« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Why Harriet Miers . . . er . . . Mitt Romney Cannot Be the GOP Nominee

Mitt Romney is the Harriet Miers of the 2012 election cycle. He is only a conservative because certain Washington conservatives tell us he is conservative. These same Washington conservatives said the same about Harriet Miers back in 2005.

What’s more, it is starting to show. Have you seen the latest CNN poll?

Newt Gingrich has surged into the lead. That was rather expected. But Mitt Romney fell four points.

Yet again we see a non-Romney candidate move into the lead. It has gotten as predictable as the sun coming up. Romney is always the bridesmaid and never the bride. Why is that? It’s easy to understand.

The Republican base profoundly distrusts MItt Romney for a billion legitimate reasons, including such small things as his refusal to sit in the center chair on Bret Baier’s show or answer any tough questions. And let’s not forget all his flip-flops well chronicled right here.

Mitt Romney has given the base no reason to ever trust him except, in 2008, when he was not named John McCain. That’s it.

So when we get to the general election, Mitt Romney will have Jenn Rubin of the Washington Post cheerleading him with the editorial page of National Review behind her and virtually every other Republican giving him golf claps on the way to annihilation against a base of black voters and union voters who will go vote for Barack Obama come hell or high water.

Don’t get me wrong. Republicans will vote for Mitt Romney. But their energy will be tepid. He gives no one anything to get excited about except the makers of silly putty and hair products.

For months on end the establishment Republicans in Washington, D.C. have told us that Mitt Romney is the “most electable” guy. I have a hard time seeing how anybody can be the most electable guy when a minimum of 75% of the guy’s own base of voters consistently want someone else. The best response the Romney fans have is that none of the other guys are getting much more than that either. True, but we have seen time and time again that as any one of them drops out or other implodes, their voters will go elsewhere — just not to Mitt Romney.

Of course I do expect him to be the nominee, so I anticipate four more years of Barack Obama.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • uncmike

    And we know how that ended. I can’t imagine Newt will end up being the anti-Romney candidate we all get behind given his record. That’s why I continue to hope that the anti-Romney vote will coalesce behind Rick Perry even though he’s not as slick in the Washington establishment sense as Gingrich and Romney. He does have a solid record as a conservative and I trust him a hell of a lot more to go after Obama-/Romneycare and to roll back all the executive orders and other HS the Obama administration has put in place.

  • mariagomez

    A few weeks ago on this website I mentioned that Perry has appointed several underqualified minorities in order to curry favor with the minority communities in Texas.

    Another example is Xavier Rodriguez, a judge who Perry appointed who is now proposing redistricting to establish Latino districts. It is estimated that this will result in the loss of 6 safe Republican districts.

    My point is that there is no ideologically pure politician in this race. They all compromise to promote their political lives.

  • PubliusII

    As Erick’s post says, roughly 75% of Republican voters don’t want Romney. This figure has remained consistent over the past few months.

    Those voters have looked at each of the other Republican candidates, and each has been found wanting, although for different reasons. This month Newt is on top, but he has so much baggage I honestly doubt Newt will survive scrutiny. I don’t mean his divorces, etc.; I mean Newt’s ties to the insider establishment that need drastic reform. Does anyone really think Newt is the guy to reform Washington?

    I wrote off Huntsman long ago. He remains wrong about global warming. But I reluctantly think he might be worth another look in view of the other choices. His economic/fiscal proposal is solid.

    I am not really sold on Huntsman, and if he fails to withstand scrutiny too, then I think we need a new candidate. Yes, I know it is late, even though no votes have been cast. Can’t we find somebody better than the current crop? Walker? Pawlenty? Ryan?

  • iidvbii

    All media outlets have proclaimed Romney the only possible candidate for the GOP. Both overtly in the liberal realms and covertly in the more conservative sectors. Consider that any challenger is first welcomed as a friend (constructing the honest broker image) and then dismissed (with mock sincerity) as unacceptable based on exhibits (fact or fiction) A,B and C. Meanwhile endless debates provide a cheap means for those with little to no resources to stay in the race (Newt until Romney and his supporters decided to bank roll him as the next challenger* can’t prove just suspect*) keeping the conservative voters fragmented as well as a bench of “Next Unacceptable’s”. Meanwhile ol switch hit Mitt runs the clock out. The debates also serve as an easy forum to provide Romney through strategic stage placement, carefully chosen questions and nearly a quarter of the total time the opportunity to convince us he is the one we need. I kinda feel bad for the guy really. Give anyone else in the field the advantages he has enjoyed and this thing would be over. Must be depressing for him, all this and still can’t secure anymore of the electorate than he did in 2007. Seems like a lot of money and effort for nothing….

  • adamd

    The same way Bush (41) was not in 1980 and on the Democrats side Hillary Clinton in 2008; the “most electable” argument does not attract voters. Nobody really likes Romney, nobody hates him but he does not have a fired up base of supporters. Romney’s base seems to be rich Republicans with Wall Street ties who he has become friends with over the years who want to beat Obama. Those are folks who write checks and get their friends to do the same, but do not attend rallies and knock on doors. The Republican base, the 75% who do not want him to be our nominee will rally around one of the other four top tier candidates.

    However, I will add that if Romney somehow does become the nominee he will beat Obama. Whoever the Republican nominee is just has to win the same state Bush did, and that looks very probably in 2012. In fact looks like a couple other big states like PA and MI will also be in play and could easily end up in the Republican column.

  • jgge

    to give up and consider Romney as the nominee. In 2007-2008 John McCain campaign was considered dead all the way until just few days before the first vote was cast in the primaries.
    I am with Perry till the end.

  • standingonthewall

    Given his record, resource$ and improving debate performances it is at least plausible that Perry will rebound, albeit slowly, and become the R nominee. He is more consistently conservative than Romney or Gingrich. He is more experienced than Cain or Bachmann.

  • standingonthewall

    to surrender to a Romney nomination. I’d gladly take Perry. I’d settle for Gingrich, Cain or Bachmann. Romney will get my vote if I learn to suppress the gag reflex long enough to pull the lever.

  • jgge

    beat Obama. The Obama campaign theme would be rather simple:
    “Obama the defender of the ordinary citizen against Romney the rich Wall Street guy and CEO of Bain Capital”. The problem is that Romney is polling well now because his record as CEO of Bain Capital has not been yet exposed to the public. In this environment where a majority of people has great dislike of Wall Street ( I know that it is not fair), nominating a Wall Street person and CEO of a financial firm like Romney is beyond foolish. Those who support Romney have no idea what Obama is going to do to him but they can get a hint from Ted Kennedy campaign against him in 1994 Massachusetts Senate seat by just seeing the ads that Kennedy ran against Romney as the CEO of Bain Capital. Obama will use the same tactics and strategy but with a hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign ads.

  • supergirl2911

    Me too

  • iidvbii

    Perry nominates…. As he did in this case, the Texas legislature
    rejected this judge.

    George W. Bush appointed this judge to the federal bench. The governor of Texas doesn’t appoint federal judges.

    If you are going to attack him at least verify the facts and relate them honestly.

  • mariagomez

    Gingrich, another flip flopper, promoted Harriet Miers and vouched for her on talk shows back when Bush was considering her.

  • mariagomez

    Huntsman really bugs me on his refusal to back away from the whole Global Warming con job, but he is by far the most fiscally conservative of all the nominees, aside from Ron Paul.

    I do like that Huntsman is intelligent and can think on his feet. Reagan was able to promote conservatism because of his excellent communication skills. We need someone capable of verbalizing our conservative goals, and Huntsman can do this.

  • reggie182

    I’m sorry but I don’t get the comparison.

    I don’t know if Harriet Miers was conservative, moderate, or liberal.

    What I’m pretty sure of is she was a preposterously unqualified Texas crony selection by George W. Bush. He had a penchant for making those.

  • adamd

    If Obama ran those ads, then Romney would run ads with the faces of all the Goldman Sachs people who are hated by the public who Obama has taken contributions from and also run ads with Jon Corzine and Obama on the same stage. An ad with Obama and Corzine holding hand with quotes of Obama praising him with big letters “1.2 Billion of clients money MISSING” would be a lot more devastating than any Bain capital ad Obama could run,

    Don’t get me wrong, I am no Romney fan. I will certainly vote for him and work all I can to get him elected if he is our nominee. I just think that he, like whoever the nominee is, will beat the false messiah,

  • mindthegap76

    What is the goal with yet another front page post beating up on Romney? There’s nothing new to report here. How about more posts making the case for a better candidate and not just piling on Romney?

    The stated mission of this site is to be conservative in the primary, Republican in the general. If, as you said, you “expect him to be the nominee,” then you have to anticipate that you’ll soon be supporting him in the general. So why sabotage that? You’re cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    Whatever your issues with Romney, there’s no reasonable basis to dispute that he would be a huge improvement over Obama. So by all means, make the case for your preferred candidate. And if there’s something new to say critical of Romney or anyone else, bring it to light, that’s part of the vetting process. But let’s stop with the juvenile insults (a hair product joke, really?) and the defeatism. It isn’t productive.

  • mariagomez

    this particular judge. But it is a fact that Perry did support this judge. But you are correct, I was wrong in using the word “appointed”.

    But the point that I was trying to make is that all politicians compromise, for instance casting support to one candidate instead of another in order to curry favor with voting blocks.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Myers. She never had a hearing.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    What else have you lied about with respect to the candidates you’ve been fixated on at RedState?

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Dubya is the best appointer of conservative judges known to man. He learned from his father’s mistakes.

  • nathanalbright

    ….that she’s a good metaphor for the flip-flopper extraordinaire from Massachusetts, whose true political philosophy remains a mystery known only to himself and his Creator, perhaps?

  • Scope

    Today there is another hit piece on Gov. Perry, written by Robert Spencer, over at American Thinker. It is very similar to the Pam Geller, Perry is a radical jihad sympathizer because he appeared in the same location as Grover Norquist, article she did a few months ago. It truly could have been written by Geller. Both Geller and Robert Spencer have written books together.

    Googling around, I find that Robert Spencer has been promoting Mitt Romney. Walid Phares is Romney’s middle east adviser. Spencer and Phares sit on the same board together for some anti-jihad group. From what I’ve read Walid Phares was invited, and then disinvited to speak at King’s radical jihad hearings held a few months ago on capital hill because of his eccentricity. Robert Spencer immediately came out slamming King for not allowing Phares to attend the event.

    For those supporting Perry, please go over to AT and leave a comment supporting Gov. Perry. From reading the first 10 or so comments, most are calling Spencer out for writing an article with no facts or proof of anything. He begins the article by calling Perry a drunk because of his NH speech. Romney and his tentacles will stop at nothing to win the nomination.

  • jgge

    there is a huge difference between being connected to Wall Street people such as the case with Obama and being a Wall Street guy himself such in the case of Romney. In this environment a majority of voters would not tolerate a nominee who is literally a Wall Street guy and a CEO of a financial firm. Bain Capital business is to sell and buy companies and in the process many people lose their jobs. You are going to find a lot of these people who lost their jobs because of Bain Capital on TV and radio ads and being interviewed all the time on TV and radio by the liberal media.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Mr. Obama “bailed-out” Wall Street.

    In addition, Obama’s campaign contributors represent an “A” list of Wall Street denizens.

    But don’t let that get in the way of promoting Obama’s sophism.

  • jgge

    candidate can beat Obama. It would be very foolish to think this way.

  • mustango

    Bit of a tangent, and I am probably in a scant minority on this, but I’ve always contended Harriet Miers was the single greatest political decoy in my adult life. GWB knew the Dems would have the knives out for his first SCOTUS nominee, so he called up a friend who was willing to take a few arrows for a greater cause, getting the nominee he really wanted, after the Dems had used up all their political will defeating her.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Of course. Mitt has become more conservative over time.

    Newt has moved to the left over time.

    Perry, a former Democrat, has moved to the right over time.

    Reagan, a former Democrat, moved to the right over time.

    To flip-flop would mean to move to the left and then move BACK to the right, over time.

    just saying

    Gamecock loathes lazy, innacurate language.

  • nathanalbright

    ….but I wouldn’t put it past him either.

  • jgge

    everyone candidate = every candidate

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    at the state and federal level in history.

  • tea4me

    You got everything right all the way up to your last couple lines. Romney will NOT win the nomination. And Obama will NOT be re-elected.

    Did you have a bad day while posting this? Let?s keep the optimism high?

  • nathanalbright

    …except that Mitt sometimes seems to equivocate on his prior positions, and show fleeting evidence that his change more conservative is merely tactical and is not genuine, which leaves many of us (myself included) rather skeptical.

    I wholeheartedly agree that we want people to turn more conservative over time, as part of a consistent narrative of growing maturity or repentance from youthful folly.

  • reggie182

    I’m talking about crony selections in the administration in general.

    Alberto Gonzales

    Michael Brown

    etc.

    Michelle Malkin to her credit was quite vociferous in calling him out on it.

  • jgge

    Obama is connected to Wall Street

    Romney is literally Wall Street

    In the eyes of a majority of voters that is a big difference. Bain Capital business is to sell and buy companies and in the process many people lose their jobs. You are going to find a lot of these people who lost their jobs because of Bain Capital on TV and radio ads and being interviewed all the time on TV and radio by the liberal media.

  • iidvbii

    Obama is licking his lips at the thought of Romney. Consider the game board for the match up.

    Obama gains considerably by Loosing some primary weaknesses,

    Romney can’t attack Obamacare with any credibility. Obama can simply point out the truth. “I used your plan Mitt!” Point Obama not only would we loose a powerful avenue for attack, we will all look like hypocrites to the independents. Really we railed against government healthcare for 2 years and then chose its architect as our nominee?

    Romney can’t attack Obama on cap and trade again Obama proposed almost an exact duplication of Romney’s plan. Ditto hypocrisy line. Point Obama.
    Is Romney going to breech gay marriage? Doubtful again ditto hypocrisy lines. Is Romney going to breaching immigration? Ditto again…. You must be seeing the point here.

    Next consider Obama and his campaign’s strategy so far. Class warfare come to mind? Really we are going to run a certified one percenter, wall street insider who made the money he didn’t inherit by buying companies laying off the domestic work force and shipping the jobs to China? I mean really? You can’t see how this is going to turn out? I can write Obama’s ads and talking points myself and I hate the guy…

    Romney will guarantee an Obama second term.

  • tea4me

    Let’s get real everyone….

  • Marcus_Traianus

    So I am not ready to concede, pout, prognosticate, ally, divide, promote fratricide or commit seppuku.

    We currently have the worst President in the history of our country occupying the Oval Office. If we can’t beat him with my dog, there is absolutely zero need for the Republican Party, Hannibal ante portas

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    nothing else. I would say that given Bush’s sterling judicial appointment record before Miers, I certainly trusted his judgment on a woman he knew for over a decade, over the opinions of the Beltway or the clueless at Redstate.

    I do understand the disappointment that he didn’t first appoint a proven, known Bork Federalist-vetted veteran appeals court judge.

    Plus, isn’t Mitt’s sin that he hasn’t flipped enough and sooner? Mitt has “flipped” to the right on many issues. I am unaware of any flops back to the left.

    The reason he is only ahead of Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum and maybe Newt, is that he is not a bold enough, nor conservative enough on enough issues. Not because of any “flops” BACK to the left.

  • jgge

    is that despite that Perry is way down in the poll still he is the most hated and attacked by Romney, his supporters, many on the right, and of course all the Left. What do they fear about this man that they are still piling on him despite his low standing in the polls? Is it because deep down they know that polls may be totally meaningless at this stage and that Republican would end up nominating the person with the strongest record and that is Perry? May be they still remember the McCain dead primary campaign in 2007-2008 primary season and how everyone pronounced totally dead all the way until few days before the first vote was cast in the primary. May be they remember the assured nomination of Guiliani and Hillary Clinton. May be they even remember the assured nomination of Howard Dean in 2004.

  • nathanalbright

    ….that unlike Newt he has trended more to the right since leaving Massachusetts to go national. Still, I see his true political beliefs as somewhat enigmatic, similar to the way I viewed Miers, though I probably would have been more favorable to her had I known more about her. And that’s how I see the similarity between the two, though certainly a similarity of their support among “establishment” and cronyist types is also present.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    that the accusations of incompetence by the Left were unfounded.

  • mariagomez

    And anyone but Obama.

  • jgge

    It is amazing that the so called “smart” folks on our side cannot see the obvious. If the Democrats want to create the dream opponent who would fit their well know class warfare political game they could not come up with better opponent than Romney.

  • mariagomez

    None of them is pure. Even Santorum supported Arlen Spector over Toomey.

  • bzip

    We have a problem with a segment of the conservative base, as I see it. With about 75% of the conservatives looking for an anti-Romney candidate I ask what is wrong with Romney that so many people don?t want him?

    I personally know why, Romney flip flops to what every position will get him elected, Romney is liberal in many positions, Romney mandate in Romneycare. In general Romney has a poor record of conservative positions.

    What are your reasons for not supporting? I ask because it seems a large percent of people who oppose Romney yet seem to support some of the other candidates that in my opinion aren?t any better or even worse than Romney.

    Newt:
    We have one candidate that has been in the business for so long he is more of the pro-politician than the anti-politician. The same candidate has a list so long of baggage you couldn?t fit it all here, he has flip flop on so many conservative hard core issues such as the mandate and global warming, he has ethic violations, has lobbying ties ? just for starters. Yet the anti-Romney folks have gone full tilt for this candidate, Newt Gringrich. Newt basically could not win in the general election with the baggage he has. Somebody explain that to me.

    Cain:
    Then we have candidate that has never held a elected off before, no track record to look back at to see how he would potentially govern. He has made more gaffes then Biden, (I didn?t think that was possible), he knows nothing about foreign policy. He has a lose temper when confronted by the media (a loose cannon, not every presidential). He has two sexual harassment allegations that have had settlements of some kind with two other women claiming sexual harassment (even If not true this present a huge problem in the general election, he couldn?t get enough of the women?s vote). He presents a 999 plan that is a liberal dream comes true with a new national sales tax, tax increases on everyone, wants to write into the tax code affirmative action ?empowerment zones? all very liberal. He can?t seem articulate his message well in interviews, always blaming others for his lack of substance (he didn?t understand the question, he was only joking, etc). Yet the anti-Romney crowd seems to have gone for Cain. Cain like Newt basically could not win in the general election with the problems he has. Somebody explain that to me this one to me.

    Perry:
    The guy has never lost an election, Perry is the longest serving governor (as far as I know) three terms as governor. He has over 10 years of governing experience, over ten years of a conservative record and from what I have read, researched 99.9% of his record is a record of a true constitutional conservative (sorry but nobody is perfect and 100% would be insane to expect). There is very little baggage, most of which could easily be explain. Perry is great in interviews, on the stump and even his debates are becoming much improved and competitive. There is a long list of his conservative position and his consistency in his conservative governing. Yet the anti-Romney crowd seems to have thrown Perry under the bus, (the one and only true conservative with no baggage), a consistent conservative record that most would die for.

    Explain to me why Perry was thrown under the bus for Cain and or Newt? My best explanation comes down to the silly debates and how much people not only pout weight on them but seem to only be interested in one thing, how well the person debates ? that inspiring speech debater as opposed to any conservative principles. I don?t know but somebody needs to explain what has happen to the ?conservative? anti-Romney crowd because I sure don?t understand it.

  • mariagomez

    I was careless in typing “appointed” instead of “supported” and I’m sorry for my carelessness. Of course I was not trying to lie. All of us have the internet at our fingertips, can do independent research, and lies are quickly revealed. Sorry for my carelessness.

    I’m a conservative who supports anyone but Obama.

  • adamd

    You make some excellent point which I agree with, as I have stated I am no Romney fan.

    But every attack on Romney for being associated with Bain capital there is a counter attack on Obama which is as bad if not worse.

    Wall Street public enemy #1 is Goldman Sachs. We all know their role in the financial crisis. Quick recap – they would be bankrupt if not for a $185B taxpayer bailout of AIG which the first thing they did was cut Goldman a check for $13B, they created CDOs to fail and sold them to accounts as normal AAA rated instruments, they took TARP money and claimed they did not need it (which was false) and lastly the perjured themselves in front of a senate hearing. Obama took $1mm from them in 2008. He also is friends with and considered their former CEO Corzine as Treasury Secretary. Corzine led to the bankruptcy of MF Global were there is currently $1.2B of missing clients money. Corzine will likely go to jail. If Obama attacked him, Romney would run ads associating Obama with Goldman Sachs and it would be neutralized.

    Also if Obama even tried to attack Romney over Bain capital firing workers, Romney would just run an ad saying under Obama 2.5mm jobs lost, unemployment at 9.0% with real (U6) unemployment at 16.2%.

    I hope Romney is not our nominee. I would vote for him, but much like Bush in 88, 92, Dole in 96 and McCain in 2008 it will not be the most enthusiastic support. But if he is the nominee he will have the capital and counter arguments to any attack Obama could use on him.

    All the Republican nominee needs to do is win the same states Bush did in 2000 and/or 2004 and whoever the nominee is should be able to accomplish that feat.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    I will take all the people that allegedly “lost jobs” over the current 9% unemployment directly attributed to Mr. Obama and the Democrats policies.

    Next, you should commence proving to me who actually lost jobs directly attributed to Bain, which is a true-stretch based on what I know of their business. Oh and when Romney was involved. Not in the history of Bain. I could be surprised, but doubt it.

    There seems to be an inordinate amount of parrots, lemmings and Chicken Little impersonators running around these days warning us of the evil Wall Street guys. I guess Obama’s tactics are working on a bi-partisan basis.

    And to think folks are running around saying he has not done anything bi-partisan.

  • stardalo

    Let me preface by saying I will enthusiastically vote for any republican candidate. I don’t know but I think Romney is the only candidate that can beat Obama. Now, everyone will say, Romney is just like Mccain and we all know how that plays out, etc, etc. However, I think Romney has the ability to get nasty which is what Mccain should have done and now he would be President Mccain. Also, remember, Romney has been around the block and he has a squeaky clean family life and there does not seem to be any major skeletons in his closet. Which is a great thing because now he can focus on the economy rather than defend himself the entire campaign.

    I believe that the key here is Romney needs to pick a VP like Huckabee. He does that and we are golden. I think Huckabee can really inspire the base and he definitely seems ready and willing to support Romney. Game over.

    Lets go through the other candidates:

    1.) Newt – He brilliant. However, he has a horrible past, married several times and seems to be quite the womanizer. Explain to me how many ladies will go vote for him? His only excuse for his past actions are that he has found god and now has a good relationship with his kids and grand kids. Come on, he can not even defend himself. Women hate this guy. And lets not forget he got forced out of congress.

    2.) Perry – He is definitely a viable candidate but does not seem to be getting any traction. I personally think he is over. But eh does have a lot of money.

    3.) Huntsman – he looks like a sissy. Come on now.

    4.) Bachmann – NO CHANCE.

    5.) Ron Paul – God forbid he runs as an independent. He will take enough of the vote to get another 4 years with Obama.

    6.) Herman Cain – He handled the sexual harassment thing horribly. He has NO Foreign Policy experience and it shows. And lets not forget he is a STAGE 4 cancer survivor. He can not win.

    7.) Santorum – He does not seem to be gaining any traction but I would not count him out yet as you never know and no large negatives have come out about him.

  • gekster

    What do you do about Romneys flops.
    What do you do about Romney changing positions to pander for the votes he needs.
    What do you do about Romneys lack of core beliefs,
    which seam to change for the office he is running for.

    He ran as a left leaning independent for the Senate seat for Ma.
    He ran as a center left Republican for Governor of Ma.
    He is now running center right for Republican President.

    Has he ever held any position for longer than an election.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I have some free advice then, for what it’s worth: spend less time bashing GOP candidates and more time bashing Democrats. :)

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    He is not a conservative per se. He has some good qualities for a President and a leader, I would say, but he is far down my list.

    I want a Reaganite!

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    no text

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    His 20% is a ceiling and a group of pretty solid supporters that are not going to switch. The Non-Mitts must garner their 50%+ support from other Non-Mitts.

  • jgge

    of the debates is really cheapening the whole race for the Presidency. It is foolish for voters to think that 30 seconds sound bytes and 3 seconds zingers qualify someone to be or not to be a good President. Presidents do not and must not govern with 30 seconds sound bytes.

  • ihateliberals

    No Dole and we would have had a conservative president not Bill Clinton. McCain has always been a Liberal and has never been nor wil be a conservative. It use to be if you said republican it was synonymous with conservative. But when Reagan left office and George H W bush took over we haven’t had a conservative Republican candidate. His son was no better then he was. i knew for positive we were in trouble with Bush when he started talking about hte thousand points of light. I knew he was liberal when Reagan picked him ass his VP but that had to be back in 1980. I consider Reagan’s biggest failure was keeping Bush for his second term. We need to be more careful when electing Republicans and to make sure they are not RINO’s like Boehner, McCain, Snowe, McConnell etc. I am all for Newt Gingrich and would very much like to see Michele Bachman as his VP choice. I am a Mormon and I wouldn’t vote for Romney on abet.

  • reggie182

    Rick Perry is 99.9% conservative?

    Would you call the Trans Texas Corridor a conservative proposition? It was a proposed government land-grab of vast proportions. It was perhaps the most significant proposal of Perry’s tenure. Thankfully it has thus far been stopped. It’s remarkable that the issue has merited so little discussion. Perhaps this is because Perry’s lackluster debate performances have been focused upon, and have distracted attention of it as a noteworthy issue.

    As for the rest, yes he generally has a conservative record. It should be noted that he is in a deep red state. He has a Republican Lt. Governor to work with. He has a Republican legislature. A Republican State Supreme Court. Preserving the status quo of a pro-business environment that existed in Texas before he ever took office is a good thing, but not exactly extraordinary.

    And yes, he’s never been defeated for Governor in ten years. Two of the primary reasons for this are:

    1. In the general election he is a Republican running running against Democrats in a state that has been ideologically conservative for many years now.

    2. He continues to run for Governor.

  • cwfoster

    I hope that no one’s been drinking the Karl Rove Kool-Aid! That sap is just a shill for the establishment GOP! His actions in Delaware and Nevada in 2010 proved that. If the establishment candidate loses in the primary, totally abandon the race, and allow the winner to sink with zero support. I on the other hand WILL hold my nose and vote for Romney, if it comes down to that (like I did with McCain) and expect the same results (like Erick) as 2008.

    “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting different results”- Benjamin Franklin

  • citizenjerry

    Where are we heading? If you anticipate four more years of Obama, what do you think will remain of the America we knew? Will we ever be able to dig our way out of the abject destruction “the man who would be God” has wrecked on our nation? Just something to think about. And have a Happy Thanksgiving.

  • tailfins1959

    Refusing to participate the Thanksgiving Family Forum was a middle finger to conservatives. Before that, I considered him good enough. I will nominally vote for Romney if he is the nominee, but he won’t get one minute of my time.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    .no…text.

  • Tbone

    I want to get it clear that you are talking about Herman Cain, the pizza guy?………………………….OK, what I think about Cain is ………..no, that’s not it………………….I got so many candidates swirling around in my head…………………..

  • stardalo

    I personally think Romney’s flip flops will be just minor noise in this election cycle. The economy is horrible and is the primary issue. Most regular people don’t pay attention enough to care exactly what side of every issue Romney is on and I feel have rather neutral feelings towards him, therefore will not have any problem pulling that lever to vote him in. But they are sensitive to the negative woes the economy can have on them and their livelihood. And they know and understand Obama is not doing a good job (is that an understatement or what??, LOL).

  • Ann_W

    Newt anyone… Hypocrite, Perry, … intolerant rube, GWB reborn, Cain… blunders, women. And the media will back him up on any of them. Romney is not the horrific candidate that you all try to make him out to be. Calm down and stop being afraid of Obama.

    We’ll all just hit back as hard as we can to show what a disaster Obama has been and how much better ANY of the Republican candidates would be than him.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    There was nothing here “beating up” Romney… the numbers are the numbers… this is one interpretation.

    What isn’t productive is Candi-bots acting like there isn’t a problem with Romney when it comes to the base of GOP voters… 25% ceiling isn’t that hard to break if you’re the best candidate… so what’s Romney’s excuse if Erick’s commentary is so off in his analysis?

  • jgge

    Most voters are much easier led by emotions than logic. Even if I agree with you on the logic side, most voters would follow their emotions and Obama can make it hell on Romney in this category.

  • Ann_W

    That is all.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I hope you’re now volunteering, sending money, or doing some sort of grassroots work to prove him wrong. :D

  • Ann_W

    These are the types of comments that go around during elections. Just like the over the top comments about Romney being as bad as Obama that Perry supporters routinely make here.

    I wish there were a better candidate in the race, but really, “his tentacles everywhere”. You have a future in community theater.

  • heraklios

    Is to nominate Mitt Romney, tick off the entire conservative base and drive some of them to vote third party or stay at home…as long as we don’t do that, 2012 is in the bag for the Republicans….

  • carolynr

    Believe it or not…it is Perry himself. No…I’m not jumping ship.

    He has taken his values/mindset and expected that of other people. Not all people in America put America first…if you get my gist. Perry does. So, how does Perry turn these whiners around to see his point of view? Talk about his policies that put money into their pockets. Talk about their benefits…let them answer the questions posed. “Suppose we let you put part of your SS deduction in US Savings Bonds. At least you get a return on your dollar and it’s in your name…nobody can steal it. Is it safe..well it is if we keep American economically viable. You have other choices…but this is as safe as one can get. What do you think people…would you rather keep some of your hard earned money or let Congress spend it on a Solyndra?”

    I wrote a long article on this on another thread. The reason that Herman Cain was so successful is that he made the people believe he was one of them and they were part of him. Doesn’t have the experience or the wisdom to be president, but that was his rise to fame. I have watched him work a crowd…first hand. Why is it that all of you like this clip from Hannity 03…look at the crowd…he is part of them and vice versa. What he needs to do at townhalls and public appearances is talk about how they are part of America…how they will benefit. How they will be able to chart their own future.

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch…Romney and Gingrich are fending off attacks (well deserved) and not pulling in the crowd. The “I’m the brightest bulb in the room deal” with Gingrich will wear off fast. Let them attack Obama. We all know the man is a fool and anti-America. Nobody has to tell them that. The best way to pull a person into your boat is to ask them questions and let them answer it. They have now become part of your campaign. With a congressional approval of 9%, we need a leader…and if Perry fires up the crowds with questions about policies…they will get the point…because…don’t you see….IT IS THEIR IDEA…NOT PERRY’S.
    Oh…how the ego can work for us.

    So Doc S…or anybody else out there…if you think this has validity…get it over to Perry’s campaign headquarters. To prove the point. Remember the debate where Perry asked the question of people from NH if they wanted a sales tax on Herman’s 999 Plan. They saw the flaw in the plan immediately…not from Romney’s apples and oranges metaphor.

  • heraklios

    Do the gals think he’s good-looking or something? To me, he seems like the biggest wuss in the field!

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    after 60+ years of remaining intentionally ignorant? Not very…

    I still favor modified 9-9-9….but also like Perry’s Flat Tax.

    Perry is the most reliable conservative in the race.

  • certainlytruth

    If you examine Mitt Romney’s record,

    1. He is a complete liberal. He was the “Father of Gay Marriage” to America….he illegally instituted gay marriage in the state of Massachusetts under his governorship, when there was NO LAW ON THE BOOKS to legalize it and still to this day, it is illegal and against the law in that state.

    2. Mitt signed in to his healthcare law a $50.00 tax subsidized co-pay for abortions.

    3. Mitt Romney (THIS IS THE TRUTH) believes that when he dies, he will be given his own kingdom/planet to populate with spirit babies…so much more about this…the truth is stranger than fiction here.

    I highly recommend that everyone gets and reads this book: CAN MITT ROMNEY SERVE TWO MASTERS? The Mormon Church Versus the Office Of The Presidency of the United States of America. His complete and true political record is laid out in this book….and his deep and personal religious beliefs will astound you.

  • gekster

    I think most ‘are’ concerned about his flopps.
    The problem with Romney is we know about Romney,
    who he is, or isn’t, depending on which day it is,
    and at least avg 75% want someone else.

  • ihateliberals

    The Republicans have the Majority of the house but the House votes liberal a majority of the time. 56% of the time since January of 2010 the House has voted Liberal. Numbers from the Heritage Foundation. Until we stop electing these conservative wanna bee’s we are going to get things better. Even if Romney is better than Obama which i doubt, he isn’t going to be better enough to make things better. He is still a Tax and spend liberal. he is from Massachusetts for God’s sake. there aren’t any conservatives there. he was the designer of Obamacare. do you thnk he wil get rid of it? We need a true conservtive not only as President but in the House and Senate. Every Republican up for re-election should be examined to make sure they are not RINO’s. The People of 8th district in Ohio should not send Boehner back to tDC. If they do then they are part of the problem as were the people of AZ for sending McCain abck.

  • bzip

    Interesting, in a 10 year period of governing you seem to point to only one issue (though I suspect somebody might come up with one or two more issues on Perry’s ten year record).

    Don’t you think in a 10 year period that even the best will have one or two issues that aren’t the most ideal? Like I said, 99.9% consistent conservative record.

    Now before you start blowing more smoke on this issue and perhaps the reason why it hasn’t been talk much about is because you have been listening to the liberal media talking points that don’t offer facts.

    I suggest you talk a look at Rick Perry Report with loads of information on the topic:

    http://rickperryreport.com/faq/trans-texas-corridor

    http://rickperryreport.com/faq/trans-texas-corridor/criticism

    http://rickperryreport.com/faq/trans-texas-corridor/eyewitness-account-how-rick-perry-killed-trans-texas-corridor

    http://rickperryreport.com/texas-state-rep-wayne-christian-endorses-rick-perry-president-full-text#overlay-context=

    Now I’ll take Perry’s record including the couple mistakes he has made over the 10 year period compared to “anyone in the race”.

    That includes that the flip-flopping Newt and his ethics violations, lobbying ties, his liberal mandates, global warming or even the naive Cain who has sexual harassment charges and can’t keep his foot out of his mouth.

  • heraklios

    Both Harvard Law School, elite east coast, patrician, out of touch, insufferable &*%#@*s!

  • cheetah2

    They all have weaknesses to attack, but Obama’s weaknesses are far more glaring.

  • heraklios

    but I sure like Sam Alito!

  • cheetah2

    We could take this diary as a warning!

  • cheetah2

    He is the least qualified candidate. He promises he will surround himself with highly qualified experts to guide him as president yet he has done the opposite in his campaign.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    (my paraphrase) to educate himself about foreign policy and economics. He wants to outsource it to experts – but since these are all contentious issues, the outcome will be determined by whom he selects, which he isn’t telling. This is governing by abdication.

    Sorry, as President, you are the leader – you need to have basic convictions on these matters. You can’t vote “present” and shift responsibility elsewhere.

    Otherwise, it’s a crap shoot as to what we get – and so far Cain has been throwing 11s.

    We can’t afford to have the office of the Presidency further diminished in this manner.

  • theone3434

    which bailed out Wall Street Bankers was supported by and passed by the GOP/Bush. Let’s not get our facts mixed up here.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    Let’s just say Cain’s been making losing throws – and there’s no reason to see anything different in the future.

  • robbyshankar

    Unless of course you are bashing Romney, in which case, feel free to bash away

  • thosjefferson

    This is a brilliant tactic, Erick. Most Americans want a pragmatic President who will reduce and simplify government, uphold moral values, and uphold the Constitution. This is what Romney stands for, and so they will vote for him in overwhelming numbers.

    What many Americans fear is a conservative version of Barak Obama; i.e., ideological, contentious, and confrontational to the point of yet more gridlock. We all know that would mean continuation of the bloated federal government, no change to entitlements, etc.

    So the more RedState opposes Romney, the more comfortable most Americans will be with him.

    Nicely done.

  • Whacker77

    For most of the past year, I was strongly opposed to Romney. I thought we could do better and fully expected a competent group of candidates to run. To be fair, I don’t think the establishment we was fully behind Romney at the start, but something unbelievable happened on the way to 2012. None of the top tier choices decided to run.

    This is the real crime of 2012. Our best choices (Jeb, Christie, Daniels, Thune, Pence, Barbour, and even Rubio) chose not to run. I think it scandalous the way they left the country in a lerch, but they bowed out. As a result, they left us with an embarrassing group of novelty acts who, I feel, muck up the whole process.

    Because our A Team fled the field, we were left with the D Team and have been forced to treat them as if they were the A Team. A year ago, a field this lacking in depth and credibility would have been unthinkable, yet here we are. Seriously, was anyone really ever clamoring for Perry until everyone else said no? I think we’re seeing why he didn’t plan to run until the last minute.

    I know many have softspots for some of the candidates, we’ve had to contort ourselves to make it work. Bachmann was always a loud backbencher with a penchant to say anything. Santorum lost his home state by 18 points. Cain was a good business man, but knows little on policy and has shown it. Paul? Please.

    After rolling though all the possibilites, now we’re stuck on Newt. He was reprimanded by the House and has said just about everything on anything. He’s not even that conservative, yet there he is at the top of the polls, even after his campaign fired him. It’s sad and it’s crazy.

    I’ve resigned myself to Romney because he’s the only plausible choice. Still, he’s infinitely better than McCain or Dole. That doesn’t mean I’m in love with him. I just wish we had fought harder to force one of the bigger names into the race. In fact, I still wish Jeb would reconsider. He has the ID to pull it off and save us.

  • heraklios

    Trust me, a Romney nomination = 4 more years of Barry O. Bank on it.

  • reggie182

    Perry’s having supported the Trans Texas Corridor is not a minor mistake. It was an idea that was outrageous on it’s face and should have been outright rejected in lieu of the political pressure it provoked.

    Here is a link I could offer. It outlines other problems with a Perry candidacy.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/08/cowboy-corporatist-rides-rescue

    These are problems aside from the fact that he is ill-prepared to run for national office. That he does not speak well on his feet. That he does not come across as someone particularly well steeped in national issues. These are problems aside from the fact that Americans are not exactly clamoring to put a inarticulate and swaggering Texas Governor back in the White House. Whether equating Perry with GWB is fair or unfair, it is will be done.

  • monty2

    just know too much about him I guess. So who next? How about giving Rick Santorum a chance? He’s been a solid conservative and hasn’t had any of the problems that some of the others are coming up with as they become the cream that rises to the top, only to curdle the next day.

  • forgiven

    The first time I saw Mitt Romney at the Olympics I said to my husband”He is going to be President”. I don’t know why I thought that but I am afraid that it might be true. I do not want it to be true and I hope my thought was wrong but the way he is being pushed by the establishment makes me wonder.
    I would love to see Gov.Perry pick up the pace with the publlic and be able to erase the perception of him as not too swift. I know that is not true, but the public is really gullible and if a candidate is not glib and does not have ready, shallow answers for them, they fall for the media hype that he could not be that intelligent. We conservatives want someone who takes time to consider their answers and tries to be as honest as possible. But alas, most cannot see through the difference between cheap veneer and solid oak.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Concur, particularly after Rick’s performance on FNC’s “center seat” last night.

    My little foray of a fortnight ago [The DeMint Gambit] is out of my system, and my contribution to Michele on Sunday-p.m. [matched by Guzzardi] was explained to her National Finance Chair as a reflection of her presence @ the ZOA-Dinner [and her fantastic speech], her superb positions [mirroring those of Carolyn Glick] and her eyeball-to-eyeball candor during a mini-reception; he was told–as I was completing the form–that we ["The Bob," Guzzardi and Dr. Bob] have been Perry-bots for almost 1/2 year.

    In any case, hope springs eternal regarding the upcoming debate!

  • monty2

    and there would be no really ugly surpises coming out that would make him the flavor of the month. Huntsman is a real conservative, he’s just not a crazy conservative. So if not now then when?

  • joecollins

    Give yourself a few days off. Chow down on turkey with bacon drippings. Watch football. Toss a ball around the yard with some kids and a dog. Put your feet up.

    No one has started voting yet. All sorts of things can still happen.

    We’re not ready to hand this thing over to Romney yet.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and then you will want to revise your assertions [and document them] accordingly, eh?

    And if you remain reticent, check-out this compilation….

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/10/31/mitt-romney-the-magically-malleable-man-of-mystery/

    {If you refuse to recant, consider changing your “name” … lest you besmirch the Constitutional Conservative tradition of this Founding/Framing Father.}

  • iidvbii

    Care to expand? I have heard Perry attacked on alot of fronts but this is a new one for me.

    Certainly Obama will try to attack each of our candidates. That doesn’t mean we should just all agree to give him the one guy that doesnt stand a credible chance of carrying our attacks to him. Romney is the least likely to win.

  • monty2

    if we don’t get behind a candidate that doesn’t have baggage then Romney will be the candidate. Time’s a wasting.

  • gekster

    Your backbone is as strong as Romneys.
    You two deserve each other.

  • kaheo

    is not always your friend! Yes we’d love to get Obama out but if simply nominating an Obama imitation will satisfy us, then how can we still be mad at O? Is Romney better than Obama because he is not him and has an R next to his name?

    The other problem with nominating Romney – he could negatively affect the House and Senate races. If conservatives stay home, Dems could pick up seats that they could otherwise have not won.

    I doubt that the 75% anti-Romney crowd will be able to get rid of Romney at this point given how divided we are. Newt will probably implode in mid-December. He’s just too arrogant and he also has a lot more baggage than a loaded 747!

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    are essential to the job he seeks. That he remains so despite years as a talk radio host shows how narrow was his show here in Atlanta.

  • redmymind

    I used to think it served a rhetorical point pretty much in the line of “The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come” (hope I got the title right) so as not to let said nomination actually occur . . . sort of a “reverse psychology,” if you will, but now I’m beginning to think that it may just backfire (if the inferred intentions hold true) into a “there’s nothing we can do about it” self-fulfilling prophecy amongst folks who may be less discerning.

    Not a single vote has been cast, and “inevitability” assessements like this, I think, serve more to create distortions in judgment rather than encourage one to zealously support a particular candidate–which is what this nomination is all about: getting the best person out there to take on BHO.

    For me, that person is Governor Rick Perry of Texas, for all the reasons my esteemed colleagues here at RS have been stating all along (far better than I could ever hope too, I might add)!

  • heraklios

    Please go back to the New England/NY/Cali hole you crawled out of and disappear from here!

  • Ann_W

    And don’t tell me to leave, you nitwit.

  • Bill S

    Prevent Mitt Romney from being nominated. Period.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …because many people were urging Perry to run a year ago. Remember how he said, “I wouldn’t have written ‘Fed Up!’ if I’d thought I’d be running for POTUS”? This was prompted by his having been rumored to be running, way back when.

    Guzzardi and I [and my son] anticipated he’d announce @ the RedState Gathering [I led the charge] and ensured that there was a modicum of representation from those north of the Mason-Dixon [as anyone who attended the Q&A may recall]; we had a BLAST!

    The prejudice against his Texas origins [which obviously can't be altered] may actually be a code-”word” for anti-Evangelical bias. To those who admit this sensation [and, in my circles, tragically, it's not too difficult to evoke a confession], I pull the Mormon card, but only to illustrate the foolishness of such an unfair rejection.

    If your entry has comparable origins, you may wish to engage in some sort of self-contemplation. If it doesn’t, then pray-tell what you consider to be so very deficient about Rick. And if you remain silent, I will assume the diagnosis related in the first sentence supra has been validated.

  • Ann_W

    But you already started to see this with him in their coverage of his big prayer meeting in Texas, the way he is so inept at debates, the rock issue, etc. As a northeast conservative who talks to lots of republicans and independents that aren’t inside the RedState echo chamber, I’m telling you that there are many people who will be persuaded with that argument.

    I find your overblown criticisms of Romney tiresome. Having him as the nominee would not be the end of the world that you make it out to be, even though I could think of many I’d rather have than him. Supporting Obama by staying home as you have indicated would be very destructive of this country.

  • mindthegap76

    I don’t disagree that Romney has issues with the base or that he has had trouble getting over 25%. Those are well known facts. So I question the need for yet another post harping on those facts and bemoaning “four more years of Barack Obama.”

    I also question the wisdom of the juvenile insults. If Romney is the nominee, which EE says he thinks will happen, EE (and other Republicans) are going to have to get out and support Romney over Obama. How are those folks going to do that with a straight face after a primary season of beating the drum that Romney is unacceptable? Talk about flip-flops.

    The ostensible reason for this news story was Newt’s surge to first place in the polls. Yet aside from mentioning his lead, there’s no discussion of Newt at all. Just a gratuitous excuse for yet another post ragging on Romney.

  • Ann_W

    It’s probably just because you aren’t running.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …that the pro-Perry bloggers on RedState disperse.

    I have hit WaPo and Politico [often, the only blogger!], and I would think that the great-minds here would want to share insights with broader audiences. If memory serves, Nathan Albright listed a few, recently–including American Thinker, American Specctator, Hot-Air–and we would probably be able to bring-back our blogging experiences to RS, thereby honing our arguments further.

    For example, as I wrote earlier, as I charged $180 [and completed the forms] as a contribution to Michele [along with Guzzardi], we both told her National Finance Chairman [James L. Pollack jpollack@bachmannnq.com] of our preference for Perry, emphasizing his experience as pivotal; he has walked-the-talk and has consistently produced deliverables. He may have been taken aback, but The Bob has done this to others, as well.

    The point, here, is that we need to fan-out, reinforce the positives in others, and ensure we cover our bases on behalf of Perry @ RS. As Guzzardi noted subsequently, supporting Michele was akin to reinforcing the anti-Romney movement, noting how both are true-Conservatives [in all three realms]. Rick has started advertising in-earnest, and his supporters must flame-out aggressively in-concert with his effort to re-introduce himself to the GOP-voters.

  • johnnyappleseed

    I agree on your points, the problem is most of the bloggers on here just can’t see the forest for the trees.
    Unless we all settle down and let the primary process play out, and support the winner, we are all going to be doomed to another Obama four year fiascal.

    “If we do not hang together, or we will certainly hang apart”…..Franklin

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    She’s the one who said she’s anyone-but-Obama. That wasn’t my idea.

  • gekster

    then they have all been ‘beaten up’.

    And since it is the primary, look for the ‘most’ conservative candidate.
    At this time, it isn’t Romney, as has been pointed out.

    Conservative in the primary, Republican in the general.

    If it’s Romney, he will get our support, but as of yet, he has not won anything.

  • thosjefferson

    You could make a list of so-called flip flops from Thomas Jefferson’s work, as well. Thoughtful, educated, and dedicated people throughout history have demonstrated open minds capable of learning and adapting to changing circumstances. Only close-minded fools never change their minds.

    An excellent example of this is Barak Obama, who refuses to change his mind despite overwhelming evidence that his policies have failed.

    Besides, the alternatives to Romney are an inarticulate, confused governor from Texas, a pizza businessman with no knowledge of foreign affairs, and a former speaker who enriched himself from Freddie Mac and other clients who hired him solely because of his government experience and ability to “persuade.” His saying he never lobbied is like Clinton parsing the meaning of the word “is.” None of these would stand a chance against Obama.

  • thosjefferson

    What’s funny is that most readers here would enthusiastically support Christie, yet he himself supports Romney. Does that forever disqualify Christie now?

    I like Christie a lot. His endorsement of Romney makes all the difference.

  • johnnyappleseed

    I miss the big”O” being anonymous too, better yet just being gone.
    2012 comes a rolling.

  • Whacker77

    Spare me the troll crap. You just don’t want to face the fact this crowd of candidates is a pathetic lot. You know who else said that? Erick Erickson last week.

    Romney is the only plausible candidate because the rest of the field is totally implausible. If you really believe Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich, each of whom have no national organization or money, can defeat Obama, then we disagree.

    The idea of a Perry candidacy looked great on paper and I supported it because I didn’t want to support Romney. Unfortunately, Perry has shown nothing in the debates and the debates have been the entire camapign.

  • Whacker77

    Where did I say I was a die hard Romney supporter? Let me answer that for you. I didn’t and I never will. In fact, I said I was resigned to Romney and feel he is the only plausible choice. That doesn’t mean he is a great choice.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    You need to look at the context behind the changes.

    From what I understand, Jefferson’s changes were often “against interest”.

    Romney’s changes seem to be “in accord with self-interest” – in other words, timed and framed to curry favor with more voters at that time.

    In other words, Jefferson had deep convictions that he did stay consistent with. I don’t see that with Mitt Romeny, but rather see expediency and opportunism as dominant.

  • iidvbii

    It?s hard to understand if you weren?t here at that time, by I here I mean Texas of course. The Trans Texas Corridor. For those of you who have been looking for a leader with vision able to produce the grand. Governor Perry does not disappoint. Here in Texas we have a very diverse economy, yeah I know you think it?s all cattle and oil. But energy only really makes up 17 to 20% of our GDP. Technology, Services, Agriculture and increasingly Manufacturing are growing to larger portions of our pie. Friends we had an idea to add to this growing diversity. An Idea as big as Texas itself, The Inland Port. Imagine state of the art high speed rail, and dedicated freight super highways appearing from every point of the compass to feed automated fulfillment centers and new and expanded air freight terminals on a scale so large it would become the center of fulfillment nationwide. Yes we were plotting against our cousins in Tennessee and all along the Mississippi river who have managed to dominate the logistics markets. Our sinister schemes were going to change the game hopefully for good. Jobs to build it. Jobs to Maintain it. Jobs from all those companies who came to take advantage of it. Jobs from the markets that supported them. Yes we are talking job creation Texas style. Governor Perry had the plans, the financing arranged and the contractors with the background to deliver picked out. With majority support of the legislature in his back pocket and the eager support of the Texas business Community Perry made his pitch. The people of Texas loved it. Then something began to happen, men in squirrel hats began to show up at city, county and state official meetings accusing Perry of power grabs. The democrats screamed favoritism, they too accused Perry of overreaching and paraded supposed ranchers in front of the cameras claiming the ?Dictator? Perry was stealing their land. Horrible terms like Eminent Domain were hurled as accusations and new terms like globalist where used as attacks. The discussions became heated, passions rose and tempers flared. People chose sides, the ammunition was passed out. Texas was a powder keg just waiting for a spark. Into the very center of this hornets nest stepped MAO SUNG Perry himself. With a crooked smile and a wistful sigh he withdrew the proposal. The squirrel hatters returned to their Ron Paul books and the liberals traded knowing smiles. The inland port was dead. Later he passed a law strengthening eminent domain protections for Texas land owners. Sometimes late at night as my wife and children sleep, I can?t help but think back on those scale models and remember Shakespeare ?Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these?.. It might have been.?

  • ceili_dancer

    but hold fast to what is true. In this ADHD world we line in, having the capacity to change our positions is given, but if it is wrong, why go there? There are certain laws in society and nature that will not change even if you are so smart that you think it should be different.

  • mindthegap76

    As I said in my original post, I’m not opposed to posting new facts critical of a candidate. That’s the vetting process. My complaint is the gratuitous shots that are being taken. There’s nothing new to report here.

    I appreciate the difference between supporting conservatives in the primary vs. the Republican in the general. But the third part of Redstate’s mission statement is that “we aim to win.” We’re hurting our ability to win by making it tough to give straight-face support to Romney if he’s our candidate in the general. That’s part of the reason for Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment. I don’t mind criticism, but we should spend more time talking about the positive aspects and the positive visions of all the candidates, rather than endlessly recycling the same negative talking points about one candidate.

  • westcoastpatriette

    is, indeed, honorable.

    Changing your mind, however, to appease and cater to whomever need catering to at the moment, is despicable. Something you seem unable to detect in your man, Romney.

    You sound delusional in your assessment if you think Romney is the best candidate on the stage. Ever consider changing your mind on that one?

    Never mind. I didn’t think so.

  • Whacker77

    What a load of nonsense. I’m dumber for having read this. Because I don’t care for Perry and his numerous gaffes, I’m anti-Christian? Wow. That’s a major stretch and you should be more careful as to whom you accuse of a religious bias.

    On paper, Perry’s campaign looked great, but he has proven at the debates he’s just not ready. His weak answers and missteps demonstrate to me he doesn’t currently have the depth of knowledge to be preisdent. Debates and how one presents himself to voters does matter and Perry has flopped.

    Frankly, I’m insulted you feel I need some sort of self-contemplation over his religious views. Take your wordiness and take a long walk off a short pier. I’m Catholic and attend Mass each weekend. Frankly, I don’t give a damn whether Perry’s evangelical or whether Romney’s Mormon, but apparently it matters a great deal to you.

  • mindthegap76

    Sorry, this was meant to be a response to Gekster far above. Accidentally misposted as a new comment here.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    …but that doesn’t translate into him being a suitable candidate for President. He’s also still in his first term, which means the jury is out as to 1) how well his program will sell; and 2) how he will stand up against he inevitable counterattacks.

  • gekster

    Christie a liberal?

    excerpt:
    1. During the 2009 campaign for governor, Christie endorsed New Jersey’s relatively strict gun control laws. He also won the endorsement of the New Jersey Environmental Foundation, becoming the first statewide Republican to do so in 30 years.

    2. Just a few months ago, he stated in a speech that global warming was “real” and “manmade,” adding that “when you have over 90 percent of the world?s scientists who have studied this stating that climate change is occurring and that humans play a contributing role, it?s time to defer to the experts.”

    3. Christie has accused conservatives in his state of demagoguery on immigration. And in 2008, while he was still a U.S. Attorney, he told a New Jersey Latino organization that “Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime. The whole phrase of ‘illegal immigrant’ connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime.” The comment prompted Lou Dobbs to call for Christie’s resignation. Christie’s staff later explained he was merely making a technical point about the law.

    So Christie is not the conservative you believe him to be.

  • iidvbii

    In fact I think I justify my position very well. However if you would like to detail where you think I am wrong, I will certainly read it. If not, thats fine too.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and he has dissed his competitors by claiming only he relies on “science”!

  • jgge

    many people on our side who would be persuaded and are persuaded by the facts that Mitt Romney is not to be trusted due to his liberal policies and believes and there are many independents who would be persuaded that they are not going to vote for a literally a Wall Street guy.

    As far as I am concerned I will only vote for President if Perry or Gingrich is the nominee, everyone else are not worthy my vote, and hopefully we can keep the House if we lose the Presidency.

  • bzip

    I think you really need to read the letter directly and thoroughly;

    Most Conservative State Representative in Texas Endorses Rick Perry for President – Explains Trans-Texas Corridor
    http://www.texasgopvote.com/2012-presidential-election/most-conservative-state-representative-texas-endorses-rick-perry-president-expla-003248

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …as I wrote a few days ago; he poisoned himself to Iowa, TEA Party adherents, Evangelicals…and the scope is NATIONAL.

  • Scope

    you knock someone’s post as being “not thoughtful”, and then post your own comment that could have come from a 7 year old.

  • jgge

    religion a campaign issue? Name one Republican candidate who went after him for his religion. There is none.
    Obama would indirectly play on Romney religion, make no doubt about it. If Romney is the nominee, by elections day 2012 most voters would think that Mormonism is a cult.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    …and Spencer is single-minded on radical Islam. Why he thinks Romney is going to be better on Islam is beyond me. Perhaps those who follow his blog better can explain.

  • Scope

    and when you look at the fact that Romney tied his dog to the top of a car, for a 12 hour trip, you see the not so pretty inside of Romney. There’s a reason some refer to him as the Ken doll. Everything is for show, and not even skin deep.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and she feels that a dichotomy may exist between Zionism and toleration of Islamism. She knows – as does Robert Spencer – that there is ongoing disagreement with this worriment [which is now seven years ancient] and much of what he wrote represents circumstantial evidence.

    Pamela claims she received e-mails from the parents of students who were exposed to this program; it’s been on my “list of things to-do” for months – out of respect for Pamela/Robert, and Rick’s “people” will be asked to clarify this issue whenever the opportunity arises in Philly.

    BTW, she likes Michele [not Romney], so there isn’t [at least in this instance] an overtly coordinated hidden-agenda.

  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

    who has taken swipes at those who don’t agree with his specific religious beliefs on global warming and evolution, characterizing them as anti-science rubes.

  • Scope

    At least you made it through one post without saying that people hate Romney because of his religion. You’re getting there.

  • gekster

    shows you have already quit.
    Quiting doesn’t require a backbone.
    Giving up doesn’t require a backbone.
    Staying in the fight and trying to get the most conservative requires effort.
    Quiting doesn’t require any effort at all.

    It’s the easiest thing to do.

  • jgge

    We went through much bigger crisis in our history including a civil war, a great depression, two world wars, etc… Obama could not even prevent the extension of the Bush tax cuts when he had super majority in Congress. Obama is a socialist but we are lucky that he is too impotent to accomplish his destructive socialist agenda.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Perry prevails, because…
    1.) Newt ? Statist/Elitist who still supports the Individual Mandate.

    2.) Perry ? He is using his money and TV-appearances to reintroduce himself; if nothing else, his sincere humility has been on-view.

    3.) Huntsman ? Democrat.

    4.) Bachmann ? A lot of verbal extremes, positive and negative, but no real deliverables.

    5.) Ron Paul ? Dangerous.

    6.) Herman Cain ? Celebrates Foreign Policy ignorance, lacking gravitas.

    7.) Santorum ? Big spender, with a social agenda that would repel Independents.

  • therightsknight

    They thought the same thing about John F Kennedy when he was elected. People that were against him tried telling the American public that he would be taking direct orders from the Pope. Obviously he didn’t. I’m not Mormon but I just thought you might like to know that.

  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

    Yesterday’s appearances by the candidates were interesting. Perry was on the hot seat with Baier, Williams, Krauthammer, and Kristol. Krauthammer did everything but roll his eyes and Williams interrogated him about whether the GOP was not compassionate toward immigrants. I think Perry fielded the questions well, including Krauthammer asking him if he would commit right then to a sunset feature to the dual feature to his tax plan. Perry said it wasn’t a bad idea and he would consider it (but wisely declined to commit).

    My husband, who does not follow politics, LOVED the part-time congress idea. He has a throw-the-bums out attitude about politicians right now and after hearing that, he was ready to vote for Perry. (When I told him Perry rides a motorcycle, that sealed the deal for him.)

    Romney, OTOH, fielded softballs in a one hour infomercial with Hannity. I was bored into an unconscious state. I am not kidding. I dozed off at least twice. It was that boring. There was nothing interesting, exciting, or groundbreaking. I imagined long, droning, uninspiring State of the Union speeches by Romney and it depressed me. There is no way this guy can match Obama’s charisma. No way Romney beats him.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …please note that you bash Perry when he indeed is articulate; listen to his commentary on FNC “center seat” last night.

    He is getting into a groove; do you like his policy statements?

    PLEASE, don’t compare your postings with the erudition of TJ; as JFK said a half-century ago, the greatest brain-trust @ dinner in the White House would occur whenever TJ ate alone. {paraphrased}

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and you may wish to chat with your Priest about the dangers of rendering hasty-judgments.

    I raised the Mormon-criterion only to illustrate hypocrisy, and it was effective in selected conversations.

    I hope this response has been sufficiently terse.

  • therightsknight

    Then man have I got some property to sell you in Florida (respectfully kidding). But seriously, this line that Romney and Obama are the same person is old and tired. Are we supposed to discount everything Romney says in his speeches and debates? Can we not see some of the conservative principles he put in place for Massachusetts? I don’t know why no one can listen to him now and see that even if he is a “flip flopper” then at least he’s flipped to the side of conservatism. Which is what we all want right? I would much prefer to live in the America that Romney proposes than the one Obama proposes. I think we all need to stop being so quick to tear down someone who is generally working to be on the side of conservatism and stop making insane comparisons that he is like the far left president we have now. He wants to be a conservative, and no he’s not the most conservative but he’s certainly not Obama in any way shape or form.

  • streiff

    is that documented criticism of the empty suit they are supporting is, in their warped little minds, the same as lying about another candidate.

    Just amazing.

  • Scope

    Geller came out with this same hit piece on Perry not long after he got into the race. It was discussed here, and the fact that there was no evidence or proof that Perry was a jihad lover, the issue was dismissed almost as soon as it came out. It was a very similar type hit piece as the rock story was. One implied Perry was a racist, the other implied Perry was a radical islamist supporter. There is no evidence to prove either charge. It is the politics of personal destruction that only a Romney campaign would copy from the progressives.

    Perry doesn’t have to address this idiocy at all, just as he didn’t have to address it the first time it was printed. Other campaigns strategists believe that if you keep hitting a candidate with one charge after the next, even with no proof of anything, you take that candidate off their game, and cause them to spend all their time on the defensive, rather than allowing them to stay on their message. Perry doesn’t have to even go their with this garbage, other than to tell an inquiring reporter to come back around when they have a story.

    I didn’t say that Geller is a Romney supporter. I said that Robert Spencer and Walid Phares, the eccentric, both sit on an anti-jihad board together, that apparently has ties to many Jewish groups. Phares is Romney’s middle east adviser. Spencer has written very positively about Romney because he was the only one to use “radical jihad” in one of his ads.

    The hit piece has Romney’s finger prints all over it, but of course through a third party which makes Romney look innocent. Did you read Leon’s diary here a few days ago talking about Romney doing this exact type of thing.

  • streiff

    are his supporters that insinuate the only reason to not support Romney is his religion.

  • therightsknight

    He’s not backing someone who he thinks will be the most conservative. He’s backing the guy who he thinks will win. Also Christie only appears so conservative right now because he had to race so far to the right to save New Jersey. He’s always been more moderate than people are giving him credit for. I don’t think he’s as far to the center as Romney, but he’s from the Northeast, and by definition most Republicans up there are moderate. A backing for Romney was easy for him because he believed that Romney would win, and Romney is closer to his own political leanings than most of the more conservative candidates. I am a huge Christie fan, but his backing of Romney was only to give Romney the biggest boost as he was still in the news right after deciding not to run, and also so he would pick the winner. He didn’t want egg on his face when he decides to run for another election, and he had just backed someone who lost in the primaries.

  • heraklios

    If Romney is the nominee, no way he gets my vote, money or support.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    …to help get to the bottom of this.

  • bobguzzardi

    Chris Christie is a good guy but he is NOT a conservative.

    Opposing unions’ monopoly power is necessary but it is not enough.

  • bobguzzardi

    Appealing to imaginary independents and middle will not win. Bold plan that changes the direction of our country is what wins and what is needed. Slowing the Titanic would not prevent sinking.

    We need new people in the wheelhouse.

  • bobguzzardi

    Give ‘em hell, Perry

  • mindthegap76

    The Supreme Court alone is reason to support any Republican over Obama.

  • thosjefferson

    One of the most famous of Jefferson’s flip flops was the Louisiana Purchase. He opposed government borrowing and at one time wanted a constitutional amendment to prevent the federal government from borrowing. But when the opportunity for the Louisiana Purchase came along, he reversed positions and issued federal debt to pay for it. Nothing in the Constitution gave the Federal government authority to enter such a transaction, either. This flip-flop became one of his most popular actions as President.

    So this is one example of Jefferson not staying consistent with his “deep convictions,” but instead responding pragmatically. In what way was the Louisiana Purchase “against interest” as you put it?

  • gekster

    if we don’t do it here and now, just when do we do it and where.
    I agree with the cheapshots thing, as some only have that to give.
    But I also think that getting the dirty laundry out in June or later will be too late.
    Lets air it out now and get it cleaned up.

  • jgge

    and the blogs who are way overrating the debates. It is really a shame that you people want the President to be picked based on his debating skills and his 30 seconds sound bytes and 3 seconds zingers. You people are causing a massive damage to the Presidency by overrating the stupid debates in such an insane way. Presidents do not govern and must not govern in 30 seconds sound bytes and 3 second zingers.

    May be next time the debates obsessed people should be wearing a T-Shirt with their candidate picture on it and eat nachos with salsa and drink beer while cheering their candidate uttering meaningless zingers and sound bytes.

  • heraklios

    Justices like William J. Brennan, John Paul Stevens, Harry Blackmun, and David Souter were all appointed by RINO Republican Presidents. We are worse off with these type justices because they create the perception that all constitutional scholars agree with the “living document” liberal theory of constitutional jurisprudence.

    Another Epic Fail by the Romneyites….

  • thosjefferson

    Hmm, so Romney changed his mind and ended up reaching conclusions closer to your own views, and you think this is delusional?

    I didn’t know which candidate on the stage would be the best until I watched the debates and read more about their positions. I’d be happy if there was a better candidate, but the others are either uninformed, inexperienced, inarticulate, or inflexible. I like Gingrich, whom I’ve met, and there’s no doubt he’s smart, but the last thing we need is someone who profited off his government position. That’s exactly the type of crony capitalism that we have to eradicate once and for all, and Gingrich is the poster child for it.

    So my mind’s open to every candidate, always has been, and none of them is perfect. But I’d rather have someone who earned his money in the private sector than by leveraging his government position and influence, whether he calls it technically “lobbying” or not. Apart from Romney and Gingrich, none of the others are smart enough, experienced enough, or articulate enough to defeat Obama.

  • thosjefferson

    Perry is inarticulate because he’s unclear in his own mind. First he thinks his opponents on illegal immigration are “heartless,” but now he’s taken that back, supposedly. His idea of a part-time Congress is both ignorant and irrational. You really want to let the administrative agencies have free reign? I could go on and on, if you wanted.

    All I’m saying about TJ is you ought to study what he actually wrote and did instead of some imaginary and idealized image of what you wish he was like.

  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

    We need to draw a sharp contrast between our candidate (and policies) and Obama. Draw a line in the sand.

  • mindthegap76

    I strongly disagree. First, the justices you site are somewhat idiosyncratic cases. Brennan and Blackmun were appointed at a time when there was overall less focus on the Supreme Court and were in fact thought to be moderate to conservative at the time of appointment. Stevens started relatively conservative and moved to the left over time. Souter was an unknown who was appointed largely on the basis of advice that turned out to be bad?if you’re interested in the topic Jan Crawford’s book “Supreme Conflict” walks through the events that led to the Souter selection.

    Although it is possible that a Republican president will mess up and appoint another Souter, at least we have a chance to get it right. We’ll certainly exert all the political pressure we can (see, e.g., Meier for Alito). And in the case of Romney, we can be encouraged that he has selected some phenomenal folks for his judicial advisory committee, which is being led by Robert Bork.

    By comparison, I can guarantee that Obama’s appointments will all be horrible, in the mold of Sotomayor and Kagan, and there is little we can do to stop it.

    I don’t know why you’d even think of taking that chance with the next 20-30 years of Roe v. Wade and other significant cases on the line.

  • thosjefferson

    I would hope all conservatives would support the person who will win against Obama, just as Christie did. That means someone who appeals to the majority of Americans.

  • omegamale

    What you said today about Romney:

    “Mitt Romney is the Harriet Miers of the 2012 election cycle. He is only a conservative because certain Washington conservatives tell us he is conservative.”

    What you said 4 Years ago about Romney:

    ?So if the Presidential Preference Primary in Georgia were tomorrow, I?d vote for Mitt. Sure, he has waffled on social issues ? but I think that highlights his pragmatic approach to politics. He was never going to get elected as a pro-life candidate in Massachusetts and he knew it. I won?t fault him. I think, if he gets elected based on conservative support, he won?t betray that support in office.?

    Weren’t YOU the one that was telling us Mitt Romney was a solid conservative?

  • GR

    I have a hard time understanding why republicans eat their own! There is so much anti-Romney stuff out there, yet he continues to cruise along with the support of about 25%. Republicans have a tendency to eat their own until we destroy our opportunity to actually win. Let’s focus more on the failed policies of Obama rather than working so hard to destroy a particular candidate in order to nominate one who hasn’t got a chance of winning. We have seen the rise and fall of Bachmann, Perry, Cain and now Gingrich. Personally I like Gingrich, but I am just waiting for the slip to occur on him, who then, Paul? (Give me a break) Romney continues through it all to maintain his 25% or so. If he maintains his base, we at some point need to all get behind him. Here are several conservative ideas for which he stands for…

    1) Get rid of Obamacare
    2) Reduce Spending-Balance Budget
    3) Reduce tax rates
    4) Increase Military
    5) Has a handle on Foreign Affairs
    6) Track record in creating jobs

    Now, I maybe wrong, but this looks pretty conservative to me! Regardless of who the nominee is, we all need to support him/her before it’s to late and we end up with another 4 years of Obama.

  • uselogic

    He makes Bob Dole seem energetic by comparison. I ended up flipping over to see what watches were selling on ShopNBC.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …Romney doesn’t even appeal to the majority of Republicans!

  • Aaron Gardner

    Which you conveniently leave out. From the end of the post that you quote:

    I’m not in his camp permanently. I’m there now, but watching for someone I think is a better candidate. So far that person has not emerged. Well, okay, Brownback has my heart, but I don’t see him really going anywhere right now. If he can convince me otherwise, I just may have to jump ship.

    And this, ladies and gentlemen, highlights my frustration with the Republican lineup for 2008. My candidate, Jeb, is not running. I’m left, at the moment, with several choices. The one I’d prefer (Rudy) won’t get me with his presently held views on social issues. The one I’d love to go with (Brownback) just isn’t viable right now. That leaves Mitt Romney and Insane McCain — and that, as it is, is a no brainer for me.

    So basically, Erick saw Mitt as the best in a flawed field. A field that was made up of entirely different people, save Mitt.

    It really isn’t that hard to square if you are willing to be intellectually honest.

  • redmymind

    I’d feel awful lonely out there and miss the esprit de corps! Losing pttx333 for a week or so is tough enough!!! . . . not to mention the fact that I’d have to tie half my brain (not a lot to start with anyway) behind my back just to get through to the folks outside of RS!!!

    Good point, though, Doc as always! Three cheers!!!

  • uselogic

    There’s gotta be an epic cartoon in that one. GDub as Ninja.

  • pragmatist2012

    Yep, I’m pushing 80 and I can remember the only year in “recent history” that the US was in the black. Those were good years when you could count on Democrats supporting John L. Lewis and the coal miners, not antigovernment anarchists. When it was a big deal that the McCarthy hearings went after a few left wing Hollywood types. Or when it was unthinkable that a marxist type could occupy a seat in Congress or government offices. When families could live with one breadwinner and stores, not banks, issued credit cards and there were was gold in Fort Knox.
    To my point… Santorum is a quality, highly motivated, conservative but in front of the world, sadly he will be outshone by the competition and the popular media. The “woman/man on the street” won’t get convinced he can represent the US in the complex world of international political ambitions. Between Romney and Perry, Paul and Huntsman. Rick Perry would look the most human, the toughest presenter, and that leaves (Bachmann not withstanding) Gingrich and Cain where Newt appears to be the most unyielding, toughest world class debater and sadly that’s what all this could come down to; a first impression at the podium. We can ignor the past. That’s history. Here’s to the future. Obama must not get a second term. We just can’t afford his brand of governance. I like Newt.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …Guzzardi and I often piggy-back, using e-mail notification.

    If you ever crave a lifeline, use r.sklaroff@verizon.net

  • westcoastpatriette

    of his own–whichever way the wind happens to be blowing is the way Romney blows. This is why he is keeping such a low profile I am sure as he does not like being called out for his hypocrisy–which will continue to dog him whether he wins the nomination or not.

    And should he win, Obama will cream him.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Tonight will be crucial.

  • gekster

    you should do more than take the Romney, and leftist talking points about Perry.
    It is clear you have ignored all of Perrys ads that are out there, let alone his last debate.

  • omegamale

    We have always been at war with Mitt Romney.

    What Erick said was that Romney would not betray conservative support if he became President, and went so far as to endorse him for President. There were other candidates to the right of Mitt Romney in 2008 so you can’t use the excuse of “everyone was so terrible I had to endorse a non-conservative Republican for President.”

    In his latest piece today, Erickson is now saying Romney is a fake conservative, not that there is simply a “better” option this time with a different candidate.

  • Aaron Gardner

    You are interested in implying people are hypocrites.

    Have fun with that.

  • Whacker77

    Your response was sufficiently inane and the last person from whom I’d like advice is someone who thinks most resistance to Perry and Texas is code for anti-Christian thought.

  • redmymind

    I love air support! . . . Count me in, then!

  • Ann_W

    Gingrich has flip-flopped on global warming, individual mandate, Ryan’s budget, staying in Iraq, Libya, etc. He’s a walking weather vane. Makes me think that your unsupport of Romney may have something to do with a different issue.

  • Ann_W

    nt

  • Ann_W

    It didn’t deserve a thoughtful response.

  • Ann_W

    Because of backstory that people forced in. I just think he probably was trying to avoid that again.

  • Aaron Gardner

    nt

  • septembergurl

    thinking, rsklaroff!

    Advancing true conservative candidates, even those who are not our first choice, in primaries where they have a chance of winning or scoring, is the only way left to us to stop romney.

    Kudos to Glenn Beck, by the way. He has endorsed Bachmann for President, with Santorum as backup. Imagine that…a talk show screamer who claims to be a conservative endorsing the two most conservative candidates in the race.

    You won’t find any of the big names doing this because they have boxed themselves in by hyping questionable candidates (Gingrich and cain, eg) when they are “attacked” by the LSM. This may be good ratings fodder but it is ruinous to our primary process. Also not helping is the proliferation of commentary (J. Rubin a good example) which is presented as conservative while engaged in campaigning disguised as punditry, or the influence of single issue groups and groups such as Tea Partiers and the Family Values group (Van der Plaats’ outfit).

    The Tea Party? Just this weekend the Missouri (I think) TP had a straw poll with the usual results: winner, Herb Cain, a former lobbyist, second Ron Paul (an extremist) third Newt Gingrich, a former lobbyist with thirty years’ experience being very inside Washington. Not only are these three not reliably conservative, they don’t even reflect the tea Party values (except rhetorically).

    In other words, in pursuit of a chimera (single perfect candidate we can rally around) we are being manipulated (by the LSM, yes, but by our own media as well) to assume loyalties to issues and candidates that serve the media’s interest more than our own. In the process good conservatives like Perry and Bachmann are raised up and hurled down, while Santorum and Huntsman are simply ignored.

    Erick’s post is a reminder of what’s at stake if we don’t get our act together. Right now the choice we are offered comes down to Romney, Gingrich or Paul. None is a conservative.

  • Ann_W

    I think Newt has more, actually. I want him to tell me. It just doesn’t make sense to me.

  • monty2

    That’s like saying we can ignore Romney’s past. But you’re right about Newt making a good impression on the podium. And for that matter, if we are going to ignore the ‘past’ then Romney would do likewise.

    No, I have to disagree with you on ignoring the past friend. So would several others make a good impression on the podium and Rick Santorum is one of them. Besides, we know where he stands with his religious beliefs. The only one I’m afraid of is the other Rick who has a habit of letting the young Rickie out to play too often. Especially when the hard questions start coming and the hard questions have been softball compared to what’s coming.

    In any event, it’s a good fruitful discussion as long as nobody starts bashing on anyone specifically. We all have our choices and we all have our non-starters.

  • Aaron Gardner

    ntnt

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    …as I have only a cursory understanding of the Purchase.

    Jefferson was in office – often that’s where ideals mash against realities of governance. This is different against an unforced switch during a campaign.

    When I take a gander, I would see the “against interest” is that Jefferson was going against his party in this matter, meaning that he was cutting into his support base. This is that opposite of switching to expand ones support base.

    But since Jefferson did gain new support elsewhere, the assessment comes down to whether Jefferson took on his base because of the exigencies of office (which would be “against interest”) or if he adopted favored the Purchase principally because he was pandering to broader popular opinion. The answer is beyond my historical knowledge.

    But I hope you see the distinction between the two types of switches.

    And again, I see Romney are almost always switching to his perceived advantage.

  • Scope

    that supported Palin because she was “cute.” I don’t particularly care one way or the other but, that, and that “other issue” sure have your panties in a wad.

  • paladin1

    Romney for the obvious reason that they are alike; both are mushy Republicans whose conservatism has been magnified by their governorship of dark blue states and, in Christie’s case, whose supporters swoon every time he yells at a union. There is more to conservatism than these perceptions, and although Christie may have a bit more fiscal conservatism that Romney, he needs the time to show it.

    In fact, the embedded New Jersey Democrats are happy to use him as their front man to deflect the ire of the New Jersey unions and entitlement junkies off of themselves (even as they compromise and vote with the Christie Republicans enough to pass legislation) and onto him to accomplish what even the most rabid Dem can see is an old-time failed liberal system which is bankrupting the state.

    He has made some headway with some of New Jersey’s fiscal issues but has indicated his support for Obamacare by refusing to sign on to any of the challenges. He knows that New Jersey stands to gain a great deal of extra funding if Obamacare stands and he is willing to sacrifice some of the most conservative principles for the money to help bail out New Jersey.

    Lastly, he has not even completed a first term yet, in order to compile a suitable track record. In this manner, he is a mirror image of the current president who was vaulted into power on a mantra of “Hope and Change”. That lack of a record and paper trail did not work out so well, so why any thinking person would believe that Christie is a conservative is beyond me.

    Your hypothesis that most readers here would enthusiastically support Christie is incorrect.

  • paladin1

    that reads, “my kid and my cash go to A & M”. I understand toning down the attacks and supporting other conservative candidates when they are unfairly attacked but Governor Perry needs all the financial support. Its kind of like hedging your bets or casting pearls to financially support more than one candidate. Just my two cents; the other $49.98 I sent to Perry. :)

  • thosjefferson

    The only talking points about Perry I’ve paid attention to are his own. He just can’t speak clearly. Even his last debate–which was his “best” of the lot–was mediocre at best. Watching him debate Obama would be as painful as watching the inept McCain debate Obama–except at least McCain could speak clearly.

    Perry’s ads are as ludicrous as most political ads. I’m in Texas and I’m having a hard time finding anyone here who isn’t embarrassed at Perry’s performance.

  • jgge

    what issue would that be? Let me guess: Mormonism. Absolutely not. I do not even think about this issue for a second. I am against Romney because he is simply a liberal Republican. Just watch the youtube videos about him when he was running for Massachusetts Senate and then Massachusetts governor. His views are simply horrifying for even a middle of the road conservative.

  • thosjefferson

    According to your logic, no one appeals to the “majority” of Republicans. Therefore, the Republicans should not even nominate anyone.

    Poll after poll shows Romney is by far the most popular second choice, and he’s usually #1 or #2 as the first choice.

    Ann Coulter has some good insights on this issue:

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/16/if-not-romney-who-if-not-now-when/

  • jgge

    the ugly religion card the same way that Obama, or even Cain and his supporters have used the race card. Really disgusting.

  • thosjefferson

    here wouldn’t enthusiastically support anyone. No candidate has approached 50% popularity among conservatives except maybe before they got in the race and people learned more about them.

  • renl57

    Because of their personal histories, Gingrich and Cain can’t win the votes of female Independents. And the Dems are already making hay out of Gingrich’s connections with Freddie Mac.

    And Gingrich energizes the *Democrat* base more than Romney does. They hate Gingrich’s guts over the Clinton impeachment and the welfare reform deal, and they will work like mad to beat him.

    Voters north of the Mason-Dixon Line will automatically be suspicious of yet another candidate from Texas (Perry), after all the others from LBJ to Bush 43. The Dems are already gleefully quoting Molly Ivins: “Next time I tell you someone from Texas should not be president of the United States, please pay attention.” It’s the mirror image of the feeling that the GOP base has over Romney being from Massachusetts.

    The big advantage that Romney has, is that the Dem base can’t get worked up into a rage over him. He’s just not that controversial. Obama can’t paint Romney into the kind of “extremist” monster that they can paint Gingrich. And Obama can’t paint Romney into the kind of “typical dumb Republican from a redneck state” that they can paint Perry.

    Romney is like the “stealth bomber” candidate. Doesn’t fly at high supersonic speed, but he’s sure hard to intercept. By either party. :-)

  • bzip

    I guess we have to agree to disagree. I have found Perry to be very understandable, very articulate in his interviews and in his more recent debates.

    For me, I honestly can say Perry is very clear in what he is saying. I don’t know how you can even come close to what you just wrote but each person perceives things differently.

    I am proud to call Perry my candidate. I am proud how Perry’s policies, his positions, his vision and how he handles himself.

    To me there are other candidates that are a complete embarrassment to the GOP and to the conservative base (can we say ethics violations, f;lip-flopping on the most basic conservative principles, can we say sexual harassment charges/allegations, gaffes that would make Biden a prince).

  • Massachusetts_Transplant

    I’ll chime in here. My thoughts are well known – but here we go again.

    1) Still waiting . . . . I asked in another one of these Romney pile-on threads for people to show me even a single example of Romney using Republicans and/or conservatives as foil to ingratiate himself with the media? It is something that John McCain did regularly, and that we have seen from Huntsman in this campaign. Yet, Romney is compared to McCain here – yet the same folks that do so, can’t bring forth a single example of Romney acting like McCain in sing the GOP as foil. Still waiting . . . .

    2) I think its funny, that the same people that want to cut government spending are blasting Romney for cutting jobs while at Bain. At the end of the day – isn’t it a perfect fit? Just as Romney blodlessly axed bloated, unneccessary positions to make an enterprise profitable, he’ll have no such qualms about slashing government positions as well. Its something he tried in Massachusetts – with the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority and other entrenched patronage havens, but with limited success, b/c the Dems blocked him at every turn.

    3) The Supreme Court is critical. I am confident that Romney will appoint good conservatives to the Court. Of course, who can we trust, even Lawrence Silverman (Reagan appointee) and Jeffrey Sutton recently screwed us with Obamacare. Newt supported Dede Scozzafava, and Perry was a Dem that supported (gulp) Al Gore and I guess “flip-flopped” to become a Republican. No one is perfect.

  • renl57

    …how will you sell “yet another Texan” to voters north of the Mason-Dixon line?

    …how will you prove to voters that Perry is not just George W. Bush version 2.0? (Because Bush left office with some real low approval ratings.)

    …how will you get Perry to do his homework and sharpen his debating skills?

    Remember, this is not *me* saying those things. But unlike some other folks here, I’m trying to anticipate what strategies and tactics the Dems will use against the GOP candidate. And we had better be prepared for those.

  • gekster

    When you go about not wanting to see anything, then you see nothing.

    I guess that makes life easier for you.

  • sunshinek67

    :(

  • sunshinek67

    * :( *

  • red_oakster

    Never the bride means never the bride. If Romney can’t close the deal by Florida, he’s not going to be the nominee. And right now, the results look to be scattershot in the early contests. That means a brokered convention in all likelihood-one which will nominate someone not currently running.

    Second, the American people show every sign of wanting to fire Obama. The election of 2012 is not a choice between two candidates. At this point at least, it’s looking to be a dismissal. And if Romney does manage to win the nomination, he would beat Obama as would virtually any GOP nominee. So cheer up Erick! And start thinking about whom a convention ought to draft.

  • giatny

    There’s plenty for Republicans to be excited about
    Romney, he’s NOT Obama. That’s enough for me.
    Newt Gingrich is not electable and with the emotional
    maturity of a 1st grader, he should not be. If the
    Repubs don’t wake up to reality, Obama will win
    in a walk.

  • renl57

    In 2009, Gingrich supported Dede Scozzfava in NY-23. (Anyone else besides me remember that?)

    http://tinyurl.com/yzdpqne

    And before that, Gingrich supported Medicare Part D.

    But what’s most interesting is that RedState.com was never thrilled about the Gingrich candidacy–until Cain and Perry both stumbled. Last summer, there was no real support for Gingrich here on RS.

    http://tinyurl.com/4xlxg7m

    Gingrich is just the new Cain, who was the new Perry, who was the new Bachmann. You’re trying hard to convince yourself that he or she is a good choice, just because you’re desperate to find anyone who’s not named Romney.

    If Rubio or Ryan were running for President, no one here would be pushing Gingrich. If Perry hadn’t stumbled in the debates, no one here would be pushing Gingrich. He’s just the latest “un-Romney.”

  • gekster

    People who pay attention see Romney for who he is.
    And like a leapord, he can’t change his spots,
    and that is because he is constantly trying to change his spots.
    And the only time Romney was #1 in a poll was because no one else was over 25%.
    Anyone who polls over 25% puts Romney in #2.
    If he is so popular and so conservative, why can’t he break the avg 25% range.
    He’s been running now since 2007, and can’t get no where past his base.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    When you trot-out Rick’s support for Gore in 1988, your credibility tanks.

    Actually, I’m glad, because that way the rest of your tangential comments don’t have to be addressed…and debunked.

  • renl57

    What Romney “fears” is that any candidate from Texas will automatically be viewed by the GOP base more favorably than any candidate from a Northeastern state.

    Romney knows what he’s up against: The center of gravity of the GOP base–culturally, politically, and geographically–is much closer to Texas than to Massachusetts. Any candidate from Texas would have that advantage over any candidate from Massachusetts, even before one looked at their bios and policies and plans.

  • changeforrickperry

    I noticed today that Perry is in the same place according to the All-Knowing Polls (/sarcasm) as McCain last go-around: 11%. Hmmmm…

    I get the feeling that we won’t know a thing until people start voting, how about y’all?

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    ..no…text…

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    because he supports the Republican every time even when a lot of people think that’s a bridge too far?

    I honestly think we’ve reached the point where words no longer have any meaning.

    Say what you want about someone that is loyal to the Party to a fault, but flip flopper has no meaning here.

  • theredrider

    Some of you here are too young to remember the primary season of 1988. We had some conservatives running like Pat Robertson, the darling of the evangelical right. We had Bob Dole, who was then considered a conservative (before the party moved to the right in the 1990′s). And we had George Bush (the H.W. wasn’t added until 2001 for obvious reasons).

    George Bush wasn’t liked or trusted by the far right. But he had the support of the majority of Republican primary voters.

    In the general election, he trounced Mike Dukakis. Bush got the GOP base out and a lot of support from moderate Republicans and Democrats. He won 40 out of 50 states, including states like Maine, Michigan, Vermont, New Jersey, Maryland, Illinois, Delaware, and Connecticut.

    There was a lot of boohooing when Bush became the GOP standard bearer. But when voters realized that it was either him or Dukakis, the choice was fundamentally easy.

  • theredrider

    Sorry. I break into song sometimes.

  • loachdriver

    If Perry takes his case to those of us who’ll vote in the primaries & make our voices heard ion the caucues, he stands a good chance of rebounding.

    It has become evident that Rush Limbaugh was correct when he said that the Republican establishment does not want a conservative to be nominated. IOW, if Perry is to be nominated, it’ll be done over the bodies of most of the entrenched establishment, an important arm of the Romney campaign.

    We know George Will, a powerful voice in the establishment, is not a fan of Romney. Indeed, he’s contemptuous of Romney.

    I’m aware that I’m not the only military veteran who simply won’t vote for Romnney even att the risk of 4 more years of our foolish Marxist. presently in the WH

  • robbyshankar

    The best thing about Redstate is how streiff feels the need to personally insult those who have a different opinion than his own.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    ..-no-text-..

  • http://rightcal.blogspot.com/ Calvin Freiburger

    .

  • bobguzzardi

    thanks Paula.

    Appeasement did not work with Hitler
    It does not work with Arabs in Judea and Samaria and Gaza and it won’t work with northeast Liberals of either party! Peggy Noonan, Anne Coulter and the rest.

    Rick Perry is the only candidate who has attacked Social Security and the “Entitlements” head on and named three places in the budget he would cut, the corporate cronyism at Commerce and Energy and the worse than useless Dept of Education.

    At appropriate time, I think Rush, Sarah, Glenn and Sen. DeMint will come out for Rick. Michele Bachmann is dynamite but no governing experience.

    Like our country in Nov. 2008, Rick had a brain freeze and, as he recovered, so will we.

    dr. bob and I live in southeast Penna.

  • center77

    and people metion Romney’s record of cutting jobs because he is running as a person who has created thousands of jobs. In reality, Romney has been part of the problem: sending jobs overseas, downsizing companies, and mass lay offs. While Gov. he was 47th in the nation in job creation, and this was while we had a much better economy that we do now. Yes, I understand he gov. a blue state, but he did it like a liberal, and its likley if he had thrown is political wind detector in the garbage and governed like a conservative his state would have faired much better.

    Now how is Romney really going to fair against Obama when they have simular records, both signed health care reforms with a mandate, and Romney’s plan is not even that far right from Obama’s, he even added the 200,000 dollar threshold for his no tax cuts limit.

    Romney is really not a great candidate, yes he is the establishment choice, and the choice of Fox News. The reason is simple, with a Obama and Romney election, no matter who wins Fox can still be the anti-government news outlet. If Romney wins, they will say he is not being conservative enough, which will be the case because Romney wants to be liked, he does not lead. His plan is not going to be enough, and as soon as the media starts to attack him if he wins he will go to the left because that is what Romney does.

  • daemonocracy

    The Gingrich Revolution Santorum from his first term, or the big government, Arlen Specter endorsing compassionate conservative from his second term?

    Santorum bends with the political winds, no matter how angrily he claims to be a solid conservative. Gingrich actually fought for reform in the 90s, he shut down the government to get his balanced budgets, isn’t that what we want today?

  • texasref

    not merely “that he hasn’t flipped enough and sooner.” It is that his flips have largely been in the direction (right or left) necessary to win whatever office he was running for at the time of said flip.

    There are thoughtful conversions and then there are changes for the sake of obtaining power.

    Gloves > Mittens

  • daemonocracy

    and would be a Democrat anywhere outside of the Northeast and the left coast.

  • center77

    This is the question I’d ask Romney. If you are a conservative, then why are you more electable than any other candidate? How can you be both conservative and the man who has the chance to gain the middle? That is not even logical.

    Here is the truth of the matter. Independents do not always go for moderates; they go with the person who they feel can best take care of the issue they care about. This is a jobs election, and Romney’s past record on Jobs is not even close to being up to par. Against Obama, I see independents not seeing a difference between Romney and Obama, and since Obama is already president, and well liked, he will get their votes.

    This is the very reason I believe Perry has the best chance of beating Obama, because he has the story (poor farmer who worked his way to where he stands now), He has the economic record Obama could only wish he had (half the jobs in this country since Obama took office), Perry has the experience (being the Gov. of a large state for 12 years), and bar none Perry has the plan that really goes after the people who dug us into the hole we are in as a nation. It?s time to knock the Washington establishment over the head.

    Newt is the insiders dream candidate; Cain is just nowhere near being ready for the White House. Oddly enough, Perry is all the things conservative hated Obama for not being: experienced, free market, and strong. He is conservative, and deeply faithful to his wife, nation, and country.

    Plus he is not weak on the border, but does give Republicans a reason to believe the Latino vote is obtainable. Perry?s heartless comment was very ill-advised, but even that can be used against the left wing smear campaign by team Obama. When Obama says Republicans are anti-Latino, all team Perry has to do is point out that Perry stuck his neck out to say hey we as a party are not anti-Latino, we are just for strong border control, one that is strong on the border and criminals, but soft on how we deal with people, kids to be exact.

    Conservatives seem not to understand that Texas did the right thing because they end up paying less in the long run (they have to take care of these people even if it?s not school, it?s all other entitlements) and there was no reason to believe that the federal government was going to do anything, let?s Remember Bush was president when the law was signed.

  • evas

    notwithstanding his past history. Normally this would have been a BIG turnoff for me, to elect a President with an unpleasant background. But these are DESPERATE TIMES and we cannot afford the luxury of eliminating a great candidate because of old indiscretions anymore. Someday, when we have returned to our former greatness, we can return to the moral high ground again. Besides, after Clinton and this illegal fraud we have, nothing will matter.

  • janvones

    Well, no, you do have it wrong. Not all Republicans will vote for Romney. I for one will stay home. Better an open socialist enemy that a false RINO friend. Let Obama defend his own baggage rather than have the “moderate” Romney carry it for him.

  • lizzie

    Obama (Harvard Law) and Bush43 (Harvard MBA).

    Time to realize 2012 is also a referendum against 12 years of Harvardism.
    Gingrich and Perry know this.

    I just wish Perry had not given a thumbs-up to a unilateral No Fly Zone over Syria last night on FOX. For more reasons than I can count – Perry will pay for steppin’ in that one tonight unless he pivots to Turkey…

    Romney v Obama? lowest turnout EVER!

    Erick fails to note that the Dems will use their 2010 strategy from New York to drive female turnout, with Gillenbrand again voicing “protecting women’s reproductive rights”.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Meanwhile, we wanted to send a “message” supporting Michele’s views and presence @ the ZOA-Dinner. We aren’t “made of $,” but we put our $ where are advocacy lies.

    [$180 is related to "Chai" = "Life" = the number "18" in Hebrew]

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Totally concur, particularly after The Newt’s Immigration-Gaffe.

    We must seize the moment aggressively, so that Rick benefits.

    And we must contend on multiple websites, and report-back.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …because this is an EMERGENCY!

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …patience!

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …noting the following:

    http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201105240017

  • tea4me

    Member of my local tea party. And been contributing hugely *by my standards:” directly to tea party candidates. Everyone should be as active as I am.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    this morning on his radio show he would vote for Bachmann.

    Before going into the details of why he trusts Bachmann, Glenn was clear that he was not making an endorsement and would continue to evaluate all the Presidential candidates.

    ?I know and like many of the candidates for the Republican nomination. I?ve never campaigned for anybody, nor will I. I will never stop calling them as I see them, and I will never endorse a candidate,? Glenn said.

    Glenn continued, ?I still don?t give my complete trust to anybody. But I will tell you that last night I made a decision on who I would vote for If I were voting for the candidate.?

    ?It is somebody that I think believes it to the core. I believe understands compassion, somebody that understands God, somebody understands the situation that we?re in.?

    ?There is somebody I think that is exceptional and truly comes the closest to embodying the spirit of Lincoln or Washington in this field. And I believe that it is Michele Bachmann.?

    ?We have to trust somebody. That?s not to say that there aren?t good candidates elsewhere. The others, many of them are good, decent men. But this woman is exceptional and I would ask that you would take a look at the character and the true life of Michele Bachmann. I believe she means what she says and says what she means.”

    I believe he also mentioned Santorum as septembergurl pointed out.

    Video is at glennbeck.com here.

  • conservativeparrothead

    I remember following, I love history and politics and I was in HS at the time of that election.

    But historically, that was one of the least substantial elections in American History in terms of dialogue. I mean, the death penalty was a major issue as I recall, which isnt really much of a federal issue IMO, of course Willie Horton.

  • monty2

    And yes, we can forget Newt’s past because he’s got lots of the old Noot left in him. Now he’s the compassionate conservative who wants to grant amnesty to lots and lots of Mexicans who came over the border illegally if they have American born children. I just knew he wouldn’t let us all down! Let’s see how that one plays with conservatives tomorrow?

  • AndrewHyman

    the GOP candidate who has the best chance of winning the general election. And Erick hasn’t convinced me that Romney is not that man. Certainly the polls say he is.

    If it’s instead Perry, or Bachmann, or Santorum, or Gingrich, or Cain, or Huntsman, then I’ll be very glad to vote for them instead of Romney. But I don’t think it is. And no way I’m voting for Paul under any circumstances.

    If there’s a brokered convention, then maybe we’d have a Huckabee-Rubio ticket or something like that, and guess what? I’d very gladly vote for them too.

    Romney has for years been consistent about turning off the magnet for illegal immigration, appointing restrained judges like GW Bush appointed, promoting a traditional family for kids to grow up in, ruling out Iranian nukes, aggressively reducing the cost of government, promoting self-government and federalism by empowering state governments, scrapping ObamaCare, overturning Roe and defending all unborn human life from the moment of conception (my own position is not as pro-life as Romney’s but it’s close), etc etc.

    I don’t think he’s lying about any of those issues. Yes, I wish he held some of these position over a longer period of years, but you can’t have everything, and his past positions will not govern his actions unless he flips back which I highly doubt after making all of the promises that are made during a campaign.

    My disagreement with Erick is mainly about saying stuff that will decrease the chances of a GOP win. Isn’t it possible for RedState to say who it prefers over Romney, without denouncing him as a loser? Geez.

  • poyman

    So many things to say and enough space or time…

    1) GOP members who think that Obama would love to run against Romney aren’t watching the obvious indicators… Obama has spent money and campaign time on only one GOP Candidate over the past year and that Candidate is Mit Romney…. Anti Romney Commercials, the only target for Axelrod and Plough on Sunday Talk Shows… They are scared of him and the indicators show that.

    2) Some GOP members think that Romney wouldn’t perform well in the General Election…. For someone to make a statement like that (including the author of this article) tells me that they didn’t major in Mathmatics in College. or Logic and have not learned how to read Polls yet…. Either that, or they just choose to ignore the facts… Romney has routinely performed better than the rest of the GOP field against Obama in virtually every Poll conducted for the past year… I think that out of the hundred polls or so Romney beats all other GOP contenders by 5 to 10 points and he basically runs even with Obama today…. (and that’s even with some of the GOPers trashing him). In a recent Pew Poll that showed Gingrich slightly ahead in the GOP race the poll also showed that Romney is the only GOP candidate that wins the majority of the Indy vote.

    3) Romney is far more Conservative than this Blog gives him credit for… He has changed positions on Abortion in 2004 (about 8 years ago) but other than that he really hasn’t changed positions…. In fact, I think that a reasonable argument could be made that he is every bit as Conservative as Gingrich, Cain or Perry (and with time and space I would be happy to make that case.)

    4)I had a friend tell me (who’s not a Romney Supporter) that he thinks we are seeing something very odd in the Presidential Race right now and that is he believes there is a Coalition that has formed between the Liberals, The Obama Campaign, and The Far Right (or as Erick calls it, “the Base”)…. The Coalition focuses on one goal and one goal only, and that is the Destruction of Romney before the General Election…. He believes that the reason the Left and Obama are part of this is because they are afraid that Romney might well win a General Election as he is polling ahead of Obama in several states that went Blue in 2008…. He believes that the Far Right is part of the Coalition because he is a Mormon and his beliefs don’t entirely line up with their “My way or the Highway” Mentality which causes them to eagerly chace and pounce on anyone who might have a chance of taking Romney out regardless of the positions they have to give up in order to make that occur.

    Romney is smart, has a great Resume, and is not only capable of taking out Obama, he can also fix this Financially Broken Economy… We ought to be greatful that we have a GOP Candidate who has this capability.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …because their comments thereat meshed.

    The audience went-wild when both spoke, as I noted earlier. Because my observations and my e-mail may not have been disseminated, in the interest of full-disclosure, I will provide the [accurate] summary of what occurred…as disseminated by the ZOA!

    *

    Almost 800 Attend ZOA Dinner – Media Superstar Glenn Beck, House Foreign Relations Chair Ros-Lehtinen, Cong. Michele Bachmann & PM Netanyahu Spoke

    NEW YORK ? Almost 800 people attended the Zionist Organization of America?s (ZOA) 114th Louis B. Brandeis Award National Dinner on Sunday, November 20 at the New York City?s elegant Grand Hyatt Hotel. Media superstar and seven-time NY Times best-selling author Glenn Beck, U.S.Congresswoman and House Foreign Relations Committee Chair, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) were keynote speakers at the Dinner at which they were also honored. Mr. Beck was awarded the Dr. Miriam & Sheldon Adelson Defender of Israel Award. U.S. Cong. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu also spoke. Prominent philanthropists Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson spoke and personally presented the Adelson Award to Beck.

    U.S. Cong. Ann Marie Buerkle and Robert Turner from NY, Cong. Dan Burton from Indiana and Cong. Joe Walsh from Illinois also attended the Dinner; other prominent guests included Richard Stone, Chair of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and Steve Emerson, terrorism expert. Rep. Ros-Lehtinen was awarded the Dr. Irving and Cherna Moskowitz Award. William K. Langfan and Mark Langfan, prominent lawyers and real estate entrepreneurs were honored with the Louis B. Brandeis Award. Jerome & Judy Taylor, distinguished philanthropists, received the Maccabee Award.

    In his video address to the Dinner guests, Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke of the ?remarkable and important ZOA.? ZOA?s ?courage and integrity? which, he observed, under Mort Klein?s leadership, had been ?absolutely fearless? in fighting for the truth and working to advance the cause of Israel with the government, media and the American public. Mr. Netanyahu said, in these times of ?seismic changes across the Middle East,? the ZOA had been ?unflinching? in its advocacy for which ?I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart.? ?I also want to congratulate Glenn Beck for winning the Adelson Defender of Israel Award. If Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson put their name on something, it must stand for a lot.? Netanyahu said. ?Glenn?you stand for a lot. You too have been fearless in defending Israel against the slanders that are hurled against [it]. You?ve done that with considerable personal cost, but you?ve never backed off, you?ve never flinched, you?ve never walked away. And I want to tell you how deeply we appreciate this stand of courage and integrity.? Prime Minister Netanyahu also strongly praised Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Miriam and Sheldon Adelson s long-time and powerful supporters of Israel.

    ZOA Board Member Harvey Friedman introduced Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, describing her as a ?national treasure to every Jew in the U.S.? and describing her legislative efforts opposing U.S. funding of both Mahmoud Abbas? Palestinian Authority (PA) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). Rep. Ros-Lehtinen came to the podium and was greeted with a standing ovation. In her address, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen commenced by saying that she was ?proud to be associated for so many years with ZOA.?

    She spoke of two Dinner attendees, residents of the Jewish community of Kedumim in Samaria, stating sarcastically that ?they?re an impediment to peace, because they live in the Judean & Samarian community of Kedumim.? Turning to the Iranian threat, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen said that the Obama Administration’s policy for stopping Iran had been completely ineffective – ?all we?ve got is a further three years closer to Iran getting a nuclear bomb.? She called for further U.S. action, including genuinely ?crippling sanctions to help bring this regime down ? We passed the sanctions bill [H.R. 1905] targeting Iran?s Central Bank.? Speaking of the U.N. Reform, Transparency and Accountability Act [H.R. 2829], an earlier law which the Congress had passed that cuts funds to UN agencies that raise the states of the Palestinians, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen recounted how the Obama Administration had sought ?flexibility? in its application, to which she had retorted with emphasis that ?no flexibility? on the law would be allowed. She also referred to the views of the Obama Administration and Palestinian apologists before pausing and adding, ?Did I repeat myself??

    Israeli scholar and director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University, Professor Efraim Inbar, presented the Louis B. Brandeis Award to William K. Langfan and Mark Langfan. Inbar said, ?;Bar-Ilan University is the only Zionist university left in Israel,? saying that Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, for example, were ?not Zionist? in his opinion. ?There are many Bolshevik post-Zionists at these universities, who pack their faculties with similar-minded lecturers. The Israeli universities are overflowing with post-Modernists who undermine not only Zionism but academic truth itself.?

    Inbar said that although he knows that there are also Zionist lecturers at the various Social Studies faculties, they are outnumbered. ?An evil wind is emanating from these places,? he said.

    ZOA National Chairman of the Board, Dr. Michael Goldblatt delivered the presentation to Maccabee Award recipients Judy and Jerome Taylor, noting that they had been ?long-time pro-Israel activists? who had worked side by side for years on behalf of Israel. He also noted that Judy Taylor?s father had been involved in prosecuting Nazi war criminals at the Nuremberg war crime trials, so that working ?to protect Jews was in her genes.?;

    ZOA National President Morton Klein introduced U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, observing that, while many speak of the importance of Israeli security, all too few speak of ?the sacredness of the land of Israel. ?If security was the entire issue for Israelis, they should move to Minnesota, it?s safer there.? That?s why we?re there. While noting that the ZOA does not endorse any political candidates, Klein described Rep. Bachman as ?dynamic, principled and committed to her beliefs.? Rep. Bachman opened by describing herself as a lover of Israel. ?Although I?m not a Jew, I?m a Christian, we have something in common, the book of Genesis, which states that ?Those who bless Israel will be blessed and those that curse Israel will be cursed.? I stand with Israel.?;

    She said her first foreign policy directive on Day 1 of her presidency would be moving the U.S. embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The Palestinians ?must recognize Israel?s right to exist and renounce violence? if they expect to become a serious partner for peace. and that, under current conditions, Israel should cede to the Palestinians ?not one acre, not one square foot, not one inch.? She chastised President Obama for failing to support Israel, saying, ?President Obama stands with Occupy Wall Street, but he doesn?t stand with Israel. When Israel looks at President Obama, they don?t see a friend.? The United States ?must sell Israel the additional fighter jets, bunker buster bombs, refueling tankers, and other materials they need to defend themselves,? she said. She also said the United States should continue its ?comprehensive missile system? in the Middle East.

    Rep. Bachman also spoke of the existential threat posed by Iran to both Israel and the U.S., declaring that the ?Pentagon should prepare a war plan as a last resort, should all else fail in preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons.? She said that, while ?only a fool wishes for war,? other steps, like but a naval blockade of Iranian ports, increased intelligence operations against Iran and ?crushing economic sanctions? were adequate the gravity of the threat. She called on President Barack Obama ?to accelerate covert operations and cyber operations in Iran and order the CIA Director to take all means necessary to stop Iran from getting the Bomb before it is too late.? Asserting that Iranian President Ahmadinejad was ?striving for a second Holocaust? Bachman said that ?once again millions of Jews are at the precipice of losing their lives today?. Ahmadinejad, she said, ?will seek to use nuclear weapons against the US as well ? and the US will learn what it is to be Israel if it does not act quickly.? She said that the US Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State and CIA director must all support this ?freedom policy? and that those in the bureaucracy who fail to do so ? ?especially in the State Department? ? should be replaced.

    ZOA Vice-Chairman of the National Board Steve Goldberg introduced Morton Klein pointing out that ?Without Mort, there would be no ZOA. Mort rescued it when it was moribund .. Your shoes are too big and cannot be filled … all the ZOA?s past leaders, including Louis Brandeis and Abba Hillel Silver pale in comparison to Mort Klein.?;

    Mort Klein commenced his address by praising Christian Zionists for their heartfelt support of Israel, especially at a time Israel has few reliable friends. ?We applaud Christian Zionists, thank G-d for you … People forget that Israel is called the Promised Land for a reason – because it was promised to the Jewish people by G-d.? He emphasized that, unlike several other Jewish organizations, the ZOA was active in bringing Jewish students , not just to Israel, but specifically also to Jewish communities in Judea-Samaria like Efrat, Gush Etzion, Maale Adumim, Hebron, Ariel, and so on.

    Klein spoke of the ZOA Law and Justice Center, headed by Susan Tuchman, and its important breakthrough in having Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which has applied to blacks and Hispanics, now applied to protecting Jewish students from discrimination, intimidation and harassment. He noted that the Office of Civil Rights would be investigating incidents involving Jewish students at Rutgers University.

    In his remarks, Klein criticized Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League and David Harris of the American Jewish Committee for their strong opposition to an Israeli bill on sovereign foreign countries providing millions of dollars to anti-Israel non-governmental organizations that operate in Israel under the guise of being human rights organizations.

    Turning to the Arab war on Israel, Klein observed that ?the Arab war against Israel has nothing to do with borders, land, settlements or a Palestinian state. It is simply old-fashioned Jew- hatred and anti-Semitism. The Arabs don?t want a Jewish state within any borders. Please understand, Arabs don?t want peace with the Jewish state, they never wanted peace with the Jewish state. And as much as we want peace, Israel will live and thrive without it as it has since 1948.? Klein also noted that the world was silent on the fact that Hamas, with which Mahmoud Abbas? PA had signed earlier this year a unity government agreement and with whose leader, Khaled Meshaal, Abbas had met earlier in the week, calls in Article 7 of its Charter for the global murder of Jews – ?This is a Nazi document, these are Nazi terrorists? and, to show that Fatah is similar, Klein held aloft the Fatah emblem, encompassing all of Israel under a Palestinian kfiyyeh, with a picture of arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat and a Kalashnikov rifle.

    Klein continued, ?The PA has violated the three legs of the Oslo accords. The PA has not stopped terrorism, has not accepted Israel?s right to exist, and refuses to stop anti-Israel incitement. Why are U.S. officials and Israeli officials not speaking out against this in our serious manner. We should be telling the PA- no more money, no more support, no more concessions. People speak as though a Palestinian state was the solution. It isn?t. Iran, Syria, North Korea – they?re all states, but that hasn?t made them lovely and peaceful. In fact, it gives them more power to advance their terrible agenda. American Jews are now understanding this for the first time since Oslo, a majority of American Jews oppose establishing a Palestinian state.? In a blistering attack on the Palestinians and on U.S. policy, Klein listed unjust accusations hurled against Jews since the time of the Crucifixion, drawing parallels to the current situation of Israel and the Jews and summing up with a sentence that seemed to encapsulate the attitude of most of the evening?s participants: ?The whole world is wrong, and the Jews are right.? Klein received a standing ovation.

    Sheldon Adelson and Dr. Miriam Adelson, stalwart supporters of ZOA and recipients of its rarely bestowed Theodor Herzl Gold Medallion and Brandeis Award respectively, introduced keynote speaker Glenn Beck. Mr. Adelson said first of Mort Klein that ?I used to think that my wife was the strongest Zionist until I met Mort. He?s my Zionist mentor. He?s the greatest and most passionate Zionist, not only in this country but in the world.? In introducing Mr. Beck, Mr. Adelson described him as a ?very special man …. We knew he was a giant even before we met him. I?d never known a Christian Zionist like Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck tells the truth about the Arab war against Israel.? Adelson, also the publisher of Israel Hayom (now Israel?s largest daily newspaper), added there is ?no greater supporter of Israel in the media today? than Beck. When Palestinians murdered five members of the Fogel family in last March?s Itamar massacre, Beck dedicated an entire show on Fox News to the tragedy and ?displayed the pictures that almost every other television network ignored? ? Palestinians celebrating the event by handing out candles in the streets ? Adelson said.

    Glenn Beck came to the podium amid a standing ovation and commenced his address with the words, ?Well, this isn?t going to help my popularity with the media .. I am a proud Christian Zionist. I know what that means in today?s world. But I put all my chips on the table. Is there a G-d? And if so, how shall I serve Him? The whole world is in the middle of a profound and dramatic change, but the change need not be bad. History is calling us now.? Beck talked about the danger facing Jews because today the world is ?aiding and abetting? the ranting of many madmen who are out to destroy Israel and the Jewish people.

    He pledged to announce on December 8 where he is headed ? ?there is a vacuum and I intend to stand in its place,? he said ? but gave no details as to what he was referring to. Beck said, ?Many times you cannot tell the difference any more between peace activists and the terrorists and fascists they claim to stand against.? Mr. Beck reflected on the eight years since he had first gone to Israel and the evolution of his understanding of the country, and how few genuine friends it has, joking, ?This is what bad shape things are in, you?ve got me.?

    Speaking of the numerous individuals and groups working actively against Israel and the Jewish people, Mr. Beck said that ?It?s a badge of honor to be called an enemy of George Soros. Soros is not a friend of Israel and, let me say, neither is the Administration. But let me tell you we, the people of the United States are not the government, we are a country built on the individual, not on the government.?

    Mr. Beck cast his mind back to several predictions and warnings he has given over the past decade and how he had been looking for what he called the ?Archduke Ferdinand moment,? referring to the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand which had triggered World War One. ?I spoke of a coming caliphate. I was ridiculed. I even once put it up on a chat on my program, saying ?This is what is coming? … It will get worse if we don?t stand together now. We must stand with Israel … Jerusalem must remain Israel?s ?united and undivided capital … I don?t come here as a Christian. I come here as a brother.

    Evil hates you. It has since the beginning of time. Evil thinks it can somehow force G-d to break his covenant and that it can destroy the Jewish people. Israel wasn?t established because of the Holocaust. That?s just the last time such an attempt was made. Israel was promised by G-d to the Jews.? Mr. Beck pledged to continue his work to speak the truth and to arouse the conscience of his listeners and was given a tumultuous standing ovation.

    This year, a record number of college students – well over 100 – attended the Dinner. James A. Tisch, former Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and NY Jewish Federation, and CEO of Loews Corp.; and Martin Gross, President of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Member of the Board of Trustees of Brandeis University, were Dinner Co-Chairmen. Rabbi Mark Wildes, director of the Manhattan Jewish Experience, delivered the invocation. ZOA Executive Director David Drimer and the entire ZOA staff worked hard on all aspects of the Dinner and Dr. Alan Mazurek, Chairman of the ZOA?s National Advisory Council, was Master of Ceremonies, presiding over proceedings with his usual aplomb and elegant wit.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …having been rectified in 1989. Many people [including myself] were “born” as Democrats [a status reinforced by sequellae of Watergate]. I became a GOP Committeeman two decades ago [atoning, one might suggest], and we should all remember Churchill’s observation [updated for the USA]:

    “When younger, anyone who isn’t a Whig/Democrat/Liberal has no heart; When older, anyone who isn’t a Tory/Republican/Conservative has no mind.”

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …when America’s future is on-the-line.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …as he has skewered each of the “evolved” positions you cite.

    Does it bother you that Mitt wanted to provide amnesty to illegals [as per video that he hasn't repudiated, notwithstanding his posture during the recent debate]?

    Does it bother you that he had to be pressured to support Kasich’s anti-union posture, last month?

    etc.

    When a true-conservative is available, can you not envision the prospect that the TEA Party Movement will continue to abhor Mitt and yearn to settle upon another candidate?

    [Let's not become fixated on the variegate perceptions of "electability."]

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    1)–BHO has attacked all of the major GOP-candidates, planting seeds. This is not a useful metric for deciding the optimal choice [as opposed to allowing the MSM/LSM/ELM again to play this role]. On Maddow, his three postures [Summer, Fall Winter] on the payroll tax-cut [sorta-for, definitely-against, supportive of something-comparable] were video-documented. This irks people, when the question hasn’t changed during the past six months.

    2)–Mitt’s “performance” cannot be gauged totally on lectures/debates; what must be factored-in are his POLICIES, the CONTENT of what he says in each venue. And he has been all-over-the-map, continuing to refuse to refute the Individual Mandate; it’s a “band-aid” to plan to rescind ObamaCare without overtly ID’ing its core as contrary to the individualism upon which the USA was built. He’s an elitist/statist [as is The Newt], as opposed to Perry.

    3)–PLEASE “make the case” that Mitt [who eschewed the Family Forum over the weekend, inexplicably] is just as “conservative” as his competitors; RS-readers crave quality education.

    4)–What you characterize as the “Far Right” is viewed by the multitudes in the TEA Party Movement as anti-establishment capitulation to the RINO-world which has aided/abetted the D’s as they have built Big-Government. WE are the Constitution-Centered activists, recoiling against appeasement.

    Mitt is preferable to BHO, but your gratitude that he is available should be extended to recognition of the strengths of everyone else in the field.

  • nathanalbright

    n/t

  • gunsrus

    before we can back a conservative I guess the Republicans will have proved themselves a lousy home for anyone but the Rino.

  • gunsrus

    the big media candidate that seems to have the support of Obama. Kinda makes you wonder.

  • gunsrus

    the young ones just lose thier income and are told they should be grateful to still have a job.
    If Romney gets the nomination I will be going back to voting libertarian.

  • AndrewHyman

    I’ll be glad to take a look at the video of Romney on immigration if you tell me where it is. After the debate tonight, Gingrich is looking a lot more lenient on the issue than Romney. My understanding is that Romney has always supported giving illegal immigrants the same right to apply for US citizenship as everyone else around the world has, and they can stay in the US while that application is pending, but they won’t get any special preference. If Romney has ever deviated from that stance, I’m not aware of it.

    Regarding the Ohio collective bargaining law, Kasich would have been smarter to follow the Wisconsin example that exempted policemen and firemen. It might still be law in Ohio if that had been done. I can certainly understand why someone like Romney would prefer the Wisconsin approach, but Romney went ahead and clearly endorsed the Ohio law anyway. After what? One day if uncertainty about Romney’s position? Giving a politician a few hours to gather facts and make an intelligent decision seems fair to me.

  • AndrewHyman

    I’ll be glad to take a look at the video of Romney on immigration if you tell me where it is. After the debate tonight, Gingrich is looking a lot more lenient on the issue than Romney. My understanding is that Romney has always supported giving illegal immigrants the same right to apply for US citizenship as everyone else around the world has, and they can stay in the US while that application is pending, but they won’t get any special preference. If Romney has ever deviated from that stance, I’m not aware of it.

    Regarding the Ohio collective bargaining law, Kasich would have been smarter to follow the Wisconsin example that exempted policemen and firemen. It might still be law in Ohio if that had been done. I can certainly understand why someone like Romney would prefer the Wisconsin approach, but Romney went ahead and clearly endorsed the Ohio law anyway. After what? One day if uncertainty about Romney’s position? Giving a politician a few hours to gather facts and make an intelligent decision seems fair to me.

    I don’t mind if the Tea Party mostly backs other candidates in the primaries, but why undermine the possibility that Romney would deserve to win and could win in a contest against Obama.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Besides the threadjack, it seems you are a bit light on facts;

    TARP cost about $140 billion, $70 billion of that in 2010.

    Care to articulate;

    How much was spent under Bush?
    How much was not repaid?
    How the eventual participants were forced to take part?
    How much was spent under Obama?
    How much was not repaid?
    How Obama changed TARP beyond its original purpose to spread the wealth (e.g. our tax money)?

    TARP was a bad idea. Period. But don’t conflate the passing of a stupid idea (by the way, it wasn’t the “GOP, check who the majority leaders were) with execution and obfuscation by Democrats.

  • poyman

    1) Obama’s campaign has openly admitted that their intent is to try derail Romney early… I think that they used the term “Kill Romney ” with their Campaign War Chest…. (here’s a link that you can read about it… http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60921.html ).

    They also have put together better than three ads specifically focused at Romney…. You can read about that here… http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-02/pro-obama-group-begins-third-anti-romney-internet-ad-campaign.html

    To my knowledge the Obama camp has not spent a dime on taking down any other HOP Candidate…. If so, please show me.

    2) I agree that one’s debate performance is not all that is important and that positions taken matter…. I think all of us know that he moved to ProLife in 2004 and then Governed the most Liberal State in America as a ProLifer… You also brought up the fact that he hasn’t denounced the “Individual Mandate” and consequently publicly commit in your mind to a code of “Individualism” which you suggest that he is missing….Before I address the Mandate, I first want to point out that I don’t believe that there is another position that puts him at odds with the “Base”… I suppose you could throw out Global Warming but I think that he has made it very clear that while he believes the planet is getting warmer ( as do 90%+ of the World’s Scientists ) he is adamently opposed to Cap and Trade as there is no evidence that Man is responsible or to what degree they are responsible and it would be ineffective to lead a One Nation Crusade via inhibbiting legislation.

    Now for the Individual mandate…. The reason Romney doesn’t denounce it is because he believes that the legislation is what his Constituentcy wanted and that the Mandate is just one of hundreds that states (all states) are empowered to legislate for their citizens (i.e. Kids have to attend school, automobiles have to be licensed,drivers have to have insurance,pets have to be licensed, tolls are charged for bridges and Highways, Etc.)…. If we just focus on the Mandate itself one could effectively argue that a mandate is as conservative if not more so than not having a Mandate… Example: Under current legislation passed in 1986 (EMTALA) and signed into law by Reagan, all Medical Facilities (who take any money from the Government) must treat any individual who comes into their facility needing treatment whether they are insured or not…. In essense one can refuse insurance and get medical treatment for them and their families in an Emergency Room and the bills are paid for by other patients in higher treatment costs, by insurance companies who pass on higher treatment costs to their insured base through higher premiums, and ultimately to the Taxpayers as Govenment supplements the cost of overpriced treatment for the uninsured… This ultimately means that we pay the bills for those who are exercising their “individualism” as you call it… ( But then, you’re a Doctor and are probably already aware of that…. So what this means Doctor,is that we are all under a Federal Mandate Today…. It’s a De Facto mandate because we are on the hook for the bills.

    3) In the interest of time and space I will simply list the Liberal Flavors and reasons for unelectibility for three of the “Base’s” preferred candidates and this item with a question…

    Newt Gingrich… Bush Tax Cuts; Amnesty; Cap and Trade; A Federal Department of Education; Huge Reductions in Military Spending; Stimulus and Tarp; Auto Bail Out; Lack of Moral Values (no need to go into that other than to say that Republican Values are typically held at higher levels except for Newt.

    Herman Cain…. Lack of Experience in Government; not sure where he really is on Abortion; Introduction of a new Tax Revenue Line; totally lost on Foreign Affairs and Economic Collaboration and dealings between nations; supportive of Public Unions and Negotiating Rights;and Untempored Retoric.

    Rick Perry…. (I should disclose that I have lived in Texas for 20 years)… Former Democrat and Texas Campaign Chair for Al Gore; Immigration; Endorsed Giuliani for President in 2008 (prochoice and pro-gay marriage); doubled State budget in less than 10 years; Wants to run all entitlements through the states and over-haul SS with no stated plan; Worst % of uninsureds in the country for total citizens (25%) and for children (20%); while jobs have been created in TX , unemployment has sky rocketed (among the lowest 50% in the country); Lowest Graduation Rate in the country as of 2008 (don’t have more recent data); Crony Capitalism Charges; the Vaccine; Immigration problems and in-state tuition for children of illegal citizens; A $27B short fall in the budget last year even though the state has a balanced budget piece of legislation; Little knowledge of Foreign Affairs; and he appears very slow witted, weak in communication skills and simply not very smart (to say it bluntly).

    Against anyone of these candidates I believe Romney compares very well…. As far as Conservative Credentials are concerned…. He has always opposed Gay marriage but supported equal rights for Gay people; he has always been pro-immigration reform but opposed amnesty; he has been very supportive of the second amendment but doesn’t believe that it includes bazookas, submachine guns or tanks; he believes that the planet is getting warmer but doesn’t know how much of that is attributed to man and as a result he rejects cap and trade (see page 272 of his book, “No Apology”); he believes that Obamacare is a federal Over-reach and needs to be appealed he immediately; He believes that the Economy will become healthier if Government is less involved in business, has fewer regulations and lower taxes; He believes in addressing the debt by growing the Economy and Reducing the spending; he managed a turnaround in MA from a $3B Deficit to a $2B surplus over four years by doing just that… nearly $2B of the Turnaround came through reduced spending and $3B came from unexpected Revenue and a stronger Economy; While he believes in Expense reduction to address the debt he also believes in maintaining a strong and efficient Military with no expenditure cuts, as he believes that World Peace comes through strength; and etc., etc.

    4) What you call the Tea Party and what I call the Tea Party are two different things…. I even consider myself a Tea Party Member and I am very active in two chapters of AFP, serving as an Officer in one of them…. Tea Party to me however, simply means that I am very supportive of three positions: A) Less Government involvment; B) Less Taxes; and C) Less Regulations…. I do not believe that the title of a Tea Party member entitles that segment of the Republican Party to trash Moderates by calling them RINOs…. We cannot win elections without “Moderates” and “Base Members” as you call them, forming a coalition and living together under one “Big Tent” (using a Reaganism)….In fact, Reagan was probably a RINO by your definition and I happen to think that he was one of the best presidents that this country ever had…. We also have to win a majority of the Independents if we are going to be successful….

    In my mind (as supported by the polls) Romney is the only one in the GOP Field that can forge this Coalition…. So if we want to get Obama out of the White House we are going to have to figure out how we can temper our preferences and come together…. Let’s get Romney now, get a very Conservative VP and then pass the baton to him/her in 4 to 8 years…. That way we all win and we should all be able to come together.

    Paul Poyfair, MBA

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    I could hear you take a deep breath after Ok, here we go….

  • poyman

    1) Obama?s campaign has openly admitted that their intent is to try derail Romney early? I think that they used the term ?Kill Romney ? with their Campaign War Chest?. (here?s a link that you can read about it? http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60921.html ).

    They also have put together better than three ads specifically focused at Romney?. You can read about that here? http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-02/pro-obama-group-begins-third-anti-romney-internet-ad-campaign.html

    To my knowledge the Obama camp has not spent a dime on taking down any other GOP Candidate?. If there is, please show me.

    2) I agree that one?s debate performance is not all that is important and that positions that have been taken matter?. I think all of us know that Romney moved to ProLife in 2004 and then Governed the most Liberal State in America as a ProLifer? You also brought up the fact that he hasn?t denounced the ?Individual Mandate? and consequentlyhe is not therefore committed to the ?Individualism? that this party stands for?.Before I address the Mandate, however, I first want to point out that I don?t believe that there is another position that puts him at odds with the ?Base?? I suppose you could throw out Global Warming but I think that he has made it very clear that while he believes the planet is getting warmer ( as do 90%+ of the World?s Scientists ) he is adamently opposed to Cap and Trade as there is no evidence that Man is responsible for this warming or to what degree mankind is responsible and consequently, he believes it would be ineffective to lead a One Nation Crusade against global warming by introducing inhibbiting legislation that would simply put us at a bigger disadvantage in the world market.

    Now for the “Individual mandate”?. The reason Romney doesn?t denounce it is because he believes that the legislation is what his Constituentcy wanted and that the Mandate is just one of hundreds that states (all states) are empowered to legislate for their citizens and do in fact legislate them (i.e. Kids have to attend school, automobiles have to be licensed,drivers have to have insurance,pets have to be licensed, tolls are charged for bridges and Highways, Etc.)?. If we just focus on the Mandate itself, one could effectively argue that a mandate is as conservative if not more so than not having a Mandate? Example: Under current legislation passed in 1986 (EMTALA) and signed into law by Reagan, all Medical Facilities (who take any money from the Government) must treat any individual who comes into their facility needing treatment whether they are insured or not?. In essense one can refuse insurance and get medical treatment for themselves and their families in an Emergency Room on demand and the bills are passed on to be paid for by others: patients in the form of higher treatment costs; by insurance companies who pass on higher treatment costs to their insured base through higher premiums; and ultimately to the Taxpayers as Govenment supplements the cost of overpriced treatment for the uninsured? This ultimately means that we pay the bills for those who are exercising their ?individualism? as you call it? ( But then, you?re a Doctor and are probably already aware of that)?. So what this means Doctor, is that we are all under a Federal Mandate De FactoToday.

    3) In the interest of time and space I will simply list the Liberal positions and reasons for unelectibility for three of the ?Base?s? preferred candidates…

    Newt Gingrich? Against Bush Tax Cuts; For Amnesty; For Cap and Trade; Cast a deciding vote for President Carter’s Federal Department of Education that we have to live with today; For Huge Reductions in Military Spending; For Stimulus and Tarp; For Bail Out; Lack of Moral Values (no need to go into that other than to say that Republican Values are typically held at higher levels except for Newt).

    Herman Cain?. Lack of Experience in Government; not sure where he really is on Abortion; Introduction of a new Tax Revenue Line; totally lost on Foreign Affairs and Economic Collaboration and dealings between nations; supportive of Public Unions and Negotiating Rights; and Untempored Retoric.

    Rick Perry?. (I should disclose that I have lived in Texas for 20 years)? Former Democrat and Texas Campaign Chair for Al Gore; Immigration; Endorsed Giuliani for President in 2008 (who is Prochoice and Pro-gay marriage); doubled State budget in less than 10 years; Wants to run all entitlements through the states and over-haul SS with no stated plan; Worst % of uninsureds in the country for total citizens (25%) and for children (20%); while jobs have been created in TX , unemployment has sky rocketed (among the lowest 50% in the country); Lowest Graduation Rate in the country as of 2008 (don?t have more recent data); Crony Capitalism Charges that seem to carry some truth; the Vaccine; Immigration problems and in-state tuition for children of illegal citizens; A $27B short fall in the budget last year even though the state has a balanced budget piece of legislation; Little knowledge of Foreign Affairs; and he appears very slow witted, weak in communication skills and simply not very smart (to say it bluntly).

    Against anyone of these candidates I believe Romney compares very well?. As far as Conservative Credentials are concerned?. He has always opposed Gay marriage but supported equal rights for Gay people; he has always been pro-immigration reform but opposed amnesty; he has been very supportive of the second amendment but doesn?t believe that it includes bazookas, submachine guns or tanks; he believes that the planet is getting warmer but doesn?t know how much of that is attributed to man and as a result he rejects cap and trade (see page 272 of his book, ?No Apology?); he believes that Obamacare is a federal Over-reach and needs to be appealed he immediately; He believes that the Economy will become healthier if Government is less involved in business, has fewer regulations and lower taxes; He believes in addressing the debt by growing the Economy and Reducing the spending; he managed a turnaround in MA from a $3B Deficit to a $2B surplus over four years by doing just that? nearly $2B of the Turnaround came through reduced spending and $3B came from unexpected Revenue and a stronger Economy; While he believes in Expense reduction to address the debt he also believes in maintaining a strong and efficient Military with no expenditure cuts, as he believes that World Peace comes through strength; and etc., etc.

    4) What you call the Tea Party and what I call the Tea Party are two different things?. I even consider myself a Tea Party Member and I am very active in two chapters of AFP, serving as an Officer in one of them?. Tea Party to me however, simply means that I am very supportive of three positions: A) Less Government involvment; B) Less Taxes; and C) Less Regulations?. I do not believe that the title of a Tea Party member entitles that segment of the Republican Party to trash Moderates by calling them RINOs?. We cannot win elections without ?Moderates? and ?Base Members? as you call them, forming a coalition and living together under one ?Big Tent? (using a Reaganism)?.In fact, Reagan was probably a RINO by your definition and I happen to think that he was one of the best presidents that this country ever had?. We also have to win a majority of the Independents if we are going to be successful?.

    In my mind (as supported by the polls) Romney is the only one in the GOP Field that can forge this Coalition?. So if we want to get Obama out of the White House we are going to have to figure out how we can temper our preferences and come together?. Let?s get Romney now, get a very Conservative VP and then pass the baton to him/her in 4 to 8 years?. That way we all win and we should all be able to come together.

    Paul Poyfair, MBA

  • Whitehorse

    I don’t agree that a Romney nomination would equal a definite Obama win. Romney is not my 1st choice & I have no perfect choice. I believe any of those running can win if they keep on a conservative message & don’t let blinded eunuch handlers lead them away from being on the offensive, making Obama defend his record. We have to be a big part of keeping Obama on the defensive over his record.

    I think we should not count the votes until they’re cast. Let’s go for our guys, work to get the most conservative nominated & then make sure whoever is nominated defeats Obama – while taking the senate & getting more conservatives in the House.

  • RJLigier

    Santorum did what was necessary to place Alito/Roberts on the US Supreme Court. Are you questioning the timing or his gentlemens agreement between he and Arlen Spectre for his support over Pat Toomey? Hands down, Santorum and Gingrich are the most qualified regarding foreign and domestic policy among all the Republican candidates. The difference being that Santorum is a federalist/conservative and Gingrich is a progressive Republican. After one downgrade of US public debt and a high probability of a another downgrade in 2012, are you going to trust a federalist/conservative or one of the members of the liberal wings of the Republican and Democrat Party that were solely responsible for profligate congressional spending since the Eisenhower nomination. As both progressives/libertarians support unfettered open borders and continued wage suppression, Santorum is the clear choice.

  • RJLigier

    Santorum did what was necessary to place Alito/Roberts on the US Supreme Court. Are you questioning the timing or his gentlemens agreement between he and Arlen Spectre for his support over Pat Toomey? Hands down, Santorum and Gingrich are the most qualified regarding foreign and domestic policy among all the Republican candidates. The difference being that Santorum is a federalist/conservative and Gingrich is a progressive Republican. After one downgrade of US public debt and a high probability of a another downgrade in 2012, are you going to trust a federalist/conservative or one of the members of the liberal wings of the Republican and Democrat Party that were solely responsible for profligate congressional spending since the Eisenhower nomination. As both progressives/libertarians support unfettered open borders and continued wage suppression, Santorum is the clear choice.

  • RJLigier

    Santorum did what was necessary to place Alito/Roberts on the US Supreme Court. Are you questioning the timing or his gentlemens agreement between he and Arlen Spectre for his support over Pat Toomey? Hands down, Santorum and Gingrich are the most qualified regarding foreign and domestic policy among all the Republican candidates. The difference being that Santorum is a federalist/conservative and Gingrich is a progressive Republican. After one downgrade of US public debt and a high probability of a another downgrade in 2012, are you going to trust a federalist/conservative or one of the members of the liberal wings of the Republican and Democrat Party that were solely responsible for profligate congressional spending since the Eisenhower nomination? As both progressives/libertarians support unfettered open borders and continued wage suppression, Santorum is the clear choice.

  • nathanalbright

    …and I can’t remember who posted these as a reply to a comment of mine, but do follow the advice. I will try to do so as well. I’m available to communication from all 57 states of the Union, though my hours are a bit odd given my Southeast Asian location :B.