Mitt Romney on the Contract With America [He opposed it]

Youtube ^ | October 27, 1994 | Mitt Romney

[EternalVigilance]

Mitt Romney:

"If you want to get something done in Washington you don't end up picking teams, with Republicans on one side, and Democrats on the other... I don't like winners and losers in Washington. I'd rather say 'Let's get together and work together.'"

[EternalVigilance]

No comment.

[EternalVigilance]

Yeah. Hang it up.

[VegasBaby]

“Sorry to hear that. You may wnat to reconsider. Maybe Mitt and Fred would be a good team.

With close numbers in the House and the Senate, there will be no real reform without real bipartisanship. Too often, what we are seeing isn’t an effort to find solutions, but rather insults and purely partisan politics. There are many good and responsible people in government who are willing to work together – but the level of bipartisanship needed for real progress can only be achieved when politicians perceive that the American people demand it.
Fred Thompson, May 18, 2007

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/05/fred_thompson_exclusive_story.php";

Ssssssssshhhh...

It’s best not to point out stuff like that here because heaven forbid any other candidate but Thompson want to work through the problems in Washington.

[Enosh]

You gotta admit that "ideological whiplash" one was good.

[EternalVigilance]

The Romney for President envelope remains unopened on the Dining Room table.

I hear they're good for starting fires.

But, then again, now that I think about it, it might flip over and throw hot ashes on the carpet...

[jude24]

It was.

[pissant]

ROFL.

[EternalVigilance]

For you:

[TAdams8591]

LOL!

[redgirlinabluestate]

It's just a nice throw-away line. Given all the vetoes he signed in Massachusetts, and how many times he bumped heads with the liberals, it is quite clear that he will not go along just to get along.

Romney stood on principles -- see here.

[TAdams8591]

Keep talking, EV. You’re responsible for more Romney conversions than all of us combined. : )

[EternalVigilance]

Keep bumping this thread, then, please!

But, let me ask you:

Do you think there should be “winners and losers in Washington”?

[Barney Gumble]

Romeny: "It's not a good idea ... to go laying out a whole series of things which the Party says that they are going to do."

So it's better to avoid a platform, be very non-commital, and just throw out great soundbites?

[ex-NFO]

Let’s say you have two sides, evenly matched in power. If one side is at war with the other, and the other side isn’t at war with the first, who do you think will win?

[EternalVigilance]

Romney stood on principles

Oh sure. Romney always stands on principles. Only problem is, it doesn't matter particularly to him whether they are conservative or liberal "principles." Then, when he finds them inconvenient, he hops off quicker than a cat on a hot tin roof.

[Barney Gumble]

How about all of the Republicans who voted it in then turned around and sold out?

I wouldn't support any of them for President either.

[EternalVigilance]

Heh. Not hard to figure that one out.

[redgirlinabluestate]

Nice flowery attacks and hyperbole, but cut him some slack EV. He arrived for public service, albeit over-educated, smart and savvy, but he was also, perhaps, a bit idealistic and maybe naive about working as a "compassionate conservative."

Given the he!! he's gone through in the trenches with the 85% liberal legislature in Massachusetts, his tune has changed. He has learned a lot through trial by fire (and, no doubt, he's learned from Pres. Bush's mistakes -- he's not stupid).

I can't think of anyone else more suited and better prepared for the fight in Washington than Mitt Romney.

[torchthemummy]

EternalVigilance + Mitt Romney = BIAS

[Gelato]

....his tune has changed...

On every issue?

If Romney really has "changed," then the question is, WHEN did he suddenly decide to abandon his liberal agenda?

About the time he decided to run for president?