Mitt Romney’s Time?

Pages: 1 2

Critics and supporters alike agree that Mitt Romney is eminently qualified to be president. His vast and successful experience in private business, his governorship of Massachusetts, and his miraculous turn around of the scandal-plagued Salt Lake City Olympics place him head and shoulders above the current occupant of the White House and many of his GOP rivals for the nomination as far as possessing the qualities necessary to be a successful chief executive.

But the same thing that irks his critics is possibly his greatest strength; a pragmatic, virtually non-ideological approach to governing and getting things done that eschews the kind of partisanship that is eating Washington alive and substitutes prudence and competence.

Detractors point to his supposed lack of passion and verve for political combat. Supporters talk up his ability to exude confidence and instill that attribute in others. And, of course, there is the accusation of flip-flopping and inconsistent adherence to conservative principles that has dogged Romney for most of his political career.

While many of those accusations are exaggerated or deliberately false, Romney admits that he occasionally changes his mind, saying, “in the private sector, if you don’t change your view when the facts change, you’ll get fired for being stupid.” This may help explain his switch from opposing to supporting a flat tax, or even his turnaround on the Massachusetts health care plan that he authored with its individual mandate and regulated private insurance plans.

But it doesn’t explain his evolving position on abortion, nor other social issues that have made him the bane of social conservatives in Iowa and around the country.

Romney’s inconsistencies are no worse than many of the other candidates in the race. Newt Gingrich has been all over the map on issues like climate change and Libya. Rick Perry’s stance on the Confederate battle flag issue and energy subsidies has changed since entering the race. And Herman Cain had heads spinning when he changed his position on abortion, sometimes it seemed hour to hour.

Not to excuse Romney, but shading, altering, or even turning 180 degrees on issues is not unheard of in politics. In the former Massachusetts governor’s case, much of the perception appears to be the result of how a Republican must run in the Bay State to be successful, and how a GOP presidential candidate campaigns in far more conservative territory.

In the case of abortion and other social issues, it is fair to ask just what is it that Romney truly believes. Michael Gerson, writing in the Washington Post answers with his own question: “Is it really reasonable to assume that a former Mormon bishop, deep down, is a cultural liberal?” Romney ran for governor in 2002 promising not to alter the state’s abortion laws — among the most liberal in the nation — saying, “I am not going to change our pro-choice laws in Massachusetts in any way. I am not going to make any changes which would make it more difficult for a woman to make that choice herself.”

Romney now says he supports overturning Roe v. Wade and defunding Planned Parenthood, as well as opposing federal funding of abortions. By 2005, Romney says he had experienced “an epiphany” on abortion as a result of his research into the stem cell issue.

Changing my position was in line with an ongoing struggle that anyone has that is opposed to abortion personally, vehemently opposed to it, and yet says, “Well, I’ll let other people make that decision.” And you say to yourself, but if you believe that you’re taking innocent life, it’s hard to justify letting other people make that decision.

Romney supporters view this as a conversion, pointing out that it proves their candidate has an open mind and is capable of changing his opinion when presented with a new perspective. In private industry, this is an attribute much valued. It should be in a president as well.

Michael Gerson believes that “a hungry political party will tolerate some heterodoxy in the nomination of a strong candidate – if it is convinced that his or her values are sound.” No doubt this is true, which makes Romney’s courting of the conservative base of the GOP so important. Neither side can achieve what they desire unless Romney can demonstrate that his conversion on many social issues is more than simply part of a strategy to claim the nomination. And Gerson points out an advantage for the base in this process:

Even conservatives who buy none of these explanations may calculate that Romney is acceptable. Precisely because he has a history of ideological heresy, it would be difficult for him to abandon his current, more conservative iteration. He has committed himself on key conservative issues. Having flipped, he could not flop without risking a conservative revolt. As a result, conservatives would have considerable leverage over a Romney administration.

What about the 60% of Republicans who may hold pro-life and other socially conservative views but don’t identify strongly with the base? These are the voters that want to pick the strongest possible candidate to go up against President Obama and are willing to accept a little heresy in exchange for victory in November. This is Romney’s natural base of support and he is counting on the majority of the party to support him — if he can navigate his way through the first few primaries and caucuses relatively unscathed.

Pages: 1 2

  • Grad Student

    I agree all the way. It is amazing that they call him the Flip-flopper when so many others have flipped and flopped too. They have nothing else to really fight against him with so they use flip-flop as being evil. Some of our best president have changed their minds on issues, some for the betterment of the country. I would rather have a president who changed his mind for the better and who did so through being enlightened than an idiot who is too stubborn to change their views when it would benefit Americans. I am voting Romney in 2012!

    • Karen Murphy

      I so agree with "Grad Student". Romney has my vote in 2012. Of all of the candidates for the Republican nomination, he is the only one that is worthy, in my opinion. The economy is an area that he can and will turn around with his business expertise.

    • kathy

      Romney is much better than what we have now…one, who, despite evidence to the contrary, will not budge on his positions, but continues in his Keynesian ideology, even though it is not working. I would like someone who could at least admit he is wrong and change course. I think that would be good for the country.

  • alexander

    Ann Coulter reminds us about Gingrich's idiocies:
    In addition to having an affair in the middle of Clinton's impeachment; apologizing to Jesse Jackson on behalf of J.C. Watts — one of two black Republicans then in Congress –- for having criticized "poverty pimps," and then inviting Jackson to a State of the Union address; cutting a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi; supporting George Soros' candidate Dede Scozzafava in a congressional special election; appearing in public with the Rev. Al Sharpton to promote nonspecific education reform; and calling Paul Ryan's plan to save Social Security "right-wing social engineering," we found out this week that Gingrich was a recipient of Freddie Mac political money.

  • Otwo

    I think the GOP are cooked in 2012. Let's break down the current batch..

    Cain – no chance.. tainted by numerous allegations of sexual assault.. how can you elect this bloke? no sane woman would vote for him so that's 50 per cent of the electorate gone in one fell swoop.. … and wishy-washy and flippitty floppy on foreign policy..

    Paul – the far right-wing base don't like this guy because he wants israel to grow up and to stop getting handouts. No chance

    Gingrich – see Cain. no sane woman would vote for this guy and he's hated by the right-wing base for crapping on several scared cows.

    Romney – a flippitty floppers, flippitty flopper! This guy is all over the place… he's got no chance. The press will eat this wishy-washy flippitty flopper alive… as it should.

    Perry… LOL..

    Bachman – ditto as per Perry.

    Who does that leave? SARAH PALIN . Why is no-one campaigning for her to enter this race???? She could win! and she ticks all the right boxes!!!

    • Murray Schwartz

      Sarah Palin? Are you kidding. This woman is an out and out moron? We would have been the laughing stock of the world if she had gotten elected last time. I mean, imagine her President of the USA?? She's a joke and the Republicans must have been all drunk when they put her on the ticket. At least this time they've been smart enough to tell her to stay out of the way and go hide under a rock somewhere, lest she hurts thier already slim chances in 2012.

      • StephenD

        I would not want Palin on the ticket either. But to call her a joke compared to your man the head clown in office is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

        • Murray Schwartz

          LOL… palin IS a joke. and an embarassment as well. It's about time this country was ruled by someone with some brains.

          The last president with some real intelligence was probably ….. well, jimmy Carter and before him, Nixon, and then johnson and so on….

          Ford and Reagan pioneered the revolution of morons leading this country. A tradition followed to this very day.

          • Herman Caintonette

            I wouldn't call Reagan a moron, though the Bushes have lined the barrel of mediocrity.

          • Murray Schwartz

            Out of respect for the fact that he's no longer around.. i will change that to simple. Simple-minded simple views which catered to the lowest and simplist common denominator.

            This country has a lot of smart people living in it. So why can't one of them run this country. Morons and simpltons are the reason this country is in the mess it's in. It's time for a change.

          • kathy

            attack comment with no substance. Making fun and calling names is what some do best,but there is no substance, just insults.

        • Otwo

          why wouldn't you want SARAH PALIN on the ticket?

          • Great White North

            She's an idiot.

      • Herman Caintonette

        We became the laughing stock of the world when we elected Shrub. One woman in Australia (a Howard supporter, and no enemy to conservatism) actually asked me how we elected such a blithering idiot.

        Willard the Job-Eating Rat won't exactly resonate with the electorate, but he is a less objectionable candidate than Fannie Mae platinum lobbyist Newt "Tiffany" Gingrich, Rick What's-his-name (at least, Palin had the sense to write crib notes on her hand), Rick Analube, et al., ad nauseum. Willard will say anything he has to to get elected, which is a part of his Gingrich-esque charm.

        Barry the Wall Street WaterBoy has to be the luckiest man on this freakin' planet. A generic Republican would trounce him in 2012, but there is no one on the clown car who can mount even a credible challenge.

    • Howard Richman

      Gov. Palin: Please, please, please enter the race. Her economic program is first rate: (1) eliminate the corporate income tax, (2) balance trade, (3) end payouts for crony-capitalism, (4) balance budgets, (5) reduce regulation. Balancing trade and budgets alone would get U.S. growing again.

    • Asher

      I don't agree with you at all…Gingrich and Romney are 2 of the most capable candidates we have had run since Reagan. Bachman would be good in a cabinet position, so would Ron Paul, Santorum or Cain. We are not falling for the propaganda that there is no one in the GOP who is electable….We know how the left sabatoges and tries to destroy candidates and tries to discourage the voters…Forget it…We are sick of Obama and his Socialist policies! No the left is cooked because they have been abysmal failures at governing!

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I hear pundits on Fox news all the time portraying Romney as a RINO or a moderate or as not being conservative enough, which is nonsense. As in the 2008 race Romney was the candidate the conservatives rallied around after refusing to support Huckabee and McCain. Indeed, Romney is just as conservative or more conservative that any of the candidates in the race for the Republican Party nomination today, and if the Tea Party wants to support the most conservative candidate, there is no one in the race more conservative than Romney, and if there is I would like to know who it is and how.

    Another negative pundits claim is Romney has a record of being a flip flopper, but that charge is also erroneous as Romney is a flipper but not a flopper, as he has regularly flipped to more conservative positions as he has gotten older, exactly as most conservatives have also done as they grew older and wiser gaining experience through the school of hard knocks known as life.

    Meanwhile, if you want to talk about flip floppers, lets talk about Newt Gingrich as he is probably the biggest flip flopper in the Republican Party field of candidates. Indeed, he infamously conceded a Global Warming debate to John Kerry of all people and then subsequently did a PSA with Nancy Pelosi urging Congress to act on Global Warming. Newt also previously did PSAs with Hillary Clinton on healthcare issues back in 2006, and until very recently Newt supported a one size fits all federal mandate to force citizens to purchase health insurance, then he flopped but only after it became crystal clear how unpopular that federal mandate is. Thus, nobody is a bigger flip flopper than Newt Gingrich.

    And what about Newt's cozy $1.6 million Washington insider contract with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, what's the real story there? Also, why does Newt refuse to reveal his official position on amnesty and other backdoor pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants? Considering Newt's long history of flip flopping, can we really trust him on that issue? Indeed, is he trying to hide something? Romney has made his official position crystal clear, he is totally against amnesty and all other backdoor pathways to citizenship.

    What about the other leader in the polls, Herman Cain? On the issue of Israel, Cain was for the right of return before he flopped to being against it, and Cain has also made numerous other famous flubs in this race alone such as on the abortion issue and always claims he was taken out of context or that he was tired. Cain is simply an amateur and not nearly ready for prime time and to be president. Indeed, there is more to being president than repeating 9-9-9 ad nauseum.

    Not to mention that Newt's campaign is deeply in debt and not nearly ready to conduct a race on a national level and Cain's campaign is practically nonexistent as he has been living on fumes and the favorable media attention that was graciously given him after the fall of Rick Perry, the other true conservative in the race that turned out to be under the magnifying glass not so conservative, especially when it came to border security and catering to illegal immigrants.

    Meanwhile, Romney's campaign is the most solid, organized, and prepared to take on a national race and no one's campaign has more money in its coffers. Thus, given the huge stakes riding on this election, nobody is more conservative, more qualified, and more prepared to be president than Mitt Romney. While the other leaders in the polls are no where near to being organized and prepared, which is also an indication of how their presidency will end up as well. Indeed, Romney would be the clear cut favorite if it wasn't for his Mormonism, which is really his biggest problem, only people can't cite his Mormonism without also revealing that they are bigoted at the same time.

    • Herman Caintonette

      Romney panders to the electorate relentlessly. Problem is, he has been forced to go so far to the right in order to pander to the non compos mentis Republican base that he has no chance to appeal to Middle America.

    • xlent

      How has the word bigoted become the favorite description of some one simply telling the truth. I will simply tell the truth and let it do whatever it will. I know the TRUTH will win. Romneys religion does bother me. Does anyone out there understand how much mormonism and islam are alike???

      • ObamaYoMoma

        With all due disrespect, anyone that compares Mormonism to Islam, which, by the way, is not even a faith-based religion, is not only bigoted, but also incredibly mentally incompetent at the same time.

        • xlent

          Yo Moma I'm sorry but you have not done YOUR homework on this issue there are many similarities between islam and mormonism. And again why is "bigoted" such a widely and wildely used word by you folks? I am intolerant but I am not speaking "blindly" I have researched and written papers on all the cults. I think you should do a bit of research yourself before you go about declaring someone "mentally incompentent" I will hold my compentency up to yours any day.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Yo Moma I'm sorry but you have not done YOUR homework on this issue there are many similarities between islam and mormonism.

            You better lay off the meth or crack cocaine, as it is literally eating away at what little brain tissue you have. Are Mormons waging jihad in the cause of Allah against non-Mormons to make Mormonism supreme? Are Mormons migrating to the West in mass for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest and again to make Mormonism supreme? Wherever there is a majority of Mormons, do they violently oppress and systematically persecute when not outright slaughtering altogether all non-Mormons? How about apostasy and blasphemy, are they also capital offenses in Mormonism? Do Mormons just like clockwork form Mormon no-go zones ruled by Mormon law as fifth columns and in direct contravention to the laws of the states in which they reside? Is a Mormon female's inheritance worth half as much as a male Mormon? Is a Mormon female's testimony in a Mormon court of law worth half of a male's testimony? Can Mormon females marry non-Mormons? Can they leave the home without body covering and without being accompanied by a close male relative? Can Mormon females drive? Can they work? Can they go to school? Can the crime of rape be proven in a Mormon court of law, or does it take 4 male witnesses to testify on the female's behalf to prove rape? Is their a similar institution of dhimmitude in Mormonism? How about a similar institution of jihad in Mormonism? Are Mormons trying to subjugate the world into draconian Mormon totalitarianism via the imposition of Mormon law. Do Mormon suicide/homicide bombers and jihadist martyrs get 72 virgins? Do Mormons sell their prepubescent daughters into child sex slavery? Is honor killing and FGM common in Mormon society? Do Mormons holler “Allahu Akbar” when lopping off the heads of non-Mormons?

            And again why is "bigoted" such a widely and wildely used word by you folks? I am intolerant but I am not speaking "blindly" I have researched and written papers on all the cults.

            Really, then why are you so ignorant of Mormonism and Islam that you morally equate the two in order to intentionally vilify and demonize Mormons and Mormonism?

            I think you should do a bit of research yourself before you go about declaring someone "mentally incompentent" I will hold my compentency up to yours any day.

            With all due disrespect again, I repeat you couldn't be anymore incredibly mentally handicapped and therefore mentally incompetent you moonbat.

  • Jane Larson Baer

    I agree, Mitt Romney is the man. The only other possibility is Bachmann becaseu she is perfect and 55% of voters are female, but apparently we are still too sexist, so Romney it is!!!!

    • Heart of Midlothian

      Bachmann is perfect…as in a perfect category 5 moron. like palin.

      • kathy

        name calling is not debate

  • walter

    Romney is a true conservative. I know three people that know him personally. One very well. His views have moved. But they have all moved to the right and stopped there. (Where they aleways were!)

    Just wait and see! With Mitt Romney in the white house for 8 years we will have a small business renaissance, unemployment will be at 4% and the budget will be balanced.

    Mitt is a true conservative and he can send Obama home to Chicago to lobby out his days.

    • Stephen_Brady

      Walter, you don't score any points, here, by repeating yourself.

    • Jim

      He tells three people one thing and the public many other things and always acts otherwise.
      Do your friends give you stock tip too.

      • Walter

        No. My friends do not give me "stock tip too".

        One of the people I have known, for ovr 20 years; worked for the U.S. Olympic Organization during the Olympics, and was with Mitt constantly (due to his position). He didnt have to like Romney or even respect him. The person I know is a well spoken retired militray leader of high rank and two tours in Nam. He had nothing but exceptional things to say about Romney.

        Jim, Stephen, do either of you have close personal friends that have personal experince with Romney? With any of the Republican candidates?

        I would be open to considering your opinions if you have such relationships.

    • thetruth

      A true conservative is ok with the state mandating to the individual a product he must by using forced coercion? It is a sad state of affairs when something like an individual mandate (on all levels not just federal) seems commonplace amongst modern conservative thought.

  • Linda W.W.

    I've read all these comments to finally conclude, LOTS of opinions here leading to even more questions. I only have one question at this point, WHY DID ANYONE VOTE FOR OBAMA. So taking off from that point, I'll vote for anybody but Obama. Now that I've said that as plainly as possible, let me take it one step further. VOTE OUT ALL IN CONGRESS NOW THAT HAS BEEN THERE TWO YEARS OR LONGER,,,,,,,,THEY ALLOWED, SUPPORTED, IGNORED, PICK ONE OR ALL THREE, to take us where we have ended up. They all need to go and we as Americans need to replace, then watch them closely and IMPEACH if they loose sight. This attitude that runs through the American public that you have somehow DONE your duty by only voting every two or four years, whoopee, is enough. NOT ENOUGH. Pay friggen attention all the time and stay involved.

    • kathy

      I have a plan..if Congress can't reduce spending, then the American people will have to help them…how? By withholding federal tax payments. Radical? Yes, but we live in radical times as we hit 15 trillion in debt yesterday. This could be our own version of the Boston tea party. And I am having serious doubts about Congress' willingness to stop the spending.

      • Jim

        You will go to jail so no one will do it. Just keep recycling congress as often as possible and as completely as possible to reduce the power of the lobbyists .
        The public may be ready for action now.

  • Robert Pinkerton

    Massachussetts has a handgun law that is just as bad as New York's better-known Sullivan law, called the Bartley-Fox law, under which law mere possession of a handgun without a police-controlled license is a felony. I ask what Romney ever did, while he was governor, toward repealing that abomination.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      So you blame Romney with an 85 percent Dhimmicrat majority legislature for not getting that law repealed? In other words, you wanted Romney to expend all his political capital on that one issue, even though repealing that one issue was impossible? Give me a break.

  • Fray222

    Of course there is nothing wrong with someone changing their views on some things, or on just about everything, like Horowitz did in the 70s.
    I think the problem is that Romney's changes in position are suspiciously convenient for him politically. Does anyone think that Romney's flip on abortion really had nothing at all to do with him moving from governor of America's most liberal state, to candidate for the republican nomination.
    If you don't think that Romney's epiphany on the abortion issue is genuine, then you must believe either that Romney is secretly pro-choice and he's lying about it now, or else that he was always pro-life, but was still willing to come out in favour killing babies in order to get elected governor of Massachusetts. Is anyone here comfortable with either scenario?
    Again, i've got nothing against someone changing their positions on major issues. My problem is with someone whose policy changes always happen to benefit them politically.
    My question for any Romney supporters out there, can you point out one Romney policy shift that hurt him politically, but that he still made out of principal?

  • Stephen_Brady

    As Republicans … and I know that not everyone commenting is one … we do this all the time. We want our candidates to be "perfect". No divorces, no affairs, no "shady deals", no flip-flops, no speeches before the CFR or the Bildebergers, ad infinitum.

    However, perfection is an impossibility, in this world. It's not going to happen.

    This fanatical desire for perfection will be our undoing, next year. NOT ONE of the candidates is perfect. If the GOP … and those likely to support it … does not coalesce around a single candidate, and then support him or her to the max, we will be helping Obama to flush our nation down into the sewers of history.

    The candidate that gets our nomination will not be perfect, and will not be without baggage. My preference is Newt Gingrich, and I will vote for him in the primary. If he doesn't win the nomination, I will vote for ANY candidate those does get that nomination.

    It's time to start talking party unity, rather than insulting each other, Herman Caintonette excluded …

    • Fray222

      No one is aiming for perfection here. We are simply looking for a president who has the courage to cut out of control spending, even when it might cost him something politically. We can't afford another president who is simply going to do whatever Washington wants him to do, because all Washington wants is more money for everything and it is bankrupting us, it is literally destroying our nation.

      • Stephen_Brady

        I understand what you are saying, and as a member of the Tea Party, I agree with it.

        But we're allowing the administration, the DEMs, backed up by the media, to choose our candidate, for us. If a Tea Party candidate gets close, all of the bimbos, liars, and trolls come out of the woodworks, while we're still running campaigns like it's 1952.

        I'm 62, and though I've lived a life that is … by most standards … is impeccably moral, I have baggage of my own. I've buried this baggage as deep as I can. But if I ran for high political office, it would be out within a matter of days, or even hours.

        Who knows? America may be screwed. Maybe Washington is just waiting for Mitt, Newt, Jon, et al, to come to the White House and continue to bankrupt the nation. But my point is that our lack of party unity plays into the hands of the enemy … the current occupant of the White House. He is not a traditional politician, and I am convinced he is purposely attempting to destroy this nation.

        Party unity, country first. We'll worry about everything else one Obama is gone …

    • Oleg

      It's time to talk party unity after the membership has picked a candidate, before then let the primaries sort it out. It's pretty obvious to me that the concensus media wants John Huntsman, while he is still technically a Republican he lead the most profligate spending governorship in the state of Utah, so he's out. Ron Paul is good on 80% of the issues, but the 20% that's left is sheer lunacy, he's so bad that the Libertarian party wouldn't pick him as a candidate. Romney, on the other hand is the partyestablishment candidate, maybe two shades more conservative then a Rockefeller, he also comes off as a cliche' of a politician, a political slickster, then there is the albatross of Romneycare around his neck, if he can't close the deal in his own party how is he going to close the deal witrh the electorate?

  • Jim

    Yes Romney has all the money ; and why not, it is Wall Streets money that preciously went to Obama. What is good for the goniffs of Wall Street is not good for business or America.

    The article never mentions Romney's main line of business was shutting down going concerns firing all the workers and distributing the money to management.. Ted Kennedy exploited this against Romney and easily beat him. Obama will do like wise.

    Romney refused to let the Boy Scouts become involved in the Salt lake located Olympics. because of the scouts stance on homosexual scout leaders.

    He eagerly enforced the Massachussetts gay marriage court decision when the legislature was willing to engage in benign neglect.( You know like securing the border.)

    He campaigns like Tom Dewey. He says nothing but in a very presidential way.
    The public picked up on that then and they will now. Dewey lost even though Truman
    was as unpopular as Obama is now.

    • simon templar

      That is exactly why the establishment elite wnat him to run and be nominated. Very good points.

  • simon templar

    You expect me to believe that a governor from the most liberal state in the US that helped create and pass that state's version of Obamacare and has shown no interest in and actually tried to keep political distance from the Tea Party is a true conservative.

    You expect me to believe this guy is a true conservative when the White House wants him to run.

    You expect me to believe this guy is a conservative when the establishment republican elite has done everything in its power to undermine every single one of its conservative candidates and has done nothing but stay silent about the 'boy combing his hair' Romney?

    You expect us to swallow the idea that Romney's is invunerable to the barrage of criticism and smear from the MSM not only about his flip floppyness but the FACT that Obamacare WAS modeled after Romneycare? Just what is he going to say next year if nominated while the Supreme Court debates and rules on this?


    What you offer is the same claptrap we hear every four years.

    • xlent

      Good questions templar …A RINO is like a bad cop. There is nothing worse than an authority figure who is supposed to be there for the good of socirty but has done so many questionable things that you can no longer trust them but they stil have power and authority over you. That is just evil

  • 080

    I like Mitt Romney but you should be suspicious of the motives of the media in promoting his candidacy. I think they are counting on the fact that he is a Mormon. One quarter of the Republican Party are Evangelicals. This may not matter to you but it may cause many Republicans to stay home on election day. Oh you may say we have gotten beyond all that. Indeed you may have but don't count on everyone feeling the same way. I am convinced that any candidate that does not bring the Evangelicals along will lose.

  • Eduardo

    I would like to see a Mitt-Gingrich ticket for Pres/Vice. What do you think? Gingrich is good too but I am not sure he would settle for vice president. Maybe go for a high office like Hillary. What do you think?

    • ObamaYoMoma

      I think Newt would take the VP spot if offered. He wants to redeem his fall from grace for posterity.

  • Grip

    The Republicans fight among themselves and squander time, money, effort and seek to destroy one another's good names. BHO saves his election money, takes all the critique of the fighting republicans to memory to be used later. The Republicans – not many ears ago – had it all; the Presidency, the House and the Senate and the opportunity to appoint constitutional judges. Then they squandered it through disunity, earmarks, disregard of Republican principles and the people who elected them. They thought those who had been elected were all wise. They had a opportunity to "flip" or "flop" or to face the facts and "change their minds" based on reason, wisdom and history which they did not do. It appears they have learned nothing and now will cause a novice, non experienced leader who has wrecked destruction on this nation to be re-elected.
    Of all those seeking the nomination as Republicans, Mitt Romney has the best qualifications. If anyone can lead the turn around of the destruction of the past four years, it is Mitt Romney.

  • Great White North

    Go Mitt.



  • publius

    Honestly, I think all the substantive issues are moot. Mitt Romney should already be president, and, I believe, would now be, were he not Mormon. I felt strongly that Huckabee and McCain were exploiting if not fueling anti-Mormon bigotry the last time around, and I don't expect any more from anybody else this time. Sorry, that's just how I see it the elephant in the room.

  • Quinn

    Yep Mitt may be Mormon, but he's not honest. Newt and Romney should join forces and just use the campaign slogan, "what do you want me to say to get your vote?" Want stability and consistency, want honesty and integrity, vote Ron Paul, the others are just Republican hacks who want the same thing as the Democrats, the end of the US Constitution, individual freedoms, rights and liberties and to rule over you by a fascist police state wrapped in the flag to trick the simple minded into thinking it's for their safety.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Thanks for restoring my faith that Ron Paul is a kook.

    • mlcblog

      Why do you say he is not honest??

  • LibertyIL

    Obama…Please enlighten me on why you feel Ron Paul is a kook. Thanks

  • mlcblog

    I shudder to vote for Romney, given his own version of Obamacare in Mass, but he may be the best choice for us. He is hardly a conservative but he far outshines Gingrich in so many ways. Younger, stronger….but the important part is what you have linked to, his own versions of flip-flopping. The New American has done extensive work on his record and it is not pretty, or should I say not trustworthy which is what we need from our politicians. There are many deficits on Newt's record.

  • mlcblog

    I shudder to vote for Romney, given his own version of Obamacare in Mass, but he may be the best choice for us. He is hardly a conservative but he far outshines Gingrich in so many ways. Younger, stronger….but the important part is what you have linked to, his own versions of flip-flopping. The New American has done extensive work on his record and it is not pretty, or should I say not trustworthy which is what we need from our politicians. There are many deficits on Newt's record.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Huntsman, Johnson, and Buddy Roemer are the only sane occupants of that clown car.

  • William_Z

    “Huntsman who?” is what I first thought when he entered the race, and still the same. And Romney doesn't have a change.  Between Cain and Gingrich, he's already heading into third place and then into oblivion. 

  • Herman Caintonette

    As a recovering ex-Christian, I know enough about your religion to repeatedly ensnare you in your boundless hypocrisy. When I posited the proposition here that the killing of a tyrant's children was a morally acceptable act, I was doing so with the tale of Passover in mind. As you might recall — most Christians are woefully ignorant of their own Holy Writ — the god of Israel supposedly killed the first-born son of every Egyptian family as a punishment for Pharoah's tyranny, passing over the Hebrew households. It is rather bad form for you to denounce me for advocating what your god purportedly did.

    As I expected, the drooling religious nutters here went ape-guano crazy, questioning my parentage and worse. But if it the killing of a tyrant's child (and especially, the killing of a child who is merely a member of the tyrant's tribe) is such a manifestly and shockingly immoral act, then by definition, YOUR YHWH IS IMMORAL!

    You have two logical courses of action: Either denounce YHWH, Jesus, or Heavenly Father (for Mormons), or apologize profusely.

  • Stephen_Brady

    No …

  • JEM

    You would agree then that the judgment of God is righteous even though religious persons may misapply or misinterpret scripture at times? As a Christian that is acceptable to me.

  • StephenD

    Well said Chez. I am a Christian and have called out Herman "killing Jewish kids is morally legitimate" Caintonette. He compares himself to the Creator as having equal rights to the creation.
    He is a fool.

  • Herman Caintonette

    We're talking about the Jewish god, guano-for-brains. And even if we both find that particular flavor of psychotic ancient tribal sky-daddy too odious to embrace, Team Horrorwitz is stuck with him.

    If David denounces YHWH, I will have made my point, Cheez.

  • Herman Caintonette

    As I said, if morality is not objective, it is meaningless.

    If you are a Christian, why don't you call out Jesus "killing Egyptian kids is morally legitimate" ben Yusuf, often fraudulently called the Christ or Messiah. After all, those differing weights and measures — doesn't your god detest them both? HYPOCRITE!!!

    When your god stops raping little boys in the shower — or at least, acting as an accomplice and accessory after the fact — get back to me.

  • Herman Caintonette

    You're going to pay quite a price for it, if you do. If it was proper for your god to kill Egyptian children who had no power over Pharoah to punish him for his acts of tyranny, it logically follows that the displaced Palestinians have an equal right to kill Jewish children at any place and any time — even New York — to punish the Zionists for their acts of tyranny. Differing weights and measures, you know….

  • Ghostwriter

    This from someone who wallows in Jew hatred for much of her life and doesn't mind Jewish children dying.

  • StephenD

    HE can do as He pleases with His creation. You cannot.

    I am done giving you consideration for anything. You are like dung on the bottom of my shoe and only worthy of being cleaned off with a disposable stick.