The context is you being a Romney guy, when not preferring McCain.
To: fieldmarshaldj
Are you going to become head cheerleader now for the Slick Willardbots, Norm ? I’d just like to know.
That one I’ll answer: NO.
I took up McCain’s cause because no one else was doing it. He was a vet, a war hero, and a moderately conservative with lots of governmental experience. It’s over and I’m not doing it again. I like Mitt and see him as a fine presidential candidate for 2012 (especially the way the economy and budgetary affairs are). While I haven’t officially settled on him: 1) I will defend what I see as excessive attacks on him, 2) I will celebrate his successes, and 3) all this whining is driving me closer to him. Afterall - I love an underdog.
143 posted on Saturday, February 28, 2009 7:46:06 PM by Norman Bates
Romney is not a conservative. He is not a bobdole, either, or a McCain. I believe he will not spend half his campaign promoting the Democrat candidate. Romney is most like Nixon. He has possibly the right idea about where the country should be but he is a Keynesian and thinks the government needs to be bigger so that the government can ordain liberty and construct an expert driven facsimile of a free market. His goal is due west but he insists on driving northeastward to get there. The conservative candidate must be pro limiting, even shrinking government. Romney is not. He must have a history of consistent small government and free market decisions. Romney’s history is quite opposite of that ideal. Saying that RomneyCare was a mistake that he won’t repeat only shows that he has no understanding of what a free society requires in the first place. He may not repeat the healthcare fiasco but he has no philosophical basis for not making the same sort of “mistake” in other areas. He is, like most dynamic personalities of either party, an economic ignoramus and he has no overall philosophy to point him in the right direction.