Never Trust a Pundit, Especially Me
Okay, I don’t really consider myself a pundit-pundit, but I owe the readers of this website an apology:
I am a lousy judge of character. Don’t ever trust me again — or at least vet me extremely carefully.
I fell for Rick Perry, a man less qualified, it turns out, to be president than my dead grandmother. Yes, I had gone shooting with him in Austin and then to the NASCAR races and thought he was a swell guy.
But that has as much to do with being president, or even running for president, as flipping burgers at McDonald’s has to do with designing an iPad.
Although he had my early backing (I even tried to help with a teensy bit of speechwriting – something I never should have done given my occupation), Perry was a lousy candidate. Even beyond being a now famously inarticulate debater, on the stump he had almost nothing significant to say other than that he created jobs in his state, which he repeated ad infinitum, ad nausea as if some “political pro” (there’s an occupation for you) was perpetually whispering in his ear to stay on message. Oh, how he stayed. His campaign went nowhere.
But now it’s gotten worse. Perry has accused Romney of being a “vulture capitalist” at Bain Capital, just because some of the companies Bain invested in failed. Of course, that’s always true with such investments — and nobody forced anyone to take Bain’s money in the first place.
This basically anti-market propaganda from Perry would more normally come from a Norwegian socialist. The Texas governor sounds like a desperate hypocrite who is so ambitious he would be willing to take anything and anyone down with him. Shame on him. And shame on me.
Fortunately, I had long ago moved on, first for a brief pit stop with Herman Cain and then on to – Newt Gingrich.
This ‘inevitability’ syndrome of Romney is killing me -
- lets hope it doesn’t kill this country.
Bravo. I second that on the premature Romney Coronation.
I have no love for any of the candidates.
I thought Perry would surely make a better showing..we were all fooled. He does good in TexAS, the people obviously like him…and keep reelecting him. Also, he’s the best looking of the candidates..and that seems to count for a lot here in america, seriously.
I think Mitt is who the liberals and democrats in general want, and the MSm is seeing to it that he will be the nominee
..Also when we have people like George stephanopoulos as a debate mediator..the fix is in..it was appauling.
Where are the good republicans candidates? I am afraid apathy will rule in November. It will reign among republicans..but democrats will be out in droves..I think Obama could kill/murder someone on a stage in the middle of washington with droves of people watching..and democrats would still vote for him.
I find it all very discouraging. The bickering between the republicans is disgusting, degrading, and plays into the democrat hands.
Republicans need people with “guts”..moxie..what ever you want to call it..but none of them have it.
Obama talks about “insourcing” jobs..fool…words, just words..and the american fools will fall for it…so what happened to Keystone???? isn’t that “insourcing” Also, he allows his minions to beat up on others and keeps his BPOS hands out of it publically.
And where the hell is that milquetoast Boehner these days??? fool
..one last thing..we need to get people out to vote. there was a very important election last year…less than 20% of all registered voters turned out..most didn’t even know there was an election. The state I live in will go for Mitt…absolutely no doubt, they think the man walks on water.
I did not get the impression that George Stephanopoulus was exactly a fan of Romney’s…and Boenher is not a milquetoast..the fact that he can not wave a magic wand and produce votes out of thin air does not make him weak. He is not the problem, the problem is Obama on one side a lot of cry baby purists on the other side who have decide that every compromise is betrayal. They can talk about guts all they want, but having guts is no substitute for having votes.
“compromise” is what got us here in the first place. Even Reagan admitted that it was a mistake to compromise with the Democrats. He gave them higher taxes and asked for budget cuts as a compromise. The tax hikes went through, the budget cuts never materialized. Newt had the right strategy in ’94. He forced the presidents hand, and he was a master at messaging. People seem to forget that for all his foibles, he did balance the budget. Were there tax increases, yes, but they came with real reform and budget cuts.
Terrye, I agree 100%. I did not go for Romney 4 years ago but I do believe he has changed and is the best guy for 2012. And he is NOT another McCain. He speaks with focus and energy and I think he will cream Obama in any debate – even if MSNBC moderates. Is he perfect -no, but who is? And the so-called purists are a sorry lot who would embrace a zombie as long as he/she echoed what they want to hear.
The smear tactics of Axelrod and his gang will be difficult to mount against Romney. So in the end, a billion dollars attacking Romney for his work at Bain might not be enough. It will be interesting when Obama’s camp start the inevitable anti-Mormon campaign – always quietly coordinated as they pretend they had nothing to do with it.
It’s scary that the MSM seem to be pushing Romney to the front, and we can be sure they will spare no effort or lies to tear him down after he’s the nominee. The big question is if he will do what’s needed to be done, to undo all the Obama misdeeds and get rid of all the Democrat appointees. I can live with a few failings to get rid of Obama (One Big Ass Mistake America). The main thing is that all non-ObamaVoters must vote for the Republican candidate without fail, because all possible fraud and other ACORN-like maneuvers will take place in the attempt to reelect Obama. I hope this era is never forgotten, or repeated, in the future.
Great stuff!! one of those replies I want to plagiarise for future debates!!
I agree with you, Anne. Perry was the man of the moment before he announced, then announced and it was downhill from there. Perry has the pro-business values to get the country out of this funk. But the mainstream media took him out, as they did with every other candidate who stepped up to the plate. And the rot about Gingrich, the smartest guy on the block with an irrelevnt marital past, took him out next. Romney is the Democrats’ favorite, but they’ll love him and leave him for Obama.
Conservatives need to remember one thing: we are not electing a saint. We did that already.
amen
Romney will get my vote.
I’ve been in business before. I know the choices of making money one way – or another way. Romney has an achilles heel – which is the way he chose to make money. He will be destroyed by MSM if/when he faces Obama…
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/287707/battle-bain-capital-michael-walsh
Romney is the guarantee of the imposter-in-chief’s re-election.
If you are inferring that either Gingrich, Santorum or Paul would somehow do better – think again. Romney is not another McCain, he can actually think and act. We can always find issues with every candidate that we disagree with but 70% agreement elected is a whole lot better than 90% defeated.
In political discourse, inevitable means “shut up and stop resisting me.” It has no other meaning — nor will anyone but the natural herd-follower be swayed by it.
I disliked Romney until he became the only one of the Republican candidates to actually defend capitalism. Perry and Gingrich’s attacks on him are disgusting. Yes, criticize him for Romneycare, but not for living the American dream.
I don’t care for winning at all costs. What’s the point in electing a Republican who spews quasi-socialist rhetoric? But I can get behind winning with a candidate who promotes the right ideas.
Promotes? In what sense? Yes, Romney talks some pretty good talk on some issues.
The problem I have is with his track record – it’s all hard-corp leftist.
Wait a minute here. Newt and Perry just came out and attacked Romney FROM THE LEFT. The three trailers are in a death march to out do each other on their leftist credentials. Does that sound like a REAGAN CONSERVATIVE to you??? Newt Gingrich… Nancy Pelosi… I wouldn’t be surprised at this point if it comes out that he went to Obama’s halloween party dressed as Clinton.
“attack from the left” Yes, that’s the Romney camps spin.
What I want to know is how questioning business ethics is an attack from the left.
Is anybody suggesting that free markets ought to be restricted? Is anybody suggesting that socialism is a better economic system? Is anybody suggesting that profits should be redistributed to people who didn’t earn them.
Please explain, because if questioning ethics in business is “an attack from the left”, then questioning the ethics of congress must also be “an attack from the left”.
Or does an “attack from the left” get to be anything the Romney’s no-holds-barred spinmeisters want it to be?
What has that got to do with my pointing out Romney’s track record?
Romney? Hardcore left? Hard to focus on the rest of your message with sheer nonsense like that.
What did he do while in office that was otherwise?
Oh, excuse me. I see why we’re not communicating.
You’re listening to his campaign rhetoric, I’m looking at his ACTIONS.
My mistake – I should know by now that words are all it takes to keep most American voters happy.
Good point Bob. When talking with people who can’t tell their right hand from their left, it becomes pointless.
hard-corp? sheesh.
Romney is not a hard core leftist…that is an absolutely ridiculous comment that has not basis in fact at all….none.
Correct. In fact Romney isn’t hard core anything except what he thinks will get him elected. Actions speak louder than words, if you would just listen.
Romney’s track record is hard core left? Let us review. His pro-life stance and action – he vetoed bills that would have destroyed life at conception.
Healthcare reform – he line-item vetoed liberal ideals out of the MassCare. Everything else in the bill was blessed by The Heritage Foundation. This forced free-loaders who could purchase insurance to do so. The poor received regular, private insurance through medicare/medicaid. Romney always stated this reform was a model for the nation, not a model for the Feds.
He raised fees, not taxes. Taxes are paid by everyone, fees are paid by only those who use a service. Taxes are wealth redistribution, fees are not.
He reduced a state’s debt. He bargained to not have the credit rating reduced and enacted plans to reverse the trend deficit spending. He left the state with a $2B surplus (rainy day fund).
He gets attacked for having a state with the worst job growth. It’s hard to grow jobs when your state is already flush with working people. However, his state was hemorrhaging jobs at an alarming rate. They were up to 6.0% when he entered office. When he left office, it was at 4.7%. And these aren’t your low wage jobs either.
Gun rights? Even the NRA agreed with the bill that Romney signed.
We have not had a Presidential candidate that has been so prepared to take on the role of President in a very long time. The last person that was so prepared was, arguably, GHWBush. Arguably, because I think we have to go back to Ronald Reagan to find someone as prepared as Romney is for the role.
Romney is a Conservative. He has always been a Conservative at heart. He is a law abiding person. And the laws of our land are directed by the wishes of the people. When Romney was hired to fix Massachusetts, he did what the people wanted him to do. He did it in the most Conservative way possible. Sometimes, the people’s choices for representatives disagreed with him. They overturned those vetoes. Mitt Romney can fix this country if we will let him. We just have to give him a Senate and a House willing to work and willing to work with the People. Romney can enable the good things of government to get done.
Mitt Romney’s credentials include a very successful career in the private sector. Even if that is demonized by the likes of Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, it is definitely what we need in Washington. His credentials also include a very successful turnaround of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. It was riddled with corruption and debt, but Romney cleaned it up and made it a financial success, an especially impressive feat in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy of 9/11. As governor he turned a multi-billion dollar deficit into a multi-million dollar rainy day fund in MA. He cut the size of government, and did so in a liberal state. He accepted a salary for his work on the Olympics of $1, and did the same thing as governor of MA.
His personal traits include an amazing work ethic, meticulous preparation, patience, generosity and sacrifice.
Mitt Romney is not a perfect man, he is not a perfect candidate, and he will not be a perfect president if we are lucky enough and wise enough to elect him. But he is a very good man, and I believe he will be a very good president. Every endeavor he has taken on has been a success. We need not only his track record in the White House, we also need his skill set and his many other assets.
Would it be ok to attack George Soros, who has used capitalism to almost bring down the Bank of England and Indonesia with currency manipulation?
Or is that a sacrosanct element of capitalism that also must be defended at all costs?
Personally, I see absolutely no connection between corporate raiders and captilism. Well, maybe it’s the same relationship that poison mushrooms have to food. One is a subset of the other after all.
As for Bain Capital, it is fair game for many reasons. Even if you are one who thinks Soros is a capitalist god, you still might ask yourself whether republicans should wait until September for the stories about Bain to come out.
Now, I’m 100% in favor of Venture Captitalists, an activity I believe Bain engaged in. And I’m just fine with Management Consulting, even when it includes bad advice, an activity which I also believe Bain engaged in.
But sorry friend, if a a group of people make fortunes by raiding the assets of another business that has fallen on hard times, leaving the employees unemployed, and walking away with millions…..I have a problem with that. I’m hearing that Bain engaged in that kind business as well. So I’d like to hear Romney’s explanation about those transactions. I’m open to hearing that Bain acted honorably in every single transaction, but I’m curious to hear the explanations about the ones where lots of people lost jobs and the businesses failed, yet Bain somehow reaped a fortune. And Romney and his spinmeisters trying to say that asking the question equates with being anti-capitalism is just another devious trick from a gang that is proving to be masters at playing dirty pool.
Questioning unethical behavior in any realm isn’t in any way denigrating captitalism nor does it have the slightest connection to class warfare.
Madam, you have bought 100% into the spin of the ruling class republicans and pundits who are incapable of having an independent thought. I’m afraid the estimable Roger Simon has as well…but as he just confessed, he’s an impressionable sort. Artists usually are. I’m no artist. I didn’t fall for Perry, I didn’t fall for Palin, and I didn’t fall for Cain…and I’m not falling for Romney’s spin either, at least not until all the facts of the Bain transactions come out.
I don’t know, proreason.
I get the anger at Romney, who started this spitball fight. And, I get the retaliation motive by Perry and Gingrich…who were on the receiving end of the Romney shivs in the back.
However….if you get Rush and Hannity and James Taranto in your grill…you have crossed a line.
This scorched earth policy to give Romney a bit of his own medicine and rough him up a little…is stupid on so many layers, it could be a Kardashian wedding cake. (Although it may last a little longer than a Kardashian wedding).
It’s stupid politically. Perry and Gingrich being scolded by Rush, Hannity and Taranto isn’t an effective game plan. It’s NOT Bain…or ANYTHING that Bain did that is going to win them a single damn vote…by trashing venture capitalism.
Your point about Soros USING capitalism (while hating it and wanting to tear it down)is a good one on its own…but a non sequitor here. Attacking Bain for BEING a free market entity…is incredibly stupid.
Gingrich did it because he wanted to rough up Romney…he is angry at Mitt’s ham-fisted takedown of him. Perry’s “me too” act is just a campaign that has no instincts and terrible optics to begin with.
Non-leftists beating up free market companies in order to rough up a single candidate is stupid, counter-productive, will backfire, and hurts everyone but leftists. Bad move. Understandable motivation, but scorched earth and “I don’t give a damn who I hurt as collateral damage” is not a great slogan for accumulating undecideds.
It would attract nobody. Maybe cathartic if it beats up Mitt for a while, but politically it was imbecilic.
The whole primary has been a trash fest, driven in a clown car. The self-immolates meet the self-absorbed. Erase the slate, get rid of the “B” team and start over behind someone who can bring people back together. This is getting more ridiculous every day.
They aren’t trashing venture capitalism Surely you know the difference between venture capitalism and plundering struggling businesses, so I can only assume you are being disingenuous.
But for those who don’t know, venture capitalists invest in start-up companies with the agreement to take very large profits if the business takes off. It’s a high risk venture, but a very valueable one for society because without venture capitalists, many businesses would never get off the ground. Since it is high risk, the VC’ers profit (and often control) demands are high. It’s a totally legitimate and valuable business. My understanding is Bain did some of that. Kudos to them for doing so.
The business practice that Newt and Perry are objecting to is totally different. Another practice if for companies to purchase stakes in failing businesses with the intent of restructuring the businesses to make them profitable. That practice is also valuable, and high risk. If the risk takers are smart and turn the business around, they also are entitled to large profits. Bain engaged in that as well. Kudos to them.
The problem occurs when the second form of business practice guts the target business rather than attempting to save it. For example, assets can be sold that can make the business impossible to operate. Employees can be laid off that are essential to the business so that unsustainable profits are made until the business collapses. This is what corporate raiders sometimes do. It’s legal, but the ethics of it can be very questionable. What has been reported about Bain is that they did this on several occassions, and the Bain people walked away with millions after gutting assets and laying people off, including raiding pension funds. I don’t know that it is true, but it has been reported.
It’s entirely legitimate to question whether Bain engaged on those business practices. Romney should have to explain them. If the practices meet the standards the public finds acceptable, good. If not, then Romney shouldn’t be the republican candidate.
Questioning Bains business practices isn’t an attack on capitalism in any way. That’s a diversion put out by the Ronney camp. Why Hannity and Torrento fell for it is beyond me. I suppose it’s possible that they have inside information that has convinced them that Bain acted totally ethically. But if so, hey, reveal the information and move on. But they aren’t doing that, so I assume that like pavlov’s dogs, they fell for Romney’s diversionary tactic to change the topic from his business ethics to make it appear to be a philosophical debate.
Second point; is it smart? Maybe not. But what if it turns out the Romney really did engage in highly unethical business practices? (I don’t know…and neither do you, cf). If that is true, then it would be stupid not to bring it up because a) we don’t want an unethical person as our candidate, and b) there is no way on god’s earth that the topic would not come up in the general election.
And yes, Gingrich is motivated by anger as much as anything else. Having watched the serial sabotage of Perry, Cain and now Newt, he is certainly justified, just as Guilianni an Fred Thompson are still angry about Romney’s negative campaigns against them in 2008.
There sure is a lot of evidence of Romney’s unethical behaviors, isn’t there?
Erase the slate, get rid of the “B” team and start over behind someone who can bring people back together. This is getting more ridiculous every day
…concur, vehemently. The debates –and the attendant off-stage rampaging –could not’ve been better designed to light Obama in rose-colored virtue.
proreason, I had to lay off 21 people in 1986. This was to save a job for the remaining seven employees. Those people lost their jobs two years later, when the whole shebang folded up. Everyone would have been better off if we had just folded our tents and moved on in 1986. Sometimes businesses lose their market niche and saving them can be accomplished only by finding a new market in time. This usually takes large capital expenditures to accomplish and the prognosis for the company is not good in any event. Bain Capital was a company that specialized in trying to turn companies around with the calculated use of Bain’s capital, as it were. This is not an unethical business practice anymore than giving chemotherapy to a dying cancer patient would be for a doctor. Sometimes it works. When Bain was able to actually save a company and fund a re-tooling to a new product or service, which has more saleability, the result is a renewal of an old company. Romney’s company had a respectable record of turning things around for under capitalized companies. Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry are saying that this shouldn’t even be tried. I bet Kodak is begging for some venture capital in order to re-direct their product offerings, and save some of their employees’ jobs. This is a small part of how a free market system works, and Newt Grinch and Rick Pardner, free market champions that they say they are, should know this!
Gingrich hasn’t said efforts to turn companies around shouldn’t be tried, and I’d be surprised if Perry said it either. And I didn’t say it.
For myself, I couldn’t have been more clear. The reports say that Bain, in some instances, made millions while the businesses they were engaged with went out of business, laid people off, and pension funds were raided. Maybe the reports are wrong. Maybe Bain acted entirely ethically. But since the reports are out there, people have every right to ask Romney to explain those transactions.
But here is what is the most suspicious thing. Romney could easily say, sure, in two weeks, after my people have had a chance to review our records and brief me on the key details, I’ll explain exactly what happened in the transactions that have been questioned.
Instead, what his people have done is to change the subject by pretending that just bringing the topic up means the questioner is “attacking capitalism”. That’s absolutely wrong on two fronts. First, anybody can ask anything about the candidates. Romney’s minions sure did. But more importantly, it’s a flat-out lie. Asking questions about business ethics has nothing whatsoever to do with attacking capitalism. So, Romney’s people have attacked free speech and distorted the situation in a way that can only be called a bald-faced lie.
So yeh, I find all of that very suspicious, as if his unethical campaign wasn’t suspicious enough.
Proreason. You keep saying Bain was unethical, but what exactly is unethical about it? Even when they closed a business, sometimes if a business is failing badly enough, the best thing you can do for everybody is to close it as soon as possible, while trying to salvage whatever capital you can while it is closed, so you can then invest it more productivity.
As for Soros, provided none of his currency deals involve political connections, rather than just good judgement of the market, I dont really care how Soros makes his money, I only dislike how he uses it.
As for saying we always support capitalists and business, the answer is no. The key distinction is between real capitalism and crony capitalism. However heartless it may seem to some, Romney practiced real capitalism, and I applaud him for it. But for those crony capitalists who rely on big gov political connections to make their money (or save them from failure), rather than the free market, I have nothing but contempt. And right now the chief practitioner of crony capitalism is Obama.
richard, nobody knows what happened in Bain’s deal because Romney won’t reveal the details. The reports state that people were laid off when the businesses were still viable so that Bain could make profits. If that’s what they did, a LOT OF PEOPLE will consider it unethical.
Asserting that he wasn’t unethical is about the same as asserting Cain didn’t have a woman problem. Sorry, that doesn’t cut it unless you are a fan-boy. Romney will eventually have to explain how Bain could make millions while thousands of people’s lives were ruined. If he acted ethically, the explanation shouldn’t be a problem, right?
Since Romney is unethical in the handling of his campaign, I believe he was also unethical in the handling of his business. The pattern is clear. There are many example that I have cited elsewhere in comments for this article.
But even if you want to defend Romney’s ethics, only a fool would want the coverup of Bain to continue. It’s going to be the biggest issue in the general election if Romney gets nominated. Sticking your head in the sand about it won’t change that.
The biggest mistake conservative commenters make is to assume that something they believe to be true simply is true, I guess because they want it to be so. In the Cain situation, it was cartoonish. This time, since most people have answered Rove’s dog-whistle about “anti capitalism”, the sentiment is almost unanimous in Romney’s favor. Unfortunately, near unaniminity among Pavlov’s dogs doesn’t have any bearing whatsoever on the facts. There are millions of people who don’t operate with your assumptions Richard. Wake up.
Most of the stuff in the Newt infomercial has already been discredited as being a very sloppy twisting of the facts. Most of the things they say Bain did, either weren’t done at all or were done after Romney had left the company to go try to save the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, which he did actually do. You need to give it up before you end up chewing on it. Newt Gingrich and the idiot Perry are busy eliminating themselves, and if they aren’t eliminating themselves then only God can save our country. I think only Romney, Santorum, and Paul will survive the next two primaries. And I am betting Santorum will be out of money after Florida.
Romney likens work at Bain to obamas auto industry bailout!!!
http://thehill.com/video/campaign/203497-romney-likens-work-at-bain-to-obamas-auto-industry-bailout
That is enough to make a skunk vomit.
You claim it is unethical to “plunder’ a struggling company. On what basis? I say itt is unethical to continue to burn through capital and waste resources on a failing concern when those resources can be put to use more effectively elsewhere. And that includes the people currently working for the poor performing company. In order to save a struggling company, somebody has to be able to correctly diagnose the problem and then effectively execute a recovery plan. That is not always possible. It is easy for someone to say, “I could have saved that company”. If that is the case, then they should have mobilized the capital and resources necessary to do it and than have done so.
Sometimes, buy out firms attempt to save a company and it fails and they lose their capital. This is guaranteed to happen. These firms continue to exist because their successes outweigh the failures. It is the nature of business risk.
Anyone who claims that it is unethical to liquidate a failing firm does not understand the nature of risk.
This is why the GOP is called THE STUPID PARTY.
Politics has been known for centuries as “war without weapons.”
But NOOOOOOOOOO, some have the need to “stay pure.”…like the British keeping in formation and wearing red coats.
Idiotic. Suicidal.
Keeping their lines dressed and wearing red coats actually was very effective in almost all environments. It was only useless in rough terrain and heavy forest. Riflemen didn’t win the Revolution; the Maryland & Delaware regiments did, who also kept their lines dressed and wore brown coats. Until the invention of the Minie ball rifles simply couldn’t be used en masse, and British troops conquered half the world in their red coats because they practiced shooting with actual powder, an extravagence other nations did without. Send a bunch of Marines back in time without their equipment and they’d tear any enemy force apart, no doubt; but they’d make their own molds for Minie balls so that their tactics would work. Smooth-bore muskets prevent modern tactics, because you simply can’t shoot straight no matter how skilled. Bows and crossbows would work better than muskets with present-day tactics.
This is where I am right now.
I think it is the Obama regime that is killing the country. Romney will do just fine, especially if the GOP retakes the Senate and picks up more seats in the House. I would have preferred Sarah Palin. But what’cha gonna do? Obama is the worst president since Andrew Johnson. Nothing matters more than getting him and his people out of the White House. I wish a lot of you one-candidate kiddies out there who call yourselves conservatives could maintain a bit of focus.
I used to be a big supporter of Sarah Palin. So much so, that I set aside the fact that she will never win the support of Independents and that she doesn’t have the education, knowledge and language skills for the job. She’s had 3 years to learn the necessity of speaking in short declarative sentences. But she still employs annoying run-ons to excess.
Palin lost me when she sent her husband out to support The Destroyer – Freddie Mac Gingrich. She is rapidly losing her standing and influence in the GOP.
Romney will be a great President. He is a rare executive – a detail man who comprehends the broader picture. His speech last night was terrific.
You used to be a big supporter, huh? Bullshit. Romney will be okay. Palin would have been far better. And she would have easily defeated Romney in the primary had she chose to run. As for the so-called independents, Obama has already lost them.
Who says Palin would have been better? Better at what exactly? I used to be Palin supporter too, and you can bullshit if you want, but watching her cash in while she berated others for not being sufficiently pure just turned me off..now we have all these socalled pure conservatives out there flapping their gums about the evils of venture capitalism. Makes me sick. Once Gingrich establishes his communist utopia no one will get fired..right?
Palin has not changed. But apparently you have, if you used to be a supporter. The thing I admire most about Palin is her honesty. I also like her clarity and consistency. She was one of the most impressive governors that Alaska has ever had. And not that it matters, but I was born there. And the reason why liberals and RINOs feared her so much is because she is a natural-born communicator, much like Reagan. She is unique in that she is both “ordinary” and charismatic at the same time. But go ahead, tell us all about how she tells her husband how to think and what to say, as if you would have any way of knowing such things.
Yeah, that’s one of the more ridiculous things I’ve heard said about Palin, and there are a lot of ridiculous things said about her.
She was impressive as a governor, until she quit because the communists were trashing her everywhere they could. Politics ain’t beanbag. She showed no guts. I can’t stand quitters.
Обама isn’t the Worst President since Andrew Johnson. He’s the Worst President, period.
Actually, I still think Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and LBJ were worse, by their records. But Obama is right on their heels.
How would it be killing the country? Romney is not a communist. The communist in the White House is attempting to kill the country. The solution is not libertarianism or objectivism or environmentalism or anyotherism. The solution is to start removing these communists from our government. They are the danger.
Boring? Inevitable? Romney is so much more. He keeps getting stronger, and better with each state he wins and each debate. He is steadfast, organized, a critical thinker, capable of getting people around him that will support and aide him in bringing this nation back to greatness and prosperity. Keep watching … he is a project in the making and he just keeps getting better. Obama will have more than he can handle with Romney. (Of course, Obama can always claim that Romney is a Mormon …. do you really think Obama wants to bring religion into this race????? Not with his lack of religious distinction). Romney gets more impressive with time. By election time, he will be so outstanding you won’t even notice who his opponent is.
No, what Romney is is a chameleon. Running for Senate in MA? Then I’ll disavow Reagan and say I’m an independent running to the left of Ted Kennedy. Running for the GOP nomination? Why…all of a sudden I’ve transformed into a social conservative.
I’m free market guy…unless of course we’re talking about the father of Obama Care; or, if it’s 2008 and I’m trying to win the Michigan primary…then I’m in favor of government bailouts.
Mitt will say *anything* to get elected. If/when he wins and governs like the moderate/liberal he is, I fully expect those on the Right who bought the Kool-Aid to be as stunned as all those Independents and Moderates who bought into Hope and Change.
eburke
No, what Romney is is a chameleon. Running for Senate in MA? Then I’ll disavow Reagan and say I’m an independent running to the left of Ted Kennedy. Running for the GOP nomination? Why…all of a sudden I’ve transformed into a social conservative.
I’m free market guy…unless of course we’re talking about the father of Obama Care; or, if it’s 2008 and I’m trying to win the Michigan primary…then I’m in favor of government bailouts.
Mitt will say *anything* to get elected. If/when he wins and governs like the moderate/liberal he is, I fully expect those on the Right who bought the Kool-Aid to be as stunned as all those Independents and Moderates who bought into Hope and Change.
end
Haven’t you heard? Ron Paul is the new Hope and Change candidate. Oh yes! Romney is the GOP “status quo” — along with Rick Santorum, of course, who is actually a “Big Government” conservative — you didn’t know that? And Newt … why, Newt is a kook — never mind that he remade the U.S. House into a Republican institution for the first time in four decades).. Newt’s a kook! A loon! A hothead! And Ron Paul’s a serious candidate (among Hari Krishna Trekkies and the crystal-set radio crowd) — Yes! Yes he is. A few weeks ago, in one of the GOP primary debates, Ron Paul asserted that U.S. forces are responsible for the deaths of ONE MILLION Iraqi citizens — which happens to be the exact calculation of Code Pink — nice even number, what? — One million dead Iraqis and WE are to blame — but, hey, we need change. We need hope, and Old Doktor Tinfoil (whose ears are even bigger than Odumbo’s — not that there’s anything wrong with that!), is just the geezer to accomplish that for us, the American people. Isn’t that inspiring?
I will say only this, you bear no resemblance to E Burke.
McCain was “inevitable”. We all know how well that worked out.
Country Club Republicans despise the conservative rabble, and like being the minority party. Sitting on the bench, they enjoy all the perks without any of the responsibility. A Romney candidacy will ensure the continuation of the status they prefer.
Precisely, I could not say it any better.
This is a complete myth. Country club Republicans, whomever they may be, are as glad to get the votes of your so called conservative rabble as any other Republican would be in an election. How is this a problem for you? This is socialist style class warfare in its usual tired out manifestation. Start thinking like an independent American man, Mr conservative rabble guy.
I’m still praying for an old fashioned Brokered Convention.
Followed by plea to a certain former Gov of a very Northern State
You Betcha!.
With a vice-presidential nominee from a very southern state whose parents emigrated from Cuba! I love it!!
Me too. It is astounding how Americans decide on a presidential candidate but it is worse how the media drums up such a spectacle. I’ll repeat again, Romney will lose against Obama, and this family is not getting on his bandwagon.
Romney will lose to the Obama because your family would rather be ruled by communists than to have to vote for a rich man? Why is that again?
Simon,you switch partners quicker than a Times Square whore; and with the same motives.Now you endorse a polytheist, polygamist, religious nutcake whose politics are left of Obama. What will it be next month? Some jerk who wants to make narcotics addiction a national pastime? Some gal who wants to marry her Great Dane? Some goniff who wants to eliminate cash and hold us all under the control of a government credit card?
Let me suggest that we all determine to follow: A. Gods word, ie, the Bible. And,B: the Constitution. Nothing more, and nothing less. And, therefore, not follow any candidate who does not actively pursue the same methodology. Finally, we must diligently and faithfully follow our course, despite temptations to align ourselves with one new “messiah” or another, as they may appear on the scene. Flighty and changeable are not good character traits, are they?
Ah, the Republican Right…. thirsting for death in every way every day.
This whole generation has turned out to be so compromised. I’m looking forward to the next generation – Ryan and Rubio in particular. Faster, please — as Michael Ledeen would say.
And you’re thinking the upcoming generation of politicians won’t get corrupted and/or morally and intellecutally lazy?
That’s like saying, “I hope today’s rock bands don’t grow old, put out half-baked albums, and then sell their old hits to be used as advertising jingles!”
I admire your innocence.
The upcoming generation of politicians is in the same situation as
the upcoming generation of specialists in stock market manipulation;
Neither will be able to find work in future due to their past failures.
Those who take their places will do so by producing on their promises,
as opposed to continuing the longest Confidence Game in history.
Just help us get the communist out of the White House. Then we can have the mental masterbations about the piety of our political positions.
Thanks, Roger. Now I can blame you for misleading me and go to sleep at night
and only have Obama for a nightmare.
Like many people, the attacks on Bain Capital have soured me completely on both Gingrich and Perry. Bain took over failing companies and tried to save them. 30% of the time Bain was unsuccessful. 70% of the time they suceeded.
When they failed, Nitt and firends lost their stake. When they suceeded, the made lots and lots of money. Just like it says to do in The Bible! Book of Mormon and all.
I saw some actual vulture capitalists at work in the Bay Area and Peninsula. These guys would do a leveraged “asset sale”, thereby stiffing all current creditors, contracts and employees. Then they would loot the cash flow for about 3 years and take the firm Chapter 13—-thereby adding their deluded bondholders to the list of those getting the shaft.
To compare Mitt Romney and his Bain Group to those dirtbags is nothing short of obscene. Wish we could tie Perry to the whipping post. As for Newt, how does the dunking stool sound to you?
Dave,
My sentiments exactly. I was sickened by what Perry said. He decieved me. I thought he was a free market oriented person but he turned out to be another progressive.
Newt did not fool me, I knew what he was capable of and he didn’t disapoint.
You can not be a conservative and believe the crap these two are peddleing about Romney, and I am no fan of Mittens, by the way.
Both of these clowns need to be out of this race as soon as possible.
Questioning business ethics is not an attack on capitalism in any way.
You bought the Romney spin hook, line and sinker.
Proreason,
Thanks,I needed that! I pray that all who seek to elect a new president
in 2012 will understand the significance of your question. Point,set,match!
So, Dave, I’m assuming that you wish for Mitt to join Perry at the whipping post for skewering Newt for having earned a living as a consultant at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, right?
I mean, attacking a man for having used his skills and connections to earn $1.6 million in the free market *is* just as evil as attacking a man who bought out failing companies and “restructured” them, earning multiple times what Newt earned, right?
Newt says he pocketed 35K for his part of the Fannie deal. The rest of the 1.6 went to the business, which suggests that he has other consultants who did most of the work.
Romney made hundreds of millions in the Bain deals. So the difference is more than 100 to 1.
And of course, Newt wasn’t firing anybody to make his money either.
Simon’s changes in preference inadvertently reveal the Republican list’s lack of sustainable appeal. There is only one choice. That’s the choice that will beat Obama, and that means Romney. Let’s hope he retains enough credibility through the internecine conflict to defeat Obama.
“Retains”?
These flirtations with Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Paul et al are just ways to show Romney and the establishment politicians that the base is serious about reduction of the size and scope of government. Let’s hope Mitt, at least, is listening.
Roger, You are being too nard on yourself and too hard on Newt.
Reagan went to Bittburg.
Bush approved the sale of GE Plastics to the Saudis.
Nobody is perfect and neither is anyone the perfect conservative.
I would vote for an empty paper bag before voting for Obama.
It would do less damage.
I think there should be a primary. I’m going for the bag of rocks. at least it has some weight behind it, and won’t get carried away on any errant breeze.
My family and I are proud supporters of “Monkey with a dart board”.
Only if the dartboard has all 1400 federal agencies and whereever the dart land that agency gets the axe.
I still think Newt would make a better president.
…heck a can of soup would be better then the present one.
I hope its Italian Wedding mmmmm President Delicious
“I would vote for an empty paper bag before voting for Obama.”
Me too, and given the GOP candidates, looks like that’s what I will be doing.
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk98/npkavanagh/Deciding-on-Romney.jpg
Simon has made his confession, and for his absolution…well, if Bam is reelected, we’ll all be in Purgatory, whatever our religion, or lack thereof.
(Heck, a lot of us are in jobless Purgatory now!)
All we can do is wait and see who Romney picks for Veep. Can he get Marco Rubio? If not, would he have the smarts to go for the governor of New Mexico? She’d bring in New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado, and maybe even put CA into play (to some degree).
Or will he pick Chris Christy? Bam will have Hil the Pill and we’d be toast.
God help the U.S.A.
An Préachán
Just a reminder … long before her conversion, Ann Coulter told the audience at CPAC last year that the surest way to re-elect Barack Obama, was to nominate Mitt Romney. I agreed at the time and am wondering today: IS Mitt’s “steady as you go” personality attractive to the average American? Will his “reassuring” appeal attract enough voters in the middle to unseat Obama? Will his calm translate into the kind of demeanor that lets Democratic/Media insults slide off of him in a way that makes him look good?
I don’t know. I can see it as a possibility. On such a slender thread, hang many a hope …
I believe many of us have gone through the same hoops that Roger has and most of us are coming to the same conclusion. However, Perry and Newt are doing Mitt a favor by making him take the attacks, fair or not, and coming up with a strategy to refute them. There are “Vulture Capitalists” out there and if Bain was not one then they can defend their record accordingly and in the process develop the counter attack that they will need to fight the Obama/msm machine. To say that Perry or Newt are being unfair to poor little Mitt is a whiner’s song and will not serve him well. Do any of you hate Newt/Perry MENSAs really think that Obama and the DNC will not go after Mitt for his business dealings? Get real.
Well, at least you are an honest pundit Roger. As for me, I have seen my two picks at the beginning of this primary season circus (Bachmann and Cain) go down and now I have sadly come to the conclusion that come election time in November I will be casting my vote for the lesser of two evils and it won’t be for Obama. The powers that be have so screwed up the process of presidential primaries that surely there has to be a better way to pick our nominee. Maybe we should consider returning to the time when the nominee was chosen in those evil ol’ smoke filled rooms because sometimes new is not better.
One of the main problems is that these early primaries are open primaries. Independents choose the Republican nominee each time. We have to insist that this stop.
Also, Ron Paul has put out a lot of these negative ads. Let’s not forget that he has egged on the food fight. And, Romney spent far more money to attack Gingrich maliciously. I will not vote for either of these scoundrels.
Aw, Roger, you’re an awfully decent guy to write an article like this. I don’t think an apology is necessary — but it was very encouraging (in the sense of continuing to believe in decency, for one) to get. Thank You! I don’t think you were “wrong” … considering all the variables involved.
Being the Governor — chief executive officer — of a state (Texas) that is doing so well economically (comparatively) — Of course that’s a major qualification for president! A poor ability in speaking/debating isn’t good, but normally not a disqualfier — it’s not necessarily a reflection of decisions he would make while running the country. This year, though, a lack in the area of speech/debate — means defeat against Obama and his MSM. Yes, it seems, after hearing him speak, that Perry isn’t what we’d hoped — and this last — attacking Romney/Bain — is very disheartening — on all levels. But who could know he’d do such a foolish thing? It wasn’t possible to know he’d make a choice like that — it wasn’t evident from knowing his background. Still — having him as Pres would be so much better than Obama. But he’s lost that chance as at this point, few would vote for him.
I guess pretty much the same could be said for the other two. Cain and Gingrich — in their own ways. And that still — no matter their faults — they’d make better presidents than Obama — much much much better — if only they could win in spite of their mistakes and weaknesses.
No one of great inspirational and ideological ability — who also has the ability to win the race with Obama — has turned up, much to our disappointment — as we do so very badly need that kind of leadership now. But our “dream lover” is still just a dream. We can’t “create” him. We have to go with who is available — now. Again. Romney is also far — very far from the kind of perfect we’ll really need to roll back this devouring beast of a government — but he’ll be ever so much better than Obama. If only the whole country can be made to understand that by election day. If only ….
These primary fights are really rough — and seem to be particularly ugly this year. Probably a reflection of the extreme times we’re living in — and an offshoot of the ugliness the MSM and the Left (Alinsky-Frankfurt School training) has established as the “norm.”
The MSM has failed the ordinary American who cannot spend hours each day reading and researching. The ordinary public simply can’t get the information they need to make the choices they would make if they knew the truth. They can’t make those proper choices.
Without you and those like you — there would be — nothing but the disinformation and lies. Websites like yours are the only ones giving at least a portion of the public access to a portion of the reality of the situation we are facing and the personalities who are up for election.
Be proud, Roger. Be very proud.
And Thank You.
Roger, a bad campaign does not mean Perry is unqualified to be President. He has more exectuive experience and a better record than anyone in the field. Selecting Presidents based on their campaign skills is what gave us Obama and Clinton.
Well, now that I think about it, Clinton looks like Ronald Reagan compared to Obama, but I digress…I doubt many of the great presidents from history could withstand the rigors and stupidity of today’s media circus.
Unfortunately, an Obama vs. Romney election will be the first one in my lifetime I honestly don’t give a damn who wins. Our country is screwed either way. It’s just a question of going off the fiscal cliff at 90 mph or 75. If it happens in the next four years, I guess having Romney in the WH means the Republicans (and conservatives) can get the blame.
Romney is so far above obama – they don’t share the same universe! Did you even listen to to his speech last night? If you don’t care who wins that tells me a lot about you.
Did you even look at his track record last time he was in office?
Speeches? You are fooled by mere words????
That tells me a lot about you.
Romney is more likely to govern similar to his speeches than he is to his former Gubernatorial record, if only for pragmatic reasons.
And he’s not going to have a Congress which is 85% Democrat. It’s a wonder he got anything done. He had to use his veto pen over 800 times. There is no rational reason for him to govern from the left if he can govern from the right. He’s a free market capitalist.
Wishful thinking is not useful in the real world.
The big difference will be that in Mass. Mitt had a 90% Demorat legislature and with the US Congress he will probably have both houses on his team. Even if you truly believe that Mitt will sell us out the Republican Congress will not.
Inspector are you serious? They are already selling us out, and they sure sold us out during the Bush administration.
Would that it were so, but it turns out that in the Texas
political machine, the part labeled ‘Governor’ is not as
important as it sounds; it produces more noise than output.
You’re a mensch, Roger. Good ol’ boy Perry has a record as a big guv, crony capitalst. And he smells like Elmer Gantry. At this point the Wasilla Warrior is looking pretty good. Come on, Sarah. What would Washington do?
It was bad enough for Palindrones to distort Perry’s record because they were (rightfully) afraid he might keep her out of the race, but it’s inexcusable to believe your own line of horsesh!t.
Big government crony capitalist? Really?
Take a look at the rest of this sorry, pathetic field of candidates.
And don’t tell me you’re a Paultard.
Perry stupid reasoning is what led to the illegal GM bailout. We should have let the market fire all those people at that failed company.
When candidates in the primaries are chosen only for their “electability”, they lose the main election.
If the candidate cannot fire up the base or win over independents, he loses. And independents never vote for boring candidates. Independents vote on instinct. They go for charisma.
Just so you guys know.
You think by voting for the boring guy that you are securing the GOP victory. But actually you are securing Obama’s victory.
Elections are not fair. They don’t make sense. And there is nothing in the moon and the stars that says that America cannot become socialist or go bankrupt.
Don’t be surprised if Obama gets 4 more years.
“independents never vote for boring candidates. Independents vote on instinct. They go for charisma.”
I cannot speak for all independents but for those in my family and in my circle of friends, we are conservatives and we are tired of the Cocktail Party led by McConnell / Boehner who spend more effort fighting conservatives than they do cutting spending and reducing government. The Cocktail Party only cares about maintaining their power base in the GOP and want their chairmanships. There are many of us out there who are frustrated by the GOP, equally, I would argue there are Democrats who can no longer identify with the party of Michael Moore / Code Pink so they are now independents. There are two parties, hard left big government and big government.
None of the reasons you list motivate me to vote for a candidate, I am looking for a fiscal conservative who is pro-business, will repeal ObamaCare, will reduce government, will protect our rights, will reel in the EPA, TSA, believes in liberty, believes in the rule of law, understands the threat of Iran and radicals who dispise the West…so like many, I will be voting against Obama but not happy about any of the candidates running.
Many of us worked hard in the 2010 Elections only to see the immediate capitulation in the Lame Duck session followed by a full court press to co-opt the GOP freshman. The nominees to the Super Committee told us a lot, we need to focus on all elections, not just POTUS, more conservatives like Rubio, West are needed in Congress and we need to get them in leadership positions.
As a boring candidate Romney did quite well in
New Hampshire. Lots of independents and fiscal
conservatives gave Romney their vote.
And all those independents will go with Obama in the final. Moreover, with an open primary, lots of Dems voted for Romney too, because they want Romney as a candidate as they view him as a loser.
Nothing boring about Romney. He is purpose driven, strong, articulate, capable of handling himself in a debate, stays on point, extremely organized …. keep going … he has so many positive character traits it would take all day to list them. I was not originally sold on him but I have kept an eye on him throughout this process. He grows stronger and more determined without becoming desperate. It is time to have such a strong person in the White House to vanquish the taste left in our mouths about the last 4 years. GO ROMNEY!
LOL, It’s ok Roger, everyone makes mistakes & I think shopping among the candidates is a good thing. Fact is though, there are no perfect candidates, never has been. The name of this game is, beat Obama and, i think Romney is the guy who has the best shot to do that.
James,
The problem with this year’s primary is not that voters shopped around. It is that they bought too many candidates without looking under the hood. Candidates won’t improve until voters let them know they need more than a slogan to win their votes. They need to learn that they have to have seriously thought about more than one issue and that a bit of executive experience wouldn’t hurt either. We had some decent people running, but they didn’t do their homework.
Gingrich is a legend in his own mind. When you get past the bluster and aura of self-importance, you are faace to face with a fatuous narcissist. Ave atque vale Newt.
Criticiziing Romney for “the Bain issue” is good, reasonable and POLITICS.
Folks, they’re campaigning in New Hampshire…*not* Texas, or Wyoming.
They’re trying to get the votes of people in a very liberal state.
I see the criticism of those highlighting Bain to be a form of the Right’s “Political Correctness,” censoring what will most certainly be raised later by Dems if not now.
They, most assuredly, have the right to make those arguments. But, if they lose points for looking like only “sorta” capitalists they have no one to blame but themselves.
It took until the 17th post for somebody to demonstrate the ability to have an independent thought.
Thank you, Mr Wallis.
But if the sheep on this thread are any indication, capitalism has no chance to survive, because 16 out of 17 posters swallowed Romney propaganda like eating m & m’s. Conservatives have reacted to the Romney camp changing the subject away from Romney’s business ethics like Pavlov’s dogs.
Too bad the spinmeisters won’t be working as hard if Romney gets to be the one to lose to obama.
Dead wrong on all counts, Ed.
Rush, Hannity and Taranto are not guys who adhere to anything like what you are trying to peddle here. Nor do I.
It is stupid on all levels. And needs to stop.
Amen, CFB.
2012: the year of the bi-polar voter…when you’re done spinning in a circle about who you support or don’t support, drop us a line, Mr. Simon. This isn’t “flavor of the month” politics; it’s more like “flavor of the minute”…shame on you for changing direction with every wind gust. I guess that means you’ll be on the Romney bandwagon next? Pitiful.
Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding. – Proverbs 17:28
Mr Simon spoke his mind, at risk. This was courageous, among other things. That he is able now to swallow his words in public maketh him no fool, but a man of integrity, an ava raris in the realm of punditry. Just consider the output of any forecaster, anywhere, anytime.
No shame attaches to choosing the strong horse when you see him come out ahead of the field in the last bend. There is only one big issue – one issue only: To pop the Inflated 0. Whatever it takes. Anything else is a sideshow.
Civility… where have you been?
This is so refreshing. When do you read, “I was wrong?” anymore. I know this feeling, having written and “known” that Sarah Palin was the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan until I accepted the words Jon Stewart addressed to her, “Either you are running for President, or you are a crazy person.” Mrs. “Sudden and Relentless change and I love Israel” has defended (let alone endorsed) no one but the supporters of Ron Paul.
The very scary thing is that the Ron Paul supporters believe that there is no difference between a Republican president and Obama so they will never budge and vote for Romney. I think you are right about getting behind Mitt. Might have been different if S. had a better showing last night.
There is vodka in the gulag. Thank you for this humble and humorous Mea Culpa!
C’mon noow Simon. Politics is a blood sport. No one is expecting the candidates to sit there and take a pummeling and not punch back. Any boxer will tell you thats called losing. I fully expect the candidates to go for the jugular. Thats part of the game.
Yeah, well that’s all fine & dandy to go after the competitors & all that but not at the expense of what is near & dear to conservatives: Free market enterprise. These jackasses (Perry, Gingrich for the most part) have given so much fodder to the Dems, they won’t have to spend as much money on negative ads against our ultimate nominee. What they have done is so utterly shameful, they should hang their stupid heads down really low & slink off to obscurity where they belong.
Rubbish. They are campaigning in lefty New Hampshire. They are vying for those votes. Expect them to tailor their message state to state…or would you prefer one recorded message played on an endless loop?!?
I would prefer that they not sound like fricking Democrat operatives. Again, they have handed the Dems valuable material that they will happily display for everyone’s viewing “pleasure” when it comes down to Obama versus our nominee.
It is hardly as if there isn’t another way to tackle Romney, with his history o flip-flopping on abortion, the second amendment & of course, there’s Romneycare. Did they do that? Hell no! The idiots.
What about the attack ads run by Romney and Paul? Those get a pass even though they were far more numerous and costly?
I didn’t appreciate any of those either, but those were pretty typical. Now it has sunk to a level to where they are attacking more than just one another; they are attacking free market enterprise (companies like Bain that are in the business of saving companies, not ruining them).
Honestly, anyone remember the last election? Other than the media shilling for Obama it was a bloodbath. On the left and the Right. I ignore most of this crap. Honestly both Newt and Perry have far and away better track records than Romney. Perry is a non starter, though, because he is pathetic in debates and Obama and his media would maul him. Gingrich is the best option. He has experience dealing with politicians on Capital Hill and he has a track record to back him up. Balanced budget. Remember the days? Budget surplus anyone? Sure he’s not going to change Washington in any significan way, but he will get results. Thats whats important.
Be a journalist and just write. Save your stumping for private conversations.
The difference between capitalism and corporatism or cronyism is stark. That is the point that Perry was trying to make.
The fact that these issues were raised in the GOP primary is actually good for Romney, if he is the eventual candidate. The then “old news” won’t be a damaging October Surprise by the Dems. Not that the MSM won’t try, but it won’t have as telling an effect.
Though I hesitate to say _vaut le voyage_, yet his freelordship of Simon Pajama apologizin’ to his own Tee Putty is a sight not to be missed, should one happen to be stranded at Pajama Junction NJ.
Happy day.
What?
Go ahead and jump on the Romney bandwagon all you want. It won’t matter if and when Ron Paul runs as a third party candidate, destroying the chances of the GOP nominee.
Better hope the pundits are right when they claim that Paul would never do such a thing for fear of wrecking his son’s political career.
Dr. Ron Paul will never need to run third party, because we plan to write him in. If the stupid GOP pick one of the losers like McCain again hundreds of thousands of us plan to write him in or stay home. Dr. Paul is the only one that is not a globalist, elitist and if he is not the nominee I know I write him in. If the GOP is this stupid they deserve to lose.
Perhaps it’s just my view but your admiration for Perry makes more sense than the enthusiasm for Kobe–I wish his wife well in the divorce settlement.
The VP pick is going to be important and I think Romney has a lot of terrific choices. Rubio and Ryan have long been my favorites and I’d be delighted if he chooses either Gov. of New Mexico or South Carolina. Condi Rice enjoys a huge base of support and has outstanding experience.
I hope that Hillary cannot be persuaded to be on the Democratic ticket, not sure how many PUMAs have enough memory loss to support BHO for anything other than a return to private life. Why do I think they are going to have to drag his angry, greedier half out of the WH? Or will MO be on vacation?
I have been telling folks for years that Romney is the vetted, reasonable one, who knew how to WIN and work with Dems in Massachusetts. Said facts were precisely why many of you did not and do not still, like him, but if you want to win the election, wake up and smell the coffee, then take a sip, even if it is a little bitter.
Ah, thwanks, Dwight. I was worried that I would not get much positive feedback on my decision to never vote again for a RINO like Romney, who says he can compromise with and work with the Marxists in the Dem party. The fact that you have always found Romney to your liking shows I was wrong. I do now have positive feedback from you. However, what you have really been “telling us for years” is that both Mwarzists and conswervatives are wrong and that you are above taking sides between Mwarxists and conswervatives, that you are intellwectually above such mwundane cwonsiderations. Thanks again for the reinforcement.
I’ll be supporting a Presidential candidate who has shown at least some signs of being a conservative on primary day in Florida, as well as my genuine conservative Congressman, Southerland.
You SAID it, Fred! Me too.
Dwight, are you sure you meant to use ‘smell the coffee’ and Mitt in the same sentence? Better think about that. If you wanted to do some quick research on Mormonism, I would suggest the wikipedia pages on 1.) The book of Abraham, with attention paid to provenance… and 2.)The Kinderhook Plates, a charming 19th century story. The Dems will be using these just after the convention.
you use wikipedia as a source? Please tell me you are aware most reputable schools do NOT allow it as a source for reports.
I don’t think that his Mormonism will be an issue that the Dems will really go after. It did not arise in Massachusetts. Belief systems tand to have their “odd” beliefs. Mary got pregnant how? Jonah did what? There may be a kind of generic sneer against fundamentalist religion, that GWB also got, but Romney is adept enough to deal with it. Believe or not, there is a certain kind of nastiness that the Dems know is counter-productive. What remaining “conservative” candidate anyone has in mind who is going to be more immune to lefty barbs and left hooks, I would like to know. It’s great that CFB and Fred can get their feeeelings out here, but in this case, they lead nowhere.
It’s pretty simple; if you want your best chance at winning, go with Romney. If you don’t, well you don’t, but we are likely to get another four years of you know who. But actually, since a lot of people would rather b*tch than win, it is really is a win/win, eh?
A great guy I once worked for said sales personnel should never lie about the benefits of the products or services they sell; however, it is understandable that, about those products and services, many of them tend to be unduly optimistic.
So Romney says he can compromise with Obama, Pelosi and Reid (known in political circles as The Great Compromisers), eh? This is what he is selling, but I’m not buying? And anyway, what is there to work with them about when what we all want the next President to do is to help tear down the monstrosities the Dems are constructing every single day?
Everybody gets fooled, Roger. Heck, I once suggested that George Voinovich might make a good VP candidate for John McCain. (Yes, I now know Voinovich isn’t even a good candidate for village idiot, other than his skepticism about the environmental movement.)
Having once been burned, I’m twice shy. I’ll vote for whoever runs against The Self-Exalted One, but I’m not endorsing ANYBODY until they prove they aren’t just “Obama Lite”. (Yes, I’m looking at YOU, Romney.)
My main concern is that Whoever vs. Himself ’12 could be a replay of Dole vs. Clinton ’96. We need a nominee who actually has a firm idea of what needs to be done; not a party “insider” who gets the nomination on the “it’s my turn” principle.
In case nobody else has noticed, all three of the last Democrat Presidents (Carter, Clinton, Obama) were “out of nowhere” candidates. The “it’s my turn” guys (Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry) kept losing. (Deservedly so, IMHO.)
If we keep nominating GOP candidates that way, we are guaranteeing a Democrat-controlled White House almost indefinitely. I do not believe the United States, or the Western world as a whole, can survive that.
And I don’t mean “in its present form”. I mean “period”.
clear ether
eon
“Heck, I once suggested that George Voinovich might make a good VP candidate for John McCain.”
Oy, eon. Did you ever meet the man? The State House GOP was delighted when he left for DC.
Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
I found that out after he left, actually. (Banging head on wall.)
Myself, I don’t think getting rid of a complete dimbulb as Governor, Mayor, or whatever is worth it if the chosen method is to send said dimbulb to Washington, thereby inflicting him on the world at large.
I thought Cleveland once more earned its monicker “The Mistake on the Lake” when it got rid of Boy Mayor Dennis Kucinich by electing Dennis the Menace to the U.S. House (repeatedly).
Now, we have Richard Cordray, ex-state treasurer and ex-state attorney general. Who was somehow allowed as AG to investigate his own performance as treasurer, and naturally find nothing wrong- he also failed to find several million dollars of taxpayers’ money that somehow got “misplaced” while he was treasurer.
Said butterfingers is now going to run a brand-new “consumer protection” agency, staffed mostly by ex-Greenpeace, etc. “environmental” lawyers. Expect it to mainly concentrate on “protecting” us from things like oil and gas exploration, nuclear power, and hydroelectric dams.
I tend to wonder- and worry- about exactly what job The One has in mind for Ted Strickland.
cheers
eon
Romney might as well learn how to counter these anti-Bain attacks now, because if he gets the nomination the Democrats will try the same sort of ploy. In that sense Perry, Gingrich, et. al. have done the rest of us a tremendous favor. Now if only Cain would “unsuspend” his campaign and start talking about Mormons and racism, Romney will have gotten the perfect warmup for the general election.
Been saying for months that the most important political position in ’12 will be the Vice Presidency.
When people (including some very intelligent people) give me a blank stare, I explained that with conservatism, progress is incremental. That means we are most likely to nominate a lukewarm conservative like Romney.
Romney, being a desperate to get the tea party/staunch conservative vote, will need to pick a strongly conservative person as his running mate (most likely Rubio, if he can get him – which hopefully, with enough pressure, he will).
Assuming that if Romney is elected, he will run again as an incumbent in 2016, that positions the staunchly conservative veep to run for the presidency in 2020, at which point (hopefully) the US will move to a truly constitutional and strong country. Of course this is provided the veep has not been corrupted/co-opted by this time.
So, that is why, (in the big picture), the most important position in ’12 is actually the Vice Presidency.
I wish that more pundits had your humility, Mr. Simon.
All the support for Romney won’t matter if Ron Paul runs as a third party candidate, destroying the chances of the GOP nominee.
Better hope the pundits are right when they claim that Paul would never do such a thing for fear of wrecking his son’s political career.
“We are dangerous to the status quo in this country” Dr. Paul said in his speech last night and I know we are. I am awake now and I will not vote for a globalist or NWO for the rest of my life. He already won, because we are awake no matter what and Rand Paul can run away with anything now, because we plan to be there for him so don’t you worry about his career.
Perry is on Fox right now spewing that nonsense. He’s making a fool of himself.
I too have now given up on Perry. Every instinct in that campaign was wrong. This guy is a fool.
“You have no heart”, “vulture capitalism”…his instincts are cheap theater and poor judgment.
Who exactly is the voter he is going after with those comments? Paulbots? Huntsman leftovers? What an imbecile. I don’t think I could have run a worse campaign if I was trying to sabotage the guy.
I have always suspected that the insanity tracks had the Paul train on it only…and that Paul was semi-intentionally drawing hard leftists to do a Rush Limbaugh style derailment of the Republican primaries by having fully committed hard leftist Democrats cross over and vote in the Republican primary.
And…Huntsman and Paul…who both belonged in the Democratic primary…but didn’t have the guts to primary Obama…FROM HIS LEFT…wound up mucking up the Republican primary with their odious brand of arrogance and idiocy.
But Perry trashing the free market in order to pander to whom? Huntsman’s center left and Paul’s goosestepping lunatics? How low can you go? Perry right now could limbo under a baseboard.
Bad Newt simply outstrips good Newt…and Bad Newt is the reason for his sky high negatives. He is brand damaged. And no, I don’t believe envy is the reason so many great thinkers on our side are turned off to him. He has the attention span of a fruit fly and skin thinner than papier mache.
That leaves Romney and Santorum. Neither is my choice. Santorum is a “wedgie festival” waiting to happen for the propaganda machine. He cannot help himself…he is a veritable buffet line of wedge issues ready to divide the country and the base. In a center right country…he will be made the scariest figure alive. And…it will work, sad to report.
That leaves Romney. I’m underwhelmed by his candidacy. Not because of this RINO idiocy…but because there is nothing that doesn’t appear overcoached, over-orchestrated, over-rehearsed. There is nothing genuine, there is a sincerity vacuum. There is no risk, it’s all plastic.
It just feels like a bad method actor playing a role as the candidate for President. It doesn’t feel right. ANY of these guys…would be “settling” for second best. This is simply the “B” team…we have drafted Ryan Leaf and we are going to have to live with him? Blech.
I want a brokered convention. This election is too important to “settle” for monumentally inferior candidates. Daniels, Paul Ryan, Rubio, Haley Barbour, Cantor, Thune, Noem, West, Jindal, Christie, Nikki Haley…should all get in a room and decide NOT to tank the election of our lifetimes. THEY are the future of the party. A Mitch Daniels/Rubio ticket or Ryan/Rubio ticket is what is needed. How we get there…I don’t give a damn.
It will throw the leftists and their propaganda machine a curve ball. They won’t be able to lay a glove on them…(other than Daniel’s wife…which would be brutal to watch).
In a center right country, needing fiscal triage and a reversal of the insane gutting of our national defense, removal of the planted small c communism in our DOJ and everywhere else…we need articulate, bright, wonkish, detail-oriented, hard working…WEDGIE FREE, and scandal free candidates …who can debate, articulate and carry forward the free market message. They have courage of convictions and not “say anything” plastic smiles.
Likeable, and respected.
Not thin-skinned. Courtly manners, but tough and resilient on the inside. Creative thinkers but not flitting from idea to idea with Nancy Pelosi and Fannie Mae. That leads to a Rubio on the bottom of the ticket and either Daniels or Ryan at the top.
We NEED to get there. Anything else…is a mistake.
Your last two paras tell it all.
Can’t see it happening, but if there is a ‘brokered convention’, and we do get the guy or gal you describe, there won’t be time for the gum-chewing, mouth-breathing vidiotic public to get their message.
And forget Ayn Rand, because they don’t even read anymore.
Nobody needs more than six months to message against the small c communists, pelaut.
OK, fair points about Perry. I offer this however: Look at Massachusetts. Now look at Texas. I know, I know, a Governor doesn’t make or break a state alone. But still…
Many years ago, I worked with a new batch of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences graduates from the Seven Sisters and the Ivies. They were on average very talented and skilled communicators. When it came to actually getting practical, nitty-gritty things done, many of them were fish out of water. They talked, not walked. In fairness, a few of them were outstanding producers.
So let’s start the conversation NOW. How do we get there? How do we override the MSM narrative and get the right candidate out there? How do we get the truth out there? How do we get folks to listen to the truth?
Why does Romney feel too “plastic”, too coached, no risk, too good, too perfect, too everything? It is probably because he is totally and completely prepared. We’re not used to prepared. We’ve had Clinton who learned quickly on the job, then we got GWBush… Need I say more (I liked the guy, but he was not prepared). Then we got Obama. That’s not to mention all the hacks these Presidents ran against, who got up on that stage and said, “Elect me, it’s my turn, I hope I’m ready.” Mitt Romney, instead, states, “Elect me, I’m ready, I’m prepared, I hope you agree.”
I’ll just say this about that.
Romney’s speech, post NH win last night, was fantastic, not filled with platitudes, but a rather thorough litany of Obama’s idiocy and missteps.
Maybe it was just the speechwriter and not the guts of the guy saying the words, but it was a pleasure to hear.
I agree. It was his best speech. It was almost Reagan-like. As I was listening, I was thinking, what a great job done by his speechwriter. And Mitt did a wonderful job of delivering the speech. But then, why is it that I cannot believe that he really means what he is saying? I really want to believe, but I cannot.
At least you didn’t refer to your readers as “hicks” as one of the others did.
What Miriam said.
The democratic political process is like a mirror. Sometimes candidates remind us of our collective selves as Americans, and it takes us aback. WE, as a nation, are basically good guys,but also narcissistic, opportunistic, and compromising on values and convictions. But then, maybe we say a prayer, ask God for mercy, and then hitch our pants and go out and face the world, and defeat the greater wrong, the more ugly enemy. Let’s just get it done. Too much is at stake. To paraphrase one of my favorite movies, Romney, you’re no daisy, but I’m your huckleberry too.
Thank you for the concurrence (see #29). I keep hoping that I’m wrong, allowing myself to become optimistic each time one of the more conservative candidates started to move away from the pack. And then they would do/say something stupid and I’d have to re-resign myself to the original conclusion…
Romney will only win the general election the same way any other Republican would..He will have to apologize to conservatives and the Tea Party instead of apologizing for them….Make no mistake about it…they will stay home on election day if they are alienated by the Republican candidate and leadership in the same manner that Democrats alienate them.
Conservatives have one thing in common with the loony left….and only one thing…they are consistent. That consistency is THE rub against which most establishment Republicans generate heat. Heat is great if its cold outside (just ask the Occupiers)….but indoors, where the bodies are plenty and the deodorant is scare….heat can be a problem. We are indoors, Mitt…what’s it gong to be?
Let us just wait and see who manages to stay in the race. While we our vetting our own candidates it will be old news when the DNC tries to use it against them.Let Perry, Gingrich, & Hunstman make fun of Romney and Paul and get it over with. Paul will defeat his ownself and Romney will come out smeeling like a rose compared to Obama. It will work itself out in the end God willing and we will have weathered the storm.
Roger, I took exactly the same path through the candidates as you. Obama’s recent non-recess recess appointments have caused a sea change in my thinking. Now the one and only important quality in a candidate is:
Respect for the rule of law and the will of the people
I have come to the opinion that right now it does not matter if our candidate’s views do not closely match my own. If he respects the rule of law then through Congress we can steer him in the right direction anyway.
Obama clearly does not respect the rule of law and the will of the people. The most important thing is to replace him with someone who does. Once that is done we can then begin the slow hard work of returning America to greatness.
Mr. Simon have no regrets. This is like playing pin the tail with the crowd trying to push you around blindfolded.
Great piece Roger….sounds like you’re becoming a politically-mature adult. You speak for many of us in our rush to serial candidate infatuations far to quickly and superficially. At least I lost that lovin’ feeling with Cain much faster than I did Perry.
Think Romney is going to be the man running against our president who is going to pick Hillary if he can. Romney needs a good running mate to counter-balance this diabolical duo. We also need to concentrate on the Senate, remembering many of our problems are outside the three pillars of Constitutional government. The Federal Reserve being the most dire case-in-point. Without greater accountability there are be more and more insoluable,very painful messes down the road no matter who’s elected.
We’re all gonna have to get tougher.
I’m at pretty much the same place, via the same route, as Mr. Simon.
I was undecided, was eager for Perry to enter the race up until he entered the race and opened his mouth, hoped Cain was the real deal until his inability to answer questions about what Obama’s stance in Libya was, and what Cain himself thought of US policy in Libya, made me reject him (I couldn’t care less about what Cain did in his personal life, much less the dubious charges of harassment), and most recently moved to Gingrich, until the recent days when Gingrich began making attack ads on a sort-of fellow Republican that MoveOn, Daily Kos, and the DNC can use without editing in the fall against Romney, should it come to that.
I still can’t back Mittens, the author of RomneyCare, I can’t stomach Santorum’s obsession with regulating personal behavior, and Ron Paul is still an anti-semitic racist and isolationist. Huntsman? No thank you.
Honestly, I’m probably going to sit back, watch the carnage, and then back Romney in the fall, if all the pundits are right about his inevitability. I’m not crazy about Mittens, but he cannot be worse than four more years of Soetoro.
Newt was “unable to control his emotions.” Huh?
You must lead a magically sheltered life if you think this was an uncontrolled display of emotions, or maybe you’ve seen different speeches by Newt than I have.
You see a meme going by (being pushed by the liberal media), and you swoon.
The first rule of poker is that you play the hand that is dealt and not the hand you wish was dealt. We haven’t been dealt a hand that included a passionately conservative, articulate, and baggage free candidate for president. But we have been given a candidate that can beat Obama and secure the White House for the same party as the Congress. So the obvious play is to be thankful for at least that and send solid conservatives to take over the leadership of the House and Senate. Let’s quit bitchin’ about Romney and like a bunch of whiney children (personally, I’m sick of it) and develop capable conservatives for Congressional leadership. If you keep the Congress in the hands of a bunch of milquetoasts and deal cutters you wouldn’t turn the Obama disaster around if Ronnie rose from the dead and moved into the White House. You whiners will lose this country for us. Grow up! Ronnie ain’t comin’ back! At least not in this election cycle.
Well said, Yooper.
“Ad nauseum.” Really, young man. While you’re busy apologizing, you should pay more attention to your declining. “Nausea” is feminine. Chalk, blackboard, X50.
It’s actually “ad nauseam.”
Don’t worry Mr. Simon, I always give your pronouncements the weight they deserve, making it easy not to be mislead by them. Good thing you have a solid roster of contributors.
You are not alone, Mr. Simon, as you can see from the comments.
Most of us know what a “Presidential Candidate” is supposed to be like. But, this time, we’re getting cheap imitations. What it’s boiling down to is a choice between bone head or lug head.
Nobody has any real spark that excites anybody but the most gullible neophyte.
You will be critically assaulted for your honesty, Mr. Simon. But with most readers here at PJ Media, your status has gone up several notches with your public introspection.
With the choices we’ve got to make, you are not alone. But most will perform this dastardly task in private.
We all know our choice will come back and bite us like a domesticated rattle snake.
So it’s not alright ever for a conservative or libertarian to criticize business practices? Were Ayn Rand and Adam Smith anti-capitalist for bashing businessmen and shady business practices?
If you listen to Perry for the most part he is nailing the most important issue of our day: The corporatism and corruption between Wall Street and Washington
He does go too far in his rhetoric but Gingrich is much worse overall. I think that criticism of Romney should focus on his liberal record and unprincipled nature. But this is also a part of his record that should be scrutinized. Even hardcore free market capitalists realize that businesspeople are not saints that are beyond criticism.
Well said. And, Romney and Paul people started the attack ads. Should Romney get a pass for that?
I will not vote for Romney or Paul. Period.
I think less a result of bad character than lack of experience and preparation. Chris Christie looks very smart for waiting.
Roger, this time you have really gone too far. You are just another pundit who can write, and yet you feel qualified to trash Governor Perry,the only real conservative among all GOP candidates and a very decent person. Go ahead, join the bandwagon for Romney as other conservative pundits and politicians have done. Laugh at Perry just like they laughed at Reagan years ago——go for the sleek “sophisticated” pretzel-twisting Romney,the one with no principles.
May the Lord bring us to repentance and may HE forgive us for what we have done to our country. I encourage everyone to stop talking and instead get on your knees and pray.
God bless,
Elvira
I don’t understand the wish to make Paul Ryan Veep. He has far more power exactly where he is. I am sure he will move to the Executive one day, but right now we need him in the House, crunching numbers and winning congressional (and popular) support for serious budgets. It is people like him who keep the idea of co-equal branches of government meaningful. If only there were more in Congress with his competence.
Hey Roger, from the “Jewish” agnostic, to the bible thumping Christian, I followed the exact same path. Guess I owe the self-admitted apology too.
Jumped on the Perry bandwagon, having no idea the man so witless. When Perry tanked, jumped on board with Newt because of the oratory skills and the brains, trying to look the other way about the character.
Still, I was never comfortable with any of them and I am still not comfortable with Romney. Though smart and articulate, Romney appears a man of small ideas and political correctness. Not calling Obama out for his egregious shortcomings by subscribing to being John McCain II, will get Obama reelected. Playing it too close to the vest if elected will only slow the inevitable crawl to bankruptcy we find ourselves.
Nonetheless, my consistent motto in 2012 will be Anybody But Obama (and Ron Paul), of which I was called a Nazi the other day for subscribing to that ideology (don’t ask me).
To which I replied, “Impossible. Hitler could never have been this incompetent overseeing the economy.”
Henceforth, I see I will have to follow your advice and “Never Trust a Pundit, Especially Me – Roger L Simon.”
I am very disappoint to find you now opining that a candidate with:
Successful Conservative, Executive experience as “I fell for Rick Perry, a man less qualified, it turns out, to be president than my dead grandmother.”
Decrying that the Texas example of Governor Perry and its legislature do not offer a meaningful“proof of the pudding,” or philosophy for successful governance!
I could go on with Governor Perry’s assets and Mr Romney’s glaring deficiencies and suspect unknowns, but suffice it to say I am personally satisfied that the Governor’s demonstrated accomplishments take the day.
Maybe, it is the mind-deadening impact of life on the Left Coast!
Mr. Simon, before you opine in favor of Mr. Romney, you may want to reflect further on the following:
“Mitt Romney and the Hypocrisy of Bain Capital” and
“Friendly Fire at Bain Capital?”
“Bain Capital is the epitome of unleashed capitalism but also a company that contains within it negative aspects that can adversely impact the lives of ordinary citizens.”
“The mindset of these firms in focused on one thing: maximizing a return on the investment made in acquiring a business that maybe on the verge of bankruptcy or grossly under-capitalized.”
“There is one element that was often missing and that is where the Achilles heel of unbridled capitalism. Oftentimes there is a lack of empathy with average workers and their circumstances, as many partners in these firms in their single-minded pursuit of enormous returns and income cannot relate to — or choose not to understand — their responsibility to those who make the companies they take over successful.”
“Those that defend the role of the investment firms such as Bain Capital – need to explain in clear, concise and easily understood language why there is a natural cycle in the life on any company and the role of investors and firms such as Bain Capital. And to admit that in the past there may have been too much greed and not enough focus on the worker.”
Not to mention the merits of looking for relevant considerations relating to the two companies in South Carolina that Bain shuttered.
Romney is GWB repeated. Does anybody REALLY want that?
GWB was a mushy semi-conservative.
Romney is an out-and-out leftist.
No comparison.
Well, Romney is willing to be even more ruthless at undermining his opponents than Dubya was. No limits in that realm.
Do ya think he will do the same with obama.
lol
Romney’s achilles won’t be Bain. His greatest problem will be defending his allegiance to a faith that vilified and excluded the black race. Nothing will soften that line of attack from a black president seeking reelection. The only thing that can save Romney from that angle is to point out that the President had enough faith in a Mormon to appoint one as ambassador to China.
Perry is out of Roger’s favor because of style failure. Romney’s got style. I’ll give him that. Man, Rog, you really have tough criteria for picking a president. What made Perry worth consideration in the first place? Wasn’t it his record, tenure as an executive and down home “style”? What’s changed? Perry will sharpen up. You watch.
Ron Paul is out on foreign policy considerations. We are exhausted from a foreign policy that dates to WWII. The whole country knows its been hard to say with certainty that Korea, Viet Nam, Panama, Bosnia, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan have been good for the U.S. Maybe for the foreigners it was good. But it wore us out with not much to show for the investment of blood and treasure. Paul is the leader, bar none on the economy. This is the #1 issue. He would eviscerate Obama. What fear ye?
Newt, I’m afraid, is his own worst enemy. Maybe he’ll refocus. He’s about down for tge count.
Santorum is exactly who he says he is. Unfortunately a big government, social conservative isn’t electable. The R base would split and the socially licentous would go spastic against him.
Huntsman is one I can’t get a bead on. I think he is the Romney substitue. Maybe I’m wrong but his political obscurity is his biggest liability this late in the game.
We’re only 4% through the primaries. Beware counting your chickens before they hatch.
Roger, don’t beat yourself up. Perry is immensely qualified compared to Barry, and I would have gladly voted for him (Perry) if he were the nominee.
I’m so glad you’re supporting Romney now. Hopefully your blindingly pathetic record of picking winners will result in the one victory this country needs.
Ron Paul in 2012.
I agree with Will about Dr. Paul, but I do not care who you support Roger and I do not hate you. I feel we all have been fooled by some of them, I do hope you feel the same way. I feel Ron Paul stands alone and is the one man who is different from Obama.
Rick Perry was at 1% last night and we all really need to get behind the one man who can and will beat Obama, Ron Paul. Ron Paul has the independents and some of the Democrats are coming over now, because of the wars.
You all know what the mainstream media was saying years ago as they all had a love affair for President Obama, saying such things as “I get a chill down my leg now hearing him speak”, and you know they will lie to get him back into office so do not trust the mainstream media now.
Please think about it, because he can beat Obama and he has the independents and the democrats are changing parties in the closed primary states to vote for Ron Paul. Mitt Romney is an empty win last night, because he was governor there, he will not win against Obama and that is the whole reason the media is behind him right now. They know every person is going to see Obama and Romney are exactly the same.
Please think about coming over and supporting Ron Paul now, because he CAN WIN, but we need you. I am seriously asking you to stand up for FREEDOM and vote for LIBERTY NOW. Please think about putting our differences behind us now and coming over and supporting Dr. Ron Paul for FREEDOM.
“Never trust a pundit” … Romney is not even close to being the “leader” of the pack. At this point; the game is far from over, repeat, far from over. Looks like the “inevitability” of Romney is just a crock manufactured by pundits. I knew there was a reason I didn’t trust them. Heh!
I still like Rick Perry, but it’s pretty clear the winds are blowing against him. I never liked Newt Gingrich, and don’t know much about most of the others. If Romney wins the nomination, so be it. At this point, Generic Republican will do, because Hell would freeze over and throw ice cream parties before I’d ever vote for Barack Obama. Probably not even then.
All this whining and kvetching about the GOP candidates is getting rediculous. At this point, does it really matter who wins? America is in such a mess that ANYONE other than Obama would be 100% improvement.
I really liked Herman Cain too, but it wasn’t to be. Two things to remember: the President isn’t the Emperor, his policies must make it through congress and nobody ever gets everything he wants.
Perhaps Romney isn’t the best but at this time the Republicans really have no one else and we can’t afford another term of Obama.
About compromises Ronald Reagan something to the effect that it’s better to make some compromises than to jump off a cliff with the flag proudly flying behind you.
I really don’t like Romney – and then when I saw that Romney is not that much different from Obama in his tax plans (nice graphic at Americans for tax reform showing Obama’s tax proposals/beliefs versus all of the Republican candidates), I was disheartened. Yuck – this is another hold your nose and vote election. What he says and what he does/writes don’t match – such liars…..
There is such a vast divide between (pick a name), Candidate for President….and (pick the same name), President…..can Obama the candidate be any different than Obama the president? No…So it is with Rick Perry….only in reverse. Here’s a guy who would likely be a strong, Reaganesque President…No one in this field is moreso Reaganesque…Yet he’s the village idiot as a candidate…the court jester. And Romney? Why has Bush 41 come out in favor of him? Because he looked in the mirror….and said, yep.
The Republican Party has become the big tent with all the animals who can’t live together vying for the same space…and the Democrat Party has become a lean, mean Marxist army. Which will prevail in November? Who knows?
Anyone investigated Newt’s super pac yet? How is it that they suddenly have this ad campaign and the 30 minute hit job ready so quickly? You really think that sit down with Pelosi was just a “mistake”? It’s all coming together now. Hmm Fannie May… Pelosi… billionaire super pac… hit job… sounds like a DEMOCRAT setup to me.
I’m a huge fan of your writings. I have traveled the same journey through the candidates. I feel the exact same way you do now.
The attacks on Mitt’s business have only rallied me to his side.
God I miss Ronald Reagan.
I hope you don’t feel too bad.
You are a natural host. I see this on your videos, where you humble and humor your own ego, to let your guests shine. You host other writers, here. You host comments. Hosting is a highly under-rated skill by guests. They just know they like talking to you, or being around you, and they can’t quite put their finger on why. You’ve seen the comments directed towards you- snapping at you for you not being unwelcoming, in some fashion or another, to some entity that they wouldn’t have at their own theoretical party.
Finding the strongest candidate is like rock-tumbling, and like police-work. It’s a different skill set, a far more snappish and uncomfortable skill set. We don’t harsh on people who are not natural cops, and most of us would probably be uncomfortable in the basilisk gaze of a forensic investigator. It’s not your skill set. You shouldn’t worry. You’ve got a more rare, and thusly more prized, ability.
Each of the candidates have been allowed to shine in your presence, and in your publications. They have all shown off their best parts, which, honestly, haven’t been high-lighted in the media. You’re doing valuable, good, creative work. I, for one, feel lucky to be able to be here, listening in, and reading.
So, thanks for what you do, and thanks for being honest about what you don’t do, as well.
Wow, note the timing for this apology! Gov Perry must be shaking it up in South Carolina.
Roger, there was one column a couple of months back that would have cured you of Perryism.
Alan Keyes wrote it. Now, I’m not a big fan of “Hey, call me AMBASSADOR!” Keyes, but he IS very good at using words.
He nailed Perry on his use of words. Or rather, his NON use of words.
Keyes took a listen to Perry’s speech at the “Horrors! A governor endorsing religion!” prayer rally in Texas. Keyes looked at what Perry said, and at what he carefully did not say.
Rick Perry spent his time doing a great job of cheerleading, telling people what they believe, and cleverly implying that these were also his beliefs, without ever actually saying what he believed.
Too clever by half, as the Brits say.
Roger, you haven’t really mislead us; you were just voicing observations based on experiences. Being from Texas, I was an early observer of Perry but never really a supporter although I do defend his intent. I’ve always liked Gingrich but never really a supporter. I’ve tended to like Romney and have just heard Sen. Bennett – Utah, reference Romney’s record in Massachusetts, working through a veto prone legislature. And I was already aware of Romney’s achievements in salvaging the Utah Olympics, also mentioned by Bennett. And I’m continually impressed by Romney’s standing army of five sons, each one bright eyed and attentive.
Being from Texas, I’m also aware of Ron Paul and voted for him in ’88. I’m closer to again being a Paul supporter but currently have less confidence of his chance of winning the nomination than that of Romney. But working through this process, with your observations as well as that of other pundits – including your readers and posters, we all will have a better understanding and more cohesive support for whomever the Republicans send in to squelch the progressive socialist agenda attempting to grasp domination of this country.
Thanks muchos for your continued input, we are listening.
Mr Simon, I love ya, but you are making the same mistake you describe making multiple times before.
Rather than believing the Romney camp’s spin about Bain Capital, I suggest you wait for the facts to be come out and be interpretted by all of the parties who know anything about them.
Questioning the ethics of business behaviors isn’t an attack on capitalism in any way. Trying to connect the two is ridiculous and disingenuous.
The question you should be asking yourself is why Romney and the Ruling Class are attempting to change the conversation from Bain’s behaviour to declaring that anybody who inquires about it is attacking capitalism.
It seems to me THAT is anti-free speech, and directly opposed to the full disclosure of candidates personal history. Of course, all that worked great for obama in 2008. Now Romney wants to replicate it in 2012.
“Questioning the ethics of business behaviors isn’t an attack on capitalism in any way.”
Well that’s true but not everybody knows that; in fact, I’d be willing to bet a lot of people don’t know that. Attacking Bain, IMO, is foolish on the part of our candidates. As I said earlier, the Dems are going to use these things Perry & Gingrich have had to say against the ultimate nominee. I really don’t appreciate all this help they are getting from these two fools.
If it was wise for Romney’s minions to say that gingich accepting pocket change to consult with Fannie Mae is evidence that he is unethical and not conservative, how is questioning Romney’s business ethics not wise?
Frankly, if the candidates were working in the country’s behalf instead of their personal ambitions, thay wouldn’t attack each other in any personal ways, like Gingrich was conducting himself before Romey’s serial attack dogs spent three million to take him out in Iowa. But, given that the Romney bottom-feeders get a pass for their despicable behavior because they own the conservative version of the make believe media, I can’t find anything wrong with Perry and Gingrich bringing up Romney’s highly questional ethics (not business ethics, ethics period) at Bain Capital?
The really disappointing thing is the mindlessness of conservatives, who, in general, have responded to the “attack on capitalism” like Pavlov’s dogs, without ever stopping to ask themselves what aspect of capitalism is being attacked…other than Romney’s ethics.
Oh I see so Romney should have kept these failing businesses afloat. Maybe he should have gone to the government for a bailout? Sometimes businesses fail, it’s a fact of life. Bain Capital tries to turn them around and sometimes it doesn’t work. That’s unethical now?
As to the Fannie May attacks you think that’s feeding democrat talking points like this Bain garbage? If god forbid Newt wins the democrats can’t attack him on Fannie May. When Romney wins, they’ll have a 30 minute hit job of material thanks to Newt. Yeah what a great “true” conservative. That Pelosi thing was just a “mistake”. Yeah sure.
What are you talking about? Do you have some inside information about what happened or are you just another pavlov dog salivating because Romney’s spinmeisters have declared “an attack on capitalism”?
What has been reported is that the Bain people walked away with millions after gutting some businesses, laying off the employees, and raiding their pension funds.
Maybe the report is false, maybe it misrepresents the facts (the millions might be consulting fees, for example), or maybe it was justified for a reason that wasn’t reported…but any rational person would want to understand some more details before rushing to judgement about it. Rest assured, the reports won’t go away on their own.
I don’t know the truth any more than you do, but all you are doing is spinning the Romney line, with no evidence whatsoever. You’re way out of your league. You’re so dumb that you think Bain won’t come up in the general election if Newt hadn’t surfaced it. Where do these people come from?
I’m puzzled, too. Isn’t debating the relative merits of the candidates’ beliefs, statements, actions AND outcomes what this phase is all about?
When did a valid question/comment about business practices, purposes and profits become an “attack” on capitalism?
It does seem the Romney team has used this as fresh fodder to shift the focus away from his “I like to fire people” statement. Clever, because otherwise, it would still be playing 24-7.
I’m okay with Romney wanting to fire those who aren’t performing as promised or desired. I’m okay with Perry and Gingrich challenging Romney’s business record, Santorum’s pork record, etc. And vice versa.
Churchill said democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried from time to time. Change a few key words, and same can be said of capitalism.
exactly.
Vet them all, even Saint Romney.
You all sound ridiculous when I read your posts here, because you do not mention the REAL candidate winning this race and it is Ron Paul. He has the support, we send him our money and he has the support none of the rest have and a strong following.
I feel Ron Paul is the clear winner, because he is running such a close race against the establishment media and he is clearly beating the machine. I am proud of Dr. Ron Paul. The race is in between two people now, Ron Paul or Obamney. Ron Paul will beat Obama, but Romney is just like Obama. Why not just stick with the President we have now if you follow Obamney, because Romney is just like him? All of them are just like the globalist President we have now, except Dr. Ron Paul. He is winning.
I hate Mark Levin’s followers and I send RON PAUL MY MONEY.
mark levin has listeners
ron paul has followers
Ron Paul’s foreign policy views are not appealing to a large enough number of conservative voters to put the odds in favor of Obama in a (hypothetical at this point) contest between him & RP. Besides, Paul will not become the nominee.
Ron Paul is the only true conservative and common sense candidate in the whole race. We cannot put the deficit in check and keep the military industrial complex going. We cannot keep being the policeman of the world and nation building. Ron Paul has enough common sense and guts to tell us the truth.
Obama has killed just as many brown Muslims as Bush did now, so why do you all hate him? He is a warmonger globalist elite, so Mark Levin and his FOLLOWERS should just LOVE HIS PANTS OFF. I know he has killed more Libyan babies in Libya then Bush ever did, so why don’t people like Mark Levin just love him? Please inform Mr. Levin I burned his book in my fireplace and no person will have to look at his bald head around here again. Please inform the San Jacinto tea party I burned the t-shirt I bought from them at the same time.
I think you’ve informed us all that you’re completely effin’ nuts.
Pretty standard stuff for a Paul follower. A lot of feeling (Cue Barry Manilow – nothing more than feelings….), not a lot of thinking, and a good dose of hating along with those feelings.
And a whole lot of Got-my-head-planted-firmly-in-the-sand-la-la-la-I-can’t-hear-you about Paul’s prospects of getting elected.
“He is winning.”
http://cache.blippitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Charlie-Sheen-Winning-Poster.jpg
The Paul-pot supporters don’t seem to grasp reality well. Good luck.
Well this man is not going to win, so you better grasp that reality. There is something wrong with a party that would pick this man with no compassion. http://www.webcasts.com/kingofbain/
I will not vote for Obama. I will vote for who ever is the Republican candidate because our country does not deserve four more years of the Obamanation. So, I will support Romney if he is our candidate and I will work for a House and Senate with enough Conservatives and Libertarians to keep any latent ‘progressive’ nonesense in check.
There are a few simple facts that remain…the first is that Romney is not the ideal candidate for true conservatives. However, the remaining two facts are inescapable if you take a step back. Romney is the ONLY candidate currently running for President who can win the general election and Romney has already won the nomination. So, I’m ready to back Romney wholeheartedly because Obama MUST not have a second term. He mustn’t.
– from today until November 6, Gov. Romney you must project to voters that you are neither happy nor angry, but earnest in word and deed about seeing us through these difficult times. Put on your catcher’s mitt, Governor, and starting fielding now the fast hardballs the President’s team and press corps throw at you. Don’t spin, but weave them into your narrative as you temperately respond, even if you have to say it a million times. There is a scene in the film Primary Colors where the Governor and candidate for President (Travolta) has to tell factory workers that their jobs aren’t coming back, but what he proposes to do for them by way of re-training. In another film, Other People’s Money, there is a debate between Peck and DeVito before factory workers and shareholders about the fate of the company. Given what has already been thrown at you regarding Bain Capital, observe how both sides argue the facts. Absorb the attacks and stay on your message.
Impressive punditry Roger : You’been a supporter of Mao Zedong, GW Bush, Rick Perry, Herman cain…
Have you ever been right, politicaly ?
Kudos for your honesty, though.
Thanks Roger but no apology necessary. We have all learned of our candidates faults through the debate process; a process that must be judged by its positive results.
Part of the process of defeating big government is undermining the myth of the great individual, charismatic complement to my own dependency who will make me proud again, who I’ve been waiting for….blech
We need a technician to get the octopus of government off the face of our economy (and nation).
I don’t need to even like the guy as long as he can do the job. And if I don’t like him, I might be more properly concerned about the job he’s doing than how proud I feel that he represents me.
You go into the big game with the team you have.
Time to “D” up.
We are toast. Obama’s been a disaster and Romney is Obama-lite. The rest of the Republican field fails to inspire. Unless a dark horse candidate appears, the decline of America will continue. I’m really pessimistic right now.
Anyone who thinks that the whole Bain attack line will reasonate in the general is a closet Democrat or just really hasn’t thought this through. Brainstorm a little here… America is BROKE. Bain capital bought companies on the ropes, some of them facing impending bankruptcy and turned them around. That means firing people, cutting budgets, you know the stuff that needs to be done to turn the ship around. If that’s “corporate raiding” then that’s exactly what is needed.
I like all of the candidates. I also liked Bachmann, Cain and Pawlenty. I don’t agree that it’s a weak lineup. And I don’t think any of them are crazy or loony at all.
I liked these people before they became candidates and I still like them.
I actually think, it’s the best lineup ever.
You’ve been punked, conservatives.
Gingrich was running an ethical campaigns based on ideas. Conservatives liked that and rewarded him with high poll numbers.
Romney, who has been running for five years on the idea that he is conservative, even though all of his actions and his signature achievement have been moderate and liberal, was seeing his hard purchased lead slipping away.
So, like he did with Perry and then Cain, he sicced his attack dogs on Newt. This time, they did it with ads in Iowa that lied about and distorted Newt’s record and made very personal attacks on him, knowing that he didn’t have the funds to respond.
That unethical and dishonest scheme worked like gangbusters, so Newt did the only thing he could, he responded by bringing up the topic of Romney’s high questionable business ethics at Bain Capital. It has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism. It’s an issue of ethics.
So here’s where you got punked. Romney and his make believe conservative media called that an attack on capitalism. It’s about the same as saying that disliking the melody of the Star Spangled Banner is an attack on the United States.
But like pavlov’s dogs, you went for it full on, conservatives. The “attack on capitalism” bell rang and you ran to Romney’s kitchen to get your scraps.
And scraps is what you’ll get if you don’t wake up. Because in addition to being unethical at Bain, in addition to running an unethical campaign, Romney ain’t no conservative. Why do you think the REAL msm is as silent as lambs about him? Why, you would think they would be jumping all over the Bain Capital brouhaha, wouldn’t you? But nope. Crickets from pravda, except to ask why Newt and Perry are attacking capitalism. You might ask youself if pravda is assempbling a full-throated defense of capitalism for the general campaign, just in case little lenin brings Bain Capital up in September. But you know, I have this wild hunch we aren’t hearing the last about it, and there isn’t going to be a full-throated defense of capitalism from pravda.
There is NO WAY Gingrich was running an “ethical campaign based on ideas.” HOW? Gingrich is very intelligent, very, very articulate, and a complete megalomaniac! HE’S not ethical. What astounds me is how such an intelligent man could possibly think he could ever seriously be considered for president. His history and baggage are irrefutable. Proreason, you can grouse all you want over your interpretation of Bain Capital’s business model- you just reveal that you don’t know much about business, large or small. (I’m guessing you’re employed, not employing.) Truly, the only really viable candidates are Romney, Santorum, and Huntsman. Each has a personal/professional/political life history that could persuade voters, but NOT Gingrich. I could live with any of them. It’s up to them to make their cases. But Gingrich? really? In a few years, I’m sure you’ll be thinking “what was I thinking?” Just like all the Carter voters who wouldn’t admit voting for the man now.
Please explain how Gingrich’s campaign prior to Romeny’s attacks on him was unethical and not based on ideas.
I suggest that you try saying things that make sense in your posts rather than reacting emotionally. Using reason instead of rants is a more effective way to communicate.
And oh yes, since you claim that I don’t understand how VC’s and corportate raiders operate, please educate me.
“Romney’s high questionable business ethics at Bain Capital”
Is there unquestionable proof of that?
There are reports about it, detailed reports.
Are you opposed to getting all the facts out for people to make their own decision about Bain’s practices? My main point is that it is perfectly legitimate, and necessary, to ask about the reports, and that asking isn’t “an attack on capitalism” in any way. If Romney acted honorably, it can only help him. Why would you be opposed to that?
Or perhaps you would prefer for the information to be revealed in September when pravda can control which details are reported.
No, not opposed to proper vetting in lieu of blanket statements like Perry’s “vulture capitalist.” I have yet to see Newt’s 30-minute vid so won’t comment on that. I am just concerned about this sort of mud slinging backfiring. Again, I don’t think it serves the interests of our candidates to be feeding all this grist to the other side. Better they tackle Romney on other pertinent issues (Romneycare, flip-flopping on gun control & abortion).
I don’t like Gingrich. But, what you said about Romney is spot on. Let’s blame the real culprits here, Romney and Paul. What Gingrich and Perry have said was a reaction. What Romney and Paul did was an aggresive action.
Right-o. The MSM is mysteriously silent with regard to Mitt. Just wait till they show tons of people in undershirts in front of broken down trailers talking about how they haven’t worked for 2+ years, alongside talking about states that want to ban contraception and kooky, crazy insinuations about how Jesus and Satan were brothers and Mitt’s magical underwear.
How soon before you apologize for shilling for Romney?
Roger, you allow one attack by Perry to undo you? Then your support was too thin. I’m a Texan and support Perry, but I know he does not run his campaign and he is getting advice and taking advice. Is this vulture attack unhelpful? Yes. Does Perry’s record in reality match up with this attack? No.
His campaign is flailing and I wish it weren’t so, but it is. In any event, the donks will attack Romney on this very vein, so it’s ok with me for Perry and Newt to go there because they are getting this out there so the donks will have less effect with it in August.
I’m sorry that you appear to be ‘falling in line’ with the popular sentiment about Mr. Romney, i.e. ‘He is the only one in the field that stands a chance of beating Obama’.
Setting aside the fact that the popular sentiment was generated by slick Mitt and his ole boys, it just is sad that we once again will be voting for the lesser of two evils.
Mr. Romney is far slicker than Mr. Obama no doubt. Problem is he is no more ethical or trustworthy than Mr. Obama.
His actions may take on a slightly different form since he comes to the table with infinitely more experience than the less than stellar current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I do hope he understands Socialism doesn’t work, but the jury is still out on his real sentiments in that space.
Unfortunately, I find him very similar to the much-maligned ‘Used Car Salesman’ both in personality and sincerity.
Mr. Simon,
Thank you for your honesty, but you don’t owe me any apology. I appreciate your views even when if I disagree with many of them. Many people change views, that’s not exactly the same as changing principles, and as we collect more facts is normal to refine our positions.
I think your trajectory here more or less describe what many others have done too, specially the Anybody but Romney ones. I was for Palin first, she didn’t run, then chose the best from the running pack. Refine and adapt as the situation evolves. Of course Romney is better than Obama, I still think he will be bad for the cause and the general capitalist cause, but the only benefit coming would be more time. Time to organize more and fight back more. I bet for a “rational gridlock” -if that’s possible, to block any statism coming from the next POTUS, whether he is Obama or Romney, and allowing any pro-freedom thing coming from the White House if there is still hope for it.
There is a lot about the way Bain made it’s money to dislike without being considered a socialist. I’m a former CPA. I’ve taken apart the books on some of these kind of deals. The most creative part of creative destruction in practice tends to be the way operations like Bain arrange their deals so there is no downside for them. Those who are on the line to lose money are the original owners they are supposedly helping, the employees, the creditors and the federal pension insurance plan. Yes they do put in a bit of their own money in as equity, but they also contract to take far more out in the form of fixed fees. Unlike the owner of an operating business who tends to pay himself last, those fees are the very first bills paid each month by the firm being “saved”.
None of this is illegal, but neither is either entirely moral or evidence of entrepreneurial genius. A lot of the trouble we are in these days is because we have had too much creativity by skimmers and crony capitalists and not nearly enough genuine entrepreneurship.
Well said.
What almost everybody thinks about when they praise capitalism and free markets are people and business like Steve Jobs, Home Depot, and Walmart. The founders of those businesses exercised their freedom, creativity, assets and hard work to create products and services that have enriched humanity beyond anything that occured before freedom took hold. On a smaller scale, even the guy who opens a storefront restaurant is admirable, brave, and provides a useful service.
They DON’T think about wealthy individuals and businesses who use their assets and knowledge to expoit other businesses and walk away rich, even if their targets are dissolved. As you say, it isn’t illegal, but it also isn’t the business model that people want their leaders to be engaged in.
And perhaps Romney didn’t do that. But the reports certainly imply, as you describe, that the Bain people were, in at least some cases, exploiting weak businesses with little risk to Bain, and also with little acceptance of responsibility.
If the reports are true, I would draw a parallel to the payday loan business. It’s a legitimate business. It helps some, perhaps even most, of its customers. But do you want your president to have made his fortune that way?
And every owner of a struggling startup computer company in the early ’80s thinks Jobs and Gates are rotten SOBs. Every owner of a small town or independent hardware store thinks the guys who started Home Depot are rotten SOBs. Every owner of small town stores of any sort thinks the founders of WalMart are rotten SOBs. And to some degree they’re all right. Jobs and Gates may or may not have had the best computers but they had the best plan, and in some instances, the best connections. The big box stores do predatory pricing really, really well until they drive the competition out of business; then its time to make a profit!
My view about Gates is that he happened on the business plan that emerged as the dominant one. He’s a smart enough guy, but luck had a good bit to do with his success. He would have done well anyway, but not become the richest person on the planet.
But Jobs must have been a flaming genius. He created too many ground-breaking product to not have been genuinely unique.
Most really successful people score big one time. That’s Gates. Few replicate that success a second or third time. Ross Perot is one who did, but he isn’t even close to Jobs. You might have to go back to Edison to find somebody who invented (or perhaps for Jobs, managed the invention of) so many useful things.
But back to the point, sure there are people who are pissed off that somebody else “stole their idea” or put them out of business, but I still think most people are thinking about the big hitters like Jobs when they think about the benefits of capitalism….and not financiers who use cash and ruthlessness to make make money and little else. If Romney wasn’t like that, great. He better describe Bains practices, because if he doesn’t, somebody else will describe Bain for him. Squealing “anti-capitalist” isn’t going to work next September.
Gates does a pretty good job of the “rags to riches” legend but actually he comes from a very well-off family with lots of very good and very Democrat connections. As much as AFSCME owned the Clinton Administration, Gates had the swack to basically exempt Microsoft from all the AFSCME sponsored Clinton measures to apply the Fair Labor Standards Act to the public safety, something that largely under the radar cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.
I agree that Jobs was some kind of genius, but it is pretty well established that he was some kind of a$$hole as well. That said, there are lots of geniuses washing down their troubles in a Silicon Valley watering hole muttering about how they coulda’ been a contender.
I’m not a Romney hater; think he’s a pretty solid middle of the road Republican who’s maybe a little too driven to do what his Dad couldn’t, be President. I also vehemently disagree with the self-annointed “true conservatives” who think that he or any other Republican office holder is “Obama Lite;” Obama is an open avowed communist surrounded by a cadre of open, avowed communists who’ve taken over the US. The worst Republicans are at least still Americans; Obama and his crowd have a very different loyalty. And, no, I don’t consider Paul a Republican; he’s a crazy-assed libertarian flying the Republican flag of convenience.
I don’t think Romney can explain Bain Capital and his activities there to Joe Six-Pack, especially if the Ds demogogue it and there’s no reason to think they won’t. Too many people in this Country, people we need to get to vote Republican, have seen some company taken over, looted, and off-shored or just shut down. The “financial class” in America have been as much the enemies of the People as Comrade Obama’s crowd have, and now they’re in league together; the Germans called it “coordination.” Romney is going to have one Helluva time explaining to Joe Six-Pack how he’s one of the good venture capitalists, company buyers, or restructurers. I’ve worked as a “change agent,” and you’d best carry a gun, watch your back, and not even think about having friends in the organization you’ve been tasked to “change.” We have a lot of quasi-libertarians, working class heroes, self-educated populist types, and a lot of fundamentalist Christians that we need to get to vote and vote Republican. And with Romney we run into a lot of the rich man through the eye of the needle thing (and yes I know I’m twisting the Bible verse before somebody just HAS to correct me).
“I don’t think Romney can explain Bain Capital and his activities there to Joe Six-Pack, ”
Which is why Romney’s baggage is no better than anybody’s elses baggage. It just depends on how you want to weigh it.
My hunch is that the portrait of a vulture capitalist from the wierd religion won’t play as well as the nutty professor with the wandering eye. Seems to me that Joe Know Nothing will relate to wierd uncle Newt better than city slicker Mitt.
But then again, I don’t have the microphone Karl Rove and the RC boys have. And I do my own thinking.
Go read up on Bain capital instead of swallowing Newt/Democrat talking points whole. Maybe look into how finance works while you’re at it.
Gee james, all I’ve done is write about 2,000 words in this thread about how corporate raiders work, with examples and qualifying informtion.
You’ve said nary a word except to imply without substantiation that you are an expert on the matter.
You might try working on providing some information instead of blurting out whatever comes to your mind like an junior high spit wadder.
The fact is, I know a lot about the subject, as I’ve demonstrated.
But curiously, Mr Romney, like you, hasn’t provided any information about his activities at Bain either. I can’t help but wonder why.
Oh yeah? Where’s the research? Go read about Bain Capital seriously. I work for a company that was bought by them ok. They turned it around BIG TIME. Yeah they fired 60% of the admin staff but me, as a front line worker did not notice other than the lack of annoying HR policy emails that just slowed us all down. We’re back to profit and we stopped losing people chasing more money. If that’s “corporate raiding” (a democrat coined term) then we need more of that and less of Newt Gringrich’s class warfare.
oh i get it. If you aren’t the one fired, it’s ok. I wonder if all the “admin staff” that you hated considered themselves to be as valuable as you consider yourself to be? And since you work for a company that Bain was involved with, you seem to think that makes you an expert on everything that Bain has done. What a bufoon you are. Support your claims or shut up.
I’m still waiting for the education about how vulture capitalists work based on your one experience as somebody who is happy because people other than himself got fired.
And btw, I’ve said several times that Venture Capitalism is ok, Management Consulting is ok, and turnaround specialists are ok.
But if a consultant makes millions by gutting a company, selling assets and laying off employees to pump up the bottom line before selling the shell, that isn’t ok. If you take your head out of the sand and watch the video, you will learn that the claim is exactly that. Like you, I don’t know what happened, but unlike you, I would like to learn, particularly since it will all come out before November anyway. It would be nice to learn it now, while there is still time to reject an unethical liberal candidate.
If Romney acted ethically in all of his transactions, he shouldn’t have any problem whatsoever explaining them, right? He’s going to have to eventually, so why not do it now?
Business – like sausage-making, politics and apparently primaries – can be decidedly untidy and often unpleasant.
I’m not saying these deals are right or admirable or (ahem) fair, but they are, as you point out, legal.
Just because they are legal does not mean that they are moral. Romney does not have the moral high ground as Roger was trying to say. Perry is better off without a friend like Roger.
Actually, a ruthless corporate raider is the very thing I would wish on the United States Government and its lovely employees!
If Obama helps me any more, I think I’ll just shoot myself!
Rick Perry is a gargantuan fraud, both personally and politically.
Glen Maxey has written a book about Rick Perry’s rampant homosexual promiscuity and precious little Craigslist adventures: http://gawker.com/5868489/all-your-rick-perry-gay-sex-rumors-collected-in-one-handy-book
I know the “girl angle” to Rick Perry: http://stuffedsuits.com/news/national-politics/847-rick-perrys-san-fran-values I knew several strippers and female escorts in Austin who have had sex with Perry and his entourage. They are the SAME ones I know!
Here is an excerpt from Maxey’s book:
“James” is a real estate agent Maxey tracked down who says he had sex with Perry after responding to Craigslist ad.
The posting asked for someone willing to unlock the door, turn off the lights, and lie face-down on the bed, legs spread. James replied to the ad, and did as instructed. As he lay on his bed in the dark, James heard someone struggling to open the door. Shielding his eyes, he ran out and opened the door…. “He jerked down his shorts,” [James said], “It lasted about a minute. He had a little ____. It was the worst ____ of my life. And on top of it all he stunk because he had been jogging. He then pulled up his shorts and put the used condom in his pocket.”
As the mystery man tried to leave James’ apartment, he struggled with the front door, which had a tendency to jam. The man started yelling for James to help him…. As James opened it…his face was illuminated, and seen by James for the first time.
“Oh my God,” thought James. “I just got _____ by Rick Perry!”
According to Maxey, James said he saw a black SUV in the driveway outside his home and a man in jogging clothes with a gun drawn—allegedly a member of Perry’s security team who became alarmed when he heard Perry yelling for help opening the door. He withdrew when he saw that Perry was OK.
Maxey writes that James had told the story to the reporter he was working with on the record—he agreed to be quoted using his last name and first initial of his first name—and that he had told numerous friends about the story contemporaneously.
Joey the Hustler
Maxey also says he found a male prostitute who told friends he worked for Perry. A “Gay Businessman” friend of Maxey’s emailed him this:
“The whole story is that i have a ex friend who hired this kid years ago fro sex and they became friends. I was out at Rain [a gay club in Austin] with my friend and we ran into this hustler kid. He very matter of factly stated thathe had just been hired to spend the weekend at the Driskill with Perry and an assistant of Perrys. He was non chalant about it and said that it happened 3 or 4x a year and he gave some sexual details about Perry and the other guy. This was in the 2000s maybe 03.”
Maxey and his reporter managed to find the hustler, “Joey,” and engaged in a months-long dance to try to get him to go on the record with his story. Maxey arranged for lawyers to represent Joey, including a nameless female lawyer who sounds a lot like Gloria Allred—she “is always on TV with high profile clients”—so that he could negotiate a good price from the National Enquirer and other publications that were sniffing around (the “national news outlet” Maxey’s reporter friend was working for refused to pay
“I knew several strippers and female escorts in Austin who have had sex with Perry and his entourage.”
Hmmm. I guess you met the hos at work, huh? And the male ones too? Workmates are they?
We The People vs. We The Elite People of culture of corruption Washington DC.
That’s what this is all about. And, from the looks of things, seems as if a Romney win = a win for We The Elite People of culture of corruption Washington DC. That’s what SUPERPAC did.
Destroy the messenger (Cain, Bachmann, Newt) and support a “finger-in-the-wind” moderate. Romney, going to Washington DC will fit right in with its culture of corruption. Just like Las Vegas casinos and black jack…shuffle the cards, play the game and the house’s odds remain a steady 85%…15% for We The People.
Trouble with this thinking is America is already on a slippery slope to perdition. Religion is gasping for breath. Education is on the ropes. Governance is corrupt beyond fixing. America’s Economy is on life-support and dying. And Mr. Pomney, along with the RNC (also of the culture of corruption ‘gang’) is going to fix these four areas? Not-a-chance.
Romney hasn’t articulated any plan. Laid out any “road map.” He’s stuck his finger in the air, felt the breeze and goes in that direction. Now, that is a decisive, left-of-center Republican…just like Mr. Clinton’s ‘triangulation’ strategery(Bush, thang).
We The People are without an option, and if We the People (Republicans) stay home on the 6th, Mr. Obama is re-elected. Period!
Think about thatyou “We The Elite People of culture of corruption’s Washington DC!”
Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it. God Bless America.
Better a flustered, angry, pissed-off s-o-b(Newt)and his message, than a smiley, left-of-center, ‘go-with-the-flow’ Republican (Romney). At least We The People know the man in the white House is human, frail and a fighter. Not a “Rocky Marciano” fighter…a political, deep down and dirty political fighter. Amen!
Can’t we just do the next four years without one? I’ve heard that many times before a big election. Take a look at what we’ve got, take a look at who wants to replace them and just give up.
I still think I am going to stick with Gov. Perry even though it seems like Obama picked his campaign advisers. I really think he should reassess his staff. Get someone in there that knows what they are doing. To last as long as he has as Governor in Texas he must have something on the ball. I know a lot of people say well, the Governor in Texas doesn’t really have much power but isn’t that ultimately what we want for the Presidency? Get in there, come up with ideas, then get out of the way and let the States figure out if it’s right for them. Cut back on all the Federal programs, re-empower the States, get us back on the right track.
It could be really interesting to see what would happen to all the “Blue” States if the Federal Gov’t. stopped bailing them out. I mean, gee, your neighbor state there is doing just fine, how come you aren’t? We warned you about all that overspending, how come you kept at it? Bail you out? Uhh, sorry, that’s not in this years budget, maybe next year or the year after that maybe.
A commenter above said Bain is in the business of saving businesses.
That’s incorrect: Bain is in the business of making money. Sometimes, saving a troubled business makes them money. Sometimes, scrapping a troubled business makes them money. Whichever decision promises to make the most profit is the decision they will make.
A business that saves businesses without a focus on the bottom line isn’t a business, it’s a not-for-profit … or the government (see: GM bailout, Solyndra, etc.). When governments do this, it’s not free market capitalism, it’s economic and social engineering.
Oh Roger, if it makes you feel any better we all knew when you were changing your mind.
We read the pro-Perry stuff, followed by the pro-Cain and pro-Gingrich articles and we knew your observations were colored by your support that week.
Considering how many times you’ve changed your tune, you sound like a perfect Romney supporter. I’m sure you like the things Mitt says today much more than the things he was saying in the past. I’m also sure that when he changes his positions again after he has enough delegates you will find a way to support that too.
FULL DISCLOSURE: When Roger was supporting Perry I was supporting Michele Bachmann. When Mr. Simon decided that Cain was the man for him, I still supported Bachmann. When Roger jumped on the Newt Gingrich bandwagon, I supported Michele Bachmann. Now that Roger has decided to back Romney I am supporting Michele Bachmann in 2016. Because with Mitzy as the Republican candidate Obama is going to be re-elected and the GOP field is wide open in 2016.
Hey Roger, have you ever thought your support might be the kiss of death?
Hmmm, did he also give Michele the death-kiss?
So, Roger, if Gingrich and Perry are evil for attacking capitalism for attacking Bain Capital, what does that make Mitt Romney for skewering Newt Gingrich for earning a living as a consultant to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Or are we just being selective in our outrage?
FROM: http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/starting-to-count-the-price-of-defending-bain/
EXCERPT:
Romney likens work at Bain Capital to Obama’s auto industry bailout:
“In the general election I’ll be pointing out that the president took the reins at General Motors and Chrysler – closed factories, closed dealerships laid off thousands and thousands of workers – he did it to try to save the business,” Romney said Wednesday on CBS.
President Obama has publicly touted his plan to “retool and restructure” the auto companies as “an investment in American workers.” Romney was strongly opposed to the auto bailouts, but on Wednesday likened the president’s strategy to his own.
“We also had the occasion to do things that are tough to try and save a business,” he said.
So in order to defend his record at Bain, Romney is forced to defend the government takeover of GM and Chrysler and the process by which the companies were downsized.
Let me preview Obama’s argument in defense of how he “rescued” the auto industry: “Why, Mitt said just the other day that what we did with GM and Chrysler was no different than what he did at Bain. But it was different. Mitt got rich off of it, I didn’t.”
Nail, meet hammer, courtesy of Ed.
That will work with people who would never vote Republican anyway so who cares?
“My”president is grinning and sipping a diet coke.
He knows that 52% of the electorate who get checks won’t let him down come November.
It’s that simple.
The critical mass of Takers over Providers has been reached.
He knows it.
Welcome aboard, Roger. Many on the right are starting to realize that Romney is the most conservative candidate capable of beating Obama. The old William F. Buckley rule still applies. I’m not sure what took so long, but I’m glad everyone is starting to wake up.
You’re a funny guy. “Conservative.” Romney. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. Fool.
He sure is beating all those clowns of the month you and the deluded support. Just like I predicted.
Hey, willie, you agree with the LSM! I guess that makes you decidedly brilliant.
According to Ann Coulter in her column of late December only two-2 candidates have focussed on the important subjects of 1. illegal immigration and 2. the economy.. All others – including Ron Paul – seem too distraught or too timid to declare number one THE major problem in today’s USA..
Only Romney and the now ‘deposed’ Michele Bachmann favor solutions on how to whip these combined problems, so if AC’s analysis is watertight – a strong possibility – then only Mitt is going to solve the nation’s ills here…but what a pity that Ms. Bachmann decided to drop out!!
Hopefully she has still a career in politics – perhaps as consultant to Vice-President Santorum??
I forgive you.
I’ve noticed how personal Republicans take politics.
I’ve been part of that, for a long time, because Obama is such a disaster, because the anti-war left for 10+ years have been such demagogues. And don’t forget the media’s war on intellectual diversity – ‘our’ side being most disfavored.
But look at this race: candidates die as soon as they ‘insult’ the electorate. Perry says you’re not compassionate if you say you’re uncomfortable with his immigration policies. Paul says our war policies were wrong and foolish and have hurt others and ourselves.
People are insulted. At a minimum, they feel as if they are being told what to do by the people they are supposed to select. Worse, they feel as if their values are under assault.
This is how the original original Tea Party fell apart. That tax day rally was huge! Then one group tried to bring a letter to the WH and the other was mad, and they stopped collaborating and then FreedomWorks moved in. Next thing, the media finally notices a smaller Tea Party “led” by Glenn Beck. I’d say that Beck rally was the high water mark – the beginning of the end.
We love Palin, because she fights against Obama, but damn her for what she says about Perry. Can’t you see the problem here with the Tea Party’s future?
We all realized that something was wrong, and we agreed to do something about it. But then we realized that there was zero intellectual capital to do anything. We’re united by the call for fiscal sanity, but not on economic policy, not on social policy, not on foreign policy, not on how we talk, or who we want, or why, or even the facts that we know.
Only – and I’m afraid some people will accuse me of lying – about three weeks ago did I decide that I really do want to support Ron Paul. I had been reading over on Mises.org about wars etc. and realized that managing security globally is analogous to managing the economy domestically. I realized that for guys like Newt Gingrich (as one example), the latter is perhaps even more enthusiastically embraced than the former. I realized that post-2008, post-Atlas Shrugged, post-Obama, I have totally rejected the idea that we have any business centrally managing the economy. And so something had to give and I’ve realized that we don’t need to be out there in the world attempting to create security. There are threats, but none are actually existential as was the USSR – if it truly was, illiberal empires have this habit of crumbling on their own.
Post-Liberal Fascism and Amity Shlaes I have realized that war is THE tool for the permanent expansion of government in American society. We should really think about this.
I’m serving in the Air Force. We have to learn a tiny little bit about this guy named Billy Mitchell. We don’t need land armies to secure the peace – we only need them to dictate policy by occupying countries.
My whole paradigm has shifted. And it’s difficult, because I know – still – how wrong the anti-war left was and is. The big emotional battle in politics has been over war – and back in the old days of using righteous American power to make the world safe for democracy, these schemes seemed like good ideas – but really, that power is financed in ways antithetical to the American economic tradition, and no ‘democracy’ in the world today expresses that freedom for which our founding fathers struggled. The idea is bunk – and at its core Wilsonian. But I think I had to witness the last decade – defend the idea of freedom against its left-wing enemies – to realize I was wrong.
Ron Paul has said he does not want Iran to have a nuke – never that he didn’t care. He just doesn’t want to bang any war drums. He is for defense spending, and from what I’ve read of his supporters, so are they – particularly in the areas of technological development, intel, etc. He’s just against large armies and boondoggle projects.
At a minimum, wouldn’t conservatives agree that despite all the pork (every last congressional district receives some money from DoD work) involved, there really might be weapons systems that aren’t needed so much as they get money for connected interests? That the system might be wasteful? That Germany needs to spend for its own national defense instead of on a lavish socialized health care system?
I think they would, but ask: what does Paul really believe? I actually don’t know. Like Mr.Simon, I may be making a big mistake. I would like to hear a more detailed plan from Dr. Paul about what his specific policies and plans would be.
But I’m open and optimistic. And I don’t care about attacks or bitterness or crankity old men. Fact is: we’re broke, our monetary policy is completely broken, and our fiscal policy is a big drag. Nobody cares about this issue as more than a talking point except for the ‘real’ Tea Party, and oh by the way Ron Paul.
We need to see more from him. I don’t think he even figured he’d do this well. But we have to be open. We have to reach out. He’s been doing his thing for 30 years, he has been right about economy. WE were the ones who were BLINDSIDED. WE have more changing to do than him.
At the end of the day, he might be wrong. But let’s give him a chance. Let him talk more during debates. Let’s hear his Austrian economic ideas on a national stage! And let’s consider seriously what a CONSERVATIVE anti-war policy might be.
Final note: morality is not protected by mandate. Morality is the product of individuals taking accountability for their choices. Only a free society offers the incentives for this to be. Catholic Europe has the highest collusion between state and church of Western Christendom. Is it any wonder the totally free America has remained the most moral – and her Catholics among the strongest? @Santorum
You make some very good points, ZSorenson. Don’t expect a lot of sympathy though at PJMedia. Some of the powers-that-be here seem to encourage a pattern in which a certain GOP candidate gets trashed for a while in many of the articles and blog postings. Either that or there’s some kind of group-think that goes on. And this gets reflected in the comments. For a while Michelle Bachmann got unfairly blasted. Romney has also been the main pile-on target at certain periods, and lately Paul has been it.
Anyway, the Republican candidates and pundits should take some of Ron Paul’s positions seriously. He has a lot of sensible things to say, although I think he’s wrong on Iran and 9/11.
Historically, especially from the Civil War on, the case that Big Military goes hand-in-glove with a growth in Big Government is pretty much irrefutable. I have used that point to badger righties who hate Big Gov, but apparently love Big Military. That having been said, everything will stay big, but cuts, (actually slowed growth) would have to come from all sectors by someone or group is is willing to make that “fairness” their credo. Instead (and probably forever) people and parties say, “cut their stuff, but not our stuff,” and the result is that everything continues to grow…and we grumble. So much political energy gets generated by the left’s outrage at the military and rich people, and the right’s outrage at social programs and poor people, that if you take away the outrage, what is left?
Bottom line: I think that a Romney could do the across-the-board 2-2-2 better than Obama or Paul, because he would have the best shot at truly working from the center and building a consensus based on the idea that we have to do this, because we will go broke, otherwise, and we are going to do it, fairly (or blindly, if you will), across-the-board. You have to do this in the face of all the outraged constituencies, left and right, and you have to have a new base, a center core of people more worried about us becoming Greece, than goring their previously favored oxes. I don’t know that Romney actually can do this, but he would have the best shot.
I see no evidence supporting your claim that Romney is either more “electable” or a more effective coalition builder than anyone else. I do find it interesting that the LSM and the dimz have already selected Romney while being “afraid” that Paul might win the nomination.
What is clear is that administrative agencies exist at the pleasure of POTUS. Perry would maybe eliminate three of those and I think Paul wants to cut everything from Interior down. Congressionally established order of succession may be part of the inevitable “victim” clamor but parts of the cabinet and many ancillary agencies could still be eliminated by the stroke of a pen. The savings from eliminating those agencies could be around 20% of Obama’s $3.7T 2012 budget, neglecting indirect impact on SHS and Treasury. The regulatory impact on GDP over four years is anyone’s guess but doubtfully insignificant.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/newsgraphics/2011/0119-budget/
Cutting those agencies would be a courageously patriotic act of a new president and something Paul has promised to do. So it is not an inevitable fact that everything has to get bigger. And it wouldn’t even require an effective bicameral majority for the game to change.
You are right that nothing is going to change by nominating establishment presidential candidates because they will assuredly continue to collude with the left’s socialist agenda and with crony capitalists of every ilk while “being here to help”. So if you want more debt, more wars on both people and Twinkies, more government intrusion, more betrayal, fear and frustration, then go ahead and vote for the establishment; any one of them will give you that.
But if you want to realize a Jeffersonian vision of the republic and its role in your life, a vision that Reagan shared, then you’re only option in this Republican primary is Paul. It’s really just that simple.
In addition to his questionable ethics, Romney supported the stimulus funding, supports attacking Iran, supports the Patriot Act, supports the War on Terrorism and we are all OK with this? Oh yea, I guess that’s what all the “conservatives” think is what defines conservatism today. Get real, people. Taking over the world, taking money from the middle class and giving it to the rich (corporations) all while stripping away our individual freedom is NOT conservatism. It’s no better than Obama and what we call “liberals”.
Well it sounds like you should vote Obama then because it sounds to me like you’re not a conservative. Sounds like that was the plan anyway.
none of ‘em can beat obama, none, not a one of ‘em
obama can even shoot and kill innocents in cold blood, in plain sight, with pictures and clips of the deed all over the tube and the web for all to see, and the electorate will give him a pass, a nod, a wink and a vote, no questions asked.
Roger, I respect your opinion and empathize with your response to this sickening primary. I disagree about Perry though–he is now a good debater, so that issue should be off the table. Furthermore, jobs and spending are the most important issues, and since Perry has by far the best record on jobs and spending, I think he should stick to that message. I don’t get why you say he overdid those issues. Perry has by far the best record of the candidates, and he also has the best economic and tax plans.
He’s made some missteps campaigning, after getting in late because of fires, redistricting and balancing the state budget–all rather important things the other candidates didn’t have to deal with. However, to me he is still the only acceptable candidate. The flaws of the others make them no-gos for me in the primary. In the primary I won’t vote for Freddie Mac’s womanizing historian, the arrogant a-hole Santorum, or the Obamneycare flip flopper. I could give Huntsman a look if he hadn’t taken that John Weaver tack of expressing contempt for people like me. So that leaves Perry, if he’s even still in the race by the time I get to vote.
And don’t even get me started on this crap of letting Democrats in two boutique states choose my nominee for me.
So you don’t like the “womanizing” Freddie Mac historian? I live in Austin, TX, and I can ASSURE you Katy Rick Perry is been far more of a womanizer and man-izer than the angry little attack muffin Newt Gingrich.
Rick Perry, his entourage and I like the SAME women. I know several strippers and female escorts who have had sex with Perry. Glen Maxey knows the “gay angle” to Rick Perry. The man has been RAMPANT.
http://gawker.com/5868489/all-your-rick-perry-gay-sex-rumors-collected-in-one-handy-book
Also, Google “Robert Morrow Stuffed Suits.com” for my articles on Perry’s bisexual adultery.
Sounds as if it is South Carolina primary time.
This blade is probably just some poor Midnight Cowboy who found life on the streets inferior to life on the blogs.
“(Or three, if you include Cain.)”
I do.
And he seemed to have the lowest character of the three of them…until this week, when fat, lazy, occasionally liberal, and famously undisciplined Newt came apart at the seams and stole the rhetoric from Occupy Wall Street and Barry O’Bonehead.
Not to be outdone, Perry dove into the class warfare sewer head first, followed immediately by someone named Jim Huntmans. For all of his lies and fakery, at least Herman Cain is an actual capitalist … I think. These other three douchebags are currently indistinguishable from our socialist nitwit President.
I am not the least bit excited about Romney unless I picture him in a one-on-one race against O’Bozo. Then I like him quite a bit.
This is the thing that bothered about so many conservatives, they complained that Romney was a flip flopper or a Rino and yet, they could not manage to come up with a viable alternative who was not either a clown, a womanizer, a hypocrite, a fool, a tool or a liar.
BTW, the really nasty ads came from Ron Paul, but Newt left him alone, probably because he knows Paul can not win. He went after Romney because he is a jealous little man.
Romney is not as liberal as the conservative blogs and talk radio like to pretend he is..and these candidates are not the principled conservatives a lot of people have tried to make them out to be.
Let me make you smile with an amusing analogy. PON FARR, American Style: The Nov. 2012 Election – Otherwise known as how the Presidential campaign will mimic the Vulcan mating battle called Kal-i-fee.If Romney wins the nomination, I assert the battle between 2 normally emotionally distant aliens will be epic. Michelle Obama is featured in a cameo role.M
My dad said (about 70 years ago) to me… the true stature of a man is his ability to say I was wrong. You weren’t necessarily wrong but got tweaked somewhat. I was a Perry guy right from the start for some quite obvious reasons but it didn’t take long to have this ideal go awry.
You are my first read in PJ… and will continue to be.
Roger:
The race is not over yet. Patience.
The national debt is sitting at $15.2 trillion as of today. Where do you think it will be if we are blessed with four years of Romney? $20 trillion? $25 trillion? How much currency can we continue to print?
We are approaching a financial Armaggedon and we are running out of time. There is only one candidate who will attack spending. That candidate is Ron Paul. Each week he gets a little stronger.
Patience.
I’m willing to place a small wager that Ron Paul won’t be the nominee. You game?
Watch out!
If “Animal” is really Mitt Romney, a “small bet” is probably $10,000.
Thank you for your confession, I thought myself Perry being a Gov for 10 years in a state that clearly is doing better economically would be a good choice. At the starting line he looked good, but as we watched him he seemed to dissolve into an empty suit.
I didn’t jump to Cain, because we are seeing first hand that executive experience (as in states or federal agencies) is essential. Newt’s rise got me a bit excited but I was torn with his history – now he is in flames.
Bachmann and Santorum both are too much on the social issues, our focus must be on smaller government, smaller debt, smarter governance. I also swing a bit libertarian here in that we should be as free as possible to live our lives the way we want.
I felt in 08 that Romney should be my candidate, but my heart said no. I still have that feeling but I will support Romney if he is nominated.
Our feelings exactly.
At Robbing America Chronicle we cringed at Gingrich attack on Paul Ryan and accepted his apology about the couch scene with Nancy Pelosi. We were hooked – just like Simon – in believing that it was a new Newt. We liked his early debate strategy of not speaking bad of fellow Republicans and putting the MSM in its place.
Oh boy, were we wrong. Just like Simon , we expressed our mistake in the piece “Newt Gingrich Desperado” at http://www.RAmericaChronicle.com where we also include Perry in our disbelief that supposed conservatives like them have so suddenly turned against the basic principles of their Party.
They won’t succeed and they will go down in infamy.
The “vulture capitalism” and like attacks will resonate with a whole lot of voters in November if Mitt Romney is the nominee. If nothing else, it will certainly put the lie to Mitt’s main claim to fame, being a job creator and understanding how to put America back to work. All this sort of financial manipulation does is – sometimes – put a lot of money into a few pockets. If you look at who were the top contributors to Bush and Kerry in 2004, Obama, Clinton, Romney and McCain in 2008, you will find the usual suspects there: Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan – Chase. If they aren’t bought and paid for, they are certainly rented.
I don’t understand how the republican powers that be managed to convince the masses that a Massachusetts govenernor (and the only gov. ever to sign a health care mandate)is the true conservative in this race.
What happened to Newt was the last straw for me. Mitt’s super pac went flat out nuclear on Newt. All the “conservative” talking heads jumped on board to destroy the former Speaker. All this before Newt said one negative word.
I only respect a handful of elected officials. The few I DO like are disliked by the party power structure. I have lost all respect for the “conservative” pundit class.
I did not fight Obamacare with a thousand phone calls, rallies, and town halls so that the party that I am a member of can nominate the only other person in American history to sign the mandate.
I quit. I will support any other republican for President, but if Willard is the nominee….. no vote from me.
You’ll be counted on then to support Obama. Hope you have no complaints if he gets a second term.
Forgive me, Roger. Since my eyes are failing, I just read your headline.
I thought were talking about supporting Perry White, editor of the Daily Planet.
Whatever…..this South Carolinian is voting for Newt next week.
Roger, I am so excited about this election. You do not understand, because there is finally one honest decent man running in this race. I am so excited and proud to support him.
Did you know I am middle class? Did you know my husband and I have never supported a National campaign in our lives and sent money? We are sending Dr. Ron Paul our money and when I called my husband the other day and told him I was sending Dr. Paul some more money he said “Send fifty dollars more in my name”.
We have read everything on him, we watch him, and I bought two of his books. I just love his heart.
I am sorry so many rich old Republicans here hate the one decent man, but every time I read a bad word about him from the GOP, well I hate the party for it. I have read his books and he is the only TRUE CONSERVATIVE I have ever had an opportunity to support and vote for.
I am asking you to think about voting for the person this time and voting with your heart, because he is the only one that can cut our debt and has the clear plan to restore this country.
You wrote about being wrong, and I have been wrong so many times too, but not this time. I know it, because I know Dr. Ron Paul is the only man who can and will beat Obama.
Please think about it, all of you look in your hearts and think about voting for the man who has been a consistent conservative for the last thirty years.
The middle class just love him, because he is more of a Doctor and an old Teacher then a politician. He does not think about saying the popular things in the debate, he just stands there and says the truth. I love hearing the truth from him. I know I was right about Obama and tried to warn every person. I know I was right about McCain, because I told everybody that McCain would not beat him and there was not much difference in those two. I know I am right about Dr. Ron Paul.
Did you read his plan to restore America? It is a great plan.
How can the party support a man like Romney after watching “When Mitt Came to Town”? He is not a nice guy and you all know Gingrich is just as dirty, because of taking all of the money from Fannie and Freddie.
I come here for years and read you Roger, and I am asking all of you to think about getting behind a winner this time.
Don’t feel bad. I liked Perry because of two reasons- 1. Perry is not Romney and we all know Romney is a “place holder” President. He will simply keep the people in power- in power, and they know it. (Again why he is so popular with the establishment) 2. Perry would have brought to Washington D.C. Texans. Texans who would NOT be tickled with the likes of the EPA, HHS, TSA and all the other letter agencies. Can you imagine a Texan running the EPA? Department of Interior? What kind of regulations would you see poop-canned almost immediately?! Back to regular bulbs, no silly demand for fuel that doesn’t exist, no global warming schtick, no Education secretary demanding we teach kids that all founding fathers were racists. Wow, imagine.
For that I was with Perry for a while…until he opened his mouth. Then I realized he was exactly who he appeared to be, a Texas governor, good there, limited outside the state.
You are right about Newt, Newt is Obama in a fat white man costume. His ego is dwarfed only by his opinion of himself. Too bad, because unlike Obama, most often,he really is the smartest guy in the room.
I wish someone like Santorum would catch fire, but frankly, this primary is much like too many others in the past, Republicans push either a RINO or one of the old guard (Dole/McCain). Innovative thought like trying to get in a real conservative scares the heck out of the establishment as it seeks to gain only enough control so it can get the lion share of the goodies this cycle around.
We were warned hundreds of years ago about institutionalized corruption destroying our nation. Sad that we are living the moment now.
French revolution anyone? Just saying…
Talk show hosts are preparing us to support the inevitable. IBD is to a milder degree doing the same today on the ed. page. Look over the cliff, those are the bodies of Dole and McCain. I voted for both. I doubt that three times is a charm. We do not need a third party, we need two new ones. I’m curious, who spent the most money in NH? VOTE AGAINST INCUMBENTS, therein lies the problem.
It is easy to lose sight of the main issue when we are being subjected to so many Republican candidates for so long and so intensely. And, of course we would like to have a good candidate who is right in all ways. But, the reality of this election is that we must not allow Barack Obama to be re-elected. If he has 4 more years, with no need to be polite for an up-coming election, the outcome will be permanent devastation to the US.
So, I will support any candidate we now have who has the best chance to beat Obama. That choice is not difficult to determine. The moderate voters comprise about 40% of all the electorate. They are appalled by any candidate who appears radical or who might not be willing to compromise on issues. They voted for Obama in 2008. They are not high quality voters, but they decide the elections. They will pick the president in November. They will not vote for Ron Paul. They will not vote for Newt Gingrich. But, they might vote for Romney. And, we need all of them to vote for Romney that we can get; because many of the Conservatives who probably know better, still, will write in Ron Paul, even if it means re-electing Obama. It does not matter how Obama may get re-elected, the outcome will be the same; and, it doesn’t matter how we beat Obama, because we must.
So, although I see Romney as fairly weak in his past efforts, I will support him fully, in order to get Obama out. And, in truth, he is probably a good choice in getting us off the spiralling decline and started back to sanity, given the views of the average American at this time, and the need for support by a president. And, unless we think we can convert enough moderates before November to being Conservatives, we had better get happy with Romney. It is a matter of numbers–numbers of votes, and the moderates have those votes.
And, to the Ron Paul supporters who say that there is no difference in Romney and Obama–are you kidding, or do you not comprehend how dangerous Obama really is?
Let us ask the thousands of people who lost their jobs and even their homes and families how dangerous Romney is. Oh wait, we do not need to ask them, because the old son of a biscuit eater Newt found them and they are telling the world. Newt, Romney, well they are just the same old John McCain losers you are trying to push in the middle class Americans faces and it is not going to work. Obama will win if you do it. Obama will win.
Quick, for God’s sake, get on the Romney bandwagon! We wouldn’t want the media or pundits to vet Romney and expose his liberal underbelly.
I think people have their Romney-sense wrong.
Because of his nice-guy personality, they fear he’s another Bush of some kind. But that’s wrong, what he’s actually said (at least in this iteration of his political life) are very thoughtful, conservative things. He’s either not being fed his thoughts by an employee, or he has better employees than the others. What he said about his Illegal Immigration solution is exactly the one that serious anti-Illegals reformers want. Somehow he learned about that, whereas other purported conservative candidates are clearly thinking stuff up on the spot, whilst avoiding offending the US Chamber of Commerce. You’d think he would be the one to avoid offending them, Mr. Bain Capital, but that’s not the case.
There are other issues too, but that’s always the make-or-break for me, as it shows you plainly if the person is corrupted.
Everyone keeps talking about Rick and Newt as if they are the ones who has thrown a “monkey wrench” into the whole affair. In my estimation Ron Paul is the real problem with this slate of candidates. Most of his followers are not conservatives nor are they Republicans. Why didn’t they run Paul in the Democrat primaries? He and his followers are offensive to me as they continue to insist that Paul is a Tea Party Conservative. What a crock. Get rid of Paul, please!
The criticism of Newt s response to Mitts ( and Ron Paul’s )attack ad’s ( lies ) in Iowa begs the question: Where was the outrage and criticism of Mitt when Newt was trying to keep it kosher ? None. OK two “dumb’s” don’t make a “smart” … Agreed that Perry’s vulture capitalism remark was more like eight “dumb’s” but Newt has been more than measured . This warthog and all puffed up and angry stuff is over the top. Newt remains the most qualified candidate because he is the most qualified and he will eat Obama’s lunch in any debate. Oh… Tonya A ? You are drinking way too much Kool-Aid .
Mr. Simon, after all those mistakes, that you still haven’t learned your lesson is not astonishing. In fact, your post illustrates exactly the low-level reasoning I am used to and come to expect from the high level main stream punditry. You are a typical pundit in your wrongheadedness about (4?) candidates, jumping on the bandwagon for each one! Yet, if you truly believed in conservatism you would be principled enough and vote for ron paul. the reason you made those 4 previous mistakes is the same reason you are making one now, you are trying to pick a winner with no regard for principles. “Theleast of theevils.” This will always lead to very poor choices, as you can justify ANYTHING by this low standard. For instance, well, he’s better than Hitler! Grow some backbone and find some principles. c
All you fools who swallowed Newt/Democrat/Palin/Perry Bain talking points should go check this out :
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/01/12/the-bain-bomb-fizzles/ Or you could just continue to be a democrat shill like Newt.
The overwhelming ignorance of the electorate is evidenced in the above blogs. It is said that “we get what we really want”, and it appears that “we” really want a communo-facist islamic jihad, by whatever name to enslave us all and murder most of us. Both major parties are owned and operated by the Council on Foreign Relations, a cabal of the very rich, which controls the world in which we live; as long as they live. If they were to be arrested, convicted and executed, legally and morally, our problems would be at an end- unless we were foolish enough to allow another group of conspirators to replace them. Who can we find to lead us in such an adventure?
YOU.
Priceless!
The middle class in this country does not want to give our money away to the failing banks. We will not vote for a person getting all of his contributions from those banks. We are the old tea party, the one that did not get brainwashed when the hijackers hijacked it and we know the truth.
We know how to follow the paper trail and we will not support them. To send money to the RNC or DNC is just like sending money down the drain to us, because we will not send our money to the banks we bailed out. We are dangerous to the status quo in this country. We send our money to the one man we trust. The Republican and Democratic parties are the same. Can you tell me why the same banks are supporting Romney and Obama? Think about it.
Obama keeps the Patriot Act for the brainwashed neocons; he keeps the wars going for you. He has killed just as many brown people as Bush. He signed the NDAA for John McCain and Lindsay Graham. You should just love his pants off of him, except for the debt. The spending is the only issue you should have with him at this point if you are a Bush lover.
Who has the best plan to cut the national debt in this country? Ron Paul will cut one trillion in the first year. He will do it; because he has did everything he says he will do for thirty years.
A question to Ron Paul supporters–where will the votes come from to elect Paul? You do realize that there are other voters besides those who want Paul? Obama’s base will vote for Obama (about 20%). The Repubican base is probably about 30%, and some of those will be write-in votes for Paul and Palin, etc. That leaves the moderates, in huge numbers. They are the ones that Obama has targeted as the “educated” upper middle-class, who,he believes, supports his values, and he will spend a lot of money to get them. They pay little attention to issues, they voted for Obama last time, and they do not take part in the noisy Republican primary, until the day for voting. They get their news from the networks and from Jon Stewart and Leno.
This is a win or lose situation, not a battle of ideals. The moderates are not going to suddenly decide that Ron Paul is the man who will bring “equality” and “justice”to America, especially with Obama telling them anything they may want to hear.
If you want to wage a battle of idealism, then let’s un-elect Obama and then start a campaign to gradually bring the moderate voters into reality of the issues. There is no short-cut, unless you think that 4 more years of Obama will be a good way to get moderates started thinking.
The fact that this guy signed NDAA into law is reason enough to never vote for him again.
And what candidate is offended by the NDAA provisions? Only one.
Ron Paul has the independents just like Reagan did in the eighties. He has the Democrats changing parties for vote for him in the closed primary states. He has many of the people Obama had last time. He has captured the young crowd, I know he has them.
I am a 47 year old independent voter and the very first President I voted for was Reagan. I have never just voted for a party. I voted for the Clinton’s every time. I told you I have been wrong too. ha.ha.. I know where Ron Paul will get his support and the vote, because I also know in the polls with Obama it is Dr. Paul polling even with him. With the independents Dr. Paul is beating Obama in the polls. In the latest polls Ron Paul is the only one to beat Obama. The other candidates are all polling behind Obama. The issues on the wars are getting the young and the Democratic votes. I agree with Dr. 100% on his foreign policy.
Dr. Paul will beat Obama and he will do it just like Reagan in the eighties did. I know what other supporters of Dr. Paul say and I say it too-we will not vote for another John McCain. We will not vote for the lesser of two evils. I will write in Ron Paul’s name and I will sleep well that night after I do it.
I have some principles this time, because there is this man running who gives us a chance to vote for somebody with honor.
Quick! Duck! There’s a black helicopter hovering right over your head! IDIOT!
Don’t you understand the reason dems crossed over and voted for Paul? Just think about who they really want to have as an apponent to obama? Just take a look at a debate with cranky old Paul and obama. Of course the dems are crossing over in the primaries. Get a clue! If your going to write in Paul, might as well pull the lever for obama, cause that is what you are doing. So sleep well. Two more appointments to the supremes and you might be sleeping in a camp.
Don’t you realize how many Democrats know Obama lied to them now? Don’t you realize how many people are against the wars and giving our tax money to the military complex to fund war and killing? Don’t you realize how many people are awake and realize the corporations supporting the other candidates have been running this country for years. I know many of these people, some who have been Democrats their whole lives and they all love Dr. Ron Paul. Do you realize how Reagan won in the eighties? The GOP did not say this about Reagan when he took many of the Democrats in the eighties. I was one of them and Reagan got my vote.
All of the mechanisms for abuse are in place. The current administration, senate leadership, and former house, have made this abundantly clear. After this administration, any scaled-down abuses will seem “moderate”, but will be no less severe. Honesty, integrity, sound fiscal policy, and a constitutional government are the ONLY way out of this mess. The time to act is now. We have been politely asleep. No longer. We will not again rest until liberty is secured for our posterity. POTUS 0 has made our danger too apparent. We dare not risk complicity.
Roger – I appreciate your honesty but am troubled by your half hearted endorsement. Maybe your column is a reflection of where we are as a nation. As you indicated yourself we are being motivated by the wrong things that is leading our judgement astray. What this nation needs is a Statesman. We do not just need somebody who can fix the economy but a leader that can remind us who we are as Americans and the need to rebuild our nation on human virtues and sound principles.
Did you listen to Romney after his win in NH? What exactly could you object to?
It was lost when they lost Palin.
The courage that managed to elect Reagan turned tail at this time.
When things get bad enough, who knows what may happen.
I imagine that Perry is a better person than you give him credit for – at least a little. I was able to resist the urge to have have a favourite candidate. Like Sarah Palin said, no matter which Republican wins, they all are going to do roughly the same things once in office.
But back to Perry. Once caught up in it all, candidates have a tendency to “do anything to win”. They do it for themselves, they do it because their advisers tell them to, they do it because they feel obligated to win for their donors. Perry may be despicable, but the system brings out the worst in people. Maybe that is as it always ways, didn’t old time politicians used to accuse each other of being dogs and monkeys?
Its a useful lesson for you Roger. People do the wrong thing when the pressure is on – or in Cain’s case, because no-one is watching. We never know until the campaign, then you place your bets. Don’t kick yourself because you can’t predict the roulette wheel in advance.
Now, you see… I bothered to read this because I thought you MIGHT have noticed that you are as effectively anti-constitutional as the MSM. Apology accepted for its intent. I extend your warning, however, to your continued misjudgment. Just as with Goldwater, as with Reagan, the GOP pulls out all the stops Along with the MSM, along with you, to defeat the candidate with common sense and constitutional ideals. No moral or intellectual assessment is implied here. It is just the way things are.
Hopefully, this will be a Reagan/Goldwater victory, not a GOP victory.
It may well be our last chance to preserve the constitution.
God help us.
The frightening thing about this is that ALL Americans elect the next President and they base their judgement, like you, on the externals of the candidate. What chance does this country have when the intellectually challenged electorate do what you do: ‘jump on the band wagon’? There is ample proof that the current process does not guarantee a desirable outcome and that a “good” president is elected entirely by chance, the cut of his suit and the tastiness of his sound-bite.
Don’t worry about the trust issue, Roger. I don’t trust your judgement over mine, nor any other pundit. The fact of the matter is, I don’t trust your statements in this post – trashing Governor Perry like that. The man has governed Texas for the past 11 years. I’ve voted for him every time – and defended him in the Texas media outlets that have bad mouthed him every step of the way. The fact remains Perry has done an outstanding job in Texas and would do an outstanding job as president. You are just another guy with a platform that has caved in to the media siege that has been laid against Gov. Perry. Believe me, I have seen it before in his last two elections here. If we had believed the Texas media, then we would have thought it hopeless to bother casting our vote for him. But we’ve learned that the media doesn’t have the same interests as us folk on the street. Americans should not listen to the massive propaganda campaign going on to nominate Casper “Mitt” Milquetoast, who will do nothing – or Ron Paul who will cause us to shipwreck just as surely as a continuation of Obama’s policies..
There are way too many commenters who don’t know what corporate raiders do. If they buy into an existing company in order to rectify some temporary imbalance in that companies strategic profile, and charge fair rates, they do all a great service. Likewise if they help a dying concern into the grave gently, rather than violently, saving as much of the existing wealth as possible. These are justified functions, morally, ethically, and economically.
It would seem that, if we really want to wind down a top-heavy, bloated, wasteful government, in the least painful way, one could hardly get a man with a better resume than Mittens.
When we consider Gordon Gecko raiding, we should instead look at Bob Rubin, for example. In order for him to get paid a billion dollars for a FEE to manage a takeover (which eventually went bust)he had to mortgage the company in question, which would have gone along quite nicely without his “help”, to the hilt and beyond, to the point that it was only no longer feasible because the loan was so huge! I know many fine businesses which suffered this fate, especially during the 80s. Clinton was right about the “decade of greed”. After all, his cabinet was full of some of the greatest practitioners, ever. John Dillinger would’ve been proud!
Let’s start thinking like adults, for a change. We really need what Romney’s got. We know he CAN do it. We must make sure he DOES do it.
O’Bumbles can’t do anything but shoot his fat mouth and kill my country. There’s no hope for us with that idiot and his “experts” in charge.
If it comes down to Romney and Gingrich, let’s keep in mind that the job opening isn’t for snide debating skills nor the sheer quantity of ideas, good or bad, executed or not. We need a manager. Some people can make decisions, some just bloviate. Can you tell which is which? I ain’t exactly in love with Mitt, either, but perhaps his talents perfectly match the times.
I enjoyed this article as I think it followed the same journey that those of us following this race went through.
That said, I’m voting for Santorum, unless someone can come up with something better than, “he’s unelectable because he’s a Christian”. Likewise, I’m not going to vote for Romney because, “he’s electable”.
I like Santorum. I don’t cringe when I hear him speak and I like what he says. The line that he’s a nutty Christian is just par for the course, and I’m not influenced by it.
If I have to vote for Romney in the general I will – but Santorum has a better overall message. I’ve never been one for bandwagons.
And after having said (and read) all that, I repeat without hesitation that I will vote for any of the above, including Ron Paul . . . to get rid of Comrade obama and his merry pranksters.
R/
Palin’s “berating others” is very valuable to some voters. She points out (and defines) much of the shenanigans that’s going on – and God knows there’s lots of people who don’t pay attention and need someone to do that for them. And she usually is right on the mark several days or weeks before anyone else “gets” it. As for “sending her husband out to endorse”, how do you know either one’s motives for doing that? First off, I don’t believe she “sent” him, and second, maybe it’s a strategy. You say Palin is stupid. I say she’s one of the most politically astute out there. She didn’t accomplish what she has accomplished – without benefit of daddy’s (Murkowski) or hubby’s (Hillary) coattails – by being stupid.
Roger,
Sorry for the early and so fleeting spring choices. I’m a Paulite. He, with whatever warts, has at least read the Constitution. If, in the final analysis, my choice is the Mittster or the Grinch who stole Freddie and Fannie or San a terius minor, who backed A. Specter ( it just looks right when put as ” A specter ) I’ll probably fail Leonard Reed’s test about the lesser of two evils still being evil while voting.
God bless America. Damn the two establishment wards for parasitic power hungry fools.
Thomas Jefferson said, “To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. I place economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared.” I agree. And that makes Paul the only viable Republican candidate. Each of the many you’ve endorsed are only obowmao lite and that concretely resolves the question of your trustworthiness.