Posted on 12/03/2011 6:47:57 PM PST by Grig
Comparing and contrasting Newt and Mitt is a real eye-opener. The two men have taken very different paths in their personal and professional lives, and have wildly different personalities. Newt is a dreamer, Mitt a doer. Newt is reckless, Mitt is careful. Newt is famously undisciplined, Mitt is the epitome of self-discipline. Romney is a leader, Newt simply is not–according to those who worked most closely with him. Both men are intelligent, yet have chosen different ways to use their intelligence.
In education, Romney pursued business and law, while Newt chose modern European History. Romney earned his education quickly and entered the private sector, while Newt preferred academia.
Romney went on to a successful career in business, becoming wealthy helping businesses and creating jobs, while Newt made a career in government, becoming wealthy by exploiting his position of power and selling influence. Romney's skills were in high demand in the private sector, while Newt was removed from leadership in the House due to the chaos he created.
In matters of faith, Romney is a life-long member of his church and has a record of many years of service to it. Newt went from Lutheran to Baptist, to Catholic, with some speculation of political motive in making the conversions. I am not aware of service Newt may have given to his church. In their personal lives, they could not be more different. Mitt married his high school sweetheart after 4 years of courtship, and remains happily married. Newt also married his high school sweetheart - his geometry teacher whom he began dating at age 16. He has admitted that there is some truth in the notion that he hates women. He has a turbulent marital history due to selfishness and uncontrolled sexual appetites. While Romney helped Ann through both MS and cancer, Newt divorced Jackie, who had cancer–saying she was ‘not pretty enough or young enough to be a president’s wife–and besides she has cancer’. Newt divorced Marrianne, who was also diagnosed with MS. At the time, he asked Marrianne if she would please tolerate the six year affair with Callista, and remain married to him. She refused. He married Callista in 2000.
In matters of character, the contrast is keen. Romney has no hint of scandal–personal or professional. Newt has rumors of sexual scandals–including the infamous oral sex in a car with his neighbor's wife, while his little daughter was near. Newt also has a history of ethics violations, shady book deals, sham fundraising practices, and inconsistencies about whether he was hired as an ‘historian’ or as a lobbyist.
In the presidential campaign, they have also chosen very different paths. Romney is serious, organized, hardworking and prepared, while Newt has been flying by the seat of his pants. He now finds himself in the running, but unprepared, due to a severe lack of preparation and organization. While Romney has been mostly humble about his long term frontrunner status, Newt proclaimed himself the nominee after less than two weeks at the top of the polls.
There are many other differences--too many to list here. But we easily know enough to determine who is more worthy of support. We should not divorce the way a man lives in his personal life, from his actions in public life. Character is revealed in both professional and personal decisions. Romney has a solid record of being true to his word, family, and stewardships. Newt does not. While both men have significant accomplishments, only one has the background, character, leadership and temperament we need. That person is Mitt Romney.
It’s why I rarely post to you.
_______________________________________
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Rare to you is a large number...
I would need a worker that didn’t spend all day long on the internet
____________________________________________
Id need a boss who didnt either...
You know, there are still other choices in the race. A month ago at this time, Cain was riding high and it looked like nothing (even those initial harassment allegations) would de-rail him. This race is still very fluid.
I, like most people, will not accept Mitt under any circumstances, but I’m not real comfortable with Newt either. I can live with Newt, but I’d rather see someone else like Perry, Bachmann or Santorum catch fire. I don’t think Bachmann will, but one of the two Ricks could still rise up and challenge Mitt & Newt.
“at a time when his wife had cancer”
SHE DIDN’T HAVE CANCER!!!!!!!
This RINO label was devised by the left. You got Obama by allowing yourself to buy into that crap. What is Obama a part time down low guy? Look our enemy is that evil left SOB who hates this country. Anyone beats him.
I liked Rick S. I was Cain’s biggest fan. Had I been Cain and innocent, my ass would have taken a lie detector test. Those results would have been made public. After passing said test-I would have informed every network that they and any woman they brought forward would be facing slander charges and I would own them if they did not cease and desist. Sadly, I recall 1970, when the Army got into the AA program. I never saw a reason for special programs as the finest men I served with in combat were all Americans. Non of us were hyphenated.
| #15 and #16 are great posts. Thanks monkapotamus and narses Here is what a zogby poll learned on 11/30 from likely GOP primary voters:
We purposely wanted to learn how GOP voters perceived Romney’s commitment to “core beliefs” and asked this question about him, Gingrich, Herman Cain and Ron Paul: |
|
FYI - . Latest results (before Cain suspended) of remaining candidatesMuch like what the government does with unemployment statistics, the following chart represents a 4-poll "rolling average" for the latest 20+ polls listed at RealClearPolitics.com (plus other recent national polls). I also weighted the polls by their size. For example, a poll with a survey size of 1000 was weighted proportionately heavier than an 324 survey size.
Weighted 4-Poll Rolling Averages of the latest |
Mitt is an anonymous back stabber.
He had NOTHING to offer so he attacks those who do through others.
He’s like the mafia in politics.
Tell us - WHY DOES CANADA CARE? Is there an underwear fetish going on?
I understand where you are coming from on this, and appreciate your stand for conservatism.
You can see by my comments that I am LDS and occasionally post in defense of misleading or inaccurate comments. You can also see that I am not a Romney supporter and feel that he has only one quality that I consider positive for a president - business/leadership experience (well, he also has nice hair).
My fear is that those with an agenda to destroy Mormonism are using the Romney campaign to further that agenda, and that we can sometimes appear to be bigots to the outside world due to the behaviors of a small handful of posters who turn every Romney thread into a bash-Mormonism thread.
Your statement is completely fair and true and doesn't even mention his religion as a basis. But there have been some that pretty much say that his Mormonism is the sole cause of their lack of support. And while I have no problem with that attitude, these same posters often resort to posting false statements about Mormonism as evidence for that attitude.
While arguments or discussions about Mormonism appropriately belong on the Religion page, do you have concerns about this heated battle appearing so regularly on the main pages?
Actually, Nana, I am sure about something, but you go crying to the religion moderator if I call you a liar. And since I cannot determine intent, I have been instructed to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that your mis-statements are not malicious but are instead done out of ignorance.
For example, an anonymous posting of an un-sourced list of mission rules is only authoritative to one who is already looking for such a thing, but to most people they would recognize its provenance as a measure of its accuracy.
And while what follows is hearsay, I have personal knowledge that LDS missionaries were allowed to drive cars in the 60's, 70's, 80's, and can even today. The difference is that they are only allowed to drive mission-owned cars. I also recognize that mission presidents have discretion over certain rules, and therefore might be the original source of that potentially-altered "list of rules" that is floating around.
But, of course, I am not blinded by my hatred of all-things-Mormonism and therefore do not automatically accept any rumor or anonymous posting as authoritative, especially after its questionable nature has been pointed out.
Still laughing at Why does his religion matter ???. Thanks for the unintentional funny.
You just voted for Obama. (sigh)
Agreed. Regardless of the few fubars Newt has made, he is a frontrunner to Romney in every respect. And we all need to remember that OBAMA MUST GO. If Newt is the nominee, we all need to get in back of him and get him elected. Four more years of Obama will destroy America and IMO would be a point of no return.
Thanks for posting these figures. Newt is not perfect, but is a far cry better than Romney and miles ahead of Obama.
Just a side note...I supported and wanted Palin (she decided not to run)...I supported and thought Bachmann would be a good candidate (she has cooked her own goose, although I would vote for her if she became the nominee)...I supported and hoped the best for Herman Cain, but he has lost it as well.
The best I see in the field is Newt, based on REAL records and NOT "taken out of context" records. So here I am: I will support Newt because I think he can beat Obama, the Evil One.
“You can’t get away from that.”
I’m not trying to get away from anything but four more years of Obama.
You are OK with four more years of Obama so you can “teach” the GOP a lesson - that is the difference - plain and simple.
good luck with that - it didn’t work for Perot, it didn’t work for Nader, and it won’t ever work.... go back to crazy town.
Do you agree or disagree that the candidate “lacks core beliefs and will say whatever he believes may get him elected.”
Yup - I’d agree with this, kinda the defintion of “politics” - unfortunately.
Look at their accomplishments. Newt allied himself with Ronald Reagan to build the Reagan Coalition, the Religious Right, and the Republican majority (together the Reagan Revolution) which directly led the downfall of the Soviet Union, the Contract with America, government reforms, less government, tax cuts, a balanced budget, and the great, long-standing Reagan economy.
Romney, on the other hand, vehemently denied Ronald Reagan and aligned himself with Ted Kennedy and the left. Romney accomplished installing liberal big government programs, defended and promoted Roe v Wade and legalized abortion as “settled law,” advocated and implemented RomneyCare with its liberty killing government mandates against formerly free citizens and its taxpayer funded or subsidized and mandated abortion procedures. He ran and governed to the left of Ted Kennedy on the “gay agenda” resulting in gay marriage in Massachusetts. He appointed liberal judges and liberal appointees throughout his government. Under his “leadership” conservatism and the Republican party was all but destroyed in Massachusetts.
Romney is one evil liberal progressive. No way in hell will MittBots be allowed to support this abortionist, big government, socialist scumbag on FR!
Guess my message isn’t clear enough. I have to keep repeating it and zotting would be MittBots.
79 posted on Sat Dec 03 2011 19:59:37 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Jim Robinson
I disagree. McCain was slow on the draw in the debates, and as much as people don't like saying the debates are important, they were the one thing that drew many independent voters over to Obama. Obama was voted in on charisma and the sheople got hoodwinked.
Newt, if he becomes the nominee, will clean Obama's clock in a debate. Obama is still a junior senator with aspirations to becoming organizer-in-chief.
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.