Posted on 11/09/2008 11:54:54 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Guess who is conveniently leaving tomorrow on a Caribbean cruise with influential conservative leaders now that the election is over and Republicans are pondering their future?
Yep, Mitt Romney, widely believed to be planning another run for president in 2012.
Mr. Romney, who sought the Republican nomination in 2008, is one of the headliners for the National Review’s post-election cruise, which departs tomorrow for six days of sun and conversation about restoring the Republican brand in fabulous ports of call in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and Turks and Caicos.
It is the same annual confab that fortuitously visited Alaska last year, stopping off to meet Gov. Sarah Palin, and, thereby, helping to send her on a trajectory, according to a recent New Yorker article, to be plucked from relative obscurity to become Senator John McCain’s running mate.
Conservative elites from that cruise, along with one organized by the Weekly Standard that also visited Alaska, came away enamored by Ms. Palin, who worked hard to court them, the article said.
Ms. Palin, of course, is back in Alaska and does not have a ticket to this year’s get-together. Mr. Romney will share the stage with Fred D. Thompson and other guest speakers.
For a taste of the goings-on aboard ship, here is a description from the Web site: “This is not your typical cruise. Guests of National Review will enjoy informative seminars and extensive interaction with our guest speakers; numerous social events; dining with fellow conservatives as well as guest speakers; and a wonderful sense of sharing and camaraderie.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
So you reduce God to merest idol ?
"and I actually aggree with you that since the legislature added alot to his bill, he should not have signed it."
Precisely. It's why his (and Huckster's) claims of "governing Conservatively" rang ludicrously false. You can't be something for years on end and voila ! the moment you decide to run for national office do a 180. Down in these here parts, we call that a snow job.
"That does not make him a socialist, obviously."
You sign off, and gleefully so, on Socialist legislation, it certainly does. That's a baloney excuse. Like the politician that says, "I'm personally pro-life" all the while voting for abortion without any limits. It's the actions that matter. Words are worthless.
"He no doubt hoped that there was enough free market reforms in it to improve the system from where it was."
Hopes and wishes don't change that it was a lousy Socialist bill. He saddled the state with a nightmare. A real Conservative Governor would've shot it down and told the legislators what to do with it.
"Maybe wishfull thinking, but again, not socialism."
Yup. 100% Socialism.
"Is the state of Mass. in charge of healthcare like Canada is?"
It's a Socialist bill.
"You are stretching the facts to keep up your resentment of a decent man."
Fact: He signed a Socialist bill. Remember, Fab, you're only arguing over ONE issue. I cited that laundry list above. You want to review that ? 14 years ago, I thought this was a decent man to when I was up there for his campaign. Ah, the folly of youth. Had I realized the stunt he was going to pull as Governor, I'd have raised as much hell to keep him out of office as I did over the past two years. If my non-stop actions in doing so helped in the slightest to reach the primary voters and the McCain campaign and illuminate his deceit, fraud, and Socialist record, I will have accomplished something very positive.
But I will say this plain and clear again so that you will understand. He is not a nice nor decent man. He is a deceitful man, he is a man who says one thing and does something else, he is a man who puts achieving power for himself far and above the people. He resorts to bribery to purchase support he cannot win through his own actions. He employs agents and professional trolls to infiltrate websites and repeat falsehoods about his record and his character, all of which are easily refutable, and to viciously swarm and slander those that do nothing more than speak the truth about him (again, all part of the public record). He does not consider military service something he, or his family, has to do. That's for the peons. If he wants to demonstrate the remotest concern for the Republican party and the Conservative movement, he can do one thing. Withdraw completely from political activities. Cease and desist. That will then demonstrate a drop of common decency on his behalf. Perhaps, too, he'd be so kind as to use a chunk of his vast fortune to go towards the Mauck family, for whom his careless attitude cost the lives of 2 young people.
You are stretching the facts to keep up your resentment of a decent man.
It's ironic, because indeed, the Romney fans engage in lying ("Rush Limbaugh supported Romney!") and willful looking-the-other-way to keep up their irrational admiration of an evidently craven man.
Small things are deal-breakers, not that RomneyCare was a small thing, and it alone is enough to make me reject Romney out of hand. As a true conservative, he should have been fighting against it, not figuring out ways to more painlessly accommodate what way too many think is "inevitable" because they're silly enough to believe everything they read about the "crisis" of health care. The Republican party, conservatives, should be about fighting against encroachments on our freedom, not enabling them! Yeesh!!! What about this don't you understand????
Fabian, the "little" straw on the camel's back that proved to me Romney is a worthy target of fieldmarshal's great efforts to drive a stake through Romney's political heart, was an official announcement, just a garden-variety PR kind of thing from the Office of the Governor, of support for a ridiculous "gay pride day" aimed at an event put on by middle schoolers. These are JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL KIDS, for God's sake! Taking part in a public demonstration of their "gay pride" and having it condoned by the governor's office!
Fabian and the rest of you Romney supporters, please tell me: WHAT BUSINESS DOES THE GOVERNMENT HAVE IN THE DECLARED SEXUAL ORIENTATION OF MINORS?
A Republican with principle and courage would have said: "My office is going to pass on either endorsing or condemning the Gay Pride March at such-and-such middle school because the government should have no role in the declared sexual orientation of minors." PERIOD.
Sick, sick, sick -- that anyone, let alone a "conservative," would condone these poor, misguided, inexperienced kids' forays into sexuality, let alone perverted sexuality.
ROMNEY IS CRAVEN. WAKE UP TO IT.
No.
No to romney, no to huckabee, no to guiliani and as much as it pains me, no to Fred.
We can do better and if we hold true, honest conservatism out as our benchmark we WILL do better. We’ve seen what compromising principles brought, and I for one have no interest in another defeat on the heels of the marxist messiah.
My vote goes to no one unless they can measure up to Governors Palin and Jindal at the very least.
No thanks...
No... I don't give a tin nickel what his religion is.
Who did Rush Limbaugh endorse Feb. 5th, 2008?
Who did Rush vote for in the booth in FL in the primaries? (it wasn't McCain or Huck)
Who did Rush Limbaugh call Reaganesque on his show? (Hint it had something to do with a "Faith in America" speech)
RUSH: I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that’s Romney. The three stools or the three legs of the stool are national security/foreign policy, the social conservatives, and the fiscal conservatives. The social conservatives are the cultural people. The fiscal conservatives are the economic crowd: low taxes, smaller government, get out of the way.
I reject (and think you should, too) that the "Reaganesque" comment (which I heard him make) was in admiration of Romney's politics, because it had to do with a speech on religion. Having listened to and read Rush for so many years, I know for a fact that what Rush defines as "conservatism," Romney does not reflect, though Romney's eloquence in his talk about religion could be called "Reaganesque."
I apologize -- you didn't LIE, and I accused you wrongly. However, HOW DO YOU KNOW WHO RUSH VOTED FOR IN THE BOOTH IN THE FL PRIMARIES? DID HE ANNOUNCE IT ON AIR? DID HE SAY, "I VOTED FOR ROMNEY"? Or do you just surmise it and call it fact?
Also, Rush's quote, "I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool ..." is hardly a ringing endorsement. You want a ringing endorsement? I heard as close as I've ever heard Rush give one when he said after a primary debate: "My friends, there was only one conservative on that stage last night and that candidate was Fred Thompson." Now THAT'S straight shooting. Even with your quote, in the context of what Rush has expressed for a decade, does not pencil out as anything more than very ambiguous, dubious praise of Romney.
Saying, "... based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there is probably a candidate on our side that ..." etc. etc., is hardly a ringing endorsement, no matter how you twist it, and certainly not enough to redeem Romney of his multiple betrayals of small government principle in practice and on record.
And the fact remains: ROMNEY IS A BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERAL who has repeatedly betrayed Republican principle.
Is there some other evidence that Rush officially "endorsed" Romney? Because if you are going to take that quote and call it an "endorsement," then I ain't buying it, and maintain that you are a liar if that's all you've got in the way of claiming that Rush "endorsed" Romney.
My guess is that Rush no more endorsed Romney than he endorsed Thompson -- RUSH NEVER OFFICIALLY ENDORSED THOMPSON or any other candidate, and I have never claimed he did. I've said that it's as close to an endorsement as I've ever heard, the high, direct praise of Thompson when Rush described him as the ONLY conservative on the stage of the primary debate. So perhaps you really ARE lying, still?
And again, I'd sure like to see the direct transcript or quote in which Rush states that he actually voted for Romney "in the booth in FL in the primaries," as you say Rush did vote. Or that he gave a real live bona-fide endorsement to on Feb. 5th. Again, if you want to take that weak quote ("the way the campaign has shaken out ..." and call it an endorsement, I say you're AGAIN putting a lot of powedered sugar on dog crap and calling Romney a confection -- and FALSELY claiming that Rush agrees with you.
Rush did like Romney...I listened to his show during the primaries, so that is not a lie. And debating with you guys is pretty pointless because all you do is project and exaggerate Romney’s mistakes onto today which is very dishonest. The man has obviously learned from past mistakes and the reason why you guys can’t see that is because you are quite unforgiving yourselves and think you are being right and conservative.
Even with that, we Thompson supporters would have been LYING had we claimed Rush "supported" or "endorsed" Thompson. The actual RECORD and ACTIONS of Romney are enough to make me reject him, but if it wasn't -- the actions of his supporters on this forum would. They:
1. Claim again and again falsely that Rush "endorsed" their guy, when all Rush did was to give Romney faint praise not much higher or lower than he did other candidates (I listened to his show quite a lot during the primaries too, so that is not a lie; you Romney supporters heard what you wanted to hear).
2. Attribute to "hate" and religious "bigotry" my and others' sound rejection of Romney's politics -- very much like Obama and his minions cry "racist" at merest criticism far removed from race.
One of Romney's supporters, Rameumptom, asked in a rhetorical way:
Who did Rush Limbaugh endorse Feb. 5th, 2008? Who did Rush vote for in the booth in FL in the primaries? (it wasn't McCain or Huck)
As "proof," he appended a transcript of Rush's words that basically had Rush saying that out of a bad lot, "the way the campaign has shaken out," Romney "probably" embodied three legs of the conservative stool. YOU GUYS take that to mean that Rush endorsed, supported, and voted for Romney. When I asked Rameumptom to confirm exactly how he knows who Rush voted for in the primaries, I braced myself to sadly read a transcript from Rush's show in which he stated that he had done so; however, the SILENCE FROM RAMEUMPTOM has been deafening.
You Romney supporters LIE when you make these claims about Rush, and I am going to call you on it. Your behaviour speaks volumes about your candidate. You lie and mislead in pursuit of power, just like Romney.
o boy, another Romney judger. You sound very unforgiving of Romney’s past also. That’s fine and your right, but you are hurting yourself and I am sure you do that with others too.
I said that Rush supported Romney which is true. That doesn’t mean that he voted for him or aggreed totally with him. I only meant that he liked alot of his stands and his business sense which was clear from listening to him. Maybe you should look up the word support before you go on one of your judgemental binges. And please take a look at the be still exercise at www.fhu.com...you really need it.
It's true that you said Rush supported Romney. It is FALSE that Rush supported Romney. You continue to lie, obfuscate, and rationalize, and reflect badly on your candidate.
Ingar: I’m sorry you think that Limbaugh supported Romney. He did no such thing. In the very show that many Romney supporters pull what they think is his support of Romney, Rush plays clips of Romney’s answers and proclaims: “This is not Conservative.”
More consicely: It is FALSE that Rush said he supported Romney. Fabian, I used my dictionary regularly and know what "support" means. You LIE when you state that Rush "supported" Romney, as I would have LIED if I had said "Rush supported Thompson" even after Rush unequivocally declared Thompson "the only conservative" in the race.
The TRUTH is that you assume that Rush supported Romney. Go ahead and post that, and I would respect you more because it would be the truth.
When I say Rush supported Romney I mean that I heard him say some very good things about him on more than one occasion. So he was supporting the good that he saw in the man. That doesn’t mean he neccessarily voted for him. I think you are assuming too much to the word support and then going half cocked and calling me a liar. Support doesn’t mean in exclusion of the other candidates....although it could mean that. Maybe I should have been more precise...but please take it easy on the liar liar stuff, you sound silly.
I perhaps should use a different word...but I heard Rush support some of Romney’s stands as well as some of Fred Thompsons. That doesn’t mean he endorsed them in the primaries. I explained what I meant and had no other reason for writing it...why don’t you look up the word support and then get back to us. If I had used the word endorsed then you would have a much better point. But I believe I clarified and still you guys go on and on. I think you need to calm down a bit.
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.