Romneys Troubling Appointments (Mitt's environmental policy team now works for Obama) ......."Significantly, two of Romneys appointments have how found a home in the Obama White House.....Gina McCarthy, the chief EPA clean air regulator,.......Another Romney environmental adviser in the effort to regulate greenhouse gases is now Obamas Director of Science and Technology Policy, John Holdren."....once floated the idea of forced abortions,....
Romneys Advisers Met With Obama to Help Craft Obamacare Three of Mitt Romneys advisers went to the White House at least a dozen times in 2009 to consult on the former Massachusetts governors health care plan that President Obama used as a model for his initiative -- now a federal law that all the Republican presidential candidates want to repeal."....
April 2006, Massachusetts Governor signs the Massachusetts healthcare law as Senator Ted Kennedy looks on.
Which Mitt video
What does Mitt Romney stand for? Find out: Which Mitt site
In 1994, while running to be Massachusetts' next U.S. senator, Mitt Romney said: "I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it. And I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." October 25, 1994
But, as a Republican Party primary candidate in the 2008 presidential election, he said: "And that is why, as a pro-life Republican, I am in favor of having the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade." September 5, 2007"
Isn’t this a bit early?
Either the Rats know the fix is already in, and Romney will be the nominee, or they would rather run against someone else.
Well, even a broken clock is correct two times a day. Obama and Romney are joined a the hip on this one. Chronic flip floppers. Pot calls kettle black. Sheesh, Axelrod!
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
I accept Mitt Romney’s contention that needed to govern as a liberal Democrat to be the Governor of Massachusetts.
I accept Mitt Romney’s contention that he needs to repudiate all of his former positions in order to win a Republican primary for President.
But here’s the the thing...
Mitt Romney needs to do these things, but we do not need to vote for Mitt Romney. We have alternatives, even if Mitt Romney does not.
Now, we can envision a scenario where we all need to vote for Mitt Romney to prevent some much greater evil from taking place, but we should all be careful not to put ourselves in that position.
Carville(D):
"It's a feel-good story, this Romney thing.
Romney is an ascendant guy."
Sen. John Kerry (D) to Don Imus on RomneyCARE:
"I like this health care bill".
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) on RomneyCARE:
"To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable."
Mitt Romney wins much coveted Jimmy Carter endorsement
"Stretch from the Fantastic 4 and IslamObama, begone! You will not defile ths Holy Temple! "
Sounds like the WH is already running against Mittens. It is like he has already won the primaries and he is now the Republican nominee.
No, Romney is worse.
With Obama, you know what you are getting. With Romney, you don't.
Romney is much more like Bill Clinton.....he will say and do anything for a vote.
Earlier this week I read an article that the Democrats are going to follow the plan used by the hugely unpopular governer of California, Gray Davis in 1998. All polls had him losing to Richard Riordin the L.A. Mayor. So during primary season, Davis’ team spent ot’s money demonizing Riordin as a RINO and insufficiently conservative. Dan Lundgren a conservative got the Republican nomination and rthen was trounced in the general election. Obama is doing the same thing here. The one republican they don’t want to face is Romney who has no actual history of conservative policy that Obama can use to scare moderates and independents. Obama knows Romney will be a formidible debate opponent and the flip flops at worst means that Romney no longer holds positions that Obama supports.
C
I’m unhappy Perry has been this cycle’s Fred Thompson. I don’t think there is any candidate who gets me enthused the way Palin did...but so be it. In the end, we don’t build up our chances in 2012 by tearing down whoever will eventually run against Obama. Rather than trash talking who we don’t like, find out and promote the values and policies of candidates we like and persuade us to vote for someone; rather than against someone (as the one you are now against may be the one we may need to vote for). ain has neither the money nor the organization to get the nomination. A vote for him is a vote for Romney as the anti-Rinos are gonna split between Cain, Perry, and Bachman. Of those three, only Perry has the organization and money to take on Romney. Perry’s poor debate performance does not bode well for him as a national candidate; however, if debate prowess were the deciding factor, then Gingrich would be the nominee.
I’m not sure what a Romneybot is; if it suggests blindly spouting that Romney is the next Reagan, count me out. My analysis and posts concerning the candidates is not based on who holds the most positions with which I agree (that may be Bachman); my posts concern which candidate I think can raise enough money and win enough states to beat Obama. Beating Oboma is the only thing that matters. All other principals are secondary. It’s no good having principals when not a single one of them will be held by the person in the White House; especially when the current occupant poses an existential threat to every value for which Freep stands. I am familiar with the writings of those of us who post here. IF (and it’s a BIG IF) Romney has had a conservative epiphany, he surely shares manybut perhaps not even mostof the values of conservatives. It is possible he is a Manchurian candidate who plans on continuing to increase the powers of government if elected. Nevetheless, the devil we know (current POTUS), is far more dangerous than the devil we don’t know.
The flip flops issue is only a small part of the strategy that Obama is going to use against Romney if he is the nominee. The main part of their strategy is to run as Obama the defender of the little guy against greedy and ruthless Romney the CEO of Bain Capital a financial firm that sells and buys companies and in the process many people lose their jobs. This is the same tactic that Ted Kennedy used against Romney in 1994 during the Massachusetts senate race and it was very successful (watch the Kennedy TV ads against Romney on this issue, they are available on youtube). We will see those people hurt by Romneys company in endless TV ads and they will be interviewed on TV again and again and again. In this environment where a majority of voters cannot stand Wall Street it is the ultimate foolishness to nominate a Wall Street Man with all the meaning of the word to run against Obama. Romneys is the dream opponent for Obama, he fits the class warfare playbook to the letter.
HOMING in.
What is it with people from Massachusetts? Seems not all that long ago a certain senator from there was "for many things before he was against it" running as the dim candidate for president.