Posted on 02/09/2008 1:36:43 PM PST by loreldan
Some 50 stalwarts of the political right privately met with Mitt Romney minutes after he dropped out of the Republican nominating race to discuss the former Massachusetts governor becoming the face of conservatism, as Ronald Reagan became en route to his 1980 election win.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Conservative Scoreboard:
Romney 35% - Keene,Weyrich, Rex Reed ...etc...
Paul 12%
Huckster 12%
A clue?
Leni
Yes, he was first choice for some folks. If he hadn’t put 35+ million of his own money in to get the delegates he did, he’d be the first choice of scant few.
Money can get you votes and recognition. What it can’t do is erase your record.
Man, have you got me pegged wrong.
Yes, I like talk radio, but I don't consider them to be "established" Republican --- do you??
Neither am I 100% happy with Romney.
It's just that Washington DC desparately needs some new blood, and all the others, except Romnay and Huckabee, have been in DC so long they lost track.
Romney is not only a good moral example, he would govern to nthe right with innovative ideas.
Exactly. Plus, if the GOP can’t win in the south no matter who the VP is they should hang it up. It’s the purple swing states we need to worry about. And Romney won many of those, including MI, MN, CO, and NV. It makes perfect sense to make Romney the VP given those wins, his already established grassroots organization of supporters in all states, access to funds, credible conservative leadership support etc....
Your entire reply is completely destructive. Of the remaining candidates, Romney stands waist-up above the rest.
"Is going back and forth on abortion a "conservative" value?"
He didn't "go back and forth," he changed once, for the better by far.
"Is going back and forth on the 2nd amendment conservative?"
Again you lie with your question. He worked with the NRA to get the best possible result that could have come out of the very statist Massachusetts legislature. The resultant bill was a huge improvement.
"Is being a backer of the Brady Bill conservative?"
Not in my opinion, but millions of people that consider themselves conservative support the Brady bill to some extent. Romney has proven himself not to be a big supporter of gun laws, but you can keep on lying if you wish.
"Is having a socialistic mandatory health care plan that is endorsed by Ted Kennedy conservative?"
There you go again. The bill that he was able to craft together greatly weakened what the legislature intended. It resulted in retention of normal private medical practice in the state, and that was not what would have happened had he not been governor.
You are a liar, and you know it. You are working against all of us by throwing your bombs at the only viable candidate.
“Read down the entire article.....and note the phrase, “a Rush Limbaugh associate.” A clue?” ~ Leni
Yes. He may also be Mark Levin’s friend.
Friday, December 14, 2007:
Faith and Israel on the table as rabbi meets GOP hopeful
http://www.silive.com/living/advance/religion/index.ssf?/base/living/1197638153298950.xml&coll=1
Leader of New Springville Jewish Center is invited to a breakfast with former Massachusetts governor
Friday, December 14, 2007 By LESLIE PALMA-SIMONCEK ADVANCE STAFF WRITER
STATEN ISLAND ADVANCE — The subject never came up.
Rabbi Chaim Nate Segal, spiritual leader of the New Springville Jewish Center, this week was invited to a breakfast with Mitt Romney, a Republican seeking the presidency.
Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, has had his faith assailed in the media this week after another GOP hopeful, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, said Romney believes that Jesus and Satan are brothers.
The former governor is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, more commonly known — although not by its members — as the Mormon church.
The church believes, as Romney has explained, that God is the father of all, which presumably means the devil as well.
But Rabbi Segal and Romney never discussed the controversy or the presidential hopeful’s church.
They did discuss Romney’s recent speech, in which it seemed, to some observers, that he wanted to assure Christians that the Mormon church is, indeed, Christian.
“I don’t think his speech was meant to allay fears of Mormonism,” said Rabbi Segal, who attended the breakfast at the New York Athletic Club in Midtown Manhattan with three of his sons: Meir, 17; Shlomo, 15, and Yitzchok, 12, and two congregants, Avi Gannon and Gershon Katz.
“I think he was simply stating the fact that religion in America is salvation,” the rabbi said of the speech Romney gave Dec. 6 in Texas. “The founding fathers knew the value of religion.”
Beyond that, the rabbi said he and Romney spoke of the candidate’s position on Israel — “he’s very positive on Israel,” the rabbi said — and discussed “life in general.”
Leslie Palma-Simoncek is the religion editor for the Advance. She may be reached at palma@siadvance.com. Visit her Beyond Beliefs Web log at blog.silive.com/beyondbeliefs.
Rabbi Chaim Nate Segal
New Springville Jewish Center
14 Elie Court
Staten Island, New York 10314
You need to take a chill-pill.
Mitt needs to continue to make these kinds of speech over the next four years.
Let there be a conservative standard bearer competition.
Here’s an interview of a candidate for the title:
Limbaugh Letter December 2007 Issue Rush’s interview with Bobby Jindal: http://download.premiereradio.net/guest/rushlimb/pdf/LimbaughLetter_BobbyJindal_Interview.pdf
These Romney haters did more to destroy the best chance conservatives had in '08 than Hillary ever could in her wildest wet dreams.
Last summer, when Romney was moving up in the polls, I had high hopes for the Republican victory in '08
I looked foreward to Romney, as the smart conservative/Republican spokesman, being able to articulate the benefits of good moral conservative living.
Romney could talk circles around these empty-platitude Democrats, and the media knew it.
Then these bomb-throwing Romney haters launched a smarmy hit-piece after hit piece (based on 15-year-old snippets from ONE FREAKIN debate in 1994) and eventually convinced just enough Republicans to be leery and fearful of a Romney candidacy.
Not to mention the rabid Mormon haters ... which would never be tolerated in conservative circles if it was say, Judiasm or Catholics, or Methodists, or any other religion. (except muslim, of course)
Thanks to empty headed conservatives, we ended up with McCain... the oldest most boring Washington insider of the past 30 years.
The conservative wing desparately needed new blood.
The Romney haters took that new blood and dumped it on the ground out of spite.
Yeah, yeah, and you lost respect for Hunter when he endorsed Huckabee.
And you lost respect for Thompson when he endorsed McCain.
And you lost respect for Rick Santorum when he endorsed Romney.
In fact, the little secret is finally out.
YOU are the only true conservative in America.... and everyone else is a phoney.
Dang, if we had only known we had Perfection In Our Midst right here on FR.
We could have just called you for all the answers instead of reading and watching TV and listing to talk radio ..... because YOU are perfection and everyone else is just a bunch of idiots.
It’s been obvious from the beginning the FR was infiltrated with disinformers and propagandists, but the poison injectors are something that I hadn’t noticed until recently.
McCain does not need help in south. Republicans will carry the southern states against Billary/Obamination anyhow.
OTOH Romney brings Michigan, Massachusetts into play which is bigger help to McCain since he would lose them otherwise for sure.
Right!
I hadn't factored that part in - along with what you are saying, and the fact that Romney has the economic background to couple with McC's military - and that Romney has now been 'vetted' by America - got over 4 million votes to McC's 4.7 - if we have anyone left in GOP leadership with brains - Romney will be the VP runner - and perfect to balance McC's age = With McC's age and health, he will be lucky to make it 4 years, let alone 12.
If we have Romney in the wings - we could keep the WH for 12-16 years.
By that time, the Socialists will have lost their momentum and Hitlery will be a has been -
~”Money can get you votes and recognition. What it can’t do is erase your record.”~
No, money can get you recognition. Romney needed that, given he was running against household names.
Money does not get you votes. Forbes is testament to that. The reason Romney built up so much support - about 30% of the Republican base - is that many people were attracted to his ideas.
The charge by some people that Romney was trying to buy the election is childish. What he bought was exposure. Evidently, he didn’t do enough to earn the votes.
No he didn't just change once, you obviously did not look very closely at his record. No wonder you guys think he is a conservative. Look at the links posted last night.
"Again you lie with your question. He worked with the NRA to get the best possible result that could have come out of the very statist Massachusetts legislature. The resultant bill was a huge improvement."
Hey, if you want to support someone who backed the Brady Bill, go ahead. And even though he is now saying he's "for the second amendment", he apparently still supports the assault weapons ban, although it's hard to tell, because he's good at speaking out of two sides of his mouth.
"There you go again. The bill that he was able to craft together greatly weakened what the legislature intended. It resulted in retention of normal private medical practice in the state, and that was not what would have happened had he not been governor."
So he doesn't have a mandatory health care plan that provides government-funded abortions? You can defend it all you want, if you like it. But your slick talk just dances around the question. No wonder you like him, you're a slick talker just like him.
"You are a liar, and you know it. You are working against all of us by throwing your bombs at the only viable candidate."
BS, and for you to accuse me of that says more about you, especially when you are defending someone who has been caught in numerous lies, stretches of the truth or "misstatements". Like the other 'mittheads' you have convinced yourself that he is a conservative, perhaps out of desperation to find someone, ANYONE to get behind. He is a phony, that is my view. But if you want to believe a man who is not only a flip-flopper but someone who has shown himself to be habitually dishonest, then go right ahead. People did the same thing with Clinton.
Well at least thank you for being honest about that. I don't care if people support who they want, but what bothers me is when people try to twist someone into being the new messiah for conservatives when the person is clearly not.
Actually, I think Romney did get a sizable proportion, more then anyone else. And how can you say you know what people are thinking? Do you want to be taken seriously or not?
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.