« BACK | PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper (oh…wait)

By: justinhart (Diary) | November 18th, 2011 at 10:30 AM |

RESIZE: AAA

Promoted from the diaries as a public service on behalf of conservative voters. For those who don’t know it, the author of this post is a self-described member of the Romney campaign.

#justsayin

Updated: Hey guys – this is Justin Hart. To be clear I am not a member of the Romney campaign nor am I paid by the Romney campaign. I welcome users of RedState.com to expand their understanding of the irony, comedy and satire in the picture below

While I have the attention of the front page I will ask:

Romney has held consistent conservative values for years now. I would hope we welcome solid converts to the movement, right?
Romney was endorsed by numerous editors here at RedState in 2008, and hasn’t taken a vote since then…what has changed since that time?
Romney has a laudable and robust conservative fiscal plan and has promised to repeal Obamacare. Is that insufficient for you?
He’s articulate, holds his own in debates and has the ability to win over moderates and even liberals who are disillusioned with Obama. That’s a good thing right?

Lastly, if not Romney… then who? There are 7 weeks to go.

Update 2: Since I’m still here on the front page I might as grab your ear for a minute more. I have a confession to make: I am a Newt Gingrich convert to conservatism. I remember in 1994 listening to Newt’s fantastic lectures on U.S. government from the University of Georgia broadcast over C-SPAN. These are the same lectures the Democrats used to push trumped up charges. Newt was later acquitted but not before the damage was done… and by damage I mean thousands of converts to Conservatism like myself.

I like Newt. I think he’s an articulate candidate who can debate anyone. My qualm is with the #notmitt crowd. I want them to stake a claim and support a candidate rather than the constant haranguing about the trust issues they have with Romney.

The supposed pain induced by the pic below was meant to stir discussion. It did just that.

Hey Justin, I understand your angst at being caught at this but your LinkedIn profile states otherwise.

Co-Chair, Faith and Values Committee
Romney for President, Inc.
Privately Held; 51-200 employees; Political Organization industry
2007 – Present (4 years)

Is this untrue? A yes or no will suffice.

Justin here again. It is not true. The line item you refer to was from the 2008 campaign and I just never put an end date to it. I rarely use LinkedIn but I’ll go ahead and make sure I make that change. Thanks for pointing that out and giving me this forum!

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES | LOGIN TO COMMENT | REGISTER TODAY

Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

And simply not witty, funny, or helpful in anyway.

Your sour grapes on the Conservative base doesn’t help Romney’s chances.

rec0n

Although I’ve picked my candidate and it isn’t Romney. Watching the base cycle through is getting a little old. But so it goes.

http://www.neoavatara.com/blog neoavatara

…but it still dose not improve my feelings about Romney.

jakeofalltrades

It doesn’t withstand scrutiny. As I said before, flip-flopping on a candidate merely means you are not prescient and omniscient. Flip-flopping on policy means you have no soul.

Bill S

that he works for Mitt Romney.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/justinhart

Not that that’s a big shocker to anyone…but if any of you take this tripe seriously, you should know that ahead of time.

westcoastpatriette

I didn’t know that.
Glaucon

Apparently not Justin…

sunshinek67

-
bornafterreagan

But as far as I’m concerned, Mitt Romney has held one fundamental principle for years and years: He would very much like to be president, please.
Flagstaff

nt

Ben Howe

This picture highlights that we’ve been very consistent in our desire to nominate anyone but Romney.

Bill S

(We really need a Like button for comments)

acat

answer that?

Mew
rec0n

n/t
papabear

+1 (x infinity)

jerbush91

I have been the very picture of consistency in my desire to not have the elites, RINO’s, MSM, and current Republican elected leaders tell me that I have to vote Romney because he looks the part.

It seems to me we went to the polls time and head our noses and voted RINO. I have been steadfast in my desire to find out about the other possible choices. The more the establishment screams and tells me to get in the line more I go NO.

I will vote how I want. I don’t trust Romney and it strikes me as odd that the MSM is so much in love with Romney that all others are quickly attacked and belittle. During the debates Romney has not shown me anything other than that he a pretty boy. IF (to my God in heaven I pray he is not the republican nominee) Romney has to face Obama the MSM will turn in him as they did on Mclame when we were told by the elites he was the only way to go.

streiff

the media loves Romney right now because he is most like them and not like those icky Tea Party types. They also like him because his campaign spoonfeeds them oppo research on the other candidates.

When it comes down to Obama v Romney, the media is going to eat this guy alive on his affiliation with Bain Capital, the 1% personified.

jonnymadison

Bain Capital owns clearchannel…
renl57

There is NO Republican whose background doesn’t give the Dems plenty of targets to shoot at.

Gingrich has his marital history.

Cain has his sexual harassment and ignorance of foreign policy.

Michele Bachmann has her history of bomb-thrower type statements.

Perry has his debate gaffes.

Romney is a harder target in that at least his *character* is not open to question. He’s a good husband and family man, he’s not open to shooting from the hip with wild charges, and he is certainly no fool when it comes to debating and knowing the issues. The usual stereotype of Republicans as stupid and ignorant just doesn’t apply to Romney.

jonnymadison

Mitt Romney owns a large block of media. They might be reluctant to eat their boss alive.
acat

The Waitress Principle applies. That is, how someone in a position of power – a customer at a restaurant – treats someone in the position of servant – the waitress – shows much about character.

Mitt’s dog, who spent a horrific 12 hours, some of them covered in its’ own excrement, some air-drying at highway speeds trapped on top of a car .. says some rather unpleasant things about Mitt’s character.

Animal welfare is one rather large reason Illinois still has a Dem in the Governor’s mansion.

Mew
http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

that no matter how squeaky clean someone is, liberals can find a shill who, even with little or no credibility, will make multitudinous, character-assassinating, false accusations against said candidate, and, no matter how incredulous the accusations are, some of them will stick. (coming up for air after that sentence) An air-dried, excrement covered dog will be the least of Mitt’s worries by the time the left finishes its signature hatchet job on him.

The moral of this story is: vote for the candidate YOU want to be President of the U.S. Don’t vote for Mitt just because he is squeaky-clean–he won’t be by the time this process is over. And whatever the left throws out there, deny, deny, deny. Never wrestle with a pig: you’ll get muddy and the pig will like it.
jakeofalltrades

n/holding-back-laughter
pttx333

That sweet baby dog (they are ALL baby dogs to me) is nothing more than a prop, OBVIOUSLY, to the entire Romney family – or so it would seem to me. If his wife and kids didn’t mind, then shame, shame, shame on the lot of ‘em. My husband would have had his head served to him on fine china for breakfast! I would bet a dollar to a donut hole that sweet and precious animal was never allowed inside any of their vehicles! Just like the current occupants of OUR White House and BO the prop dog – not a nickel’s difference insofar as the love that is shown them. Not.

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who is mistreats children and/or animals is a cold you-know-what. AND with your waitress comparison, that is a given and one sure sign to look for when you are dating. Wonder if there were ever any complaints by Romney’s employees?

irishgirl

n/t
determinedconservative

The cartoon is cute, but in all seriousness the issue for me at least is the desire to nominate someone who has true, deeply held conservative values that they did not just suddenly discover when they wanted to get nominated by a conservative national party. I am perfectly willing to say that for me, this does not mean I have to attach to one single candidate. Anyone who can fit this bill and can beat Romney and then beat Obama is fine by me.

Right now, I feel like despite his flaws, Perry best fits that bill. But if the leading conservative “anti-Romney” is someone else by the time it comes time for my state to vote, that’s who I will support.

Romney is blatantly, obviously full of **** when it comes to pretty much every political position he states. He reminds me of Bill Clinton, sticking his finger in the wind. Who knows what he’ll do if he gets into the Oval Office. And in the meantime, he does not offer a sharp contrast to Obama, he cannot attack ObamaCare without looking like a ridiculous hypocrite. Just…no. A thousand times, no.

streiff

is a winning strategy when you’re mired at 25% in the polls.

Stan

You said it, streiff! To be fair, Romney has had one consistent position – that he’ll say ANYTHING he thinks it will take to get elected… the guy should legally change his name to Clinton….. just sayin’.

Joshua Persons

nt

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Like me. I supported Pawlenty in the beginning. After he dropped out I’ve just been sitting back waiting.

Also, Bachmann, Cain, & Paul were never acceptable candidates for me from the very beginning. They eventually showed what I knew all along…and that is they just aren’t ready for the big stage (Paul is the loon we always knew he was).

BTW, in case he’s interested, I found a nice set of footwear for Mitt Romney.

acat

If Romney’s the nominee, I may as well dress appropriately for voting.

Mew

jakeofalltrades

n/feet

acat

What did we call the Bachman-branded candi-bots again?

Mew

Wes_W

That is the name Romney supporters have been using for Rick Perry followers.

jakeofalltrades

sans codus

acat

-fin-

streiff

for their opponents.
reggie182

That term PerryKrishna arose primarily because of the intensity of the attacks many of the Perry supporters issued against Romney, Cain, and to a certain extent Gingrich supporters.

They obviously did their candidate no good at all.

gekster

this is not you?

Co-Chair, Faith and Values Committee Romney for President, Inc. Privately Held; 51-200 employees; Political Organization industry

2007

streiff

that item was from the 2008 campaign and he never got around to updating it despite he has obviously updated his profile sense then. He’s either being dishonest with us or he’s deliberately puffing up his profile.

Luckily we have the screen capture of his LinkedIn profile

gekster

Let’s see.
2007 + 4 years = 2011.
Yep, that part threw me off.

(not meaning nothing, just seeing a ciuriosity)
gator_hoo

(which it seems more likely than not that he is) he’s clearly been associated with them and clearly still supports Romney, so I am not sure what we are supposed to learn from this update.

jonnymadison

cares!

I will not vote for Romney, if the GOP thinks they can jam a big government liberal down our throats, at this point in our history, then we might just be better off with Obama.

It offends me that the GOP is even trying to do this.

There is no real difference between romney and obama, they are both business as usual. At least with obama, people are pissed off.

If romney is the nominee, I’m going to take a vacation on election day. At least then I’ll enjoy the day.

Remington_Steele

If Romney wins the nomination then it’s because the largest group of Republicans voted for him which is democracy at work. If you want to take your toys home and not play with the rest of the kids, fine.

Romney has trust issues with everyone, not just conservatives. Yet he has always polled the best for general election results vs the whole other field including Obama.

I don’t care how apocalyptic you think it’s going to get, Romney will always be better than Obama.

jakeofalltrades

Democracy is a very bad form of government, so I don’t think you’re making a real point by bringing it up. Mob rule justifies nothing.

jonnymadison

democracy is the worst form of government. I’m not going to vote for another tyrant.

Remy. I don’t “think” it’s going to get apocaplyptic, I just understand the possible consequences if we don’t change our course. No government, or no army can defy the laws of economics. If we continue to spend like we are, it will end in a collapse. It’s a simple cause/effect, and it’s probably the most predictable crises ever.

Changing from Obama to Romney is like changing the radio station to a better song while your car goes sailing off a cliff. Sorry if I’m not going to get all excited about that.

I’ll either prowdly vote for a candidate I believe in, or I’ll enjoy a fruity drink on a beach somewhere, either way I’ll enjoy election day!

acat

(assuming, of course, you’re not ghostwritten, as your namesake was….)

All Romney has to do to win is to split enough early States to appear the winner, then buy the delegates from some of the also-rans like Bachmann and Santorum when finances force them to drop out.

The trouble with Romney is that having a left-leaning republican in the White House and a couple cheap folding suits leading the House and Senate means we’ll be back to the Nixon era.

You remember Nixon, right? The guy who didn’t try to undo Roe v. Wade? Guy who raised taxes and tinkered with a command (i.e. price controlled) economy?

Is that really your goal, Mr. Steele?

Mew

Remington_Steele

to appreciate the TV show eh? Cool.

Although I lerk in RS corners here and there, I’ve been here for many years. No Ghostwriting from my username.

I really disagree with the previous guys that democracy is bad bad bad. That’s just non-sense and silly. They need to enumerate all the better governments that are actually better than our democracy. Sure we’ve had crap for government for the last few years, but show me a country where the people can change its leaders without bloodshed better than ours.

Acat, you’re right that it’s not a simple majority that gets us our President. I’m still grateful Al Gore was kept out of office because of that. Yes, GWBush created some serious issues for us, but the democrats should accept their responsibility for the housing meltdown.

For me, I will always be more grateful for Bush than us having four years of Al Gore and should the scenario of a less than perfect republican candidate become the nominee, he will be better than Obama any day.

acat

or, to be technical, a representative republic such as ours has its’ warts, it is still far superior to oligarchy, unlimited monarchy, various dictatorships (regardless of whether the thugs in charge are religious or communist in ideology) and far better than mob rule or anarchy.

As I said around here somewhere, the last time we elected a Governor from Texas, it worked out pretty well… for all his non-conservative warts, Bush 2.0 was a good man, and a good President. (and I was frequently annoyed with him during his 8 years in office)

I do not like Romney. I do not trust his conservatism. I expect that, if he is nominated, I’ll vote for him, and will then remain in activist mode, holding his feet to the fire, and dealing with disappointment after disappointment.

Still, yeah, he’d be better than Jimmy Carter 2.0.

Mew
Remington_Steele

.
jonnymadison

oligarchy, monarchy, dictatorship, democracy… all bad, but to put one worse than the other could only be done by looking at the size of the specific governments influence. For example, a oligarchy that assumes a small roll and allows maximum freedom, would be much better than a democracy that assumes the roll of education, retirement, healthcare, feeding the poor, protecting the environment ect ect ect.

History doesn’t have a good record for democracy, just listen to our founders:

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers: We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy…it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.

John Adams: Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

Thomas Jefferson: A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%.

Benjamin Franklin: When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.

James Madison: Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death.

John Quincy Adams: The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.

Thomas Jefferson: The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Benjamin Franklin (maybe): Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

James Madison: Democracy was the right of the people to choose their own tyrant.

it goes on and on – more quotes: http://takeourcountryback-snooper.blogspot.com/2008/12/democracy-v-republic-founding-fathers.html

Or, as Karl Marx put it: Democracy is the road to Socialism

renl57

“I will not vote for Romney”

Yes you will–if Romney is the alternative to Obama.

In my past experience, disgruntled party base voters return to the fold by October–once the reality of the other party winning begins to sink in.

You probably won’t *campaign* for Romney.
But you’re not going to stay home on Election Day either.

jonnymadison

You’re right, I will not stay home on election day, I already said that, I’ll be on a beach.

I’m not scared of obama, I’m scared of people becoming apathetic.

Plus, if that is actually your strategy to get conservatives to vote for romney, then you can probably expect the same results as McCain. (how’d that one go for ya?)
acat

You can google it.

I have the, erm, luxury of living in a blue-purple State – Illinois – that’s unlikely to vote to oust Obama. I can therefore vote Green Party and not affect either outcome.

Do not lecture me about what I “must” do.

Mew

p.s. – and yes, the downticket races will be straight GOP

jakeofalltrades

I’m just ecstatic because I just moved from California to a swing state, and my vote finally counts.

sunshinek67

tell the room what happened to those millions in votes that John McCain lost? huh.

A person is delusional with any thought process that conservatives are going to be giddy going through sleet and snow, rain or shine, stand in hours long lines after a long day at work to cast a vote for Obama-lite. ha~

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Yeah, we’re familiar with your kind.

tailfins1959

I consider Romney a barely acceptable nominee. The debates and early votes will tell us if another candidate can stand the spotlight. Limbaugh seems to think Romney is a media bowling pin (set him up and knock him down). I am wondering if the media is sitting on derogatory information about Romney until September or October. There seems to be a “what’s wrong with this picture” lack of media scrutiny of Romney.
http://www.WILLisms.com WILLisms

Definitely, Perry needs a second look. His record is the best. He has the best story on jobs. His plans are superior to anything anyone else has. He won Saturday night’s debate. He’s got the best ground game. He’s got money in the bank.

gator_hoo

I see a consistent rejection of Romney as the nominee.

gator_hoo

Perry’s entry into the race helps Romney?”

Also his blog links directly to his LinkedIn account, so either he is lying or dumb, although both is also an option.

gator_hoo

Well, if you wanted discussion about how Mitt is an unacceptable candidate, Mission Accomplished!
tailfins1959

Does that mean if you make a survey about this topic, check boxes should be implemented, not radio buttons?

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

So, per consensus, notwithstanding his oratorical skills, The Newt should be supplanted by Rick.

conservativeparrothead

IOnce supported Ethonol subsidies before he was against them, has personally taken thousands in farm subsidies.

Check him off your list..flip flopper…cant be a conservative. Oh but thats right, he is your guy so you ignore all of that and you construct a narrative that fits your candidate.

Let me ask it another way, if Rick Perry were in the senate or congress fighting against healthcare in the early 1990′s…are you 100% absoultely sure without a doubt that he would not of taken the conservative position at the time which was supporting individual mandates OR is it just a convenient argument since he didnt have to do that since he was just an agricultural state leader writing letters to Hillary Clinton commending her efforts on health care?

snowshooze

Democrats no longer exist… that party is gone.

conservativeparrothead

Sure he might make it, I dont know all the particulars of his voting record in the House and Senate, but I dont recall hearing about it being much other than pretty liberal.

I know he cut taxes, and rightly so, the top rate at that time was 90%, I think he proposed cutting it down to the mid 60′s or maybe 60. Still almost double about what we are talking about today as the top rate.

snowshooze

Because the progressives are fixated on socialism.. they want their rightful percentage off the top. Kennedy realized that less is more, and the resultant effect is a matter of history.
Ifa Democrat came out advocating tax cuts today, he would be accused of crony capitalism, theft from the downtrodden and run out of town on a rail.
But I see you recognized right off where I was headed. good observation.

jakeofalltrades

of the two candidates you mention, put Newt’s left brain into Rick’s body and vice versa, reattach, and create a chimeric super-candidate complete with running mate.

acat

Mew

westcoastpatriette

be upstaging Perry as VP? Can’t see him as a VP for that reason.

jakeofalltrades

He was meant for the Senate anyway.
acat

“Bury the would-be upstarts in work!”

Newt needs to be busy. No single department, possibly excepting the charlie foxtrot that is Health and Human Services, could keep his attention for long enough .. but as veep, he could go gadfly-style from department to department!

Imagine Newt, at the start of each month sitting down with a different cabinet secretary for an all-day meeting .. and at the end of the month coming back with “suggestions” .. then repeating. That should keep him busy, and we all benefit!

Mew
westcoastpatriette

no words

tomhave

Mitt supported the individual mandate for health insurance. So did the Heritage Foundation, Newt and most conservatives. They did so with good reason. It reinforces three conservative principles . First, individual responsiblility. It means everybody pulls there own weight and do not place you burdens on others when you can afford to carry your own weight. Secondly, it provides market-based choides. You can pick the type and options for health coverage you want and make the economic choices they entail. Third it is private sector based. It is not a Canadian type government solution.
These reason are why many conservatives favored an individual mandate and many conservative governors have individual mandates for auto insurance.
So what happened when Obama passed the mandate then the conservatives, reading polling data, decided they did not like it. When Obama passed tax cuts the GOP decided they did not like it. If Obama dedicated a memorial to Ronald Reagan the GOP would be denouncing Reagan.
To be sure there is a lot to not like about the Obama administration. However, hating Obama is not a principled idea. Neither is hating Bush or hating Newt. We need to be able to separte the person from their policies. Likewise loving Obama to the point where we lose objectivity is not good either.

streiff

but I’m sure you know that since you seem to have opposable thumbs
jakeofalltrades

n/sense
renl57

“Mitt supported the individual mandate for health insurance. So did the Heritage Foundation, Newt and most conservatives. They did so with good reason.”

The reason was to have some plausible-sounding bait-and-switch to head off HillaryCare. They came up with this alternative to HillaryCare, not because they believed in it but because they wanted to convince the public that the cooperatives of HillaryCare were unnecessary since alternatives existed. That was the bait.

Notice that after HillaryCare went down to defeat, this Heritage Foundation “proposal” never again saw the light of day. And that was the switch.

jakeofalltrades

of this year.

1bunny

Jake not only did he support the mandate in May but Newt Gingrich

jakeofalltrades

Thanks!

tomhave

You mean it was okay to support the mandate when it was an alternative to Hillarycare but it was not okay to support it when it was not? That makes not sense.
Many Republican states with conservative governors have auto insurance mandates. There is a sound reason for healthcare mandates. When people do not purchase health insurance the cost of their care places a burden on those who purchase health insurance. This is caused the “hidden tax”‘ So opposition to the mandate is actually supporting a “hidden tax”
You need to read 1984 to understand the conservative (and liberal) changes on issues.

sethellis

I’ve always been a Romney supporter, and I love watching the horserace. It’s been odd watching the evolution of this primary.

I liked Tpaw and thought we had a great primary ahead of us (still hoping for tpaw to be vp). I was disappointed when he dropped off.

When Perry came along I thought we still had a great contest at hand. I was surprised by the anti-Romney sentiment that really surfaced from Perry supporters, but I thought they had legit arguments. I still supported Romney, and could only say let the best candidate win. I love the competition.

When it moved to Cain I was a little troubled. I love the guy, but I never thought this was his time. I was concerned that his lack of experience was a liability. Still I understood the rise. He’s hard not to love. I was very disappointed to see him demolished. I thought he had a great future ahead, and it was ruined by receiving the spotlight too early.

Gingrich though? Seriously guys? Yeah he’s smart, and he is a great source of new ideas. He just doesn’t stand a chance. To go up against Romney and the establishment we pick the most hated establishment Republican in history? You are worried about Romney’s record on things like healthcare and the environment, and so you start to coalesce around someone with the same issues?

I gave you all the benefit of the doubt before, but I just can’t take it anymore. This thread is the embodiment of everything wrong with this primary. Sometimes it seems like you guys would elect hitler before you would pull the lever for Romney. What’s next? Santorum? Huntsman?? Paul???

Oh how I wish we could just go back to arguing the pro’s and con’s of several great candidates. Instead we are trying to play gotcha games with Romney supporters on the front page.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Romney/Pawlenty? I was a Pawlenty supporter in the beginning (and remain undecided since his departure). But seriously, Romney/Pawlenty? Wake me when it’s over.

You want to know what worries me most about Romney? Obama can say anything he wants about Romney’s position on any issue and it will have been true at some point in history. Makes it hard to argue against that.
acat

Mew

daemonocracy

Conservatives are consistent in their distrust of Romney. He takes no bold stands and lacks a single key conservative issue he has not played both sides of and been an advocate for througout his life.

Out of all of his flip flops and duplicity, the one issue he refuses to walk back is the failed Romneycare. Not only is this alarming to conservatives in the age of Obamacare, but it neutralizes Obama’s greatest weakness in the general if Romney can’t declare that Romneycare is a failure and all other programs like it will be as well.

Snarky little slights against conservatives like the flip flopper picture posted above are typical of Romney faithful and just as clueless – we have consistently not supported Romney in this primary as he is not a conservative according to his own record and activism. You don’t just switch up your words and expect us to rally behind you when you have not been in the trenches with us.

Conservatives: Consistently anti Romney. Insulting us gets you nowhere. We would have to flip flop to support Romney, but since you mocking us as flip floppers, perhaps we shouldn’t support him at all.

sticktotheconstitution

#RonPaul

Marcus_Traianus

When liberals don’t touch a Republican Candidate it is time to burn the Trojan horse.

Romney’s team has probably provided better opposition research to the press than their own people could gather. The fact he has been the “front-runner” for some time and they simply retread the “flip-flopper” theme out there since 2008, with nothing new should be a clue. Meanwhile every other candidate who starts to reach bigger poll numbers gets flamed. That doesn’t pass the smell test.

That $900 million Obama campaign fund doesn’t buy a bunch of dummies. It purchases the craftiest, most conniving liars and thieves money can buy. They are simply waiting for the right moment to beat the “mane man’s” weaknesses like a chicken-fried steak.
jakeofalltrades

since there really is no other interpretation.

sticktotheconstitution

and it’s your right to vote for whoever you want. my comment was really simple, i don’t see how much interpretation it took on your part jake

jakeofalltrades

n/consistency
sticktotheconstitution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWTyHbGcUQY
jakeofalltrades

For instance, that he’s made about 4 billion in earmarks while railing against pork-barrel spending.

He broke with his party on a purely symbolic policy, you’ve got me there. However, as Ron Paul, he of all people should respect the importance of purely symbolic votes.
acat

Never tried to build a coalition to get anything “dangerous” (read: conservative) done, just kept demanding that the Fed be audited, earmarks be ended, etc. etc.

Hint – the Fed is audited every year, all Ron Paul has to do is to ask to see the books.

Hint – for someone who rails about pork, Ron Paul should have been first in line to ban them .. and shouldn’t have any in the first place.

Get educated, son. If you’re looking for a libertarian, try Gary Johnson.

Mew
jakeofalltrades

instead of using his time to write in earmarks!
jakeofalltrades

Quite apt for Luap Nor! I think I’ll start calling him Luap Nor de la Mancha.
jonnymadison

is actually misinterpreted.

I could be wrong, but I tried to research this one myself, and I agree with Paul on this one.

Earmarks don’t effect amount, only where it is spent. If congress doesn’t direct the spending through the earmarking process, then the executive branch directs the spending.

It works like this. Bill XXX proposes $100B for XXX. What earmarks do is direct where the $100B is spent. It has already been decided that $100B will be spent somewhere. If congress neglects their constitutional authority to earmark it, beaurocrats will gladly do it.

That’s the way I understand it. If I’m wrong, let me know where.
jakeofalltrades

Just like voting for Ron Paul! If Luap Nor cannot stomach making a purely symbolic gesture, then what on earth is his argument for voting for him? He was one of four to break with his party on earmarks. He probably should have been expelled from the caucus over that.
jonnymadison

Thanks for that generous symble that transfers power to the executive branch. A brilliant strategy when Obama is the executive. Sheesh.
jakeofalltrades

n/getting it
jonnymadison

dokay
Aaron Gardner

Nothing gets spent until the money is made available via the bill being passed. Those who would be inclined to vote no are given earmarks to sweeten the deal in exchange for their vote.

Taking earmarks out of the equation lessons the opportunity to buy votes to get the spending passed in the first place.
jonnymadison

ron paul can get all the earmarks he wants and still vote no on the bill… but others can only get earmarks if they vote yes??? (is that what you are saying?)

It’s not logical, you can’t “sweeten the deal” by offering something you are free to do anyway.

Wild_Bill

Interesting quote from Michael Medved on Romney: In February 2008, the most influential and persuasive right-winger of

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

a) Pointless appeal to authority and b) Deceptive removal of context.

omegamale

How’s this for flip flopping?

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

Do you think you’re going to win support for your candidate by making attacks on his critics?

I judge your candidate by your stupid posting. He must be a pretty dull-witted man to attract dull-witted defenses.

Wild_Bill

In what way deceptive removal of context?

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

.

nathanalbright

…just saying.
conservativeparrothead

Who is the greatest President of our lifetime and the Conservative Icon President? Ronald Reagan.

But if Ronald Reagan were here today, running simply on his time in Sacramento, he would be ripped apart and called 100% not-conservative and a moderates moderate.

- Huge tax increase equal to 1/3 state budget
- 177% Spending increase during his tenure as Gov.
- One of the most aggressive pro-abortion bills passed and signed
- Lots of pro-environmental legislation

I would contend, that every candidate in the field has a record to the Right of Reagan as Governor, yet we keep trying to bring people down…

“This guys not a conservative he once supported individual mandate and sat on a couch with Nancy Pelosi”….”Oh yeah, well I will trump your Nancy Pelosi with an Al Gore and letter to Hilary Clinton and receiving of farm subsidies”…”Well, Ive got both of you beat, your guy is ROMNEYCARE”…”Wait a minute, you cant say anything, you worked for the Obama administration”….”Excuse me Senator, but your not conservative, you supported Arlen Spector and voted for the Prescription Drug benefits”…

Sell people as to why your candidate is the best for President of the United States, not cherry picking records as to why someone should have their conservative mancard taken away.
constitutional

It must be erasable marker, since Perry is going to beat Mitt Romney.

P.S. — Generally not a good idea to make conservatives dislike Mitt Romney more, when you’re obviously advocating his candidacy.
Repair_Man_Jack

What in heck does just sayin’ really mean? To me, passive aggression pretty much is the last refuge of someone doing the catchin’ instead of the pitchin’. Just sayin’…Teh!
texas214

As a party and a movement we are not doing ourselves any favors with the sniping going on between Romney supporters and non-Romney supporters. Yes we all have our favorite candidates, but spending time on tearing down the other is a complete waist of time.

Any moment you spend negatively attacking GOP candidates is time you’ve waisted not getting to the ultimate goal – beating Obama.
far52

I’d prefer Huntsman. He’s been far more consistent and has impressive credentials. I’m just not sure that his “don’t peak too soon” strategy will work out for him in NH.
http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

RCP and I both missed when Bachmann led. And I never did find any polls with Pawlenty over 6, so he never led.
gekster

But it is conservatives vs a liberal.
That you can’t see that or refuse to know that, well what can I say.
aeternalis

This is precisely the reason for the primary season and process. I will support Romney in the General versus Obama if he wins the GOP nomination, but not before. We, as conservatives, can do much better than this spineless windsock.

Also, it’s spelled “waste.”
JX12

…by “sniping.” What you call “sniping,” I call separating the wheat from the chaff, which, ultimately, is what separates representative republics from monarchies and dictatorships.

People living under totalitarian governments have to make nice, regardless of the competence and character (or lack thereof) possessed by their leaders. Challengers are squashed (or if they prevail, they do so at a heavy price – reference our own revolution).

The price paid to secure our freedom to decide our own form of government would have been wasted had we imposed more of the same (reference the French revolution).

Do you think our founders were all sweetness and light to each other? By all accounts I read, it would appear they did their share of “sniping” at each other, and sometimes it was vicious. And yet somehow it played a role in producing the most vital nation and robust superpower the world has ever known.

I’ll grant that sometimes it is the best liar who prevails (at least in the short run), but I also firmly believe that the truth usually always eventually comes out. In any case, those who can’t stand the heat in the short run are probably not fit to occupy the oval office anyway – and the “sniping” that goes on in the pre-primary process will – more often than not – cull them out.

Those who have not quit the race by the time the first primary elections roll around have at least been vetted to a sufficient degree so as to give the primary voters some semblance of an idea of who they’re voting for. Whether or not the voters make the right selection after that is another question, but at least they have information at their disposal which would have otherwise been unavailable had all that so-called “sniping” not been allowed to occur.

Long live the sniping. Along with the jet noise, it is the sound of freedom.
Bill S

This is the primary season. We are trying to elect the right person to lead the GOP and the nation. Mitt Romney is a flaming liberal and letting him get away with it by holding back on criticism would be the exact wrong thing to do.

Primaries are all about contests between candidates. There are going to be disputes, disagreements and downright nastiness. It’s been that way for over 200 years. Deal with it.
aesthete

He’s at least as terrible as the alternative!
aesthete

is not going to bring in the primary voters.
jonnymadison

it’s a pathetic field of candidates that have no spine and simply float along wherever the political winds are blowing.
texas214

I’m not here to promote Romney as a candidate, however I’m not here to tear him down. There is no perfect candidate, because even conservatives aren’t 100% in agreement on what a conservative is or what the conservative position is on all issues, that is why we have debates.
constitutional

Probably should read into the facts about Reagan. Christ, JIMMY CARTER brought up the fact that spending increased-but less than the per capita than Georgia’s because so many people came to CA.

If you spend ten minutes researching facts, you’ll know you’re all wrong.
acat

Why vote for the lesser evil?

Mew
buddha1556

nt
Darin_H

can’t stand that one either.
aeternalis

nt
jakeofalltrades

n/t
justinhart

Hey streiff – I updated my LinkedIn profile about two years ago… I’m sorry you think I’m lying or otherwise.

How could I possible be working for Romney for President, Inc. over the past 4 years when it went dormant in 2008 and was only re-launched this year?
Langley

Even if Mr. Hart isn’t currently working for Romney, I don’t really think that matters – the point remains that he used to work for his campaign.

This is a lame and unwise attack on non-Romney fans. Trying to be cute and call people “flip-floppers” when your candidate has that label only points the flip-flopper attention back to your candidate.

The majority of the base doesn’t want Romney to be the nominee, and he hasn’t done anything to change that. If you’re a Romney fan, that’s fine, but don’t lash out at those who aren’t.
texas214

Good catch, I lost my mind .
Repair_Man_Jack

http://dotan.wordpress.com/2007/11/21/justin-hart-resigns-from-romney-campaigns-faith-and-values-steering-committee/
streiff

then by all means stick to it.

Far be it from me to see you hoisted by your own petard.
conservativeparrothead

Ive seen many on here who call themselves “Reagan-Conservatives”, but then rail against people for not being conservative, when their own namesake was far from conservative purity.
tailfins1959

Why not admit it’s reasonable to change your mind as new information comes available? That goes for Republican primary voters and Mitt Romney. I don’t condemn Romney for pleasing his “customers”, in his case voters. I like elected officials that don’t want to govern against the grain of their constituents. If elected President, I don’t think he will forget that conservatives are a major part of his “customer base”.
daendda

Isn’t it Romney who has been touting candidates for people to vote for if they have a substantive disagreement with him? I remember him telling us to vote for Cain…until Cain started surging.
justinhart

I forgot about that! Who would have thought that this infamous Soren Dayton post would one day come back to help me

Thanks.
jakeofalltrades

an anthropogenic global warming nut, and a fan of big government. Thanks for reminding me.
jakeofalltrades

no text
acat

The trouble with that is it runs counter to one of the definitions of conservatism, those who preserve what is worth preserving.

Mitt simply cannot have this both ways, eh?

Mew
streiff

rarely works in politics
renl57

Reagan’s platform was a reduction of tax RATES, not total tax revenues.

In fact, his 1986 deal with Congress included closing of tax loopholes so that we ended up with getting more Federal revenue than prior to that deal.

Global warming wasn’t an issue back then.

But the hole in the ozone layer was.
And Reagan signed legislation which phased out halocarbon propellants which scientists said were damaging the ozone layer.

Finally, in 1980, Reagan ran on a platform that promised that Social Security and Medicare would not only be sacrosanct, but would be placed on a firmer financial foundation.

The GOP platform of 1980 was further to the left than the current Ryan plan. It included firm support for unions and collective bargaining. And Reagan ran on that platform.

Would you like to read it to refresh your memory?

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=25844#axzz1e5g7nyvo
jakeofalltrades

See aesthete’s comment for why.
snowsoul

then changed this time is quite simple: the world changed. In 2008, Romney’s failures were overlooked because they just seemed to be the “ideas of Massachusetts.” The wisdom of the day was that to be a governor in a liberal state, you have to govern liberal(Chris Christie, more or less, destroys that). We never thought what would happen in large part in Massachusetts would happen to America as a whole and here we are: Obamneycare has passed. We saw democrats who said they were conservative vote for it and we saw the tides change.
We see a politician who, will criticize others for being “career politicians,” yet one has to wonder: if it wasn’t for his electoral failures, wouldn’t he have near two decades under his belt as a politician? Wouldn’t that be a career politician?
We see a guy who’s business experience, which he promotes constantly, not help in Massachusetts as healthcare costs go up and his state still was not business friendly. And even then, the business acumen can be called out as we see how he did business(Bought companies, leveraged them to raise capital and if they constantly stay at that rate, they’d fail).
We accept the fact that politicians change, I mean, Reagan was once pro-choice, and changed on a few others issues, much like Romney. But unlike Romney, Reagan admitted his mistakes and was able to joke about it. Romney, which proof to the contrary, stands by them.
But now we see a world in which these over reachings are reality. We see politicians who will lie for convenience and we have no reason to believe Romney is any different. There was no grand “I saw the light!” moment, there was just “I’ve changed my mind” without an explanation as to why.
daendda

Nonsensical, deranged, and random commenting all over the place. You give the opposition a great name. I knew I saw it somewhere: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65585.html. Does Mitt still endorse Cain?
daendda

Now that I’ve read some of your other comments on this thread. Regardless, you’ve lost me.
daendda

I woke up at 3 am on the other side of the planet and did not immediately grasp the gist of your comment. I apologize for said negligence towards you.
jakeofalltrades

I can only assume that they are the troll and not the one they accuse.

Why don’t you go find a bridge or eat a goat or something.
Scope

of a real troll. Doesn’t have a clue, doesn’t know who he is replying to, and just throws out jackcrap about long time members that he knows nothing about.

Hint hint daendda, acat has more sense and intelligence in his pinky fingernail than you have in your entire person. You have no credibility here at RS, acat has earned his. Take a hike.
jakeofalltrades

n/doubt
daendda

Althought the idea of a “vetted commenter” in an online thread is an odd notion.
jakeofalltrades

Calling him a troll is like calling kowalski or gekster a troll. We’re pretty sure they’re not.

For example of a non-vetted commentator, I offer myself .
conservativeparrothead

Tax increase size of 1/3 the state budget? FACT
TAX increase in income, sales, corporate, inheritance. FACT
Signed pro-abortion legislation FACT

There are facts, they are pretty straight. Im not here to downgrade Reagan, Im simply saying that here is a guy with a record as Governor that would probably make him the target of many of the candidates seeking the fill the office that he did so well.
daendda

I said I stand corrected. Would you like a pound of flesh with that?
http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

nt
Scope

that vetting is put on the fast track. Most here know instinctively who is friend, and who is foe, within someone’s first few posts. When someone comes in like a bull in a china shop, it’s usually not a good sign.
Scope

A simple apology to acat for calling him inappropriate and inaccurate names would be great though.

This is a privately owned site, and while it isn’t like whatever site it is that is banning any Romney and Perry supporters, it is a moderated site. There are posting rules which you need to read. One of them is name calling of other posters is taboo.
Thomas Crown

In 2007, it was astroturfing commenting.

In 2011, it’s an honest, ridiculous, apples-to-oranges diary.

I see progress.
jakeofalltrades

n/trolls
Flagstaff

make anybody think anything about Romney? Unless he wrote it or released it, it’s just commentary on an ironic fact of the current primary campaign.

Herman Cain is right. The country needs to get a sense of humor.
acat

(Cheshire grin)
acat

And if you really want to see someone look shocked, say that to ‘em after they back into your car.

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

He has moved to the right on issues? right? Not saying all his flips are credible or not, but just trying to be accurate.

And, I think I would favor Newt over Mitt (My main goal is to get a tea partier over Mitt) given Newt’s history on ego, JC Watts vs Jesse Jackson, Freddie, etc…
jakeofalltrades

I don’t like getting people in trouble, and besides, it matched the other dents nicely,
williamjameson

week till Perry gets back in stride, if ever. I’ll take Newt over Romney, Newt is actually a more experienced choice, we just have to deal with his baggage.
tailfins1959

Algumas pessoas entende melhor assim. Posso ate mostrar RedState para minha esposa. Como voces gostam de Rick Perry, isso pode ganhar os votos do candidato pro-imigrante!
nathanalbright

….it is about distressing to see the fickleness of the people, though, in such a time as this.
Flagstaff

I don’t completely understand all the venom towards Mitt. He has changed positions, but always in the right direction.

I do understand that there would be resistance to a somewhat “establishment” candidate, but some of the things that are put up as bad things about Mitt would actually help him with the so-called independents that we seem to need for final election. Some of us might not like the fact of MassCare, but for the ones who want health reform, it shows a willingness on his part to work with what he has.

Massachusetts was going to do something. It wasn’t all his idea, and he didn’t push it through alone, via an executive order. Politically, it would have been to his advantage to sit back, stay out of the discussion, then veto what they came up with and have his veto overridden. Instead, he chose to lead, to try to make a difference for the better. (Isn’t failure to lead one of the many things we find wrong with Obama?)

I too have become a Newtster (or is that been Newtered? (^:^) Guess I shouldn’t give anybody ideas). He, too, has his shortcomings. We’ll see how it plays out. I can’t believe Obie Won Kant will get more than 45% of the vote against either Mitt or Newt.

Today, my ticket is Newt-Perry.
http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

nt

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper (oh…wait)

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL