Posted on 12/26/2006 9:03:55 PM PST by Jeff Fuller
Michale Reagan has a column up where he has some great things to say about Romney. Essentially, he says that Romney and Giuliani are the type of leaders/candidates that could beat Sen. Hillary Clinton:
The common wisdom holds that it is all but inevitable that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008, and that she’ll be a formidable if not unbeatable candidate.I don’t disagree with that assumption, despite the sudden emergence of Barack Hussein Obama as the media’s newest darling. I see him as nothing more than a passing fancy for the mainstream media. If it becomes evident that he poses a real threat to Sen. Hillary Clinton he’ll suddenly find himself under a withering fire of criticism and he won’t have the vaguest notion where it’s all coming from. Wiser heads, however, will understand that the Clinton attack machine is back in action and before it’s finished Obama will be history.
So let’s accept the fact that whoever the GOP nominee is, he’ll be facing Hillary Clinton. If the Republicans want to win, they will have to decide which Mrs. Clinton they plan to run against; just plain Hillary Clinton, or United States Senator Hillary Clinton, D-NY.
If they choose to run against Hillary Clinton, they’ll lose. If they choose to run against Senator Clinton, they’ll win hands down.
If we run against Hillary Clinton as the former first lady, if we run against her as the wife of Bill Clinton, if we run against the cherished darling of the media who spent eight years all but canonizing her as America’s patron saint, she’ll win.
Running against that Hillary is the wrong argument. If, however, you run against Senator Hillary Clinton and her record, or her abysmal lack of one as a senator, you can win.
If you focus on her dismal record of accomplishment and not on her carefully created image as St. Hillary and her hyped-up public personality you’ll beat her hands down.
You can beat the senator; you cannot beat the cardboard saint.
Consider her record as a senator. She admits she voted for the war and now she says it was a mistake, not exactly the kind of consistency we expect from a president.
Senatorial candidate Hillary Clinton promised to bring 200,000 new jobs to New York. She failed, claiming that she didn’t have the benefit of a Democratic Congress to help her achieve that goal, but adding that even though there had not been the kind of environment she hoped for, there had been some progress.
The fact is that there hasn’t been any progress. New York is not improving – it’s getting worse. New York has lost 112,000 jobs since sending Senator Clinton to Washington.
In contrast, consider the records of two Republicans, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. Both governed with Democratic majorities in both state legislatures.
Back on April 12, 2006, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney signed into law an act to provide health insurance to virtually all citizens of Massachusetts and did it without raising taxes.
Working with Democrats in the state legislature and others, he developed a plan that starting next July will make mandatory health insurance for all state residents, providing a plan is available to the individual that is deemed affordable according to state standards.
Romneycare won in 2006, Hillarycare lost in 1993.
Romney has done much more and been credited with creating an environment that has attracted new jobs to his state, especially in the field of technology. Massachustts added jobs, New York lost them.
Another executive facing Democratic-controlled city and state legislative bodies was New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. His leadership in the nation’s toughest city created jobs, brought down crime, and shepherded the city through the darkest days after 9/11.
Those are genuine records of accomplishments, and when you run candidates with such records you can win against candidates with dismal records such as Senator Hillary Clinton’s.
The point is when you argue on the merits you can win. When you argue on personalities, you lose.
It’s no wonder Senator Hillary Clinton, who has the media in her pocketbook, wants you to attack her as Hillary Clinton and not as Senator Clinton who has accomplished nothing meaningful as a senator.
Matched against a Republican with a solid record for getting things done, she’s a sure loser.
If you check out all Republicans POTUSs, they were all nationally known figures. Eisenhower, Nixon (veep), Reagan, Bush(veep) GWB. Unknowns make it as democrats, but not as Republicans.
I never claimed his name was on it. I used the bill as an example of the sort of thing that HAS NO PLACE in the USA. If Romney was craven enough to sign it, I've got to question his qualifications as a republican candidate.
Massachusetts suits him perfectly, he should stay there.
I'll be perfectly content if he just stays in Massachusetts. Why should I concern myself with finding a job for him?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.