So it really isn’t all that surprising that they would throw objections of conscience and religious freedoms to the wolves in order to save a few bucks.

Case in point, remember all Romney’s comments about “free riders” and “how they weren’t going to allow it”? Because it’s the government’s money, like I said. That’s how they see it.

We’re just objects to serve the purpose of earning the government’s money. For the sake of fairness and equality and all that stuff. But they manage money so much better than we do, you know. /sarc

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/opinion/krugman-romneys-economic-closet.html?_r=1

He’s now Paul Krugabe’s most favoratist Republican.

I remember this coming up on an interview with Hannity, and at the time his explanation was that his hand was forced by legal issues. This seems to be a more logical explanation that lines up with the events catholic insider describes. Some might disagree with that analysis of how it went down, but it’s certainly closer than what he said at the debate.

I would like to see the full text of his press conference where he explained his decision to get the full context.

Romney will not win the general. More than anything else, that’s the arguement to defeat him now. To unseat a sitting prez the independents and swingers need a clear alternative. Romney has never, and will never be able to present himself as an alternative to those voters. Different, sure. Clear alternative, nope.

See Kerry v Bush.

Romney will not win the general in 2012. He mighta won in 2008, he might win in 2016. But this year it will not happen. So why in the hoooznits would we nominate him?

Come on, all together now.

as such a major issue facing our great nation today. I was afraid that the 2012 election would get bogged down with all those minor issues like jobs and the deficit.

Romney has a habit of lying. He is hiding his liberal record.

He did it to Gingrich in Florida and now he did it again last night.

If we stop him in Michigan, he is done. So if Gingrich supporters vote for Santorum in Michigan, we can fight it out on Super Tuesday without fear of LYING Romney.

This is infuriating, and depressing. How are we supposed to defend this man in the general when he’s caught lying then? I just wind up feeling dirty at the thought of supporting this phoney.

I don’t know about Michigan anymore. Momentum seems to be drifting back Romney’s way and Santorum didn’t even do the basics in deflecting the attacks. I’m still hoping for a Santorum win next week but even then, it won’t mean Mitt’s completely finished. It’ll just mean the playing field has at last been leveled, and Romney’s not the frontrunner anymore.

A Michigan victory might also mean the establishment Republicans decide to start bailing on him. In which case the establishment folks stop being a hindrance to the base and instead may work with us to achieve an acceptable outcome to all.

I mean, it’s a leap to the LEFT, if anything, to go from being pro-choice to mandating Christian health care providers to administer non-surgical abortions that violate their conscience. It’s the ultimate example of the phenomenon you’re talking about. I would just call it “Mittens Knows Best” (apologies to Robert Young).

I’m not supporting a nominee who in his most recent stint in public office shoved abortion pills down the throats of Christian hospitals and who would lose to Barack Obama in the general election ANYWAY (see numerous EE articles for the cite on THAT).

I don’t care if you call Romney an arsonist and wife-beater if you can present the facts to back it up. But here you don’t present the facts, only the ones you like.

How about letting folks know about the VETO?

for exposing exactly what happened! Lot of informed people on our side do not know the extent of Mittens liberal record in MA! Even, when he had the support of the people, he took the easy liberal route to please the Globe & Democratic members of the senate & representative. There are so many instances such as these in his record.

When Romney knew he was not going to run again in MA, hetried to move to the right because he knew he wanted to run for the President of USA! Also you have the facts correct & Romney told another (too many to count now!) whopper in the debates & Rick or Newt should have called him on it….frustrated with Rick & Newt for not pressing on it more! It is time to call Romney a liar to his face!

I have posted so many times on how conservative media (Rush, Hannity, etc.) & republicans will not call out Romney’s flip flops while Obama gets mentioned for flip flops every time!

Romney = John Kerry! He wil face the same fate!! Since there is no big difference between Romney & Obama – we should not feel so bad when Obama beats one more RINO! We should have our spirits up since a conservative did not lose to a socialist!!

Romney’s “ingenius” nomination strategy. People have GOT to wake up and see this fake for what he really is! Him and his anarchist lapdog pretending to be a libertarian of all things! Instead, what do the mindless masses do? They keep giving him a free pass.

The conservatives will AGAIN lose the nomination IF they don’t unite under ONE candidate but continue in their self-serving “go-it-alone” approach.

…that Mitt Romney offered some insincere, dishonest account of his past and present for political gain.

Did I mention that I’m shocked?

There’s been a lot of talk lately about honoring religious conscience, but to me, Obama’s latest attack on the Catholic Church is just one more symptom that the Federal gov’t has usurped too much power from the states and the people, and wields it for mere political purposes. Unconstitutional dictates are just that, regardless of who or what is being attacked.

Romney has never voiced an opinion that most of the things government does are quite a stretch out of the bounds of enumerated powers. And so it really wouldn’t change much in the grand scheme of things if he should gain the oval office. He might just shuffle around the targets, but there’s always going to be someone getting slammed. The power is there to use, and it really shouldn’t be.

ObamaCare is a big one that really needs to go, as we’ve already seen the rehashing of the birth control debate when that’s just not government’s business, and it shouldn’t be be making medical choices for every man, woman and child in the country with a flick of the wrist, but there are plenty of others that need to go that have a huge impact on our personal liberties and carry subsequent economic effects, like the EPA, the NLRB, NTSB and many others. That’s not even mentioning what these do to the 4th and 5th amendments, and how people are harried and harassed for political reasons, like Gibson, for example.

Romney has been too busy sliming other candidates to even talk about these, except when he was cornered on ObamaCare. If you’re looking for someone who is going to get rid of the huge heavy hand of government, Romney probably isn’t the guy. For me anyway, it isn’t just about religious institutions, although I do not want them harassed either, I would really like to see most of that going away for everyone, no matter who they are.

Flip Romney obviously is not in politics out of conviction. He has no ideology or convictions of principle, judging from his opportunistic positions and related rhetoric (including an abundance of fake passion and commitment, when on one side of an issue when politically advantageous, then on the opposite side when that is politically advantageous).

So what drives him? It could be a combination of patriotism and a belief that what we really need is a smart technocrat. But more likely it is simply pure ego derived from power and — perhaps even more importantly — the winning of power by gaining the approval of the public.

And that’s the biggest concern we should have about Romney (other than the sad commentary and example it would be for our society that such a blatant phony could be elected our leader). As soon as he is in office, he will make decisions based primarily (and to a much greater extent than with past presidents, even Clinton) on how deciding one way vs. another will affect his chances at re-election, because re-election will be the ultimate test and potential ego-feeding remaining for him in his life.

So, to a lesser degree than with any other candidate in history can we use his campaign positions and rhetoric as a reliable guide to how he would act as president. It all depends on how the political winds blow.

As Forrest Gump would put it, “Romney is like a box of chocolates. Ya’ never know what yer gonna get.”

the idiot voters fall in line for him like a bunch of mindless zombies. Are people really THAT stupid and incapable of critical or independent thought? Can’t they really see the piece of slime that Mr. Silver Spoon/Big Businessman truly is when they come across his negative ads? Have these folks no backbone or conviction, such as that of never settling for the Massachusetts liberal who wouldn’t last a second against a conservative in a fair fight?

If Romney and his unmanly, cowardly tactics make me sick, the folks who actually fall for him make me even MORE sick!

Question. Why didn’t King call him on the lie right then and there? Here was a perfect opportunity to point out the truth to all. Because unless King didn’t do his homework, he allowed the lie to stand as stated fact.

This just goes to show that if elected, Mitt will be allowed to say or do anything, truth or not, and the media will take a pass just like they do with Obama. Could it be that those companies (people) that own media outlets, and the souls of their employees, are forming the narrative of their version of the truth and vision for the world? The politicians and subsequently reporters, are just pawns in the game.

First he vetoes a bill, and his veto is overriden. Then he supports a new law that preserves the religious exemption and it doesn’t pass the Legislature. Then his legal counsel advises him to change course and he does, taking the advice of his lawyer. And then he makes a misstatement picked up by — of all places — the Boston Globe and you tar and feather him for it.

Maybe you should ask Nielsen why he advised the Governor that the “grandfathered” exemption didn’t apply. It could very well be that Romney really does believe that women who have been raped should have access to Plan B. I believe that, too.

If your daughter is raped tomorrow, what would you want?

THAT is why he or she should not be aborted. Therefore, it is not a question of a woman’s right to her own body, which nobody questions. It’s the new human life within who is conceived through no fault of his own, regardless of the unfortunate circumstances, such as rape. The Catholic Church as always taught this . . . OPENLY.

George H.W. Bush was told by Sununu that Souter would be a home run for conservatism but he was an unknown. Now the GOP insiders want to pretend that Romney is conservative and tell primary voters to ignore the man behind the curtain. They’re counting on voter ignorance to get someone who has no principals other than political gain in the White House.

I fear what kind of justices a President Romney will appoint. Romney stands against conservative positions on gay marriage, gun rights, and Obamacare (each issue will be on the Court’s docket in the next year or two) and I’m sure he’d vet any potential justice so they’d be people who will vote in conformity with his positions. We have three justices that will be 80 in the next Presidential term so who we have as President will have a huge impact on the composition of the Court for decades. We’ve already seen the kinds of people that Obama would appoint. Can we risk Romney?