An Open Letter to Mitt Romney
Dear Governor Romney:
Unasked for, but gladly offered, here’s my best advice for you to increase the chances for your election to the presidency in November 2012:
(1) Prepare for every debate as brilliantly as you did for last night’s. You were ready for every single question and every one of Gingrich’s attacks on you. Your criticism of him was right on target, and delivered with previously unexpressed zeal. You were sharp, focused, and appropriately fierce. Perhaps one day, the leaders of Iran, Cuba, and other hostile nations will hear such eloquent fierceness rather than the fawning obsequiousness to which they’ve become accustomed from the president and his administration.
(2) Don’t try to be amiable and likable. You were at your best last night when you let it rip, in a gentlemanly and dignified way, and let Newt have it between the eyes. I don’t think he knew what hit him.
(3) Stop trying to persuade us that you and Bain Capital were in the business of creating jobs. It doesn’t fly. It is legal and OK to be in business to make money. It was far better last night when you said that rather than attacking an American for being capable of creating wealth, such skills should be seen as an advantage that would serve the country well.
I’ll put it to you in one of the simplest concepts in the law: You know the legal concept of a third-party beneficiary: that in a contract between A & B, it is possible that C may benefit from the work that A & B do together under their contract. But A & B haven’t agreed to work together for the purpose of benefitting C. They’ve signed a contract to benefit each other. That C also does well is a happy byproduct, but neither A nor B should ever try persuading the public that their work was intended to do C any good.
That’s what’s wrong with arguing that Bain Capital “created” jobs. That wasn’t your or Bain’s purpose and Jane and John Q. Public know that. I think last night’s debate may have been the turning point for you: when you said, “I’m proud of being successful,” you won over more voters than with anything you’ve said previously about Bain. I’d stick with that approach in the future.
(4) Admit to yourself that no one outside your family and your own circle of friends and business associates is going to vote for you because they’re wild about you.
For most people, and that means most Republicans, the phrase “I’m just not that into him” has seemed to fit you to a tee.
We’re just not that into you. You sometimes come across as a little too self-satisfied for many viewers. Not that you don’t have reason to be satisfied with yourself. You do. It’s just not appealing to see someone as pleased with himself as you appear to be. But you’re not going to change and this isn’t the time to try.
Luckily for you, the president doesn’t have to be loved. He or she has to be able to do the job. That’s where Obama has failed the country. He’s not up to the job. You are.
That’s your best argument for voting for you. Not that you’re lovable or that you’re a regular guy (you know you’re not), but that you have what it takes to get us out of this economic morass and leftist la-la land the incumbent has foisted upon us.
Mitt Romney is a liar! His entire campaign has been nothing but character assasination. He is just like Obama, he cannot run on his record, so he has to try and smear his opponents.As soon as he fell behind in the polls he went personal, and he has so thouroghly poisoned the well that he could never be elected. One month ago I would have held my nose and voted for him, now, I could never vote for such a dispicable human being. God help us all if Mitt Romney is our canidate because the media will never let him get away with his slimey tricks in the general election.
People like you will help re-elect Barack Obama. Whether its Romney, Gingrich, Santorum or Paul, the Republican candidate will be less than perfect. Gingrich and Paul have both dishonestly attacked Mitt. Santorum was an 18-point loser in his last Senate rate. Paul’s foreign policy is basically isolationist. If we’re waiting for Reagan’s second coming, we’ll be waiting in vain through another 4 years of The One. Step back, take a breath, and look at the alternatives. If Romney is the nominee, there will be a lot of Republicans less than enthusiastic – but I hope most of them will be smart enough to vote for the best alternative to going further down the road to statism/socialism.
I would like to thank Belladonna Rogers for taking the slings and arrows from so many directions. It isn’t easy to get the whole spectrum upset with you.
I think what we are upset about is we all can see how vulnerable Ogodawfulbarackhusseinobama is. And instead of going at him with a Sarah or a Jindal we are going after him with yet another Ivy League geek. I for one can hardly stomach it.
Romney’a paid supporters with their non-spontaneous support were blatantly obvious at the CNN debate providing cover for the lack of enthusiasm charge
Newt, reeling from the Eliot Abrams and Bob Dole refutations, was an easy target for CNN and their boy Mitt
Why is everyone ignoring the wonderful, obvious choice of Santorum? Why is he getting no traction?
Thank you Ms Rogers for giving us this forum to vent
Thank you for your comment, jtmckee. I much appreciate it.
Those who submitted comments in flagrant violation of the PJM comments rules or whose comments included otherwise inappropriate language and innuendos will have to find another place to vent.
Mitt told two whoppers last night when he said he didn’t know if Newt said Spanish was the language of the Ghetto (he didn’t) and yet Mitt approved of the message. When asked if it’s true he turns to Newt and Newt says no and then CNN fact checked it and said he never said it yet little mittens doesn’t even apologize.
However, the biggest lie is when he said his investment of Freddie and Fannie was in a blind trust and he didn’t know about that – WELL IT WASN’T. Plus the investment was not just any old investment in Goldman Sachs it was an investment in a fund that specifically was set up to benefit from mortgage foreclosures. Praying on the misery of others – what a guy!
So we have a liar that doesn’t put 23 foreign funds in his financial disclosure form when he said he put everything there (Hey I’m running for President for Pete’s sake Mitt) and gets caught, lies about his blind trust, and now on two occasions has lied about his ads. Obama is going to fry him as he should.
It’s a fair observation that Mitt is a pathological liar, just like Obama.
His attacks on Gingrich in the NBC debate were a mix of flat out lies, half truths and misdirections. At this point I don’t know why anyone cares if he beats Obama because their is no way to know what he will do in office.
Meet the real Mitt Romney here. He is totally amoral and corrupt.
Well, I wasted 5 minutes of precious time by clicking on your link. Any nut can put up a web site.
Isn’t it time to admit that calling McRomney and his ruling class supporters, and the small-c communists liars is counter-productive.
It doesn’t make them mad because they don’t care. Their parallel strategies are based on lies, so it isn’t something they even bother to defend against.
It is better to stress that the McRomneys and the marxists have dedicated themselves to acquiring wealth and power for themselves, and will do anything to keep it. The marxists are the top dogs of course, and the Republican statists are the junior partners, happy to lap up the scraps at the feeding trough.
“… McRomney and the Marxists”??? How are we supposed to take you seriously?
How are the tactics of the Left and Romney any different? Really, explain how they are different in the slightest way.
They both are willing to do anything to win.
Moreover, the Ruling Class Republicans for the last 15 years have only set the table for obama. How is unfunded Medicare Plan D any different than unfunded obamacare? Oh yeh, it only costs hundreds of billions of money we don’t have rather than trillions. We complain about budget deficits. Well the difference is in degree, is it not? A few trillion under Bush. A few trillion more under Obama. Please explain how the ACTUAL AND IMPLEMENTED economic politices of the Ruling Class Republicans are different than the leftists economic policies. The talk sounds better. The reality isn’t.
Please explain what the Ruling Class Republicans have done in the past 15 years about the impending crises in SS and Medicare, other than occasionally flap their jaws. Please explain how the Ruling Class Republicsns have differed in their approach to Tarp from the leftists? Please explain how the Ruling Class’s actions in the last 15 years regarding the Federal government have been any different from the Leftists. How many departments did Bush shut down. How did he reign in the EPA. How did he make Education better? drilling? regulations? How have foreign relations been any different? How have the leftists ACTUAL policies in the Middle East and on Terrorism been any different? Not policy TALK, policy ACTION. There is no difference.
Lots and lots of Ruling Class rhetoric. Other than taxes, which, surpise, put billion in their own pockets, what did they do?
So why do you think for a second Romney is going to be any different? Because he says so? Unfortunately, the problem with what he says is that he has turned out to be a bald-faced liar. Not as natural a liar as obama, but certainly a world-class bald-faced liar.
People should think seriously whether they should invest their hopes in a man whose ACTIONS demonstrate only one thing…he will do anything to win. Beyond that, if he wins, why should anybody believe he will do anything other than delay by a couple of years the demise of the country. They haven’t done anything the last 15 years. Why now.
You want to engage, snap-e-tom, so engage. Explain the differences.
Explain why the rhetoric of a man who hasn’t done a single conservative thing in his life, backed by a group of people who have been abettors of the leftist revolution are any better than the leftists themselves. I’m listening.
Florida and the vile scheming of the conservative pravda have been an eye opener for me.
I’m beginning to think that my family will be better off if we just face up to the fact that the criminals really are all the same; after all, that is what they are demonstrating in spades. If we can’t get somebody elected who will make significant changes, then I would rather spend my time adapting to reality.
Romney is a liar. Nothing more. If I’m thinking these things, other people are as well. Now that he has revealed who he really is, I’m having a hard time making a case to vote for him. I’ll bet I’m not the only one. People like myself are outspoken and influential.
Romeny should have thought about what people like me would think before he decided to slime the character and life of a man who has done more for the country since Reagan than any other person alive.
“How are the tactics of the Left and Romney any different?”
[1] Newt pulled the same stunt in NH – it’s called politics.
“Moreover, the Ruling Class Republicans for the last 15 years have only set the table for obama”
[2] I agree with you there, but both Newt and Santorum also belong to that group. Romney has never held office in Washington, which is a plus in my book.
“Lots and lots of Ruling Class rhetoric. Other than taxes, which, surpise, put billion in their own pockets, what did they do?”
[3] Now YOU sound like leftist.
“So why do you think for a second Romney is going to be any different? Because he says so? Unfortunately, the problem with what he says is that he has turned out to be a bald-faced liar. Not as natural a liar as obama, but certainly a world-class bald-faced liar.”
[4] Yes he lies. All politicians do (except Ron Paul, who I believe to be an honest and principled man). Come down off the big rock candy mountain and face the real world.
“People should think seriously whether they should invest their hopes in a man whose ACTIONS demonstrate only one thing…he will do anything to win.”
[5] See 1
“Explain why the rhetoric of a man who hasn’t done a single conservative thing in his life, backed by a group of people who have been abettors of the leftist revolution are any better than the leftists themselves. I’m listening.”
[6] If you think Romney is like Saul Alinsky and his ilk – people who want to tear the fabric of our society and replace it with some utopian fascist state, then why am I even bothering to try and reason with you? Sorry, but that’s just plain stupid.
“Florida and the vile scheming of the conservative pravda have been an eye opener for me.”
[7] Oh boo hoo. So Coulter, Krauthammer, Imus, Drudge, etc are attacking your precious Mitt. Pravda?? Gimme a break.
Even though there’s more to your post it’s just meaningless gibberish. I stop here. Try to keep it to a few pithy remarks from now on.
Oops. [7] should read:
[7] Oh boo hoo. So Coulter, Krauthammer, Imus, Drudge, etc are attacking your precious Newt.
Exactly. I imagine the dem strategists are licking their chops, it will be so easy to beat Romney. Just toss Swiss bank and Cayman Island account out to the public, it is like red meat thrown into a lion’s den. One could almost feel sorry for Romney.
You have very little faith in the American voter. Most voters will see right through that. The ones that won’t will vote dem regardless.
“However, the biggest lie is when he said his investment of Freddie and Fannie was in a blind trust and he didn’t know about that – WELL IT WASN’T. Plus the investment was not just any old investment in Goldman Sachs it was an investment in a fund that specifically was set up to benefit from mortgage foreclosures.”
Excuse me for interrupting you. But do you have any, um, evidence?
Spanish was included in the languages that Newt spoke of as being connected to the Ghetto.
Fred:
You are mistaken friend, he absolutely did NOT say Spanish.
That was Mitt only saying he said that….once it was
played you could clearly see Mitt added his 2 cents not what Newt
actually said.
People need to take it the wrong way, makes them feel better for some bizarre reason.
Sooner or later reality will seep in and truth will be revealed.
Like Obama, politicans put out lies HOPING Americans will be too lazy to
google it, research the truth.
That is when damage sets in…….don’t believe lies, just read up on it.
You’re mistaken. During this week’s Fox’s Chris Wallace show, Gingrich was shown the film of him where he talks about the language in the ghetto bit, then Wallace reminded him that Hispanics were so upset with what he said back then, that Gingrich was forced to apologize to the Hispanics in Spanish. So why would he apologize in public to the Hispanics if he didn’t upset the Hispanics for what he said about their language?
Gingrich also is going around Florida stating that it is not true that he was fined for ethics violations. Gingrich is lying big-time, just like he pathologically lied to his 1st 2 wives when he was having affairs behind their backs. All you have to do is surf the search engines, and you will find Gingrich being fined $300,000 in 1997 for violating ethics rules. You’ll also see that one of those establishment Republicans that Gingrich regularly criticizes because they support Romney, is Bob Dole, who loaned Gingrich the $300,000 so he could pay that ethics violation fine. Gingrich is a pathological liar – he’s not an honest broker.
TruthHurts:
This is why gossip hurts so many people, just think before you speak.
Newt never mentions Spanish…only in Libs dreams-
“The advertisement was an apparent reference to a speech that Gingrich delivered on March 31, 2007, to the National Federation of Republican Women in Washington in which he said, “We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and so they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto.”
TruthHurts: Silly boy, nice try though!
His apology was because people like yourself, WANTED to make the none English speaking folks feel less than human, feel insulted.
Shame on you!
Didn’t work, people are actually researching now and blow liars out of the water pretty quick.
So much for cheap gossip…..
I’m confused — it sounds to me like you’re talking about Newt Gingrich.
Thank God you get it! Romney is an unacceptable candidate and when you have his own advisers saying he will not repeal ObamaCare, it points out he is a John Boehner Republican. ENOUGH!
snap-e-tom: The base WILL NOT come out for Romney, get over it. I will campaign for the other side before I vote for Romney.
If the system has to collapse, then it does, perhaps that’s the only way to fix this country, but I’m not playing “the game” a second longer.
“The base WILL NOT come out for Romney, get over it.”
This is just plain wrong.
“I will campaign for the other side before I vote for Romney.”
Thanks for the loyalty.
Emotion + Ideology = Self-Destruction = You
I don’t vote for RINOs and the base will not either. You are clueless as to what the state of the party is right now. I encourage you to continue to think that John Boehner Republicans get the nation-wide support of the base. They are pissed and they are bitter.
Say whatever you want, if Romney is the nominee, Obama is re-elected. The electoral maps don’t lie.
I’m not “clueless”, I just see it differently than you. You are projecting your own frustration on everyone else. The Tea Party needs more time to establish itself. You have to be patient. Look at the Libertarian party. Each election cycle they grow a little. They may be a major party in a decade, maybe sooner, who knows.
Look, for about 2 days I had this encouraging vision of Newt rallying the Tea Party movement across the country, winning the White House and taking the Senate. Then I woke up. I just don’t think is going to happen. It’s too late for him to change.
I didn’t watch the “debate” and I choose not to explain why. However, there is no getting away from endless auditory clips on the radio. The few I heard were so staccato with a forced delivery that it just confirmed further my opinion that Romney is a a milder form of Obama, arrogant and elitist. I look forward to the comments on these pages after Romney loses to Obama!
Thanks for your uplifting comment.
willspeaks; You have just described the Newt Grigrich I have watched for for over 30 years of his career, he even has you convinced that it is not him who has been playing dirty politics. He has convinced you true to a Washington politician that it is someone else who is doing what he himself has been and is doing. This is typical Washington insider political practice. After all these years of watching Newt I dare say that he would not be able to restore our free republic form of government which has been high jacked by the Progressive Socialist Movement something the Marxists have been working on for over a hundred years. Newt is very definitely by his own mouth on the public air waves one of them. He has been a Washington insider far longer than the other 2 Washington insiders in this GOP race, Santorum & Paul these three are among those whom a great number of people have said we must kick out of office and send them home. Newt was kicked out of office and sent home but even after that he showed up back in Washington and became a government contractor being paid over 1.6 million dollars. I don’t want anymore of such individuals managing our tax dollars so they can do as Obama , and George W has done to the public treasury, that is steal from the people in broad daylight. I almost totally agree with the author. There is only one thing I do not agree with and that is his comment that the company co-founded by Romney did in fact create a great number of jobs and it is my opinion that it is his choice whether or not to use that fact in his campaign.
Exactly. Thank you.
Couldn’t agree with you more, never saw a man lie so much, except for Obama.
I read the court documents about Newt and it is the opposite of what elite Mitt spews. If he wants to win, he needs to try honesty.
I am fed up with Washington liars, and sick of the Liberal new rules/laws that are detroying the very fabric of our beautiful Country.
Obama is anti-Christian, anti-middle class, anti-white, yet if you say boo to him, you are the racist. Poor Obie if you look at him wrong, if you say the wrong word…he whines for days.
The only thing he is a pro at… sending US jobs/BIG bucks overseas.
It’s getting old fast, Obama needs to get out of the way and let a person who actually loves this Country run it. A person Americans respect instead of a spooky socialist with hidden agenda.
No more millions from Wall St for Obie, once he got the $ he needed from them he destroyed them.
You mean no more to him than yesterday’s garbage.
Live and learn people…..China loves Obama and Brazil thinks he is Santa Claus, there is a reason for that!
Thank you very much for the advice. I feel almost guilty taking such excellent, free advice. I will endeavor to follow the ideas laid down herein.
That’s the smart thing to do.
Belladonna is the most astute image consultant a candidate could find.
Belladonna, this is excellent advice. Hopefully, Mittens will listen.
Mitt, if taking free advice makes you uncomfortable, send Belladonna a check.
By far and away, the best advice that Mitt could get. Well said, Belladonna! If Mitt would take it … and adopt it as the real meat of what his life is meant to be, he would be changed man.
Therein lies the rub. What IS the real Mitt? Will he put on your excellent advice like a new suit … and another one tomorrow … and another?
You’ve crystallized my discomfort with Mitt perfectly. If he WERE the rough and tumble Mitt of last night, I’d be relieved … On the other hand, if he IS the changeable, adaptable, vanilla-man I’ve seen him be all along, I’d continue being worried, very worried indeed. In other words: How do I know that last night merely another new suit?
He might maintain this marvelous image for a debate, a state, a month or two, but for a year … for a term? I still have my doubts.
Sounds like you want Gene Simmons to run.
When attacked because of his wealth, Romney should continue to point out that he did not inherit that wealth, but earned it, and add that his great wealth guarantees that, as our President, he can’t be bought by special interests. He has no need for post-Presidential speaking fees or book sales or directorships or other sources of remuneration that might influence him while in office. He should also indicate that, if elected and if Newt will take the job, he will appoint Newt to the post of White House Press Secretary. White House press briefings would then become one of the highest rated television events in history. We can only dream.
You just wrote that Romney, because he is a wealthy person, is incorruptible. OMG! Wow! Do you honestly believe that the wealthy are less subject to monetary influence because they cannot be bought off due to their existing fortunes? God help us!
Try bribing Mayor Bloomberg
Don’t be ridiculous.
People can be bribed in so many ways not even needing money. As an old lion in politics, I know the beast from the inside. I’ve seen people selling their votes and their support (which to me is like selling your soul) for a meal, for a dinner in a cozy place, for promises, etc, etc, etc. Heck, even in the Bible, someone sold his rights for cheap lentil stew. Being rich has nothing to do, wealth is not an immunization for this type of corruption.
Yep. We are all fallen.
Not too cynical, are we? You must be great fun at parties.
Indeed we are, Ceteris Paribus, indeed we are.
PJMedia certainly has its share of apologists for the RNC and its candidate, Mitt Romney. They are full of advice, as it were, for how to be good little Republican subjects and vote for the nice, bland former governor. As if the last ten years never happened and Mitt had never kowtowed to liberals. With the RNC, as if the last 23 years never happen and the RNC never found an expensive “bipartisan” effort in Congress it never liked, and as if the RNC never backed a loser. Electable, indeed. “Indeed” is a word I picked up in charm school. It means, “my a**.”
You can certainly make me like Newt less, there’s a lot there to not like. But you can’t make me like Mitt more.
Looks like this is another year of Republican Party re-education. Too bad they’re ineducable.
You should NEVER try to “educate” a party establishment in the middle of an election year.
Popular insurgencies by the base never succeed in anything but splitting the party and causing it to lose the general election: 1968 (Dem), 1976 (GOP), 1980 (Dem), 1988 (GOP), all had insurgent candidates who were beloved by the base running against the “establishment” candidate. None succeeded. But the party lost.
> You should NEVER try to “educate” a party establishment in the middle of an election year.
Unfortunately, election years are the only time I have something the RNC wants. Once they have my money and my votes, it’s too hard to get their attention.
> Popular insurgencies by the base never succeed in anything but splitting the party and causing it to lose the general election: 1968 (Dem), 1976 (GOP), 1980 (Dem), 1988 (GOP), all had insurgent candidates who were beloved by the base running against the “establishment” candidate. None succeeded. But the party lost.
In that case, then the establishment GOP needs to get out of the way of this primary and let the candidates sort it out.
The whole point of the column was to say that Romney shouldn’t even try to make people like him. So by saying this column isn’t going to make you like Romney more, you’re missing the point, which is this, from the first page of the column:
“(4) Admit to yourself that no one outside your family and your own circle of friends and business associates is going to vote for you because they’re wild about you.
“For most people, and that means most Republicans, the phrase “I’m just not that into him” has seemed to fit you to a tee.
“We’re just not that into you. You sometimes come across as a little too self-satisfied for many viewers. Not that you don’t have reason to be satisfied with yourself. You do. It’s just not appealing to see someone as pleased with himself as you appear to be. But you’re not going to change and this isn’t the time to try.
“Luckily for you, the president doesn’t have to be loved. He or she has to be able to do the job. That’s where Obama has failed the country. He’s not up to the job. You are.
“That’s your best argument for voting for you. Not that you’re lovable or that you’re a regular guy (you know you’re not), but that you have what it takes to get us out of this economic morass and leftist la-la land the incumbent has foisted upon us.”
You missed my point. I meant “like” as in “like his candidacy”. I can’t speak for all conservatives, but Newt had a chance of earning my vote, I like his fighting style and think he might be conservative enough to do some good things. I have no such faith in either Romney’s essential conservatism or his willingness to stand tall in a stiff wind and do what’s right. This is based on how he governed in Massachusetts, including crafting his own socialist medical mess, and also based on how he wooed leftist groups in Massachusetts.
I know a liberal when I see one. I’d rather be beaten by a Democrat than backstabbed by a Republican. Both Bushes taught me that.
Seeing as how this is in fact a republic, and “titles of nobility” are specifically forbidden by the Constitution, we should NOT allow politicians “life long titles.” I’m a small “r” republican (as well as a conservative). Just my rant…political offices aren’t life long tenancies…and the titles that attend them should end once that individual leaves office.
Romney is a liberal. If you are pushing him, then you are not really a conservative.
If you’re pushing only the most “conservative” (despite polls showing that Obama would beat someone too far away from center), then you are not really an American.
Whatever your intentions are, the fact is that you’re an Obama supporter.
“Romney is a liberal”
Ridiculous
Look at the record Romney-bot. Like Obama, you refuse to do so or when you do, you choose to ignore it.
Obama will be re-elected, as he doesn’t even need FL to win and will care the Great Lakes states, the West Coast and the Northeast. That’s all he needs to win.
After crapping all over the Tea Party Romney wants the votes. NO THANKS. I stay home
OK, then, who do you support?
Calling anyone who supports Romney a “Romneybot” makes you sound like an idiot. And suggesting that I didn’t study his record and “refuse to see” the truth is just a cheap shot. F.U. I do my homework. I don’t agree with a lot of the things he’s done in his political career, but there is noone else. Yes, he may lose (but don’t be so sure about Wisconsin) but it will at least be a close election. Gingrich/Paul/Santorum would be a landslide for the dems, and they will take down all the lower elections with them. Good god, man, do you even follow the news? Or do you spend your whole day at whacko web sites that talk about going back to the gold standard and who was really behind 9/11?
Zowie! That was good. If you get tired of this gig, there may be a position available as adviser/speech writer to the next POTUS, assuming it is not the present one.
I don’t view this as apologist rhetoric, it closer resembles a swift kick in the backside, it’s a wake up call.
Hello Mitt , Look around, Look where you are, this isn’t a bunch of your thumb-sucking underlings you’re talking to!
Exactly, Chiefparker. scizzorbill is way out of line and doesn’t have the reading skills you do to see that this is a wake-up call and not an application to work in the Romney White House. It’s sad when people so twist and purposely misinterpret what is plainly on their computer screens, if only they’d stop and read what the column says before posting their comments.
That’s obviously asking too much.
Cheap shot.
Mitt is a polite, well-mannered consensus builder who works very hard and well to get things done. He has his goals that he achieves through compromise, working with people. Belladona is right, he’s not a “regular guy” and shouldn’t try to be. Politics is a new venue for him and the rough and tumble takes some getting used to. In a sense, he learned some in saving the Olympics, which was a very public affair, but folks there were desperate and happy to have a competent volunteer come in (for free) and save the day. He learned more as governor of a state that is heavily Democratic controlling both houses of the legislature with more than two-thirds in each chamber. He probably did as well as any Republican in the situation he was in where, don’t kid yourself, the Democrats in the legislature are in charge no matter who is governor. As for principles, one good example, he took a strongly pro-life stance and earned the support of Massachusetts Pro-Life organizations and Mary Ann Glendon, former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican. I don’t know him personally, but I have observed him for years as a fellow resident of Massachusetts: He is a good man and will be a good president capable of returning this country to its founding principles and igniting growth in the economy to create jobs, reduce debt and bring down the deficit. I think we are fortunate to have him willing to lead the rescue effort. Decades of too many unsupportable political promises aggravated hugely by this President have to be brought into line with present and future revenues and both major parties have to support the effort if it is to succeed as we hope it will.
since 1994. Politics is new to him? Well he must be a very slow learner. Plus last night he said he always voted Republican – well he donated in 1992 to the most liberal Senator in the country who was running for President against GWB. He was an independent and we are to believe he never voted for a Dem against a Republican. In MA that would be considered an unnatural act and Mitt has lied often before – as Newt says: Mitt thinks your Stupid!
Romney gave 15% percent of his income to charity. Newt 2.6%. Romney has remained faithful to his wife for 43 years. He is moderate, temperate, and prudent. Newt is egotistical, vindictive, volatile, moody, and swings to left whenever it suits him. His wife looks more like a Stepford Wife than a first lady.
You and all the Romney-bashers on this and other conservative web sites are putting ideology above reason and common sense, and that is not a very conservative thing to do.
What is the point in electing an R president if he acts like a democrat?
Romney will act like a democrat? What are you smoking?
Sorry, “Anonymous” is me ^ – I forgot to enter my name.
Look at his record as governor of MA.
OH, and his advisor Norm Coleman has flatly said that Obamacare will not be reprealed.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-come-on-obamacare-wont-ever-be-repealed-in-its-entirety/
But don’t worry Romneybots, your master will lie his @ss off about it soon.
It will take 60 votes in the Senate to repeal ObamaCare. Romney has said that he opposes ObamaCare. Realistically, if he becomes president he can’t just make it go away with the stroke of a pen.
To suggest that he will intentionally prevent a repeal of ObamaCare is ridiculous.
From a poll I’ve seen, about one-third of Republican voters would like to see someone else enter the race, and I would count myself in that one-third. Unfortunately, no one else seems to want to enter at this point, and even if he/she did, it might be too late (except if there’s a brokered convention). While I love Newt’s attacks on the LSM, I have severe doubts about his abilities to be President of the United States. From what I’ve read about him, he is unfocused. He says that’s not true any longer, but it would be detrimental to the country to learn otherwise were he President. That leaves Paul, Santorum and Romney. I like Paul’s domestic policy, but his foreign policy, like that of Britain and France in the 1930s, has the potential of ending up in a major war. Also, I have learned in recent days that a site with which he is associated has been peddling the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and to me that is a total turn off. Santorum, while very appealing, just does not seem electable. By process of elimination that leaves Romney, who, admittedly, leaves much to be desired; but it comes down to the following question: Do we, or do we not want four more years of Barry O. I for one do not, and while I would vote for anyone except Paul, I think most independents would feel more comfortable with Romney than any of the remaining possible nominees. So, reluctantly, I think we have to go with Romney and wait for the Republican messiah another time.
Do we, or do we not want four more years of Barry O. I for one do not, and while I would vote for anyone except Paul, I think most independents would feel more comfortable with Romney than any of the remaining possible nominees. So, reluctantly, I think we have to go with Romney and wait for the Republican messiah another time.
I think Romney will govern as conservatively as he can. He will also be what he is at his core: cool and competent. He will concern himself with the details of governing. If he is able to turn around the American economy he will significantly expand the Republican base.
I think Romney will govern as conservatively as he can.
Nice weasel phrase at the end of that sentence.
There is really no evidence or reason to believe that Mitt is a conservative at all or that he will govern as one. In fact, all of the evidence points to the opposite.
Mitt is conservative in his core. By habit and by temperament. He will make a great President.
Evidence?
Terry Gain – We won’t know how conservative Romney really is until he has the opportunity to govern. I though Nixon was a conservative, but he did not govern that way; he imposed wage/price controls and left us with a bunch of alphabet agencies that were most un-conservative (OSHA, EEOC, and the best of all: EPA). But as one of the commenters on PJM said, I’d vote for a bag of dirt (Paul excepted) before I’d vote for Barry O.
You could have stopped at number one, Mitt’s new debate coach did his job. However, the country doesn’t need someone comfortable with his debate coach, it needs someone comfortable enough with his principles to assert them, (even angrily if necessary) without weeks of advice and coaching. In Mitt’s defense, if these principles are new to him, I understand why defending them come hesitantly. I run my own business, work 7 days a week and will hand over close to 44 percent of my income between state and federal taxes plus charity. I am in the trenches and can attest to the absolute necessity that Santorum’s manufacturing plan is to resusitating our economy. You must have a plan to put people to work and Bain isn’t a plan, nor is it even the experience we need now. In fact, the last thing this country needs is another Harvard trained anything. Harvard has tried to tell me for over a decade why it was a good idea to send manufacturing over seas- now look at us. As Mitt and Newt argue back and forth about immigrants being good for our country- and yes, they have always been-but because there was WORK for them- in manufacturing! Santorum understands this and has the right tax policy and manufacturing plan. Manufacturing, of course, will create blue collar and white collar jobs and these people will then earn their own healthcare coverage.
I have never been more dissolutioned- those who profess to be conservative have dissolved into partisan bickering while a global marxist, hell bent to put government in control of property, (through Fannie and Freddie), business through union labor, higher education (take over of loan industry)- in essence- to make all of us dependent on the government or slaves to it through taxation continues to deceive the nation with his lies. Thanks Belladona for not bothering to give Santorum any advice- he doesn’t need any. Just ask Obama who has already figured out that Santorum is the real threat- he is trying to jump on the manufacturing idea too.
“Harvard has tried to tell me for over a decade why it was a good idea to send manufacturing over seas”
and Harvard was right. What Romney needs to do is to talk to Harvard, and you, to find out why it was a good idea. If he did, he’d likely find that regulations, taxation, and labor unions were the driving factors. Then he needs to talk to Bain Capital and find out why those companies were is such financial trouble. If he did, he’d likely find that regulations, taxation, labor unions, and poor business decisions were the driving factors. He could then form a study group to determine the common factors, and after a few years and millions of dollars he’d come up with “government”. More specifically, he’d find that perverse government incentives destroyed the manufacturing base and sent the jobs overseas. He could then stop talking about “creating jobs”, which he can’t do as President, and start talking about removing the government impediments to business. He won’t because he’s a big government guy, but he could.
Chris, Santorum agrees with you-the problems we have today are government inflicted and he does reduce the regulatory impediments to business in his manufacturing plan. There is an ever increasing part of our population that is gravitating toward government because they have little else to fall back on. Rick starts with them- unlike any other candidate. If we can reduce their need to seek more government- we will likely preserve prosperity and our great country.
This is exactly right. And to Belladonna Rogers’ point about not trying to pretend that Bain was in the business of creating jobs, here is the right answer: Vulture capitalists don’t invest to prop up jobs in failing businesses. They invest to take control of failing businesses and redeploy their assets to a winning strategy, if not in the same business then in a better one somewhere else. Often that means the former employees have to find new jobs. We hope they’ll find them in a winning business instead of a losing one, because then they may have a future instead of wasting another ten years here only to find that their pension has disappeared.
The worst thing either private money or government subsidies can do is prop up a losing business — no matter how many people clamor to preserve dead jobs in amber.
About Paul’s association with the website hawking the Protocols, see: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/01/26/the-protocols-of-the-elders-of-ron-paul/
and: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/01/26/scrubbing-the-protocols-of-the-elders-of-ron-paul-2/
from: “Mitt and Newt in florida”
at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289406/mitt-and-newt-florida-neal-b-freeman
“What I can tell you today is what this election is going to be about. The 2012 Florida primary will be an old-fashioned family feud pitting conservatives against Republicans. It’s a feud with deep, 1964-vintage roots, but it’s not about old grudges misremembered or long-forgotten. Next Tuesday’s vote will be a referendum on what happened here and elsewhere around the nation in 2010.”
“In that bountiful year, you’ll fondly recall, disgruntled conservatives leapt from the soft shoulders, grabbed the wheel of the party’s wandering bus, and whipped it hard right. The party people were at first outraged — you’ve just cost us the services of Mike Castle, for God’s sake! — before developing a sober (and ephemeral) gratitude for the infusion of conservative energy. Almost immediately following Election Day, however, the systematic restoration of party prerogative began. Messrs. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, who had seemed to be tea-party when tea-party was cool, banked their revolutionary fires; Karl Rove, for a time doubted and (even more painfully) ignored, was reinstated to his architectural role; and the party people quickly selected their candidate for 2012. To avoid any intramural frottage, in fact, they helpfully declared their candidate “inevitable” before a single delegate had been won. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome your Inevitable GOP Candidate: a formerly pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-amnesty, pro-individual-mandate, one-term governor of Massachusetts who has stashed part of his unimaginably large paper-shuffling profits — the part that he didn’t stash with Goldman Sachs — in a bank in the Cayman Islands. Who, I ask you, could possibly be more inevitable than he?”
My best advice to him would be pay someone to invent a time machine-go back and erase romneycare.http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/it-s-not-worth-getting-angry-about_618705.html
“That’s what you need, America: not a comic, not a star, not a fast-talker, just a serious-minded man who understands money, finance, fiscal responsibility, and how to repair a broken economy. This is what I do and I do it well.”
Or Mitt Romney, Calvin Coolidge with big hair. Say what you want about him, “Silent Cal” got the job done.
Pity Romney doesn’t know what the base wants, what us Tea Party members want. We want him to take the battle to Obama. We want the next Republican candidate to call out the press when they’re obviously carrying water for Obama, or when the elitist media constantly attacks Republicans and expects us to just shut up and take it. THAT is why people were applauding Gingrich in South Carolina. Newt actually had the temerity to tell the mainstream media to get lost and to show just how hypocritical they are. “Silent Cal” may work when it comes to the economy, but being president is more than that, much more. It’s about being a leader, a leader to everyone in your party, not just the bean counters. And if Romney can’t do that, the base just won’t come out for him. They will think, “What’s the point. I will either be getting Obama or Obama light in Romney.” And with Romney being the sole owner of RomneyCare, as Ricky Ricardo once said, he’s going to have a lot of “Splainin” to do to the base that he’s not just another liberal from New England.
A big difference between Federal legislation and State legislation, is that if you don’t like the quirks of a majority of the population in one State, you have the freedom to move to another State with more congenial folk.
Romney’s policies on the economy and jobs, the federal-state relationship, and foreign policy are http://pjmedia.com/blog/an-open-letter-to-mitt-romney/?replytocom=2252517#respondthe opposite of Obama’s policies:
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care
Plus, in a startling contrast to the current Administration, Gov. Romney has a real record of competent governorship.
My god some of you have really become unhinged on here. Romney is a Liberal? Huh? I think you’re grabbing the remote control a bit too tightly. Relax.
You’re going to fall into the trap of re-electing Obama because you won’t settle for anything less than your idea of a perfect checklist conservative candidate. Well guess what, if that’s all you’ll settle for then get ready for 4 more years falling off this cliff because he is not up there and if he was he would lose mightily in the general election. The middle is a muddle. Ignore that at your peril.
This was excellent advice and if he followed it he’d be very wise.
Congratulations Belladona! Terrific piece. You hit it right on the head. Let us hope it gets to Mitt Romney, who needs to read it. If Obama is to be defeated, we need to knock Newt Gingrich out of the race.
The best moment in the debate for me was when Mitt said, referring to Gingrich’s moon colony plan, that if anyone in the private sector came to him with that idea, he’d say “You’re fired.”
And do go to The Daily Show website and watch Thursday night’s segment on Newt and the moon plan!
Romney is definitely a smart guy. He graduated as the valedictorian of Brigham Young. That may be an even greater accomplisment than doing so well at Harvard.
My advice to him would be to talk about his life journey to conservatism. He could say that like many, he was attracted by the causes of liberalism when he was younger, even up to the point where he ran for senator. But as he worked in business, and as he raised his family, it became more and more clear that the principles of the Founding Fathers, which we now call Conservatism, are the principles that work best to make the country stong and the people prosperous.
And that long-term conversion, in concert with his experience learning about the factors that turn businesses around, and implementing successful turnarounds for many companies, are the twin pillars that will allow him reverse the tide of the statist trend that is swallowing the country. So, the natural conservatism of the family values he was taught as a boy are now matched by political conservatism he has learned as a man.
There probably isn’t a word of truth in that, but hey, when has he ever let honesty and integrity ever stand in his way.
Beautifully crafted, Bella mia.
From what I’ve seen on TV, people who know Romney one on one think he is actually a wonderful guy to have a soft drink with, easy going, congenial, smart, well spoken, someone it’s not hard to get along with, even admire.
Until last night, it seems as if he dressed in suit, tie and a straight jacket not even Houdini could escape from.
Newt is a fighter by nature. Mitt is not. I somehow have a hard time believing that folks of that vintage are likely to change basic Myers Briggs personality traits just because we voters want the combination of letters to line up in a certain order.
We get what they have when the throw their hats in the ring.
In fact, it’s the trying to pretend to be something they are not, that is often the most off putting.
Romney is a classic example of people SAYING they are 100% behind the American Dream, except when ANY person or company gets there…the petty envies and class warfare inanities arise. One leftist twit said that no corporation (or person) ever made it on their own…they always make it on the backs of “the have nots”.
It’s classic leftist pap and sadly, one can be certain that leftist banner will be carried by people who pretend to be conservative.
Romney is not a liberal, he will not govern as a liberal, he certainly is not a leftist. By any stretch of the imagination. Those who paint him with that broad brush are not to be taken seriously.
However, he is a compromising guy. Ordinarily, that might be an admirable trait. Certainly in social settings and often in business.
At this moment in time, someone who is too quick to compromise, too easily “backed down” will be seen as weak, vacillating, someone who is always ready to retreat.
There are voters whose political instincts are so rigid and inflexible, (approximately 15% on each side of the aisle) that they want warfare now, warfare always, warfare each and every day. Forget whether that is a permanent losing position in a center-right country, it’s simply unachievable.
There’s a happy medium. Playing to the state of CONSTANT warfare is simply bad strategy.
What Obama did, was spout the right answer…and govern by the extreme lie.
We are not a red state or blue state, put childish things behind us, unite, heal…and then he governed by the most class warmongering, race warmongering, most radical, most divisive most anti-America, anti-Judeo/Christian, anti-law enforcement, anti-military position in the history of this nation.
THAT FACT, means that someone who is too eager to compromise, too willing to say that “he’s a nice guy, just misguided”, is probably the absolute wrong choice. The Marxist takeover has nearly completed the job of destroying the continent of Europe.
Marxist gunk hurled into the wheels of the American free market have ground our engines to a near halt. The strangulation by unsustainable entitlement is the Cloward Piven blue ribbon prize for overwhelming capitalism in order to destroy it.
It is NOT that Mitt needs to fight Newt. That’s a spitball fight of personal egos, a spectacle humiliating to endure, ridiculous in substance and counterproductive to the tragic plight of this land of ours.
What Mitt needs to do, if he is to eventually become the choice to lead us…is seek not first to be understood, but to understand. The Marxists have declared war on capitalism, have and are attempting to collapse the free market and to cut the legs out from under America. They do not like America the hyper-power. In fact, they instinctively hate her and want to traipse around the world apologizing for her.
A man who should embody what happens when she allows you to succeed on your own merits, who apologizes for that success, who compromises on the fight to keep her strong, who does not understand the war by Marxists against her…can’t possibly turn back the overthrow. He’s barely cognizant that it exists.
He’s not a liberal and he’s most certainly not a leftist. He’s a center-right guy who thinks we’re up against the center-left. That dead wrong analysis will destroy us. Unless and until is made aware of this, he’s the wrong guy, at the wrong time, who is being championed for the wrong reasons and criticized for the wrong reasons.
Unfortunately, everybody else running…is worse.
Excellent. And your comment in the Gingrich thread – equally excellent.
“He’s not a liberal and he’s most certainly not a leftist. He’s a center-right guy who thinks we’re up against the center-left. That dead wrong analysis will destroy us.”
Chilling and spot-on, cf.
“Unfortunately, everybody else running…is worse.”
You said the same thing in your comment about Gingrich. What am I missing?
Irony.
And, about 50 of my prior comments
Thanks! Thought that must be the case but am big on verifying from the source.
Mitt indeed thinks he is center-right. And in some sense, it is true. The political center that he stands to the right of is the prevailing politics in a country that is and has been declining. The decline is mostly due to Progressivism and corruption in both parties. He accepts the status quo decline as inevitable and wants to slow it down a little by outsmarting his putative center-left political rivals. In business, he looked for declining companies that could yield profits when he slowed their declines or even reversed them. The difference between our declining Republic and the declining companies he tried to improve is that the peons in the Republic can still vote and can’t be fired.
As CFB puts it so well:
A thoughtful analysis, but I think he’s smart enough to know that our nation is not just another manufacturing plant that’s in the red.
And I strongly disagree that our country is in decline. It always looks like it’s in decline, but it keeps rumbling along year after year. Do you have any kids? I look at my son and I see the future. There are millions of parents that feel the same way. Have a little faith.
Yes, but the continued rumbling is a product of kicking the can down the road. That is, the ongoing printing of fiat money and the excessive buying of worthless US and European bonds that delay the inevitable collapse. This needs to stop if we are to have a decent future. We have no children and thus have no vested interest beyond our own mortality. But we, perhaps strangely, care about the long-term future. That would include your children.
When you said the nation was “in decline” I interpreted that to mean something other than the national debt. You are absolutely correct about that. Most voters don’t understand how serious it is. O must go.
First, before the “you’re fired” remark gets too widely distorted, the context is important. Didn’t Mitt basically say, “In view of the massive debt and other problems we’re facing … I’d say ‘you’re fired’ to anyone making the moon base proposal.” (Paraphrased, of course.)
Second, every micro, small and medium-sized business owner I know is seeking some sense of predictability from government, a steady march to fix things backed by action not speechifying, and some combination of tax and regulatory relief. Mitt’s business success implies he might be able to pull this off. Along with all the other great tips, he must start stating this simply, clearly and consistently. The subsequent sound you’d hear is the rumble of business folk moving from undecided to Mitt in 2012.
– lose on Election Night, be brave and brief in your concession speech.
Fine……alright…….big, heaving sigh…….okay.
dammit. he’s from massachusetts.
abo.
Hats off to Ricky last night for taking Willard’s clothes off regarding Romneycare and Obama’s defense of the Affordable Care Act. Obama says the very same thing Mittens does in defending healthcare. There is no difference and Ricky is right – I love it!
“I didn’t say I’m in favor of top-down, government-run health care. 92 percent of the people in my state had insurance before our plan went in place and nothing changes for them. They have the same private insurance they had before. And for the 8 percent of people who didn’t have insurance, we said to them, if you can afford it, buy it yourself, any one of the plans out there, choose any plan. There’s no government plan. And if you don’t want to buy insurance, then you have to help pay for the cost of the state picking up your bill.”
Heck Obama can say the very same thing.
Romney deflected Santorum’s “Romneycare” attack. “Rmoneycare” is not a serious enough liability for Romney in the primaries and will actually be an asset in the general election.
It’s clear that many commenters have not read the companion column ‘An Open Letter to Gingrich’.
I’m guessing that the Romneybots and the Paulbots and the Obamabots are using Google searches to do ‘Drive-By Commenting’
Never look back. Obama has spent zero minutes discussing the past.The GOP candidates are so focused on each others past that they blind to what is happening today.Leadership?Bickering children who put self before party.Obama is the luckiest guy ever.With enemies like these guys,who needs friends.Affirmative action for presidents:you get to borrow all you want,the media is your press agent,and only candidates who have been losers can run against you.
I think Romney should release, without fanfare, his college transcripts and his and his father’s birth certificates. The latter would shut up the lie inventor Andrea Mitchell. He needs to begin building contrasts between himself and the poseur Obama. Might also publish info on his campaign site regarding his Mormon faith, including his missionaries. I’m not a Mormon, but have read a fair amount about the faith. One thing is very clear. They espouse patriotism toward their country and the duties of Mormons to live their lives actively engaged in works benefitting their fellow citizens irrespective of their faith or non-faith. One thing is for certain. Never once has any Mormon priest uttered the words “God damn America”.
Anything that would shut up Andrea Mitchell would be welcomed.
Have you counted how many Mormons there are? They have kids. Liberals have abortions. Makes a difference at vote time. Best estimates had a Mormon president at about 2024, just on demographics. Mitt’s ahead of schedule, is all. Allan Bloom has an ” I greet my Mormon overlords” speech to match the Kent Brockman one on Simpsons.
Second off, people have Mormon neighbors. And Mormons make nice neighbors. And preschool teachers, and hair-cutters and small business owners. They have more social visibility than gays, who also try the neighbors you like approach. So, don’t just count Mormons- count their acquaintances and friends.
Crazy guys threatening to bring guns to a knife fight? Crazy bitchy women at Target? Crazy folks who get Johnny Depp into White-face? I’m not seeing that as the neighbor you vote for.
I don’t think he’s running as a religious Mormon candidate. I think he’s running as a conservative Boy Scout, valedictorian, top of his class, keeps his books in order kind of guy- the kind of guy we really usually do elect as president. The current guy is about like all of us compassionately electing the Down’s Syndrome kid as prom king. Great once, but don’t hand over any power.
We just don’t invite Mitt to the kegger, after graduation. Which is fine- the man needs to be staying up late, fixing America’s public finances.
That’s the part that gets me- we don’t need the smartest guys in the world in the room in Washington. We need enough of them to power Washington, and they need to know enough to get out of the way. Everybody else has competencies that they cannot fathom. Hair-cutters!!! were considered so dumb and helpless prior to Reagan that they had required prices for haircuts. That’s one that got de-regulated. And that’s how we got — cost cutters, sports clips, great hair, bO, sally kershman, tigi—-buckets of innovation in hair services. the salon owners can add, they can do hair, but they can’t talk fine washington policy. that’s good! that’s basic economics- do your own thing best!
Very sober comment and dead on.
A pretty accurate critique of Mr. Romney. On the religion issue, I’ll put Mormon up against Black Liberation Theology any day.
I have no idea how to do it,since I’m not techy, and I can’t find zombie’s address, but I want a photo essay: from before civil rights- the black guy who worked with shirley temple in blackface, and the white president, and then a photo of johny depp dressed up in white-face at the alice in wonderland party, with the black president. B/c whatever that was, just switching colors isn’t the progress we aimed for.
BR slaughters another wooden duck: when will these tragedies end?
Unlike BR, I believe R-Boy has to really work on his show and smooth his message. People are concerned about the Cristites on his campaign, as should we all be.
Too bad you didn’t read Belladonna Rogers’ column. She advises Romney how to be a better candidate than he is. You shouldn’t comment without reading what a column says. It just makes you look …lazy, at best.
Most folks have no idea what a Venture Capitalist and or a ” turn around guy ” is or even looks like mainly because (A) there are few of them and (B) They tend to hang out with their own kind, financially and philosophically. Mitt is a horse of different stripe as unlike most VC guys he sought public office and is not a wine collector. I will digress for a moment because there is someone looking over my shoulder as I am writing this shouting Donald Trump! Lest we get confused, The Donald is not a VC he is a “entrepreneurial investor and hustler” There is a difference. OK Back to Venture Capitalists and Mitt. I HAVE hung out with these fellows . I have had them as partners, sat with them on various committees and been at plenty of social events and parties. They are , in general highly intelligent and motivated but boring, shallow, self absorbed, narcissistic and have a real problem when it comes to honesty and truth telling. They are usually loyal to their families and pathologically disloyal to everyone else. They love to run things then leave to run something else . . Its a pattern and Mitt fits it like a glove.
Stereotype much?
I call em like I see’um.
Lame answer. I think you work for Media Matters.
Aside from some of Wolf’s “he said/she said”-type questions, I thought each candidate was given ample opportunity and time to make short speeches, and all made very good points. The big moment for me was when Santorum stressed individual freedom (from gov’t mandated health-insurance) and Romney responded by saying 98% of the Mass. population is insured. Santorum, Paul and Gingrich should have pounced. Individual freedom doesn’t equal a % insured or a gov’t mandate, even if it’s done by the state. I think it’s another example of why so many conservatives and libertarians have a problem with Romney. It’s almost subliminal. He is a big-gov’t pol at heart — his record and unscripted statements reflect it. (See his recent Ohio union vote position switch from natural, pro-union, to advised, non-union. His first reaction was to support the liberal side until his advisors told him it’s the wrong side.)
When the Tea Party came together and put people into the House and Senate in 2010, I thought, along with alot of other people, that the task of taking over Congress and the GOP would continue in 2012. I still believe that. However, I though that the candidates would be more helpful. Silly me. From that perspective, the anti-establishment Gingrich makes the best candidate to bring change to the party. Romney is Not!
…and Gingrich and Santorum are not big-gov pols? Please.
2010 was only 2 years ago. It will take years for the Tea Party to change the status quo, and I have faith that they will. But it has to grow up first. You sound like children demanding that you get what you want right now. Forget Gingrich, he is a disaster waiting to happen. You’re nit-picking about every little politically-expedient move Romney made in his political career is getting tedious.
We are approaching 16 trillion dollars in debt. $16 trillion is $130,000 per taxpayer….$50K per citizen. Can you pay your fair share? I can assure you Bill Gates, Donald Trump; et al cannot make up the difference. Not to mention that Medicare, Social Security, and state and local gov’t guaranteed benefits are probably each greater than the national debt itself.
This is why I, regrettably, probably cannot vote for the republican nominee (Romney) this year. For the first time in my life. Our silly arguments over debates and other trivial matters look foolish in light of the mountain we face.
Rino’s in the primary, republican in the general has been and is a recipe for disaster. It’s led us to the place we are now, so it demonstrably does not work. We should be drawing the sharpest contrast between the dems and us, not nominating someone just because they appeal to both sides. Nothing more demonstrates the superiority of our ideals than the results of a conservative President vs. the disgrace we have now. Instead we’ll wind up with a nominee who will merely try to fix Obama’s problems, instead of unwinding them completely.
Note to Tea Party Patriots:
It would be helpful to think/talk/present the makeup of Congress not in the traditional Republican – Democratic majorities/minorities, but instead as the number of Tea Party members versus non-TPers. At present, who among the Representatives and Senators on the Hill should be considered worth of that designation? However we choose to decide, there can be no doubt that only a minority of the men and women of the 112th United States Congress would qualify — and it will take a majority of such folk to enact major reforms. So let’s see a count of where we are today and what it will take to reach that goal.
Sorry, but that is just unrealistic. Romney is the least objectionable at this point in time. I had high hopes for Newt but his behavior since Iowa has put me off.
Ok, we agree to disagree! We will cancel each others votes!
Joey, I’ll break this to you gently: a whole lot of us are going to cancel out your vote. Snap-e-tom is far from alone. We’ve got an army of snap-e-toms and we’re all realistic voters who want to vote Barack Obama out of the People’s House back to his even larger mansion in Hyde Park where he belongs. Yes, like Clinton, he’ll make millions on the lecture circuit but he won’t be guiding our economy or foreign policy.
After reading your advice to both Gingrich and Romney, I have to say ‘well done!’ I found both very thoughtful and insightful, and I hope both candidates take at least some of it to heart.
Thank you, Renaissance Nerd.
OK, so under the pretense of offering “advice” to each candidate you write 2 columns.
One is advice. The other is a take down.
What has happened to PJM, they don’t even try to pretend they’re conservative anymore, they’re merely Republican.
Mark Levin weighs in on the smear job on Gingrich:
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=116130
UNLEASH GINGRICH IN 2012!
Mark Levin?!? He can’t get his open conservatism straight.
OMG yessss!!! Let’s hurry and nominate Mitt so that we can assure that Himself is re-elected in ’12! How else are we to assure that the United States becomes the faild Social Democracy that we all so desire?!?
What is this fascination with Mitt Romney? I’ll admit readily that he is a very successful businessman and that’s part of his problem. He is very narrowly focused and that means he’ll miss things. He’s evidently already missed all the private sector interest in space travel.
Hearing his comments about firing a vice president who suggested an investment as dumb as a moon colony makes me wonder whether he’d have begun an American space program had he been in Kennedy’s place. I think the man lacks vision for the future of mankind and that’s a serious lack in a world leader.
It’s not “fascination with Mitt Romney”. Have you even read these posts? It’s about sending O back to Chicago. Oh, how sweet it would be. In the history books forever: a lefty peanut farmer who was sent home after one term and a lefty thug who was booted out after one term. Hell, I would support Olympia Snowe over the Narcissist in Chief.
Instead of whining about Mitt, how about some suggestions? Or are you Paul supporters so bitter that you WANT Obama to win so that in 2016 the country will be so f***ed up that John Taylor Bowles could win the White House.
Additional points
6) You are not gaining much traction with Republicans because you don’t appear to stand for anything apart from wanting to be president and endless bailouts of Wall Street TBTF banks. This is due to your long record of fence sitting, endless flip/flops and talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Remember “Everything to everyone becomes nothing to nobody” and those who stand for nothing become empty vessels.
So far all your policies have been either “hopey changey, we are america, oh yeah” or minor variations of “business as usual” that will have us going bankrupt like Greece 1 week later than under Obama.
The time had come to put on the big boy pants, man up and make some hard choices for your administration.
Show us you are SERIOUS about turnig the ship of state around and are prepared to make the HARD ADULT decisions that will take.
As we are spending 45% MORE than we earn I suggest disdanding 1 worthless department – Homeland, Energy, Housing and Education are all good canditates for the sacred cow woodchipper and then going to the mat defending that decision from the howls of rage from BOTH parties.
You CANNOT WIN with your current strategy, most Republicans regard you as the “white Obama” and the Evil Party will go spastic over your wealth, BAIN Capital and “Wall Street” connections.
Go bold or go home, remember “Those who stand in the middle of the road get run over by semi trailers.”
You’re living up to your name.
So.
You want a REAL conservative to take the White House. To beat an incumbent with $1 bil to spend and almost the entire media complex on his side. In a country where 43% of the people don’t pay income tax, where a GOP debate gets 5 million viewers and American Idol gets 18 million, where more people are sucking at Uncle Sam’s sugar tit than ever before, where both the president and almost every “beloved” Hollywood pretty boy/girl ridicules conservatives at every opportunity, and where public-service and teacher’s unions work hand in hand with entrenched dem regimes to soak the working class and then teach their kids that their parents are racist homophobes who want the poor to starve?
Hey, genius, let’s hear your plan.
– thought you were referring to name “belladonna”.
No, I was referring to blowhard.
He has apparently left us and is back hanging out at ebaum’s world.
… and if YOU are Belladonna, let me say that you are beautiful but deadly.
We fight. We cede them no ground. We take it to the pulpits and the streets. We stop using the public schools. We attack liberalism on moral grounds- it is wrong to take from one person to give to another, it is wrong to silence people you don’t agree with, and it is wrong to condone the murder of the unborn, the elderly and the disabled. We run against the media and use their own forums against them. We demand equal treatment and boycott those organizations that refuse to give it to us. I have no delusions that this will be easy, but we can’t preemptively surrender.
myth buster, what you say is true and inspiring, but not practical. My plea is for pragmatism, not ideology. In fact, a true conservative eschews ideology while embracing tradition and fellowship within the community.
Snap-e-tom – I plan to fight against the transformation of the United States into a failed state.
This involves cutting spending and nominating candidates who are conservative.
My plan – adopt a blend of Ron Paul’s (spending cuts) and Garry Johnson’s (the libertarian candidate) policies.
The alternative is to simply winge and complain like yourself and wait for the collapse to arrive, sometime within the next presidential cycle.
I believe the correct term is Cheese eating surrender monkey.
Wow. Spending cuts. Now why didn’t I think of that?
Getting off my soapbox for a minute.
Snap-e-tom, do you believe that “business as usual” can continue?
As you probably know we spend 45% MORE than we earn and our debt to GDP has rocketed past 100%.
The democrats CANNOT cut spending on anything, their political coalition only holds together if everyone gets paid. Hence “spendulus”.
Greece today is US tomorrow, what happens when we hit that point? Riots?, Hyper inflation like Argentina in 2001?.
4 more years of Obama will end the United States as a first world country. Europe is falling apart TODAY, how much longer do we have before the axe falls on US? We have to cut spending and we WILL only the timing is in doubt.
Long economic collapse, short hope and change.
OK, Random I apologize for the sarcasm. You are obviously sincere and care deeply for our nation. I agree with you on everything you say in this ^ post. I think we can agree that we are all stressed out over what the left is doing to our country.
snap-e-tom – Thankyou. I chose the name Random Blowhard as both a reflection on the value of my opinions and to occasionally provoke.
Make the “change” that Obama has planned miss both you and those you love.
Billionaire investor George Soros explains why there wouldn’t be much difference for Wall Street between President Obama and Mitt Romney. He also tells Chrystia Freeland why his billionaire constituents see him as a traitor to his class.
Yeah, we should all listen to what Soros and Reuters has to say. Nice try, lib. Now go back to daily kos.
Romney Explains Why He Can’t Beat Obama
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/30/romney-explains-why-he-cant-be