Romney Takes on McCain Over Taxes

AP via Yahoo! News ^ | 22 December, 2007 | Glen Johnson

[The Pack Knight]

The Boston Globe reported [in 2003] that during a meeting in Washington with the Massachusetts congressional delegation, Romney was asked about the tax cuts and said he "won't be a cheerleader" for proposals he did not agree with. "But I have to keep a solid relationship with the White House."

Now, Romney is solidly behind the cuts, arguing they should be made permanent before they expire in 2011.

So Romney attacks McCain for a position McCain and Romney both held in 2003. Incredible.

[BoBToMatoE]

Typical Mitt stuff.

Says what he needs to say to get elected, then expects us to swallow hard to believe it.

Unfortunately, so do many other Republicans in the chattering class (see National Review Online).

[Maelstorm]

Isn’t this a little like the Pot calling the kettle black?

“Anti-tax advocates are scrutinizing Mitt Romney’s (R) record as governor of Massachusetts and focusing on the fact that he increased fees in the state by $500 million and proposed nearly $400 million in business tax increases...

The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, published a fiscal-policy report card for 2006 that gave Romney a C grade, ranking him behind 11 other governors, including Democratic White House hopeful Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico.
“

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/romneys-tax-record-gets-a-closer-look-2007-03-27.html

[Leisler]

"... to run the Olympics and to run a state..

The Olympics was a 3-400 billion dollar bailout with a federal check. I think even I could do that.

Mitt raised 250 million a year, a billion dollars total in tax..er..'fees'. Of course a 'fee' isn't a tax.

And of course, Massachusetts is now threatening to arrest and fine any citizen that doesn't pony up for the ballooning costs of state commanded health care. (The soviet union used to be called a 'command economy', but when Brother Number One Mitt does it, it's free enterprise. Just make sure vor papers are in order YA!)

[The Pack Knight]

To get on my own soapbox, I don't really have a huge problem with McCain's position here. He has one of the best records in the race on spending, and I've always seen spending as a more important issue than taxes.

Anyone can call for tax cuts; they're always popular. Cutting taxes without controlling spending is just irresponsible, though. Borrow-and-spend is no better than tax-and-spend in my book.

[tompster76]

“The man refused to give his name, and Romney aides surrounded him afterward and accused him of being a Massachusetts Democrat who had challenged Romney about his tax record at another event.”

Hillary/Soros/FR machine is working overtime to defeat Romney. Why is it that democrats are so focused on taking on Romney and could not care less about Ron Paul or Fred Thompson? DNC knows, that Romney - with successful executive experience and more money than DNC - beats Hillary easily. Too bad the fifth column here is helping Hillary. Maybe, just maybe, you could point out something positive about your candidate instead of using Hillary/Soros talking points about the leading republican candidate? There must be something? Maybe he is leading in polls in one district in rural Georgia? There must be something? Anything?

[Petronski]

Romney failed Reagan 101 when he lied about Ronald Reagan’s pro-life record.

[Petronski]

Maybe, just maybe, you could point out something positive about your candidate instead of using Hillary/Soros talking points about the leading republican candidate?

Huckabee is the leading republican candidate.

[gpapa]

[The Pack Knight]

Fred Thompson has better positions than Romney on spending, taxes, illegal immigration, national security, health care, gun control, and the role of the federal government. Why should we give Romney a pass if we don't like his record and don't think he's the best candidate?

Besides, Hillary doesn't need our help to beat Romney. In case you haven't noticed, 48% of voters have said they'd "definitely vote against" Mitt Romney in the general election.

[tompster76]

If you believe polls so much, why don’t you admit that Thompson has zero chance then?

Thompson’s actual record (as opposed to talk) is pretty awful (CFR is the only piece of legislation he authored).

[businessprofessor]

While I agree that cutting taxes and spending is preferred, cutting taxes alone is far preferrable to the rat alternative: increasing taxes and spending. Cutting taxes can spur economic growth and lead to more tax revenue, not less tax revenue. In addition, cutting taxes leads to pressure to reduce spending. Cutting taxes is preferrable to the status quo of incremental tax increases and spending increases.

[Petronski]

You keep saying Thompson authored CFR, but you never provide proof.

[mjolnir]

Isn’t this a little like the Pot calling the kettle black? “Anti-tax advocates are scrutinizing Mitt Romney’s (R) record as governor of Massachusetts and focusing on the fact that he increased fees in the state by $500 million and proposed nearly $400 million in business tax increases... The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, published a fiscal-policy report card for 2006 that gave Romney a C grade, ranking him behind 11 other governors, including Democratic White House hopeful Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico.

First, The fact that they gave Richardson such a high grade tends to render their conclusions nearly irrelevant. Second, Romney raised fees, not taxes--- there is a difference, however slight, that is not merely trivial. Third, however mixed his economic record is, it obviously shines next to that McCain's, who apart from his support of free trade has been to the left of his party on every single economic issue of importance.

[Dragonspirit]

I’ve been showing several of my skeptical Republican friends links to these various attacks on Romney. They agree, they will DEFINITELY be voting for him now as they are obviously desperation tactics to weaken the strongest Republican in the race.

[The Pack Knight]

Why? Because he's all of 10 points behind the "frontrunner"? All those polls show is that it's still anyone's race.

As for his "awful" record, are we going to have to go through this again? Forgive us if we find the fact that he didn't author an endless parade of Sense of the Senate resolutions and feel-good nanny-state legislation to be a negative. Fred's work with the GAO alone is enough to make me a fan.

[NYC Republican]

I swear, FR is becoming more disgusting by the day. Romney blasts Hillary one day, destroys Time on Putin another day, blasts others on immigration... McCain on taxes...and all these disgusting FReepers do is Hillary’s dirty work, by blasting Romney. They should be ashamed.

[The Pack Knight]

Read the comments. Is it just me, or is it starting to look like those form letters to the editor the DNC always puts out?

[Petronski]

“I’m a lifelong rock-ribbed Republican, but this time Bush has gone too far...”

[The Pack Knight]

Who's to say Romney isn't doing Hillary's dirty work by blasting McCain?

I'm no McCain backer, but he'd be at least as strong a candidate against Hillary as Romney would.