get rid of the stench, and tar and feather the scum.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

AND when cons are in office they spend like drunken democrats.

CW on February 16, 2012 at 9:09 PM

here in the berkshires we have one word for the transition from Mitt to Patrick. Seamless

rik on February 16, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Come again? I knew Mitt Romney was running on his private-sector experience — situational competence and all that — but I didn’t know he now claims he hasn’t had a political career. What was his 2008 campaign then? His run as the governor of Massachusetts? His bid for the Senate?

That was the Romney from the alternate universe, Romneynate in fringe speak.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Santorum stands up to auto-bailouts… in Michigan. Santorum stands up to ethanol subsidies… in Iowa, and wins! Seeing a pattern. Don’t worry about this overhyped contraception flap. No big deal at all!

1.) Santorum strongly endorses ethanol subsidies. Said he would make them permanent and mandatory, and even increase the mandated percentage of ethanol in gasoline to artificially boost Iowa farmers’ profits, if elected President. So you’re simply a liar. (Hilariously, he justified his “conversion” to being pro-ethanol by invoking 9/11, of all things).

2.) Funny how you fail to mention that nobody has come out against the auto bailouts more strongly and more vocally Mitt Romney (heck, he even wrote ANOTHER big op-ed about it on Monday for the Detroit News), and he did it at obvious risk to his standing in a state that is extremely important to him electorally. But obviously he gets no credit for that because as I said in my earlier post: Romney is a priori an evil person, so everything he does that one might think of as ‘good’ must only be explainable by recourse to the theory that he’s lying with ulterior motives. Because Romney’s sole and entire goal is really to subvert conservatism and turn America socialist, of course.

Esoteric on February 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM

And poor Mitt is on Hannity right now saying that Santorum started the negative ads against him.

BooHoo!

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

What? MittPacs slung mud first in 2008 and in 2012.

He campaigns like a Democrat also. Sling mud and lie about it.

Santorum is on Greta tonight. He may have a chance to respond to this.

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:12 PM

And poor Mitt is on Hannity right now saying that Santorum started the negative ads against him.

BooHoo!

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

He saying he was a conservative governor too.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:13 PM

a conservative’s conservative. Is that too severe ?

rik on February 16, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Well, I can’t argue with the first part of that Governor Romney. I also think that Republicans should stop acting like Democrats…and not just those currently in Washington.

*rolls eyes*

Pattosensei on February 16, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Acting like Republicans has become the problem. They need to start acting like Americans. Adult Americans. Patriotic Adult Americans. Altruistic Patriotic Adult Americans.

Bmore on February 16, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Dongemaharu on February 16, 2012 at 9:08 PM

He was a yesman for donkeys

rik on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

That was the Romney from the alternate universe, Romneynate in fringe speak.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Does that Romney have a goatee in that alternate universe?

batterup on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

He saying he was a conservative governor too.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Does he really think that if he does get the nomination that Obama won’t dig out every liberal thing Romney did in MA (and there are many) and have a PAC and the media play them in an endless loop?

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

He didn’t make his career in Washington…that’s his point. Good lord.

changer1701 on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

In one paragraph Mitt mentioned conservative at least 8 times,
“look I live conservatism”.
He is not, nor is Santy, end of story.

evergreenland on February 16, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Good grief. Seriously, how sad is it that people have to dig that deep for nit-picking criticisms of Mitt Romney. He served what?… four years as Governor of Massachusetts. That’s hardly the decades-long careers of some of the yahoos we’ve got in Congress right now.

Sheesh. Some folks need to get. a. grip.

Murf76 on February 16, 2012 at 9:16 PM

One term comes to mind…. RINO

ultracon on February 16, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Damn, now that is what I call friendly fire!

astonerii on February 16, 2012 at 9:17 PM

And poor Mitt is on Hannity right now saying that Santorum started the negative ads against him.

BooHoo!

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

I need to ask Gingrich about that.

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:17 PM

devastating: RICK SANTORUM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMACARE // ROMNEY WORKED TO FIGHT IT

Drunk Report on February 16, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Drunk Report is responsible for me stubbing my big toe. When DR was typing this article, he did not warn me about how close the side of my desk was when I went to cross my legs. Had he warned me I would never have stubbed my toe.//

Pattosensei on February 16, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Does that Romney have a goatee in that alternate universe?

batterup on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Just imagine the hissing, clawing catfight between Team Pompadour jihadis, blood-battling for the coveted status of Captain’s Woman. ;)

Kent18 on February 16, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Does that Romney have a goatee in that alternate universe?

batterup on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

“Mr. Butterup, your agonizer please.”

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:19 PM

The weasel has no shame.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Yes, agreed, if you have any communication with 0, see if you can shame him.

Bmore on February 16, 2012 at 9:19 PM

What? MittPacs slung mud first in 2008 and in 2012.

He campaigns like a Democrat also. Sling mud and lie about it.

Santorum is on Greta tonight. He may have a chance to respond to this.

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:12 PM

I saw shades of Newt in that interview. I think Santorum has gotten into Mitt’s head.

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:19 PM

1.) Santorum strongly endorses ethanol subsidies. Said he would make them permanent and mandatory, and even increase the mandated percentage of ethanol in gasoline to artificially boost Iowa farmers’ profits, if elected President. So you’re simply a liar. (Hilariously, he justified his “conversion” to being pro-ethanol by invoking 9/11, of all things).

2.) Funny how you fail to mention that nobody has come out against the auto bailouts more strongly and more vocally Mitt Romney (heck, he even wrote ANOTHER big op-ed about it on Monday for the Detroit News), and he did it at obvious risk to his standing in a state that is extremely important to him electorally. But obviously he gets no credit for that because as I said in my earlier post: Romney is a priori an evil person, so everything he does that one might think of as ‘good’ must only be explainable by recourse to the theory that he’s lying with ulterior motives. Because Romney’s sole and entire goal is really to subvert conservatism and turn America socialist, of course.

Esoteric on February 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM

1) do not care.
2) Romney said that Obama was doing the same thing he was doing at Bain. He can lie all he wants after that, but the end result is that he is ineffectual with it.

astonerii on February 16, 2012 at 9:19 PM

devastating: RICK SANTORUM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMACARE // ROMNEY WORKED TO FIGHT IT

Drunk Report on February 16, 2012 at 9:09 PM

“Devastating”? It looks like a desperate Mittbot blog post to me. Santorum endorsed Arlen Specter and thus is responsible for ObamaCare? ROFL…and hmmmm…I’m trying to remember Mitt Romney getting in the ring personally against ObamaCare…can’t come up with much.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Good grief. Seriously, how sad is it that people have to dig that deep for nit-picking criticisms of Mitt Romney. He served what?… four years as Governor of Massachusetts. That’s hardly the decades-long careers of some of the yahoos we’ve got in Congress right now.

Sheesh. Some folks need to get. a. grip.

Murf76 on February 16, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Can you contemplate the fact that he isn’t exactly convincing with the “I’m an average joe, non-politician who understand you” schtick?

He’s the son of a former Governor.
He was a partner in a firm that indirect work with businesses.
He’s ran for office multiple times.
He’s much more wealthy than the average small business owner.

Are the things listed above bad or disqualifying, no.

But he’s no Joe the Plumber and people can see that.

Bluray on February 16, 2012 at 9:20 PM

What will it take for Republicans in Washington to act like Republicans — or, better yet, conservatives?

Once inside the beltway, Republicans just can’t help themselves. Follow the money on K Street and at every advocacy association representing every special interest group ever dreamt up.
Conservatives OTOH know they need to decentralize/defund/shrink the power base in D.C.

egmont on February 16, 2012 at 9:21 PM

He didn’t make his career in Washington…that’s his point. Good lord.

changer1701 on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

That’s like a butt-ugly old maid bragging about her virginity.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM

“What will it take for Republicans in Washington to act like Republicans — or, better yet, conservatives?”

In a word…

… Newt!!!

Seven Percent Solution on February 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM

And out comes the Romney haters…….Like flies to honey.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Good grief. Seriously, how sad is it that people have to dig that deep for nit-picking criticisms of Mitt Romney. He served what?… four years as Governor of Massachusetts. That’s hardly the decades-long careers of some of the yahoos we’ve got in Congress right now.

Sheesh. Some folks need to get. a. grip.

Murf76 on February 16, 2012 at 9:16 PM

No kidding. He was trying to draw a contrast between himself and Santorum and Gingrich, who spent years in DC in various capacities.

changer1701 on February 16, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Does he really think that if he does get the nomination that Obama won’t dig out every liberal thing Romney did in MA (and there are many) and have a PAC and the media play them in an endless loop?

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

I think hes at point of saying whatever he can to stop the bleeding and damn the effect later. You think after running for president for seven years he’d be smarter about it.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:25 PM

And out comes the Romney haters…….Like flies to honey.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Your point would be…what? Entomology class?

egmont on February 16, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Romney will next be saying, ” I severely feel your pain, unlike the bums in Washington who took my Romneycare plan and rammed it down your throats.”

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:26 PM

The anti-Romneybots here and elsewhere constantly say “Oh, if Mitt had only TRIED TO WOO US by SAYING THE STUFF WE WANT TO HEAR, then he wouldn’t be having so much trouble right now! Why doesn’t he court our votes?”

And then, every single time he says those sorts of things, the unvarying and universal response is “oh, that lying scumsucking weasel, go to hell.”

Esoteric on February 16, 2012 at 9:06 PM

No. We’ve also said he needs to really, truly, genuinely mean it, as well.

If all it took to win conservatives over was lying to us, baldfaced: we’d have followed in the footsteps of Republican “moderates” back in ’08, and voted for Obama.

Kent18 on February 16, 2012 at 9:26 PM

No kidding. He was trying to draw a contrast between himself and Santorum and Gingrich, who spent years in DC in various capacities.

changer1701 on February 16, 2012 at 9:24 PM

And the only reason Romney didn’t do the same was because he couldn’t get elected.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Does that Romney have a goatee in that alternate universe?

batterup on February 16, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Well if Santorum gets zapped by some weapon from the captains bedroom then i’d say yes.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

1.) Santorum strongly endorses ethanol subsidies. Said he would make them permanent and mandatory, and even increase the mandated percentage of ethanol in gasoline to artificially boost Iowa farmers’ profits, if elected President. So you’re simply a liar. (Hilariously, he justified his “conversion” to being pro-ethanol by invoking 9/11, of all things).

Esoteric on February 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Santorum said at a debate in Michigan in November 2011 that he would phase out all energy subsidies and opposed creating incentives for “different forms of energy that the government supports.” Santorum voted against ethanol subsidies while in Congress. In a June 2011 debate in New Hampshire, Santorum said he believes the ethanol industry is mature enough to survive (CNN) without them.

Link

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

That’s like a butt-ugly old maid bragging about her virginity.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Thread winner!

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

And out comes the Romney haters…….Like flies to honey.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Don’t you mean bees?

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 9:29 PM

1.) Santorum strongly endorses ethanol subsidies. Said he would make them permanent and mandatory, and even increase the mandated percentage of ethanol in gasoline to artificially boost Iowa farmers’ profits, if elected President. So you’re simply a liar. (Hilariously, he justified his “conversion” to being pro-ethanol by invoking 9/11, of all things).

Esoteric on February 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM

If what you say is true, can you explain this?:

From the Des Moines Register on June 21, 2011:

Oskaloosa, Ia. – Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum told a group of Iowa farmers here today he supports an end to federal government subsidies of the ethanol fuel industry.
“My position is that we should phase out all energy subsidies and create a level playing field,” the Pennsylvania Republican said in remarks after lunch to about 50 people at the Steve and Jan Boender farm in rural Oskaloosa.
Santorum, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, said he advocates phasing-out the existing tax incentive for ethanol production, commonly known as the blenders’ credit, by reducing the credit 9 cents annually over each of the next five years.

In turn, he supports the use of half of the annual reduction (4.5 cents) of the blenders’ credit for investment in flex fueling stations to increase access to biofuels – which he believes would provide consumers with increased access to the fuel marketplace and allow greater market competition.

After five years, both the blenders’ credit and the corresponding investment in flex fueling stations would be eliminated.

“This is an industry that has come a long way and has not done a very good job of telling its story about how competitive ethanol actually is in the energy mix,” Santorum said.

Santorum’s stance on the corn-based alternative fuel got a mixed response from farmers here.

Steve Boender, who raises corn and soybeans on a large-scale farming operation with his five sons here, said he thinks it’s time to understand that “maybe we cannot afford to subsidize ethanol” produced with Iowa grains.

“I am a firm believer in alternative fuels, but I am totally OK with them getting to the point where they can stand on their own” without subsidies,” Boender said.

Carl Branderhorst, who produces grain and hogs near Oskaloosa, described himself as an “ethanol supporter and a farmer.” He talked privately with Santorum and reminded the former lawmaker that the oil industry also receives subsidies. The farmer said he understands, however, that eventually all subsidies should be eliminated for all energy.

Monte Shaw, a spokesman for the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, an industry group, said Santorum’s policy stance “is within the realm” of the association’s position regarding federal subsidies for ethanol..

“We are willing to talk about reforming and eliminating the ethanol tax credit. But we want broad reform that includes petroleum. We want a level-playing field field for all fuels,” Shaw said.

Walt Wendland, president of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, issued a statement earlier this month saying ethanol policy has evolved over the last four to eight years.

“Support for a status-quo ethanol blenders tax incentive is no longer synonymous with support for ethanol, as is evidenced by Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley’s legislation to phase down and reform the ethanol incentive.”

But Wendland also said he took issue with recent news stories suggesting that ethanol is a second-tier issue behind the economy and jobs and that opponents of ethanol have nothing to fear in Iowa. “A candidate who refuses to appreciate the positive economic and national security impact of ethanol will find tough going in Iowa,” he said.

The U.S. Senate voted 73-27 last week to eliminate billions of dollars in federal subsidies for the ethanol industry, although the vote was considered largely symbolic. President Barack Obama’s administration has pledged to veto any attempt to totally eliminate subsidies for ethanol producers, but some analysts have said the Senate’s vote is a sign ethanol is losing its allies as Congress considers ways to eliminate tax breaks.

Other GOP candidates for president have been on both sides of the issue regarding federal subsidies of the ethanol industry.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have expressed suppport for ethanol subsidies, while former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty opposes ethanol subsidies and U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas has long been against such incentives. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who announced his presidential candidacy Tuesday, said recently he wouldn’t compete in the Iowa Caucuses because of he won’t endorse ethanol subsidies.

Santorum said Tuesday he came to Iowa “not knowing a whole lot about ethanol” and found a very different industry from what he expected. He described Iowa ethanol producers as having a “state-of-the-art industry” that can be competitive going forward with his approach, which he considers an “off-ramp” for subsidies.

“I think one of the things holding back ethanol is this idea that…..it is a product that cannot sustain itself,” Santorum said.

In an interview, the Des Moines Register asked Santorum if direct-payment farm subsidies should be phased out.

He responded that anyone who has studied his record will see that he has not been a strong supporter of agricultural subsidies.

“My sense is that we need to get away from those things and move towards, as farmers do, managing their risks, and using markets, using insurance,” he said. “I mean farmers in Iowa use forward contracts, they do all sorts of very smart financial maneuvers to manage risk, and that is the best way to do it; let the market manage risk.”

KickandSwimMom on February 16, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Link

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Yeah, I take votes over words every day of the week. Just exactly how I treat Romney. Actions speak louder than any words he can mouth.

astonerii on February 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM

The solution to U.S. unemployment? Green jobs in the tree-measuring industry!

Romney mentioned at nearly every opportunity his connection to the state in which he was born and raised, repeatedly citing the “thrill” of returning to a place where the “trees are just the right height…”

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on February 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Your point would be…what? Entomology class?

egmont on February 16, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Your hatred blinds. Headlines read Romney and the Romney haters come trolling out… As you have already proven.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM

That’s the key, all they do is act like conservatives at election time. Acting is for Hollywood. Answer to your question is to vote every damn one of them out and elect conservatives. Short of that, burn the place to the ground to get rid of the stench, and tar and feather the scum.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM

The key is to get them to govern like conservatives after they win the election.

PatriotGal2257 on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Not Romney! Not Romney! Not Romney! The bigoted, anti-mormon fascists are in lockstep!

Oracleforhire on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

I think Santorum has gotten into Mitt’s head.

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:19 PM

That’s a good read of it.

they lie on February 16, 2012 at 9:26 PM

He’s already given the equivalent at the debate when the candidates were asked why their wives would make good first ladies.

Mitt said something like his wife would know how to reach out to the hurting.

I did almost gag. Now I appreciate compassion from friends when I’m hurting, but that statement was patronization and demeaning elitism.

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Romney is right. Also Newter and company need to stop sounding like Occupiers.

Roymunson on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

I wish this was Jan 2000 but it ain’t – Mitt,Rick or Newt would be better than – The One — in 2012 .

wheels on February 16, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Your hatred blinds. Headlines read Romney and the Romney haters come trolling out… As you have already proven.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Actually, it is the Romney people that are like flies. A new batch every day. The people who do not like Romney are much more likely to have been commenting on this site for years, daily.

astonerii on February 16, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Not Romney! Not Romney! Not Romney! The bigoted, anti-mormon fascists are in lockstep!

Oracleforhire on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Hey, this hyperbole just gave me another reason not to vote for Romney.

Thanks! :)

Bluray on February 16, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Actually, it is the Romney people that are like flies. A new batch every day. The people who do not like Romney are much more likely to have been commenting on this site for years, daily.

astonerii on February 16, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Yep, and we’ll still be here after Romney and his mitt-wits flame out.

KickandSwimMom on February 16, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Actually, it is the Romney people that are like flies. A new batch every day. The people who do not like Romney are much more likely to have been commenting on this site for years, daily.

astonerii on February 16, 2012 at 9:32 PM

I agree.

INC on February 16, 2012 at 9:33 PM

He served what?… four years as Governor of Massachusetts. That’s hardly the decades-long careers of some of the yahoos we’ve got in Congress right now.

Murf76 on February 16, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Not for the lack of trying. But I guess when you run and fail a few times your not a politician, your an outsider.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:34 PM

The bigoted, anti-mormon fascists

Oracleforhire on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

FAIL.

Kent18 on February 16, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I do not fault Romney, aka. SMOD, for making such a statement. What matters is the truth of the statement, not who made it. If a man tells you that drugs are bad in one breath, and then tokes up on some crack in the next, does that mean his statement that drugs are bad is less true? Don’t shoot the messenger (in this instance).

Weebork on February 16, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Your hatred blinds. Headlines read Romney and the Romney haters come trolling out… As you have already proven.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Wow. What an azz umption. Calm down there, sunshine.

egmont on February 16, 2012 at 9:34 PM

And the only reason Romney didn’t do the same was because he couldn’t get elected.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

He could’ve tried for the Senate before or after that time, and did not. He went back to the private sector and had continued success, something the other candidates wouldn’t know anything about.

changer1701 on February 16, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Mitt said something like his wife would know how to reach out to the hurting.

I did almost gag. Now I appreciate compassion from friends when I’m hurting, but that statement was patronization and demeaning elitism.

I believe he prefaced that by explaining that his wife had MS and was a breast cancer survivor, and that is why she would know how to reach out. Illness and suffering does not discriminate, but your hatred blinds (or, I guess, in your case, gags).

Priscilla on February 16, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Not Romney! Not Romney! Not Romney! The bigoted, anti-mormon fascists are in lockstep!

Oracleforhire on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Any chance that you can actually make an argument without calling people bigots or fascists?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 9:37 PM

KickandSwimMom on February 16, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Thanks for pulling up an even better article than mine.

Well done.

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Speaking of acting like a Democrat, Santy endorsed Mitt in 2008, Arlen Specter in 2004 and also endorsed Specter for President in 1996. At least Mitt endorsed actual Republicans.

Slainte on February 16, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Tax Man!

Key West Reader on February 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Your hatred blinds. Headlines read Romney and the Romney haters come trolling out… As you have already proven.

rich801 on February 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM

“You’re full of haaaaaaate! Stop haaaaaating! You’re a haaaaaater! Haaaaaaate! Haaaaaaaaaate!”

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM

On spending Romney is as bad as Santorum.

Bluray on February 16, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Based on what?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 9:40 PM

He could’ve tried for the Senate before or after that time, and did not. He went back to the private sector and had continued success, something the other candidates wouldn’t know anything about.

changer1701 on February 16, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Yeah, he waited a whole 8 years. Give me a break. He ran for governor to punch his ticket for a presidential run. Nothing more. If he had won in 1994, he would’ve sought the GOP nomination in 2000. No question about it.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Brokered Convention.

It’s whats for breakfast.

Open wide, and swallow.

Key West Reader on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Speaking of acting like a Democrat, Santy endorsed Mitt in 2008, Arlen Specter in 2004 and also endorsed Specter for President in 1996. At least Mitt endorsed actual Republicans.

Slainte on February 16, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Wait. Specter was running for President in ’96?

How come I wasn’t informed of this?!?!?

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Drunk Report is responsible for me stubbing my big toe. When DR was typing this article, he did not warn me about how close the side of my desk was when I went to cross my legs. Had he warned me I would never have stubbed my toe.//

Pattosensei on February 16, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Analogy Fail.
putting aside that i didnt write the article: not warning you of the shape of your own desk has no parallel to Rick Santorums endorsement of the senator who cast the deciding vote for Obamacare while Romney endorsed and worked for the senator who cast what was supposed to be the deciding vote against it.
Look up analogies and metaphors and you might understand how theyre supposed to work.

Drunk Report on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

The MittBots sure are thin-skinned.

SparkPlug on February 16, 2012 at 9:42 PM

I do not fault Romney, aka. SMOD, for making such a statement. What matters is the truth of the statement, not who made it. If a man tells you that drugs are bad in one breath, and then tokes up on some crack in the next, does that mean his statement that drugs are bad is less true? Don’t shoot the messenger (in this instance).

Weebork on February 16, 2012 at 9:34 PM

When the messenger would do good to maybe read Matthew 7:3-5, I find it rich. Its like Keith Richards telling someone they shouldnt do drugs.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:43 PM

putting aside that i didnt write the article: not warning you of the shape of your own desk has no parallel to Rick Santorums endorsement of the senator who cast the deciding vote for Obamacare while Romney endorsed and worked for the senator who cast what was supposed to be the deciding vote against it.

Drunk Report on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Yeah, that’s supposed to be “devastating” though?

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:43 PM

The MittBots sure are thin-skinned.

SparkPlug on February 16, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Heh. Remind you of anyone else?

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Well if Santorum gets zapped by some weapon from the captains bedroom then i’d say yes.

Sultanofsham on February 16, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Is alternate universe Santorum looking in people’s bedrooms?

batterup on February 16, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Wait. Specter was running for President in ’96?

How come I wasn’t informed of this?!?!?

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Lol. I imagine only Santy and Specter knew for sure.

Slainte on February 16, 2012 at 9:45 PM

The bigger question (and my exit question) is this: What will it take for Republicans in Washington to act like Republicans — or, better yet, conservatives?

A good start is sending Mitt Romney back to the private sector.

18-1 on February 16, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Romney with his “conservative outsider” shtick though. Who said the guy doesn’t have a sense of humor?

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Wait. Specter was running for President in ’96?

How come I wasn’t informed of this?!?!?

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

It’s true if Wiki is right.

His candidacy was not expected to succeed in winning the Republican nomination due to the overwhelmingly large number of social conservatives in the Republican Party. He was, however, able to gain support. Although fellow Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum was never overly enthusiastic, he was supportive.

Link

JPeterman on February 16, 2012 at 9:49 PM

That’s like a butt-ugly old maid bragging about her virginity.

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM

“Lorien to the white courtesy phone…

… “Lorien, white coutesy phone, please!”

/

Seven Percent Solution on February 16, 2012 at 9:49 PM

No. We’ve also said he needs to really, truly, genuinely mean it, as well.

If all it took to win conservatives over was lying to us, baldfaced: we’d have followed in the footsteps of Republican “moderates” back in ’08, and voted for Obama.

Kent18 on February 16, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Yep. I mean he has been telling us what we want to hear, for the most part. But it’s simply hard to believe him based on his frequently fluctuating philosophy. Sufferin’ succotash!

Dongemaharu on February 16, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Wait. Specter was running for President in ’96?

How come I wasn’t informed of this?!?!?

Lanceman on February 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Santorum should have endorsed Bob Dole to show his real conservatism. /

sharrukin on February 16, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Not Romney!Santorum! Not Romney!Santorum! Not Romney!Santorum. The bigoted, anti-mormonCatholic fascistsRomney bombthrowers are in lockstep!

Oracleforhire on February 16, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Right Mover on February 16, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3