I'm trying to come up with a rationale of how you can say none of the quotes supports my thesis?!
Best I can do is to agree that maybe it doesn't prove that he doesn't take promises seriously, but it sure does prove he doesn't keep 'em.
Posted on 12/14/2007 5:06:25 AM PST by Kaslin
Pretty much every election year since I can remember, a complaint has arisen that goes like this: "Why are we stuck with these awful choices? In this vast country of highly successful individuals, why don't any of the best people run for president?" Some years evoked more howls than others, and admittedly, 1976 really did present two underperformers, as did 1996. So let's pause to notice the fact that this year we have some exemplary choices.
Fred Thompson is an excellent man who is running a refreshingly substantive campaign. John McCain has demonstrated not just personal courage (which is admirable enough) but the courage of his convictions. And Rudy Giuliani achieved a seemingly impossible task in transforming America's largest city.
But no one running is more impressive than Mitt Romney. It was his speech on religion in American life that caused me to take another look at him. Until then, I confess that I saw him as a sort of robo-candidate: smooth, articulate, but perhaps a little opportunistic and possibly even insincere. The religion speech cast a new light on him.
The question as to whether someone's religious convictions are a fit subject for public scrutiny is not as simple as it sounds. It's too pat to say, "There should be no religious test for public office and there's the end of it." If a candidate were, say, a fundamentalist Mormon like Warren Jeffs, or a Scientologist, that would be an obstacle. But the mainstream Mormon Church has enough of a track record in producing excellent Americans that the particularities of its doctrine are by now a matter of purely scholarly interest. No one thought to raise objections to Mormonism when Mo Udall ran for president, nor even when Mitt's father, George, made a bid. The Senate majority leader is a Mormon and this fact causes not a flicker of interest on the part of his colleagues. Besides, Mitt Romney served as governor of Massachusetts. If anyone felt Joseph Smith's brooding presence during that time, they haven't mentioned it.
What Romney's religion speech demonstrated was not so much his devotion to his own faith (though he declined to run away from it) as his understanding and embrace of America's civic religion. In his telling, that civic religion amounts to a commitment to religious liberty as well as to broadly shared religious values. "It is important to recognize," he said, "that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter -- on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people." Romney went on to paint America as the golden mean between the empty cathedrals of Europe and the violent jihadists of the Islamic world. It was a masterful performance.
But then Romney has been masterful in everything he has attempted. It is not insignificant that this cum laude JD/MBA graduate of Harvard guided Bain Capital to become a hugely successful private equity investment firm and rescued Bain & Company from financial collapse. Romney was brought in to save the 2002 Winter Olympics when the games were mired in scandal and $379 million in debt. Romney was able to turn the situation around completely so that the games actually turned a $100 million profit instead. (He also gave back his salary.) That's not slick, that's substance.
When Mitt Romney took office as governor of Massachusetts, the state had a $1.2 billion deficit. Four years later it was in surplus. He boasts that fourth and eighth graders in Massachusetts achieved the highest scores in the nation in reading and math, though they were doing so before he became governor as well. But his program of assessment, merit pay for good teachers, English immersion and a focus on math and science may have helped keep them at the top.
It is difficult to find any significant weakness in Romney. He is refreshingly articulate, exceedingly well prepared and self-disciplined, clearly an excellent manager with both private and government experience, happily married with a large, supportive family, and well within the mainstream of conservatism on every major issue. His nomination would not divide the base.
He is just the sort of candidate people complain that they never get.
When I saw slick Sheriff Joe had endorsed Romney, Romney immediately dropped a notch in my regard. Joe is a media hound of the worst kind.
I hear people say we need change, how about a “first” like the first woman or first African American President.
I agree we need a change and I think we’re ready for our first Mormon President. Go Mitt!
The state that has this:
Governor
Deval Patrick (D)
Senators
Edward Kennedy (D)
John Kerry (D)
Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a good sheriff, but he’s an unlimited government guy. He used to be DEA.
It’s at least the 3rd time it’s been posted today, it’s already been discussed, and it’s an example of him pledging to keep promises. The promise was made in 2002.
Nobody, not even Mitt, is claiming that Mitt said he was pro-life in 2002.
None of your additional quotes supports your thesis that Mitt doesn’t take his promises seriously.
The “unlimited government” part disqualifies him from being a “good sheriff”.
You severely tax the meaning of the term “flip-flopper”.
In this case, he had a position in 1994, based on a belief that a policy would not work. 13 years later, he has changed that position, because it turned out his belief was wrong.
Fred Thompson had a belief in Campaign Finance reform in 2001, based on his opinion of what would work. Now he has a different belief, based on the failure of that legislation.
That’s not flip-flopping. We expect our candidates to seriously deal with issues based on the facts, not blindly adhere to past beliefs regardless of the facts.
And when the facts lead them to change to the RIGHT position, that’s to be applauded, not ridiculed.
I like Sheriff Joe Arpaio, too, ever since I saw him on Lou Dobb’s TV show. Illegal immigration is an important issue for me and on this Romney is stronger than Huckster and Rudy.
Thursday, Dec 13, 2007
Boston, MA – Today, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman announced his endorsement of Governor Mitt Romney for President of the United States. Governor Heineman joins current Governors Matt Blunt (R-MO) and Don Carcieri (R-RI) in endorsing Governor Romney.
"In his campaign for the presidency, Mitt Romney has outlined the clearest vision to move our country forward. With exceptional leadership experience and outstanding values, Governor Romney is the only candidate who can bring true conservative change to Washington. I am proud to be a part of his team and look forward to joining him as he travels across this country discussing his strategy to build a stronger America," said Governor Heineman.
http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Endorsement_Heineman
Then Mitt's your man.
Because he's not a serious candidate. Congressmen don't get elected president. Period.
Let him run for Senate or governor. He needs to work his way up. You don't get promoted to CEO straight out of the mail room.
“I want to vote for a CONSERVATIVE - SOCIAL AND FISCAL. Mitt seems to be just another smooth talker from the northeast, who thinks he knows more than us hayseeds in flyover country.”
That’s just your perception. All of the Romneys were and are decent, down to earth, hard working people of Mormon faith. I remember his dad (as Michigan governor) visiting my little Catholic school. He couldn’t have been more kind and gracious. Just a very likable guy.
Excellent point. I sense that many people around here derive more satisfaction from tearing other candidates down than in supporting their guy. I support Mitt, but as Mona Charen points out, we’ve got other candidates with admirable qualities and accomplishments.
I'm trying to come up with a rationale of how you can say none of the quotes supports my thesis?!
Best I can do is to agree that maybe it doesn't prove that he doesn't take promises seriously, but it sure does prove he doesn't keep 'em.
The silly list grows....
1. New Hampshire 2. Iowa 3. fundraising 4. announcing b4 Labor Day 5.ACU ratings 6. Fox News/Sean Hannity/O' Reilly/Carl Cameron 7. Hugh Hewitt 8. ground organization 9. attending debates 10. face to face campaigning 11. Ann Coulter 12. Michelle Malkin 13. Federal Marriage Amendment 14. Tort reform 15. George Will 16. Human Life Amendment 17. going to church 18. No new taxes pledge 19. GOP platform 20. Bob Jones 21. Paul Weyrich 22. Dr. John Wilke 23. National Review 24. The Heritage Foundation 25. Club for Growth 26. Mona Charen
Historically, that is true. I recognize that it is unlikely that a congressman will make it to the White House.
However, I think you make a mistake in implying that the House is something of a lesser job than the Senate. They are different. Many have observed that the Senate is about compromise. You cannot be too idealistic in the senate. It just doesn't work. The House is different. It's big enough so that you can hold on to principles and still hope to accomplish things.
I want a President who puts principles first. I think being a senator is actually bad training for the job. But, as you say, voters seem more likely to disagree with me.
You are right. We do have some geat candidates IMO. However, Huckabee is not one of them. I cannot understand what some of our fellow GOPers are thinking!
Mitt is neither a social conservative or a fiscal conservative:
Mitt Romney: A Massachusetts Liberal for President
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/mitt_romney_a_massachusetts_li.html
Mitt Romney flip flops on Abortion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFMdK0TWtks
Romney does not support 2nd Amendment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzYTdM9b5F4
Romney on Abortion 2002
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
Romney does not want to return to Reagan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pVqZzHm3Z4&feature=related
Mitt Romney Flip-Flops on hunting, abortion and iraq and dog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PURfrORhWPc
Romney Flip flops/Duncun Hunter sets the record straight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AffxIfq4LWQ
Duncan Hunter/Huckabee stand up to Clinton/Corrupt News Network plant/Romney flip-flops on gays in military
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU-AFU_OiFo
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.