Posted on 01/11/2007 11:56:29 PM PST by Jeff Fuller
After months of waffling on whether he supports sending additional troops to Iraq, Smooth Talking Mitt Romney today finally said something. Despite the failure of previous troop increases to stabilize Iraq, the advice of generals and experts who oppose the plan, and the fact the American people have utterly rejected President Bush's failed leadership, Romney issued a statement endorsing President Bush's escalation of the war, saying "I agree with the President.I support adding five brigades in Baghdad and two regiments in Al-Anbar province."
See COMMENT NUMBER 1 BELOW
(Excerpt) Read more at dnc.org ...
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) headed by Howard Dean seems to be doing just that. They've been doing their homework on Romney and they don't like what they see. In fact, they are currently attacking Romney more viciously than any other GOP POTUS hopeful (many of which they are completely ignoring). They've even given him a couple of new nicknames "Smooth Talking Mitt" and "Multiple-Choice Mitt."
My hypothesis is that the DNC is scared of losing a general election to Romney. They have seen the recent attacks on Romney from the right and the left and have decided to "pile on" and try to nip his candidacy in the bud. Or, they saw that he pulled in $7 million in a one day fundraiser and realized that he is a force to be reckoned with. Either way, Republicans everywhere should take notice that the DNC doesn't want to have to deal with Romney. That, in my opinion, speaks volumes.
The Evidence:
A simple search of the DNC's website of Press Releases regarding different GOP hopefuls reveals that they're only really attacking two of them: McCain and Romney (with the latter being the latest preferred target.)
ELEVEN DNC press releases in the last six weeks (inlcuding FIVE in the last 3 days!!) are headlined against Romney. Direct and obvious attacks on issues such as Troop escalation, "Flip-flops", Immigration, Romney's Tax record, and GOP governorship losses. Also, back in Sept they include Romney in a long press release about GOP "agents of intolerance" (AKA "Racists") for his proper use of the literary term "tar baby." Also, the use of the nicknames is particularly interesting.
"Multiple Choice Mitt" derives from Teddy Kennedy's accusation during the 1994 Senate debate addressing Romney's stance on abortion.
"Smooth Talking Mitt Romney" seems to be their favorite nickname. They're planning for the future with this one. They're so used to enjoying Bush bumble and jumble his words that they won't be able to tease a President Romney similarly. They know he's articulate and smart, so they spin that into a negative of being "Smooth Talking". Funny stuff!
The DNC's sure giving a whole lot of attention to a guy who is still polling in the single digits . . . I think they have realized something and many Republicans need to realize this too . . . that Romney would be their toughest competition in the general election
McCain has been a long time target of the DNC. This is expected for anyone bearing the "GOP frontrunner" title. He has a long list of anti-McCain DNC press releases to his name. Still, he's only been the headlining subject of two press releases in the last month (and both attacking people he's hired, not him really).
Rudy only gets a couple of DNC press releases against him to his name. He's been fading as Romney's been surging and so the DNC has changed their attack tactics accordingly
Newt's the least likely of these guys to actually get into the race. That, plus the fact that they have lots of "dirt" on him already makes his a target not worth attacking.
Brownback has earned ZERO defamatory Press Releases from the DNC . . . Message from the DNC: "PLEASE, O, PLEASE LET US RUN AGAINST THIS GUY!!!!"
DNC Mike Huckabee Search: Huckabee was initiated into the "the DNC hates me because I'm a republican" club today . . . still, that's hardly close to Romney's 11 in 6 weeks.
Bottom line: The DNC realizes it will be trying to defeat Romney or McCain in the general election. They don't want to face Romney then. They're just plain scared of him already!!
FDR escalating war! Sends troops to North Africa. Generals, experts oppose escalation.
Will there be a U.S. to have history sixty years from now? Not if the Rat finks have their way.
(The thousand-cuts word of the day: escalate.)
It was a case where the political consideration wound up being the correct military decision as well.
Thank you. I am sure you realize that I was trying to make a point.
Even if political opponents did not agree they did not openly and publicly voice their opposition on matters of war. Those were the days!
We actually won the war, if I remember correctly. :)
It was the very last time that the left gave widespread support for the U.S. in war. Gee, I wonder if us helping to defend their Uncle Joe had anything to do with that.
Washington did squabble over the post war and what our attitude toward communism should be, I believe, but not the war itself. Those were the days!
We gotta get them days back.
Pinging Romney Commentators.
I think it's revealing that the DNC is attacking Romney (a guy who's still just polling in the single digits) so voraciously and ignoring many of the other candidates . . . see comment #1 for a full explanation.
No wonder the Dems/MSM fear the Romney. Since they have no issues, all they can do is smear. And they've got nothing to smear him with. If in desperation they smear him for his religion, they have to explain why the same religion is just fine for their Senate Majority Leader.
Indeed Romney is smooth talking and this is a huge advantage for Republicans AND FOR CONSERVATIVES. Reagan was also smooth talking and like Reagan, Romney chnaged his opinions over time as he matured.
Would you please provide a citation for an article where Romney discusses his epiphany?
You are correct. The difference was that so many people lost their lives during that war. When your son got his guts blown out on a beach or was forced into a death march or spent time in a real concentration camp, the American public had little patience for a Tokyo Rose media. A little over 3,000 dead in over three years does not compare to the sacrifices of the WWII generation and so many people today don't even know anyone even serving in the military. It's just a bad TV show now that the public is tired of watching and they want to switch the channel. It will take a real media savvy candidate to mange today's hyper-media and explain things to a short attention span public that is obsessed with themselves.
It's out there. Go to any of the "stop romney" postings on this site and see what he said while running against Kennedy. Compare that with what he says today. I'm on my way out the door now but if I find some quotes later I'll pass them your way but you do know they exist. For that he's called a phony and no one would be called a phony if there weren't these citations you've asked for.
Great observation. I think one of the great failures of this war so far (at least PR-wise) is not giving the Americans who aren't military or military families a way to get involved in the war effort.
In the 1994 campaign, Romney also proudly labeled himself a moderate. "I'm not a partisan politician," he said in an interview with The Post that fall. "My hope is that, after this election, it will be the moderates of both parties who will control the Senate, not the Jesse Helmses."
You say Romney's changed. I say he hasn't.
I've shown you mine. Now you show me yours.
Without any kind of citation, it's just your word. And no offense, but I don't know you from Adam's housecat.
I totally agree. The DNC is afraid of a Romney candidacy, and this makes me smile...big time.
You are correct in fact Reagan also went a little to far on the War on Drugs imho.. Yes Reagan was great, but he was no "pure" conservative.....
My brother is a Cent-Com. My son-in-law is Army, Military Intelligence. My son is considering going into Army as a chaplain after graduation.
I'd like Nancy Pe-lousy to tell me I'm not affected or sacrificing anything.
Dear Jeff Fuller,
The DNC is attacking him because they fear he might gain traction, get the nomination, and beat their guy in the general election.
That's not an unreasonable fear on their part. Mr. Romney COULD gain traction, win the nomination, and beat their guy in the general election.
That doesn't mean actualy, real, live conservatives, especially social conservatives, should join the Romney bandwagon. That a candidate has a chance to win the election is not the only criterion upon which to choose the nominee (in spite of what some posters seem to think). It would help if the candidate were a bona fide conservative.
I know that Mr. Romney is trying to re-make himself from liberal Republican into Reagan Republican, but the latest thing with the Second Amendment is starting to make him look foolish in my eyes. This man SUPPORTED the AWB AND the Brady bill. And now he's a great protector of the Second Amendment??? He must be made of rubber to avoid the whiplash.
Heaped on top of his alleged "conversion" on abortion, and increasingly, he looks like a run-of-the-mill opportunist.
Albeit, with great hair.
sitetest
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.