Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Paul Weyrich Talks About Why He Endorsed Romney - And Not the Others
National Review Online ^ | 6 November 2007 | Jim Geraghty

Posted on 11/06/2007 2:08:50 PM PST by Spiff

Paul Weyrich Talks About Why He Endorsed Romney - And Not the Others

National Review Online
Jim Geraghty
6 November 2007

I spoke to Paul Weyrich, chairman of the Free Congress Foundation and a founder of the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority, about his endorsement of Mitt Romney.

“I felt it would come down to a contest between Giuliani and Romney,” Weyrich said. “I don’t want Giuliani as the nominee because a lot of our values voters will defect... I know the same argument is made about Romney, but eventually, I think those voters can be brought around. There is a hardcore group that absolutely will not vote for Giuliani… I don’t think they’ll go for a third party candidate, I think they’ll stay home. I think there’s no convincing them. I’ve talked to a number of these folks. Even though they recognize that Hillary is a real problem, they think that it’s better to have somebody bad like that than it is to have somebody halfway reasonable.”

On the other candidates, Weyrich said each one, ultimately, had flaws too large to earn his endorsement.

“I’m on the permanent executive committee of the Arlington Group, which was formed to push for the Federal Marriage Amendment. We’ve got [Fred] Thompson who says he can’t support that. I can’t push this for the past several years and then say, ‘oh, that’s not so important.’ … I’ve been working with candidates for close to fifty years I recognize candidates with fire in the belly. I’ve got to tell you, I do not think Thompson really wants to be elected that badly.”

“As for McCain, I can’t support him — McCain-Feingold is a dealbreaker, as far as I’m concerned.”

“Huckabee, I came close to supporting him, and if we were running for some sort of religious organization, I would support him, but we’re not. He has compromised on so many conservative issues, I simply can’t be for him. Every time you turn around, he’s taking the wrong stand on a different issue.”

“I know there’s the issue that Romney has flip-flopped, but so have most of the other candidates,” Weyrich said. “I’ve questioned him very thoroughly and I’m of a mind that he is sincere in his change of heart. I may be wrong but I have interviewed hundreds of candidates over the years, and I have a sense of these things.

Weyrich said he wasn’t worried about Romney’s comparatively low name ID at this point.

“If he wins Iowa, New Hampshire, maybe wins in South Carolina, that it’ll take care of itself. Anybody who wins in all of those states is going to get a lot of coverage.”

Weyrich said other candidates sought his nomination, but that he reached out to Romney, not the other way around. “I was impressed with the dynamism of the candidate. He’s a candidate that will impress the American public.”



TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2008endorsements; endorsements; fred; mittromney; romney; weyrich
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-127 next last
To: curiosity

I don’t see 30piecesofsilver in the keywords. Fredheads must be asleep. :-)


61 posted on 11/06/2007 4:28:39 PM PST by Romneyfor President2008
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: donna
"Paul Weyrich just told the next generation of young people that being a Christian is one of those “it depends on what the definition of is is”."

So in order to be a good Christian I can't just vote Republican, I have to vote for a very specific Republican.

Can you forward me the email you got from God where he informed you of this?

62 posted on 11/06/2007 4:29:00 PM PST by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Spiff

No thank you. His record is that of a liberal abortionist socialist. I don’t believe his convenient presidential bid conversion. End of story.


63 posted on 11/06/2007 4:33:29 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: newfreep
Add his refusal to endorse the marriage amendment

I'm a solid Romney supporter, but I must say, this fuss over marriage amendment puzzles me a little.

Yes, I support the amendment too. But I don't see why it's all that important for the president to support it.

Are people forgetting the fact that the president is in no way involved in the amendment process? To pass, an amendment must be approved by 2/3 of both houses of Congress and then be approved by 3/4 of all state legislatures. The president has literally no say in the matter.

Hence I really don't understand why everyone is focusing so much on what a presidential candidate thinks about this or that proposed Constitutional amendment. It's completely irrelevant to the office.

64 posted on 11/06/2007 4:35:47 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
Thompson may as well be the phony candidate. Here we have Rudy the frontrunner and Thompson bashes Romney but doesnt lay a glove on Rudy. Why is that? Thompson's real chances are in SC and FL, yet he leaves FL open for Rudy. And is suspiciously low-key and running a campaign that is suspiciously inept at taking enough advantage of openings to win ...just enough to get Rudy nominated.

Interesting observation.

65 posted on 11/06/2007 5:04:28 PM PST by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

Your ridiculous tagline makes me want a new tagline.


66 posted on 11/06/2007 5:14:56 PM PST by JRochelle (I think marriage should be between a man and woman, and a woman and a woman. Mitt Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

“Yes, I support the amendment too. But I don’t see why it’s all that important for the president to support it.”

The president has to offer moral leadership. If he isn’t for it then he is against it. And if he is against it then he is siding with the left wing pinkos, gay rights activists and other assorted fringe groups. Not a very good place to be.

Weyrich and Dobson are right. And many candidates in their eagerness to please everyone end up pleasing no one. Others take a stand and ally themselves with the right people. We’ll see which approach works out best in the end.


67 posted on 11/06/2007 5:27:44 PM PST by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Dionysiusdecordealcis

What do you consider key states ? I spoke the truth and nothing but the truth . Mitt consistently polls in the low double digits ... get used to it , because if that’s all he has after pumping massive resources into certain states , he’s done .

I absolutely read the endorsement and came to the conclusion that Weyrich knows that he is going to have to convince / sell / con people into coming to the Romney camp . Pathetic ...


68 posted on 11/06/2007 5:34:03 PM PST by Neu Pragmatist (Unite against Rudy ! - Vote Thompson ! - It's the only way to beat Hillary !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: All
Mitt Romney and the Supreme Court

Excerpts follow:

Douglas W. Kmiec is a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University. He served as Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He serves now as a co-chair of the Romney for President Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Courts...

Grasping the significance of the rule of law is one of the most understated aspects of the current presidential campaign. While virtually every Republican candidate has said something adequate about avoiding judicial activism, legislating from the bench, or a la Richard Nixon, being a strict constructionist, only one, Mitt Romney, truly has demonstrated by his state executive experience as Governor that he is capable of sustaining, without the distractions of politics or friendship, an historically-informed appreciation for what John Locke meant by the rule of law in his Treatise on Government: general enactments, prospectively applied, that are enforced evenhandedly and interpreted by a disinterested and capable judge. Maybe Romney is inspired by the knowledge that the historic phraseology "rule of law" comes from the original Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, which noted that the powers of government shall be kept separate, and specifically, that "the judicial power shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men." Or perhaps its simply Romney's unalloyed belief that the rule of law must never be allowed to be distorted as partisan or contradicting of such fundamental values as life or marriage between a man and a woman. But whatever the source of the inspiration, my conversations with Governor Romney and study of his past state judicial appointments convince me that a President Romney will make nominations in the tradition of Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas, and before all else, will insist that the women and men to be appointed have a demonstrated record of valuing the rule of law in the fuller sense discussed here...

Finally, likely headed to the Court's docket is the invalidation by a lower court of the District of Columbia's handgun ban. Here again because this is another issue that divides many people, we need to be able to count on the integrity of the justices to resolve matters. As Governor Romney has said about this case, "I hope the Roberts court takes the Parker case and upholds the Bill of Rights . . . ." Governor Romney recognizes that the best way to respect the Second Amendment - like other protections in the Bill of Rights - results when, but only when, the justices are fairly guided by the original meaning of the constitutional text.

69 posted on 11/06/2007 5:38:05 PM PST by La Enchiladita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: newfreep; Petronski

Thompson never said the he couldn’t win and you know it.

It’s already been cleared up as another out of context smear , but I guess you missed it .


70 posted on 11/06/2007 5:38:09 PM PST by Neu Pragmatist (Unite against Rudy ! - Vote Thompson ! - It's the only way to beat Hillary !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Neu Pragmatist
Intrade Political 'Securities' Percentage US$ Traded
Rudy Giuliani to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 40.4% $1.2M
Fred Thompson to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 6.0% $919K
John McCain to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 7.1% $1.5M
Mitt Romney to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 29.7% $999K
Mike Huckabee to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 6.2% $607K
Newt Gingrich to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2008 0.3% $590K

71 posted on 11/06/2007 5:39:32 PM PST by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

Is Intrade more reliable that a poll?


72 posted on 11/06/2007 5:46:02 PM PST by JRochelle (I think marriage should be between a man and woman, and a woman and a woman. Mitt Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

Fred hasn’t left Rudy alone. He took him head-on in the last debate.

I don’t think he is secretly (subliminally) shilling for Rudy.


73 posted on 11/06/2007 5:52:44 PM PST by Shelayne (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Neu Pragmatist

Fred has no chance now. He really doesn’t want it and said as much.


74 posted on 11/06/2007 5:55:49 PM PST by Paulus Invictus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Politics is a very strange entity where the truly better candidates too often don’t win.


75 posted on 11/06/2007 5:56:35 PM PST by johnthebaptistmoore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle

yes, it factors in all the polls but also incorporates the trends, whereas a single isolated poll is only a snapshot of the moment.


76 posted on 11/06/2007 6:02:09 PM PST by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Dionysiusdecordealcis
Weyrich is trying to wake you folks up to the disaster that is bearing down on us. Meanwhile, everyone sits in his corner bashing everyone but his own pet candidate.

I am not bashing anyone. I simply stated my reservations about Mitt Romney. I don't happen to believe his "pet candidate" is the one who can rally the troops, either. His negatives are too high. That is a problem.

The endorsement was a letdown to read. That is how I saw it. I was expecting-oh, I don’t know- a little more fire. A little more passion. He wasn’t very convincing for someone making an endorsement that is all I meant.

77 posted on 11/06/2007 6:05:08 PM PST by Shelayne (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita
""As Governor Romney has said about this case, "I hope the Roberts court takes the Parker case and upholds the Bill of Rights . . . ." Governor Romney recognizes that the best way to respect the Second Amendment - like other protections in the Bill of Rights - "" “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.” "We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them," he said. "I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety." ============================================================ NATIONAL REVIEW; "Waiting on Fred" Aug 27 2007 The Supreme Court, and judicial issues in general, are Thompson's strong suit. Not only does he have the background-the Watergate investigation, the Senate Judiciary Committee, private practice, and the job of guiding John Roberts through his confirmation hearings-he also knows the conservative legal stars who would likely be candidates for the Court in coming years. But he won't name names, beyond the men already there, "I like Roberts and Alito and Scalia and Thomas" he tells me. "We're in a heck of a lot better shape because of Roberts and Alito, and one more gain would put us in even better shape." Should he become president, Thompson would undoubtedly try to nominate that elusive fifth conservative. ============================================================ Image and video hosting by TinyPic
78 posted on 11/06/2007 6:09:29 PM PST by ansel12 (Proud father of a 10th Mountain veteran. Proud son of a WWII vet. Proud brother of vets, Airborne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
You are right. The have staked their bank accounts and the money was not lite by any stretch.

Mitt’s donations were very welcome.

79 posted on 11/06/2007 6:10:23 PM PST by ejonesie22 (Real voters in real voting booths will elect FDT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Paulus Invictus

Nonsense .


80 posted on 11/06/2007 6:11:18 PM PST by Neu Pragmatist (Unite against Rudy ! - Vote Thompson ! - It's the only way to beat Hillary !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-127 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson