« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Romney Never Met A Flip He Couldn’t Flop

By: streiff (Diary)  |  September 8th, 2011 at 08:20 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Last night in the debate, Mitt Romney went after Rick Perry over Perry’s characterization of Social Security as a Ponzi Scheme. I happen to agree with Perry. The payroll taxes of currently employed workers are used to pay beneficiaries and even the Social Security Actuary agrees that the current model is not sustainable more than 20 or so more years.

Mitt Romney went on the attack today on Sean Hannity’s Show. I’m not opposed to attacks on your opponents over policy. I am opposed to flip flopping.

According to Philip Klein at the Washington Examiner (ht to NRO and Ace):

“The issue is not so much how we finance Social Security, it’s that Gov. Perry in his book ‘Fed Up,’ says that Social Security has been forced on us, and by no measure is Social Security anything but a failure,” Romney said. “That is being against not just how you finance Social Security, but being against Social Security. One, in my view, that is wrong. I am for Social Security. I want to save Social Security, it’s an essential safety net for the American people. And number two, it’s terrible politics. If we nominate someone who the Democrats can correctly characterize as being opposed to Social Security, we will be obliterated as a party.”

This stands in stark contrast to whatever version of Mitt Romney wrote his book last year where he says:

“Let’s look at what would happen if someone in the private sector did a similar thing. Suppose two grandparents created a trust fund, appointed a bank as trustee, and instructed the bank to invest the proceeds of the trust fund so as to provide for their grandchildren’s education. Suppose further that the bank used the proceeds for its own purposes, so that when the grandchildren turned eighteen, there was no money for them to go to college. What would happen to the bankers responsible for misusing the money? They would go to jail. But what has happened to the people responsible for the looming bankruptcy of Social Security? They keep returning to Congress every two years.”

Last night Mitt Romney nearly made me forget why I disliked him so much in 2008. In 2008, Romney surrounded himself with smug, arrogant little twits who lied to bloggers just to keep in practice. Everyday my inbox would have a emails slinging mud on other candidates always labeled “Not For Attribution.” And everyday Romney would seek to reinvent himself from a pro-choice liberal governor into a conservative into Heaven Knows What.

The whole sorry spectacle was only mitigated by the hilarity of watching NROs KLo swoon over every syllable the man uttered.

Last night I liked Romney and told RedState contributors in an email discussion that I thought I could not only accept but actively support Romney if he wins the nomination. The cheap, tawdry flip-floppery we’ve seen today is making me reconsider.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • renl57

    The SS trust fund has been raided, as we all know. Repeatedly.

    But that wasn’t how SS was originally designed. FDR never said “I want to create a trust fund that we can raid with impunity.” Rather, that’s an example of how a program can get corrupted in future years.

    In his book “Fed Up!” Perry said something different.

    First, he suggested that SS was an example of disrespect to the U.S. Constitution. Them’s fighting words, because it suggests that any elderly retiree drawing SS checks is cooperating in disrespecting the U.S. Constitution. Good luck trying to sell that one.

    And Perry even wrote that SS was like a “bad disease” (!!!) (his words) that continues to spread. For those retirees who are struggling with serious illnesses (as many elderly people are), telling them that the SS program is similar to a bad disease they’re struggling with is going to fall like the proverbial lead balloon.

    Perry isn’t just against raiding the trust fund. He isn’t just appalled at the inattention given to maintaining SS’s solvency. He’s clearly angry that SS was ever enacted in the first place–and the only thing stopping him from abolishing it is that Congress wouldn’t go along.

    Perry is going to lose the election on that basis. That’s not sellable except to maybe some young folks–who will then turn around and vote for Obama anyway because he’s “cool”. In the meantime, all those retirees living in Florida will not vote for Perry–and Obama will win the state.

    Finally, if Perry gets the GOP nomination, it will put Rubio in a bad spot. Rubio will have to thread the needle between supporting his party’s nominee and having to explain to angry seniors how he’ll defend SS against all comers.

    I don’t know why Perry is bothering with this. Obama is vulnerable on about 10,000 different things. Perry (and the rest of us) should be running against Obama, not against FDR.

  • silentcal2012

    In 2008, people hated him because he didnt lie down for Fred Thompson, as if Fred were royalty.

    Now, people are mad because he dare attack precious Perry.

    Romney has taken plenty of barbs and arrows for a long time and has taken them like man.

    I think this is the real reason Perry fans are so peeved today, InTrade:

    Before debate: Perry 40%, Romney 33%

    After debate: Romney 36.3%, Perry 35.5%

    • The_Gadfly

      it will make you feel better when Romney goes down in flames.

      Given the field last election I would have taken Romney over McCain, but last election was the weakest field of Republicans since, well Roosevelt. Romney will go down because he’s another big government liberal Republican trying to pose as a conservative. Their kind can occasionally win a divided field in a blue state, but lack the insight to fix the problems we face now.

      For the record, Perry is still my third choice after Cain and Bachmann.Romney is my second last choice, right in front of Nor Luap and his bellowing minions.

    • streiff

      there were a lot of valid critiques that Romney could have made of Perry’s SS comments. In fact, I think Perry will need to revise and extend those remarks to ensure that everyone knows his intent is not to blow SS in place. Regardless of how he feels about it, it is what it is and it will have to be fixed. I think Perry realized that when he talked about debating what they intended in the 30s as being an intellectual exercise.

      What Romney did not need to do was throw his own position from last year under the bus. But Romney, and his staff, went back to their default position of changing their beliefs depending upon the prevailing winds or perceived momentary advantage.

      All Republicans, not just Perry fans, should be appalled at this.

  • AceInTX

    It goes,

    If you don’t like the weather in Texas…wait ten minutes….It will Change

    I would modify it for Romney

    If you don’t like Mitt Romney’s position on any subject…wait ten minutes….It will Change

    • AceInTX

      I’m sick to death of the requirement that every story about him have the obligatory smear that the “far right” won’t support him because he’s Mormon…

      and I guarantee you…if Perry keeps creaming him in the polls…they’ll start playing that demagogic card with reckless abandon.

      He’s a fraud, a phoney and an automaton who approaches All gore in terms of personality and inability to exhibit a soul, a core, or a consistent set of principles

      • acat

        You *have* seen the anti-Mormon screeds on Red State already, right?

        2012 is going to be ugly.

        Mew

        • AceInTX

          I’ve taken a sabbatical for a while because I’ve grown weary with the way Republicans have acted since winning in 10.

          It doesn’t surprise me though…I was one who started out 2008 supporting Huckabee as the, (what was for me), the least bad of a bunch of bad choices…but I always had my eye on Romney and figured I’d end up supporting him in the end…until his piss-ant followers demagogued the “You just don’t like him cause your an anti Mormon Bigot and ticked me off to the point where I wouldn’t pour a bucket of warm spit on him if he were on fire to put him out.

          That’s besides the fact that he’s like Al Gore in that…he’d lie when the truth sounds better

          • acat

            Figured you’d be back eventually.

            You missed some of the fun with the anti-mormon bigotry this time. I *think* there’s links in there to some of the previous ones. If not, well, your google-fu is strong.

            Mew

      • onemovoter

        Romney likes to micromanage a lot of things like liberals do. That’s not leadership. Leaders delegate to good people who know how to do a certain job the best. Reagan did that, and Perry does that.

  • onemovoter

    debate about Social Security between Perry and Romney.

    Here’s what I’m starting to see as a range of pundits are seeing the aftermath of the SS exchange. They are starting to see the actions of Mitt Romney continuing the attack on Perry and SS. The problem they see with this is that it puts Romney in the camp with the Democrats in wanting to not change SS and Medicare, This means Perry got Romney to make himself out to be a democrat-lite.

    Guess what that means? That means Romney now is turning off a large section of the republican voters who tend to be quite conservative and are looking for that outsider who will stand up strongly when the tough times come knocking. This pandering like the Democrats do is putting a really bad taste in people’s mouth towards Romney. By the time the next debate comes, Perry will be polling back up where he was if there is any change at all in the polls.

    The way to look at all this, is to see what everyone is talking about, and it’s still “ponzi scheme”. Romney’s jobs plan barely got a mention, all 59 points of it. That’s how you know who is leading.

    • streiff

      is put Romney in the camp of wanting to change SS, if you read his book, and not wanting to change SS, his position since Wednesday.

  • http://www.rightreality.wordpress.com andysmith

    This is the pot calling the kettle black.
    I’m NOT a big fan of Romney at all, but look back at Perry’s remarks about illegal immigration, abortion, and let’s not even forget the Al Gore campaign chair thing. I know, I’ll hear the “Reagan did the same thing” argument, but comparing the likes of Rick Perry to Ronald Reagan is like comparing Mark Texeira to Lou Gehrig.
    Sure, I don’t want to have a candidate locked into not being able to change their mind, but it should be the exception. Perry and Romney make it the norm. Perry has flipped as much as Romney has flopped. And with some of the negativity thrown the way of Sarah Palin’s supporters and even some comparisons to her’s being on the level of the Paultards, Perry’s squishiness goes largely ignored by his supporters.
    If these two are supposedly the best and the brightest, then the party is in trouble. I know Romney is preferred by the beltway, but how Perry’s supporters can miss how he’s blatantly done the same thing for years astounds me.

    • onemovoter

      When the accusations have been investigated and found to not be true.

      Perry and illegal immigration? What about it? If you make a comment like that here at RS, you better back it up. What flip is there here?

      Perry has been consistent on abortion all his life. You got a problem with that? Don’t see a flipping here. We do know Romney has flipped on this one and still people aren’t sure if he is pro-life currently.

      The Al Gore campaign chair this is my favorite, since it’s a complete falsehood. Perry, being a Democrat at the time only gave a recommendation for Al Gore back when Al Gore was more level headed back then for the Democratic primary, instead of the maniac these days. Soon after this is when Perry switched parties because Democrats treated Perry like sh*t.

      Again be specific about Perry’s “squishiness” rather than throwing generalities. You’ll get a lot more mileage that way then being like a liberal.

    • streiff

      as to Al Gore, a lot of us liked Al Gore back in the 1980s. I count myself among them..

      I searched my post long an hard to try to find where I compared anyone to Reagan. It isn’t in there. So either stop arguing against strawmen or start your own diary. I know the latter choice would be a lot like work, but life’s tough then you die.

  • antisocial

    Your titles for the recent posts are certified Truths. For instance RP being crazy. This one – Mitt is a flip flopper. I don’t think any one doubts that. They are not assumptions. They are certifiable truths.
    //////

    PS: I am so pissed off at the recent middle class non sense of Mitt. Republicans don’t group people into classes. I will take a Huckabee or your doormat over Mitt any day.

  • Adjoran

    On the list of our current problems, Social Security is not the highest priority. With common sense reforms the system can be extended, and should be as reform options are debated, but the critical problems are Medicare, Medicaid, ObamaCare, and overall spending policies.

    Yes, Social Security must be dealt with at some point, but can we put out these raging fires first? Thanks!

    This is a trap to divert the debate from the disaster of Democratic economic policies to one flawed but popular program which happens to benefit the most dependable voting class.

    Don’t go there. Kill the wolves before worrying about boll weevils.

  • The_Gadfly

    Romney’s statements don’t actually conflict.The second statement actually supports the first: the problem isn’t with the idea of having a government funded mechanism to function as a safety net for the elderly poor, but government has abused the fund by using it for things other than its intended purpose. So the funding mechanism needs to be fixed, but you don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    Spin meistering done. Wheh! I think I need a shower now.

    Note that even with the spin meistering, it doesn’t make Perry wrong or Mitt right, it just isn’t as inconsistent as you claim. Perry is right. The fact of the matter is there never WAS a trust fund. The first money paid in went directly out to people who never paid a dime in, and it has been funded the same way ever since. This is the very definition of a Ponzi scheme, even before the diversion of money to ends not intended enters the matrix. You need to recognize that before you can fix the problem. Fundamental to the fix is doing away with SS. At some point on the demographic curve you need to grant people privately managed IRA/401K equivalents, and fund those above that point out of general funds. I’m open to still having a means tested benefit for the truly indigent, mostly because it may be necessary to get the votes so we can get the majority of people of the government SS dole.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    People can whine all they want, but it was, and still is a horrible idea. Social Security was a tax scheme from the beginning. Democrats fallaciously sold it as akin to a savings account. It was never any such thing. Every year, Congress, Democrat and Republican alike, gleefully sucked up all this money and used it for things like “artistic porn” and Obama’s bus. Then applied accounting gimmicks to make payouts. That’s a Ponzi Scheme. There is no “balance” sitting there for the retirees.

    Most people have never looked at their paycheck where it says “Social Security TAX” It’s called a “tax” for a reason.

    That doesn’t mean to say that people Democrats have hooked on Social Security crack shouldn’t get their money. They should, it was promised to them.

    But the” scheme” is not sustainable for future generations. Look at the numbers and independent reports. They all say the same thing. The only controversy is when. Period.

    Frankly, I am a little sick of voters and in particular seniors, that don’t do their research and vote like Pavlov’s Dogs on emotional appeals every time some Democrat says Republican’s are going to take away their Social Security. I can’t think of one mainstream Republican that EVER said that. Ever.

    Romney is riding this like Secretariat in his zeal to get elected and try to politically nail Perry. It won’t work and is just one more reason why Romney is McCain 2.0, with better hair.