Posted on 07/06/2012 5:17:21 PM PDT by jimbo123
Kevin Madden, a Republican communications expert with long ties to Mitt Romney, will become a more frequent and visible spokesman for the presidential campaign, a source close to the decision said on Friday.
The increased responsibilities for Mr. Madden came in the wake of criticism from nervous Republicans about Mr. Romney’s campaign team. The Wall Street Journal said in an editorial that the campaign “looks confused in addition to being politically dumb.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Romney and Obama are two sides of the same coin. And the only difference between Axelrod and Madden is that Axelrod wins elections.
Yes, YOU!
Here and on other sites too.
mitt had said some things in the past two years to lead you to believe otherwise... I understand that and I offer you evidence here that calls into question everything mitt says and portrays himself as today. Ask yourself this... how many politicians have changed so radically that every major position and every major ideological belief that they ever held are changed to their polar opposite.
Do you believe mitt when he says all of the right things today... or do you believe mitt when he says all of the wrong things yesterday? Do we believe mitt or do we believe mitt... and which one and why?
Check these out... you will not like them but they are mitt uncut, uncensored and 100% in his own words and in his own skin.
Romney and his mother love abortion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgBdU7M3Y20&feature=related
I am NOT a republican:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsX2gXwlcfI&feature=related
I am a progressive moderate and people know it!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9xTIDB106g&feature=related
Anti Gun and then Pro Gun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj8Nk3p1wyY&feature=related
Immigration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6_ktWZZmSo&feature=relmfu
Flip Flops:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c&feature=related
2nd Amendment... mitt refuses to answer why he voted for the huge assault weapons ban in Massachusetts and then he says because it increased gun rights and that all gun rights groups asked him to sign it. Liar to the power of 10.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-UQG7k1uX0&feature=related
LLS
Mr. RomneyCARE also supports Sharia and the 911 Mosque.
But like TARP, TAXES, and ineligible POTUSes which he also
supports, Mr. RomneyCARE will keep it hidden
... until too late. THE ROMNEY WAY.
EVEN IF everything you've said about Mitt is true, it will still take a good amount of time for him to change the course of the country for that to occur under the auspices he desires. Plenty of time to apply the proper brakes. But if OBOZO is re-elected we stand at the razor's edge of a precipice from which we shall never return once we tumble over the edge. We're so close to total destruction that I can feel the edge of that cliff already buckling beneath us. Can't you feel it too?
Here's the other reason we need to elect Mitt, the coattails that he can generate could tip the Senate into our favor and there are a lot of real conservatives in line to take office having the Tea Party to guide them, among others. That accomplished we can give the UN gun treaty the boot almost immediately along with other crappola OBOZO has planned. If Mitt falls, the Senate falls as well and there goes that loooong fall over that cliff I mentioned.
I can believe it. Is it true that MA wanted Romneycare? That something like this was coming down the pike anyway? Is it true that the Heritage Foundation liked and supported the plan?
One issue I have is that often the voters want something, there exists a problem and you work to experiment with an answer. Given that, isn’t Federalism all about experimentation?
If we have 50 labs out there each trying something doesn’t it give us both liberty and opportunity? I’m not arguing for Romneycare per se, but the ability of states to work their problems out and then be judged.
Obamacare doesn’t do that. It forces a blanket answer upon all of us. That’s a major distinction. I mean the reason Obama’s policies don’t work is that they haven’t worked in Illinois. They come straight from the IL playbook. Anyone wanting to know if Obama would be a success prior to electing him need only look at Cook County to know he’d fail. I never suspected Obama would succeed economically because I know the local results.
Why is experimentation wrong in the case of Romney? The free-rider problem in healthcare is real. The cost to the system is significant and we all pay for it. We know that health insurance isn’t treated as catastrophic insurance, which is what it should be, but as a subsidy. How do you get from there to liberty without losing the politics?
Dang! That was a gud ‘un!!! :-)
LLS
I know you don’t like Romney. What isn’t clear is your viable alternative to Obama. Your posts seem angry, lack lucidity and seem hateful/spiteful. They’re messy and hard to follow.
For instance you made several assertions of “fact” in your post, but no links. I’ve got a choice to make between a Cook County Democrat who’s a true believer in Black Liberation Theology and a RINO. I’m from Cook County so I’ve dealt with both.
It is true that a RINO disappoints, but only because you think they’re conservative. I don’t think Romney is conservative, it’s a rare politician who truly is (I like Jeff Flake). So Romney won’t disappoint me and he’s not any worse than GW Bush.
I am certain that Obama will not disappoint me either. I know he’ll continue to implement Cook County Economics and Politics in the America I love. That’s the most destructive path outside North Korea. It’s not a hard choice, FRiend.
I will vote Romney over Obama. Unless you come up with a viable alternative a vote against Romney or no vote at all is a vote for Obama. That’s the facts, math and truth of elections. Immature conservatives who cannot deal with reality have always hurt the cause.
Heritage reversed their early opinion and they have a large article on their site explaining their mistake. They were not for what romneycare was but for what they were told that it would be... but then again... isn’t obamacare the same. You had to pass it to see what was in it. Same old same old.
LLS
Right on!
LLS
There will be no coat tail effect... almost everyone that I know will be voting for every Conservative on the ballot. Even those that say they will not vote... most will. They will not vote for romney but as it is here in Mississippi... all of the Conservatives down ballot are republicans. I will vote for every one of them. They are not perfect... I do not look for perfection... but I can forgive an occasional mistake or a new Congressman's tendency to go along to get along... up to a point... but I will not tolerate liars, cheaters and thieves. mitt is a liar... and a liar will cheat and a cheater will steal. I will vote for Goode or Sarah as a write in... but make no mistake... my other votes will be to propel Conservatives into the Congress.
LLS
MA voters were fed a line about all these people making $70,000 but refusing to buy health insurance and getting free care. Struck me as ludicrous on the face of it -- how many jobs paying $70,000 don't have good benefits, including medical insurance? It's the jobs paying $18,000 or $20,000 that usually don't have benefits either. And hospitals at least used to go after non-payers with good incomes, either work out a payment plan or take them to court. As far as I can see, it was all a tissue of lies.
There was a poll showing that 71% of MA residents were in favor of RomneyCare. Sounds to me less than the percentage who already had insurance, whether through the employer, the union, or MassHealth, so these people thought they wouldn't be affected. And the state did its best to hide the correlation between rising taxes (esp. the sales tax), rising premiums, rising health care costs and RomneyCare, even with the infusion of federal money and throwing a bunch of legal immigrants off MassHealth (I don't know whether they were then to be fined for not having coverage.
I think the percentage of insured went up by about 2 or 3 percentage points -- costs went up far more. The state is bad shape; there were several hospitals suing over it. Small businesses closed. Several tried suing, but I don't think they were successful, given the liberal judiciary.
The state did come out with a study touting its success. Less partial and more objective studies found, well, less auspicious results.
I thought she was a fascist and now she's more like a running dog lackey.
Just don't know what to do.
Here gimme that lute ~ I know what to do now (grabbing it by the neck, swinging it around in a broad arc). SMACK BAM BAHHHH (Deliverance Music) ~ Oh that feels so good!
She doesn't like hillbilly music anyway, ain't no how her boy gets our votes!
Does Romney also have a professional arsonist or mad bomber on his staff (like the Algore, Lurch, Clinton, Clinton and 'bomba'?
I don’t think Mitt is wonderful. He wasn’t my choice, but he’s what I have to work with. That’s the political reality.
Between Obama and Romney both of whom have track records, I’ll take Romney. At the same time I’m working to have the most conservative House and Senate I can. Using the levers of power always involves compromise and it always has. That’s how republics work. The opposite is dictatorship.
A Senate that won’t approve a less than conservative SCOTUS nominee is a major goal. Obama is certain to appoint another Sotomayor and Kagan. With Romney we at least have a chance to get a Roberts at worst and perhaps a Thomas at best.
A conservative House means a budget and tax policy that Romney cannot refuse. For Obama and the media a conservative House becomes a whipping boy - racist, misogynistic, anti-poor, etc. I want conservatives to win for a generation or two. It’s the only way back. Winning the Executive and both Houses is the way to go.
Letting Obama win isn’t a strategy for victory. Without a viable alternative to Obama or Romney the reasonable choice is Romney.
I don’t disagree and Heritage as a think tank can change policies, particularly one they heralded and many conservatives pushed.
Romney as a politician cannot reject or refute completely his signature plan. It would only help Obama. Instead he’s stated that there are errors in it that he would change now that it’s been in action: http://mittromneycentral.com/resources/romneycare/
At the same time Romney’s also agreed to grant instant waivers and undo the bill. Do I believe that? Not completely, but I do know that a conservative House and Senate can work wonders with a willing WH. That won’t happen if Obama wins again.
Romney’s team of insiders are clumsy, but loyal. That’s a bad mistake. They’ve got the Federalism argument and now the tax argument. If they could just get their act together the election should be a landslide.
Romney’s choices seem to favor loyalty over aggressiveness and brains. That’s not good, but it’s common.
As a serious question what else can we do to win long term and over and over again?
Here’s Romney’s rebuttal: http://mittromneycentral.com/resources/romneycare/
If it is down to Romney v. Obama, then Romney is the clear choice, even for the most ardent conservative. Anything else is a vote for Obama.
Despite your LIES for Romney, the citizens of Mass.
never voted for EITHER socialized medicine
(a.k.a. Romney Death Panels) or gay marriage
(a.k.a. Romney agenda with the New York Times).
Mr. RomneyCARE pretends he is something,
and then steps the helpless in the back.
It is his way.
Romney is just as despicable. And he’s such a conscienceless liar, I wouldn’t believe a word that comes out of his mouth.
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.