Ouch! Looks like I have riled you up personally, so I apologize about that.
What I am trying to demostrate is how selective presentation and phrasing can even make Ronald Reagan look questionable. You don’t seem to have anything good to say about Romney at all and plenty of sweeping negative generalizations. I think that you have exaggerated Romney’s ideology and imputed a lot of motivation to to iedological committment. I have worked with a lot of folks in business and government who are just trying to stay out of trouble and gain some advantage by presenting whichever politcal position will work for that audience at that moment - its common.
You accuse me of lying, for which you should, if you were fair, apologize. Here are the points you made, which I characterized as: “about Romney aligning himself with mainstream Rockerfeller/Country Club Republicans, or cozying up with the ruling Democrat power brokers while he was in business at Bain Capital in Boston.”
1. You wrote: Romney became a supporter of liberal republicans through the 1980s, until 1989 (this is what I called aligning himself with mainstream Rockerfeller/Country Club Republicans)
2.after that, all of Romney’s donations went to democrats (these few years (89-93)were when he was leading Bain Capital in Boston)
3. Romney even did democrat fundraising and voted democrat (this is what I called cozying up with the ruling Democrat power brokers while he was in business at Bain Capital in Boston.) Note: the voting was in the Democrat primary (not the general) for the local Mass. candidate (Paul Tsongas) while Romney was registered as an independent. It is a token freebie to ingratiate with local powerbrokers, and it was a vote against Bill Clinton. It was about twenty years ago - about the same length of time between Reagan voting Democrat in the 1948 general election and being the principled conservative candidate in the 1968 Republican primary.
I was not quoting you verbatim, I was characterizing the points you made and adding some context - and they are what happened. You repeatedly calling these lies and me a liar are way off base.
You state: “Romney was a lefty, pro-abortion guy during the 1960s, and the Vietnam war” He had nothing to do with the anti-war left at that time, but rather he was a clean cut, church going, hard working, good student and a Republican - not what folks then would consider a “lefty”. Objectively, this baseless mischaracterization is much more a lie than any statement that I made (except possibly for his abortion belief at the time - I don’t know).
You state: you simply deny everything about Romney’s decades of politics. That is simply untrue. I have a different impression of his motivation in taking his positions - he strikes me as a professional politician who can wheathervane with changes in public opinion and work out deals with the opposition. Massachusetts is one of the most leftist political environments in the whole country. You seem to simply deny all of the many actions that totalled to a lifetime American Conservative Union score of 88 - which is a great lot to deny. I guess they are now just bull because they don’t agree with your absolutist narrative.
You state: Romney has no personal character, he is a pathological liar and a man with seemingly no shame, conscious, or scruples, like your post.
Talk about demonization... this descends into irrational hatred. Let’s face it - he is a squeaky clean choir boy for a politician, and this is unfair.
As always: Obama Must Be Defeated.
Your level of BS and dishonesty and distortion and anti-Reaganism, and anti-conservatism, is high.
Reagan-*””did evolve to be solidly pro-life. Despite his (then) scandalously liberal personal life as a divorcee (Jane Wyman)””
You lied to smear Reagan, Reagan was always pro-life and never known for a scandalous personal life.
Reagan-*””Thank goodness that conservatives supported him despite his Libertarian social leanings “”
You keep lying, Reagan was the first pro-life and social conservative presidential hero of the social conservatives. If you want social libertarian go with HW Bush, or Carter, or Ford, or Clinton, etc. not the hero of the religious right.
*””I think that the points that you make about Romney aligning himself with mainstream Rockerfeller/Country Club Republicans, or cozying up with the ruling Democrat power brokers while he was in business at Bain Capital in Boston are consistent with a pragmatist who is working with the existing power structures, or positioning himself to get elected in Massachusetts. (such as registering as an independent, and voting for the local candidate from Mass, Paul Tsongas in the Democrat primary, but not in the general election). Any responsible executive has an obligation to manage a favorable relationship with the political powerbrokers - it is common to contribute to both sides like Trump does.””
Wow, lots of lying, I never said that stuff, or anything close to it, because that is a fake description that you made up of Romney’s political past.
*””The rumor I heard on abortion is that a Romney family member died from an illegal abortion, but that is just an unsourced rumor.””
I don’t know whether you are lying here, or just don’t know much about Mitt Romney, I think that you just don’t know much about Romney.
*”” His ACU rating of 88% while Govenor shows that he was not the unmitigated liberal that he is painted as by some on this forum.””
Come on guy... The ACU doesn’t rate governors.
*””He was considered by many in the Republican establishment as too conservative for the 2008 nomination.””
We missed that at freerepublic, care to share with us?
Within at least three posts, you have claimed an 88% rating for Mittler from the ACU. I had never been aware that the ACU had EVER rated governors and Taxachusetts governor is the only office Mittler ever held (until his 34% approval rating drove him from office). I went to the ACU home page and found reference to ratings for US Senate, US House, and six state legislatures (Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, California, Georgia and Colorado) but no governors. BTW, many years ago, I was a state chair of an ACU affiliate in a state bordering Massachusetts. That proves nothing in itself but I would make two observations: First, John Ashbrook's American Conservative Union and David Keene's ACU were entirely different things as the National Rifle Association now chaired by Keene will find out to its detriment. Second, rating even state legislators much less governors is likely beyond the competence of ACU's staff, giving them every benefit of the doubt. At least with state legislators, their voting records and their bills may be reviewed not unlike Congress or Senate. Massachusetts has an (old colonial era institution) elected Governor's Council which affects gubernatorial actions in many ways not readily discernible to outsiders.
I am the first to admit that I lack computer skills but perhaps you can point me to how I can find internet confirmation that the ACU EVER rated Governor Romney at all, much less at 88%. Are you talking about a state affiliate in Massachusetts? Again point me in the right direction to obtain confirmation. I am not doubting your integrity though I do question your wisdom and your analysis of what constitute reasons to go to political war especially for the likes of Romney. I DO absolutely question Romney's integrity and everything else about him and that goes for both of his now deceased parents as well. Romney's daddy became part of the antiwar left while running for POTUS in 1968 as a stalking horse for Nelson Rockefeller (who never became antiwar) and while Mittens was following the family tradition of avoiding military service by choosing his military draft eligible years to run off to France as a missionary. None of his five sons have served and neither did his daddy.
You characterize Mittler as a "squeaky clean choir boy for a politician." How about a more accurate description? He is and always has been a money-obsessed unprincipled sleazy whore EVEN for a politician and one who never saw a social issue whether babies, guns, marriage, education or whatever on which he was meaningfully distinguishable in policy from Ted Kennedy. It is true that Myth Romney never drove a girl off the Chappaquiddick Bridge and left her to drown.
I understand the argument of some that absolutely ANYTHING has to be to Obozo's right although a Romney presidency, in my estimation, will permanently destroy the GOP and, with it, our nation. I cannot imagine any actual conservative supporting Myth Romney if that conservative is familiar with the details of Romneycare.
Reagan's ex-wife Jane Wyman (probably in later years a far better person than Nancy) was asked by lame stream media in 1980 to tell them about Ronaldus Maximus (most politicos knew that their approximately 1948 divorce had been a nasty bloodbath). Wyman responded to their shock and horror that Ronnie is was a very fine man and that the USA would be blessed to have him as POTUS. If you posted suggesting that he was libertarian during the divorce period, he was not. Any libertarianism on Reagan's part stemmed from his Hollywood background where abortions and sexual perversion were more commonplace than most moviegoers knew. He had a certain tolerance for such things without being a cheerleader for either. By 1948 he was testifying before HUAC against Hollywood communist influence although his circle of friends and allies included ex-communists Sterling Hayden and John Garfield among others.
The last sentence of your second paragraph is the very definition of Romney as a money-obsessed unprincipled whore as noted above.
Finally, I am often in disagreement with Ansel12 over issues of our respective faiths. I am a Catholic and he is a Reformed Christian. Both of us are more than a bit textured in our respective faith commitments. OTOH, I have found ansel12 to be a thoroughly honest FReeper and worthy and principled opponent here even when he disagrees with my point of view. Ansel12 has earned that reputation here over a long posting history.
If you imagine that this post is the product of "irrational hatred," so be your belief and I will tend to view you through the prism you are earning accordingly.