The 3-S Test [Surprise! Lefty thinks Mitt, not Sarah, "Safe, Sane and Selfless" candidate for 2012]

The Pacific Northwest Inlander ^ | June 2, 2010 | Ted S. McGregor Jr. , Editor and Publisher

[2ndDivisionVet]

Sometime around the time Barack Obama won the White House, I started wondering who would inherit the Republican Party. I have to admit I felt a little schadenfreude when George and Dick drove the GOP off a cliff, but I also named this space “Common Ground” for a reason. We need to focus on what unites us more than the things that divide us.

Here’s some common ground: We need two functioning political parties to continue to meet the challenges of our times. Unlike Karl Rove, I don’t want one party to run the country. Hammering out public policy through competing visions for the future has always been America’s strength. But today the GOP is not functioning; it’s a rudderless bunch who just say “no” to everything, while faux-populists stoke the fires of discontent while cashing in on the emotions they manipulate. It’s not pretty.

Today’s new candidates must rise above the mess; they will set the tone for the next generation of the GOP. To judge whether they might be part of the solution for the Party, I apply what I like to call the 3-S Test to new candidates — the Safe, Sane and Selfless Test. I’ll break it down: Are they safe? Would they support starting two wars with no plan for winning or paying for them? Would they leave Wall Street and oil companies alone to pursue their profiteering? (As they instruct new doctors: First, do no harm.)

Are they sane? Will they use their office to pry into the sex lives of citizens? Will they insist that God planted dinosaur bones 5,000 years ago just for fun?

Are they selfless? Politics has become a highly lucrative career, with elected office a springboard to higher paid jobs in lobbying or speechifying. This is why I find myself trusting a guy like Michael Bloomberg — he’s already rich, so he’s obviously doing it for ego (which I can live with) and the good of the people. Normal people can be selfless, too, but you’ve got to gauge their potential greed factor.

You can apply my test to any candidate from any party, but to illustrate, let’s apply it to the GOP contenders for president. Mitt Romney passes on all three counts. Sarah Palin, meanwhile, fails across the board. So for me, to return the GOP to its Reagan-esque roots, Romney would be the wise choice. And crazy as it is to hear myself say it, America needs the GOP to make a comeback — a safe, sane and selfless one, that is.

[Darkwolf377]

The size of Alaska makes her fit for the presidency?

Of all the reasons to support Palin that is, no offense meant, the lamest. Seriously, what does the size of the state, which is one of the least-populous, have to do with anything at all? She still seemed to govern from inside an office, right?

[9YearLurker]

Romney could handle the job? He didn’t quit? Are you kidding me?

He completely rolled over for the Dems in the MA legislature, he quit actually tending to his gubernatorial responsibilities and started campaigning for president close to full time only two years into his one term and yes, his self-proclaimed signature achievement was Romneycare which does move government into a bigger, more statist role.

I was there, he was a huge disappointment. But he can ‘handle’ the presidency?

[Diogenesis]

Romney is very antibusiness with every tax disguised as a "FEE".

Wake up, RomneyBOT.

How can you possibly defend Romney?

---

“The Massachusetts Republican Party died last Tuesday.
The cause of death: failed leadership.
The party is survived by a few leftover legislators
and a handful of county officials and grassroots activists
who have been ignored for years.
Services will be public and a mass exodus of taxpayers will follow.
In lieu of flowers, send messages to Republican voters
warning them about a certain presidential candidate named Romney.”
- Boston Herald, 11/12/2006

---

"In 2006, while Romney was chairman of the National Republican
Governors Association - a group dedicated to electing more
Republican governors - his own hand-picked Republican successor
as governor lost badly to the Democrat, despite the fact that Republicans
have held the governorship in Massachusetts since 1990. Romney largely
ignored the Massachusetts elections and spent most of the time
during the campaign out of state building his presidential campaign.
He came back and publicly campaigned for the Republican candidate
the day before the general election!
“Locally, this is a rebuke to Mitt Romney and checking out within six months
after being elected and having accomplished almost nothing,”
[Jim] Rappaport [former chairman of the state Republican Party]."
- Boston Globe, 11/8/2006

---

"Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans,
has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced,
instead tapping registered Democrats or independents -- including two gay lawyers who
have supported expanded same-sex rights, a Globe review of the nominations has found.
Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats
or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians
or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show.
In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters,
and 14 registered Democrats."
- Boston Globe 7/25/2005

---

Romney Rewards one of the State's Leading Anti-Marriage Attorneys by Making him a Judge
Romney told the U.S. Senate on June 22, 2004, that the "real threat to the States is not the
constitutional amendment process, in which the states participate,
but activist judges who disregard the law and redefine marriage . . ."
Romney sounds tough but yet he had no qualms advancing the legal career of one
of the leading anti-marriage attorneys. He nominated Stephen Abany to a District Court.
Abany has been a key player in the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association which,
in its own words, is "dedicated to ensuring that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision
on marriage equality is upheld, and that any anti-gay amendment or legislation is defeated."
- U.S. Senate testimony by Gov. Mitt Romney, 6/22/2004 P>

---

"Romney announces he won't fill judicial vacancies before term ends
Despite his rhetoric about judicial activism, Romney announced that
he won't fill all the remaining vacancies during his term - but instead
leave them for his liberal Democrat successor!
Governor Mitt Romney pledged yesterday not to make a flurry of lame-duck
judicial appointments in the final days of his administration . . . David Yas,
editor of Lawyers Weekly, said Romney is "bucking tradition" by resisting the urge to
fill all remaining judgeships. "It is a tradition for governors to use that power to appoint judges
aggressively in the waning moments of their administration," Yas said.
He added that Romney has been criticized for failing to make judicial appointments.
"The legal community has consistently criticized him for not filling open seats quickly enough
and being a little too painstaking in the process and being dismissive of the input of the
Judicial Nominating Commission," Yas said.
- Boston Globe 11/2/2006

[Diogenesis]

Happy, happy Romney IMPOSING RomneyCARE.

[RichInOC]

Safe...at least as much so as anybody in or likely to be in the Republican field, if not more so, and more so than the incumbent.

Sane...at least as much so as anybody in or likely to be in the Republican field, if not more so, and more so than the incumbent.

Selfless...as far as I can tell, she’s the least likely to be staying in politics for the fun of it.

Win. Win. Win.

[aruanan]

Freaking hyenas.

[Darkwolf377]

Romney could handle the job? He didn’t quit? Are you kidding me?

No.

He completely rolled over for the Dems in the MA legislature,

You don't know your facts. On the Romneycare bill which you and I seem to agree on (and which Teddy Kennedy loved) vetoed major provisions which were in turn replaced by the democrats. This is a liberal democrat state. That's a fact. He did what he could in such a state, and indeed vetoed major, objectionable sections. Obviously this isn't enough for me, but he didn't completely roll for the Dems.

he quit actually tending to his gubernatorial responsibilities and started campaigning for president close to full time only two years into his one term and yes,

That's not true. His term ran from 2003 to January 2007; he formally announced in February of 2007. Of course he was doing work before that but I was here all that time and I don't recall any complaints about him not being around to do his job. I mean, which was it, he was creating Romneycare which he signed in 2006, or he was nowhere to be seen? As for leaving the governorship to campaign...as opposed to Palin, who didn't even fill out her term?

his self-proclaimed signature achievement was Romneycare which does move government into a bigger, more statist role.

OK, we both object to Romneycare, already dealt with.

I was there, he was a huge disappointment. But he can ‘handle’ the presidency?

Yes. You don't seem to be able to see a difference between someone being capable of doing the job, and someone doing a job as we would like it done ideologically. Just because I say someone can obviously perform the duties of a job doesn't mean I like them ideologically. I object to many of the things Truman, FDR, Wilson (all of whom did far more harm than good in their tenures), but they obviously were capable of doing the actual job. Obama is not.

Palin had a one-year tenure on a state board, which she quit; during a four-year term as governor, she took a couple of months off to campaign (which you find so objectionable in Romney, though he didn't even announce until the month after he left office), then quit the governorship after two years.

Is that sufficient experience to take command of the largest economy in the world when it is undergoing complicated, historic change?

[Darkwolf377]

And of course Teddy laughing away.

We've already established that Romneycare is vile, and Romney has his fingerprints all over it. I'm trying to get some ideas about who could be a good candidate in a time when we should be exploiting the GOP cliche of the Big Businessman. I think Romney is trying to take advantage of that.

I am not supporting Romney anymore than I'm withdrawing my support from Palin. But these ideas and questions had better be answered by us, because you can be sure the Dems will be all over 'em.

[Darkwolf377]

Romney is very antibusiness with every tax disguised as a "FEE". Wake up, RomneyBOT.

I was hoping we could discuss ideas, not toss around lies, which that is. I defy you to come up with pro-Romney posts by me.

How can you possibly defend Romney?

In the future, try reading before you toss around slurs like that.

It is posters like you who try to derail conversations that are beneficial to the party.

I guess saying Romneycare is a dealbreaker for me, and that I currently would vote for makes me a Romneybot?

Such simplistic and ignorant nonsense only makes the libs happy. Good going.

[9YearLurker]

I was in and in the GOP and worked to get him in office. He most assuredly was traveling out-of-state on the flimsiest of excuses and being called on it, and Romneycare was one of the few governing initiatives that wasn’t driven by the Democrat legislature, which probably ran the state (and the governor) more than at any time in the Commonwealth’s ignomious political history.

Gov. Palin in contrast has a record of getting real achievements accomplished as governor, knowing how to inspire and how to lead. She’s clearly got a better grasp on nationwide influence, the media, clearly espousing and sticking to principles and just about anything else that is actually part of a president’s portfolio.

[Darkwolf377]

BTW, for someone calling ME a Romneybot, you sure do quote the Kennedy-loving Boston Globe a lot...Obamabot?

[Diogenesis]

Romney abdicated while he was Governor. Totally. Quitter.
He was more interested in running for President (and lost).
He was more interested in inviting in millions of illegal
alien Mexicans and S. Americans.

Shame on the carpetbagger.
Shame on you for defending such indefensible behavior.

[Darkwolf377]

I was in and in the GOP and worked to get him in office. He most assuredly was traveling out-of-state on the flimsiest of excuses and being called on it, and Romneycare was one of the few governing initiatives that wasn’t driven by the Democrat legislature, which probably ran the state (and the governor) more than at any time in the Commonwealth’s ignomious political history.

That is an astonishing thing to assert. Robert Travaglini, Sal DiMasi, the House and Senate bills of 2005...this isn't the Dem legislature driving the healthcare initiative??

Gov. Palin in contrast has a record of getting real achievements accomplished as governor, knowing how to inspire and how to lead. She’s clearly got a better grasp on nationwide influence, the media, clearly espousing and sticking to principles and just about anything else that is actually part of a president’s portfolio.

That's all just assertion. Let's see facts.

Just asserting things isn't going to get us anywhere. What are all of these real accomplishments? She inspires, sure, but so does Obama (just not us), and where is the evidence she knows how to lead? I keep HEARING people say this--what are the examples? As for her grasp on the media--how can you say that after the way she's been utterly demolished by the media?

[Darkwolf377]

Romney abdicated while he was Governor. Totally. Quitter.

Romney served 4 years of his term.

Palin served two, and quit.

He was more interested in running for President (and lost).

He announced his candidacy after he finished his term.

Palin ran for VP. (And lost.)

Seems to me Reagan ran for the presidency and lost a couple of times, too. Sure didn't hurt him or us, ultimately.

He was more interested in inviting in millions of illegal alien Mexicans and S. Americans.

Well, one more reason why I don't support him for the presidency. You seem to have missed that part.

Shame on the carpetbagger.

Good lordy, not that old saw. Yeah, those rotten carpetbaggers, how dare they actually move around this incrediuble country. They shjould all just have stayed where they were born, like, uh, Reagan, Palin...

Shame on you for defending such indefensible behavior.

Please point out where I defended any "indefensible" behavior.

I

[Darkwolf377]

Romney abdicated while he was Governor. Totally. Quitter. He was more interested in running for President (and lost). He was more interested in inviting in millions of illegal alien Mexicans and S. Americans. Shame on the carpetbagger. Shame on you for defending such indefensible behavior

This is just the kind of post I was afraid of. I don't know why people are afraid of discussing things. People who rely only on emotions and can't discuss facts logically and dispassionately will kill this party just as they're rotting the dems.

Back to your regularly-scheduled thread...

[9YearLurker]

Romneycare was the initiative that Mitt preened about to the press as being the result of his great, deep, problem-solver thinking. He wrapped himself up in it at every chance he had.

And Palin’s accomplishments—from the new pipeline to becoming a national-debate-changing best-selling author and ratings-driving commentator and essayist—are there and obvious and measurable.

[Waco]

Palin’s a walk-in if she runs, in politics winning is what counts. T. Kennedy and algorejr. were both half-wits, but most of that was kept from the public so long as they counted on to hold a seat etc. Imagine if Palin were a democrat,,the MSM etc. would be bombarding us promoting her qualifications or sweeping the subject aside, and never mind cause she’ll have ‘’handlers’’, aids etc.so she’s OK.

[Darkwolf377]

Romneycare was the initiative that Mitt preened about to the press as being the result of his great, deep, problem-solver thinking. He wrapped himself up in it at every chance he had.

Once again, as I've stated over and over...I agree--that's why i don't support him.

And Palin’s accomplishments—from the new pipeline

How is that her personal accomplishment?

to becoming a national-debate-changing

What debate has she changed?

best-selling author and ratings-driving commentator and essayist—

Oy vey....

are there and obvious and measurable.

Publishing political memoirs and answering questions she's asked on TV?

Is this really our standard now?

Have a good day.

[Darkwolf377]

Palin’s a walk-in if she runs, in politics winning is what counts.

I think this is something we assume because WE like her. I've yet to see a single poll that indicates anything like this.

Of course polls in themselves don't tell us much, but polls over time do indicate direction. I've never seen any poll that shows this, which is the main reason I'm thinking we need to get going on a vigorous debate with more choices. (And I still don't think she'll run. She may have found her spot right where she is now.)

T. Kennedy and algorejr. were both half-wits, but most of that was kept from the public so long as they counted on to hold a seat etc. Imagine if Palin were a democrat,,the MSM etc. would be bombarding us promoting her qualifications or sweeping the subject aside, and never mind cause she’ll have ‘’handlers’’, aids etc.so she’s OK.

You've perfectly articulated why I think she has such an uphill struggle. Gore and Kennedy had the support of the very people who loathe Palin--that's why we respect her BUT it's also the reality we've been complaining about for decades. And now some of us seem to think that just doesn't matter cuz we feel so passionately about her.

People have to step back, look at the facts, and see what's really up. Because if we don't, we end up with " "conservatives" splitting the primaries, Rockefeller Republicans and McCain nominations.

[Buckeye Battle Cry]

I love it when the left tells us how to vote. This joker KNOWS that a Mitt Romney nomination guarantees Obama four more years. THAT is his motivation here.