Mitt Romney, Mad Hatter
[Posted by Karl]
Just returned from an early movie — Mission Impossible 4 in IMAX, so I could see the first seven minutes of The Dark Knight Rises — to find this from Allahpundit in my Twitter feed:
Mitt Romney said today he’s “the ideal candidate” for the Tea Party movement because his stance on issues lines up “pretty darn well” with the movement he says will soon realize that GOP frontrunner Newt Gingrich isn’t their best option for president.
Granted, Newt seems a little insider-y for the level of Tea Party support he’s getting. But Mission Impossible 4 and the first seven minutes of The Dark Knight Rises were both more believable than Romney here.
–Karl
Ding!
Karl (e39d6b) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:20 amThey made a Mission Impossible 4?
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:21 amWas it any good?
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:22 amYeah, MI4 is on 400 screens now (but you get the Dark Knight only on 42 IMAX screens). Opens wide next week. It’s in the top half of the franchise, I would say. Directed by Brad Bird (The Incredibles), who knows how to make a secret-agenty cartoon flick with a smidge of depth.
Karl (e39d6b) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:32 amI’ve heard that MI4 is great; havn’t got to see it yet though.
Mitt has to say that kind of stuff; it backs up Bachmann while she trashes his competition.
Perry’s got this, watch 🙂
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
Lord Nazh (821ae1) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:32 amWell, if there’s anyone that can relate to the term “mission: impossible” . . .
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:35 amI think I’ll have to go check that out. I have to do something this weekend with family. The Imax near me probably has it.
Mitt Romney’s comments about what he likes in Obamacare and his comments against seeing the truth of Social Security’s design flaw, and his self description as a “progressive” lead me to disagree that he is the ideal Tea Party candidate. I’d rank that as about as fair as Ron Paul’s commentary about Bachmann or Bachmann’s commentary about anything.
We have a lot of politicians I don’t like lately.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:38 amBut maybe Nikki Haley and Jeff Flake see something I don’t. My guess is it’s colored green.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:39 amNow, if you’re gonna insult MY favorite politician, Mister Jeff Flake . . .
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:43 amI would think that Perry’s I’ll take my pension now, plus I’ll take some more along with my salary decision is not going to sit too well with Tea Party folks.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:45 amRomney is a smug, delusional, upper class twit. He is incapable of an honest moment or a genuinely conserative impulse. In the unlikely event that he wins the nomination, I will vote for Ron Paul or Ron Popeil or Ronald McDonald or any other human being other than Willard Romney. Every single movement conservative I know feels the same way.
Kevin Stafford (abdb87) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:49 amNo, I actually think a lot of him too. I don’t understand his choice, but I grant that was a great endorsement for Romney to get. It’s hard for me to understand why Flake would support the most ideological progressive candidate, who just happens to be the most connected.
My guess is it’s because Flake is a politician and knows how to play the game.
But to be honest, he’s a lot better than most other politicians. This is one very bad call on his part, in my opinion, that he needs to explain or I’ll support his primary challenger.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:50 amMr Stafford, Teh Won thanks you for your vote.
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:51 amWell… if the primary challenger is better, at least. He probably won’t be, but I think it’s time we started kicking this establishment to the curb, and Romney endorsements are one of the best ways to see where the disease has spread.
Either we fix the GOP or we don’t fix the entitlements.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:52 amMitt Romney is the Republican Clinton, or maybe the Republican Humphrey. A steady manager and predictable player, at a time when the country needs far more.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:52 amWe’ll cross that bridge if we get there.
It’s up to us to prevent this mistake.
Obama’s corruption is deep, and I fear how bad he will be if he has a second term. I do not expect Romney to be much better than Romney on policies, even foreign policy, or judicial nominations, which is how I usually explain my support for RINOs… but Romney will be far more ethical, and this is worth a vote against Obama.
I don’t think Romney would be even close to the worst president in recent memory, but he also would be so far insufficient on needed reforms that I just cannot accept it unless I have no alternative. In fact, I think Romney will govern like Nixon, helping cement in place liberalism because it’s just clever centrism.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:55 amLook, I jumped all over somebody’s case here (can’t remember who it was, offhand) for suggesting that the ONLY reason why Flake endorsed Romney is because they are both LDS. Now, I am not going to fake naïveté and claim that it wasn’t a factor at all, but I know Flake to be an honorable man; and Yes, I believe it is honorable to fully support the candidate you think has the best chance of beating the Duffer in Chief in 2012.
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:00 pmWe’ve seen all the candidates, and all are flawed. Romney, Gingrich, Perry and Bachmann seem to pass the laugh test as potential presidents, and Gingrich and Romney are clearly qualified for the job.
Question: Can any of these people unite the party? Economic conservatives, social conservatives, Tea Party small government conservatives, not to mention moderates and hawks? And appeal to independents? And then win against a weak, but well-funded, opponent?
I think Gingrich can, but not so sure about Romney. There rest are too narrow or have become so in their campaign.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:01 pmI think Perry is clearly qualified for one of the two jobs he’s running for… that is: running a large government and steering policy. Even Romney’s best endorsement, NRO, grants that Perry is an “exemplary” governor, and his state is vast with a complex government. It’s larger than most countries.
So Perry is qualified for that job.
The job he’s not really qualified for is being the prime time slick talk express politician that his two main rivals are. One of those rivals, Romney, is not qualified to be President for me, as I think some policy issues are that important. One of those rivals, Newt, is arguably qualified for the presidency, but also qualified for the slick talk stuff.
For me, I just plain reject the slick talk stuff. I think Perry can handle running on his record, against Obama, but I grant he’s not the politician the others are.
Maybe. I’ll be pretty happy if we nominate Newt. My Romney bashing my suggest I refuse to compromise, but it’s just that Romney is a progressive and I’m a conservative. I’m OK with some degree of compromise on policy, but I’ve got some standards (And I think to support Romney when they are alternatives basically amounts to having no conservative standards).
Can Perry unite the party? I don’t know. I’ve been constantly surprised by the venom folks direct at Perry, who then say they just care about electability. Would they support Perry over Obama? I think they would because they get mad when a conservative says they wouldn’t support Romney in the general. I think the liberal Republicans are the easiest to get on board, and they would support basically anything with an (R) on it (which against Obama is not as bad as it sounds).
Obama will unite the party for us unless the candidate we pick is too ideologically similar to Obama. That’s why I think we should pick a moderate conservative. Newt and Perry, in that order for this aspect. Perry and Newt, in that order, with a substantial gap, for how they would govern.
I am simply ignoring Santorum and Huntsman, which may be unfair but I’m doing it.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:11 pmKevin M, all of those divisions you list are part of the problem. Conservatives need to get over themselves when it comes to deciding what passes the smell test for them (“i will hold my nose and vote for him/her”) and look at the bigger picture:
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:15 pmFour more years of President On-The-Job-Toilet-Training is simply unacceptable — period.
As someone said elsewhere, Mitt is making a good case for what he supports, but there is a great question over what he is.
AD-RtR/OS! (75a477) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:16 pmEven if Newt and Mitt come down on the same side of an issue that is contra-conservative,
at least people have a feeling that, due to past macro-performance, Newt is a conservative.
That feeling does not transfer to Mitt.
The country needs more…
Will we get Chamberlain of 1938, or Churchill of 1940?
AD-RtR/OS! (75a477) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:19 pmYeah, I jumped on their case too.
I think Romney is the guy who need to be friends with to raise enough money to move up in the GOP. I think he is as electable as John Mccain was, and would have more trouble beating Obama than his polls suggest.
I also think beating Obama is not enough for this country. We need to reform entitlement spending and other spending, and we need to repeal Obamacare, and we need a president who tells us the truth about what he believes. Romney nearly provably lies about what he believes, simply based on what he needs to say, and to support him is something that makes no sense if you actually have something in mind you want to accomplish.
It’s very telling that Romney support always descends to that pathetic point of noting at least he’s better than Obama. Yeah, so is a bag of rocks. So is Christine O’Donnell. So is Hillary Clinton. I’m not even sure John Kerry is worse.
Romney’s display in the CNN debate and in a Fox News interview show just how weak he is when he’s faced with even short and predictable attacks. This guy is the wrong man to trust to be Palinized in 2012.
If you’re just concerned with electability, why not Newt? He’s got baggage, but he can take a little beating. Why not Perry? His argument for being President is so great that you can just ignore the personal crap entirely. The guy led a certain way, for a long time, and knows what he’s doing when it comes to job creation. So what if someone wants to call him a gay pervert crooked bastard with a racist rock in his yard?
The one thing that we know about 2012 is that it’s going to take thick skin. One of the few things we know about Romney is how he reacts when under pressure.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:20 pmLet’s not pretend Flake is a saint. He’s a good politician who supports a progressive for president. That’s the vision he has for our country, which is one I disagree with. I think he, like all politicians, knows that you need great connections to powerful fund raisers, and this is the kind of thing Romney’s billionaire supporters meant when they said they were going to put something together for Romney, many months ago.
Some endorsements are negotiated. That is a reality that is not some horrible slander to recognize.
Romney had most of the endorsements, particularly from congressmen, in 2008 as well, and he also raised the most money, but he was beatable by a pathetic candidate with no executive experience. This year, with class warfare and anti wall street and Tea Party fury at the individual mandate, Romney faces some serious problems before you even get into the flip flops (Which would define 2012 if he were the nominee).
But if Flake thinks he’s more electable, that’s fine. I can read a poll, so that is a useless and empty endorsement. I think ideological leaders who support candidates are conveying the notion they support that candidate ideologically, but maybe I’m expecting too much. I’m sure Flake knew he would take flack for his endorsement.
I mean, a progressive for president? That’s the wrong move in 2012.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:26 pm________________________________________________
I think Gingrich can, but not so sure about Romney.
Lots of ideological flaws and flubs in the two of them. Romney has a level of squish that makes me want to smack him in the face, while Gingrich has a crabby-uncle demeanor — along with a clouded personal history — that makes me want to smack him in the face too.
I wish Rick Perry had been quicker on his feet, and I regret that Herman Cain suffered from so much hubris that he couldn’t see the sand traps he had set for himself. I don’t even bother to mention Michelle Bachmann — vis a vie Hillary — because although she’s far more philosophically and ethically decent than Bill’s wife (ie, the former First Lady who dodged sniper fire on airport tarmacs), she apparently is too conservative for too many folks in this nation.
I just hope the US never catches — or hasn’t yet caught — the disease of Argentina, Mexico or the eternally leftist nations of Europe. That’s an illness where no matter how screwed up and corrupt a liberal politician is, he or she will naturally get greater deference from a larger share of the public even when facing a very skilled, good, impeccable politician of the right. But if America has gotten a serious dose of liberalism — meaning if it has been further dumbed down or desensitized by the symbolism of Obama in the White House — imagine what 2012 could be like since none of the current Republican candidates fall into the “impeccable” category.
Mark (411533) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:29 pmI agree completely, Mark.
I was let down by Perry’s performance in many of the debates, though I note he has gotten much better, rather steadily, with a few hiccups to punctuate. If he debates as he has in the last couple he’s actually solid. And that is a big if, and this is too serious an issue to rely on such ifs.
So I just don’t rely on it, and hope America has some good sense (as you are referencing with the ‘good dose’, which if they did we wouldn’t have Obama to worry about at all.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:34 pmAs Bill Bennett mentioned, one of the problems with Newt Gingrich is that it matters very, very, VERY much to him that he be thought the smartest man in any room he occupies.
Couple that with the plethora of half-baked ideas he espouses and it’s often off to the races with that mouth of his… oh, and he’s not brave like Ricky Perry.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:34 pmEvery single movement conservative I know feels the same way.
Take some Ex-Lax®… should cure what ails ya, Kev.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:37 pmToday’s GOP is OK with a $1 trillion budget?
We need to clean the GOP up a bit. The GOP is probably necessary to fix this country, so we need to stick to our guns in primaries and fix it.
You are so reliably personal against anyone who challenges Mitt Romney.
Newt probably IS the smartest man in any room he occupies. Much unlike Romney, who has to show he’s the smartest, but then turns out to not be able to handle a follow up question. Lazily changing positions every time the polls change is one way for everyone to say ‘he’s right!’, but it’s also not very intellectual.
Actually, the one thing I like about Newt is that he’s so civil and presidential. His tenor is easily the best of anyone running. Far better than Perry’s and makes Romney look like a garbage pail kid.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:39 pmEither we fix the GOP or we don’t fix the entitlements.
Yep… I say we kick Rick Perry’s double-dippin’ ass outta The Party.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:40 pmand as Romney picks up one endorsement after another, it’s amusing to watch as some folks question credentials and motivation.
Amusing and poignant, at the same time. The Purview of The Sad.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:44 pmYou know what passes the smell test for me?
Flowers and perfume.
😀
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:44 pmHow about we kick you in the ass Colonel.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:45 pmlight a match, biden.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:45 pmThis year Romney is against ObamaCares’s mandates but he wasn’t last year, at least not if the “incentive” he was talking about is the individual mandate. I think it is because the mandate is the only meaningful “incentive” in RomneyCare and ObamaCare that causes people to get health insurance.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:50 pm“What to do with me, a green young man
Who fails to consider the
Flim and flam of the world, since
Things have been easy for me”
– Barack Hussein Obama, poet
http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/prespoetry/bo.html
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:53 pmDoh, you are giving Colonel Haiku exactly what he wants.
They guy wants to reject anybody but Romney with some personal stuff.
So be it.
BTW, my video where Romney talks about what he likes in Obamacare is from 2010. That’s how fast the guy can flip flop.
If he is nominated, he might flip flop before he’s even done with his convention speech. The poli sci model is to raise money and then rush to the center, making personal attacks to change the subject from policy. Romney’s lucky that Obama really is the scumbag Romney would make him out to be.
But he’s not going to be nominated. We need to remember that Newt and Rick aren’t as horrible as some say. Are they perfect? Nope.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:53 pmDoin’ the Double-Dip.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:53 pmExplain that double-dippin’, Rick Perry, before the issue goes nuklar.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:56 pmBrave Sir Rick Perry.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:57 pmKevin M, all of those divisions you list are part of the problem.
They certainly are, but it is the CANDIDATE that has to meld them and get them to work for his or her election. The candidate has to unite the party behind him. Obviously Ron Paul cannot, and I think that Santorum limits himself to a faction or two (and Perry is going down that path). The rest? Not sure. I think that Gingrich comes up as second choice of many, Bachmann less so but some.
All will get the party’s votes (no one is going to vote for Obama), but some may have problems getting out the vote. Which will make us lose.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:58 pmConservatives need to get over themselves when it comes to deciding what passes the smell test for them
For too many elections, conservatives have had to hold their noses and simply vote for the lesser of two evils. This go-around, there are actually conservatives that one feels they can, with integrity, rally behind.
So while the smell test may be objectionable to some and even defeating, the fact is there has to be some standard to meet or exceed, or else we might as well be Democrats.
To me, I’m more concerned with electability at this point. Which candidate can take on the viciousness and and dishonesty of the Dem’s campaigning full throttle? Which candidate can handily beat Obama in debate as well as on their records? Etc.
Purity of party or electability? See: Christine O’Donnell.
Dana (4eca6e) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:59 pmThe voting public has more votes than endorsements by rinos.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:59 pm“BTW, my video where Romney talks about what he likes in Obamacare is from 2010. That’s how fast the guy can flip flop.”
Dustin – I don’t see any flip flops from that when you listen to the parts he does not like about ObamaCare. What are you talking about?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 12:59 pmhttp://www.dccomics.com/mad/on_the_stands/?i=20887
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:03 pm“Either we fix the GOP or we don’t fix the entitlements.”
Entitlement reform is for other people until Rick Perry gets his and he sees nothing wrong with that.
Winning!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:08 pmThe voting public has more votes than endorsements by rinos.
Perhaps, but our nominee will need all the RINOs voting for him instead of for Obama. He’s also do well to get the votes of the DINOs. And everyone in between. AND satisfy all OUR party’s “real” members..
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:08 pmWho knows? He doesn’t.
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:13 pmDustin – I don’t see any flip flops from that when you listen to the parts he does not like about ObamaCare. What are you talking about?
Don’t mess with the righteous anger, daley. Whether what he contends is actually there or not isn’t the point. First we were treated to the Ghost and now the Phantom appears.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:13 pmromney is not conservative, newt atleast pretends he could be.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:14 pmThe guy seems to really like Obamacare. He’ll tweak it and improve it.
He’s also reportedly said he wouldn’t repeal the mandate.
Now he says he would do away with the whole thing.
A blatant flip flop.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:15 pmBut I encourage everyone to watch the video of romney praising much of Obamacare and tell me if they think this who they support, let alone what Romney currently supports for the entire country (rather than, I guess, just MA).
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:16 pmOf course, if you parse words enough, nothing is a flip flop.
There are Romney fans who will play this sophist’s game, and I’d like them to actually outline specifically how that works, because it usually is not persuasive.
For example, I know a pal who says Romney never flip flopped on abortion. He always had some BS middle waffle POV where he’s sad when it happens, but it’s your right, and now he thinks something close to that so it’s just a minor change.
No, sorry.
If you actually watch the video, note how Romney praises Obamacare for using incentives to force people to buy health insurance. What is he talking about? Watching the video, it’s clear Romney is praising the individual mandate, over the entire country, as something he LIKES about Obamacare. What other incentive is he referring to?
I think Romney has also loudly denied he thinks this is a good idea for the whole country, and this is a blatant flip flop.
Now, months later, Romney claims he’ll repeal the whole thing, but not long ago he was on the opposite side.
But if you parse, I guess that’s not a flip flop. He didn’t say the exact some words with a yes once and a no the second time, after all.
Not to be rude, but this kind of thing makes me roll my eyes. I have not seen Romney talking like this in the debates.
Here’s the video again.
This is a link to a more competent summary than I am ever going to offer.
I hadn’t noticed that! But yes, fans of Obamacare seem to ignore that it’s redistributing wealth, and in MA’s case not even MA wealth, but federal dollars, so essentially more of the debt our kids will suffer with, to offer free health care for illegal immigrants, if you want to take the worst (but truthful) spin on it.
Now Romney says he would repeal Obamacare entirely, but last year he said he would repeal the worst of it and keep all the parts he likes, and he seems to like the individual mandate the most.
I think Romney’s record as a shameless flip flopper is a good reason to doubt his present ‘I’ll repeal it all’ claim. The guy played politics with human life with his abortion flip flop, and he’ll play politics with Obamacare, too. If you oppose Obamacare, you oppose Mitt Romney. He will tweak it, and keep it, perhaps claiming this is a compromise, but never actually having a full repeal on his wishlist.
The guy simply doesn’t accurately tell you what he thinks.
Watch the video.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:26 pmRepeal and Replace is a great slogan, but let’s not replace Obamacare with an individual mandate. That would not help enough.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:30 pmWell, Rick Perry lost this conservative’s vote with his commercial “Strong”. And I’m wondering whether Perry isn’t as horrible as they say.
When Perry implied that gays serving openly in the military was part of some war on religion in this country, he lost me. I don’t support same-sex marriage, but I fully support gays who wish to serve in the military doing so. And Perry’s attempt to equate that with children not celebrating Christmas at public schools, it was an insult to my intelligence (and the intelligence of a whole lot of independent voters).
I will never vote for Perry because of his stupidity in running that commercial.
Chuck Bartowski (69b74e) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:38 pmThat was such a stupid commercial, Chuck.
I think some have tried to parse that as not an attack on gays, but some kind of ‘if we’re willing to allow this in the same culture that doesn’t allow that?’
I don’t buy it. That was a terrible commercial.
If you only vote on social issues, and this is important to you, then I guess Perry isn’t your guy.
I disagree with Perry on that issue, but I support him on spending and entitlement reform, and prioritize the latter. I don’t think people should vote based on religion or gay rights, but rather on spending reform.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:41 pmComment by Colonel Haiku — 12/17/2011 @ 12:40 pm
Double dipping?
AD-RtR/OS! (75a477) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:41 pmIs that all?
For serious dipping you need to look at Dems, Alan Cranston comes to mind, who make quad and pentuple dipping seem casual labor.
Is Romney going to release his tax returns?
He never has, why is that?
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 12/17/2011 @ 1:49 pmHe’s also reportedly said he wouldn’t repeal the mandate.
— In the end there can be only one: Either prove it or retract it.
I encourage everyone to watch the video of romney praising much of Obamacare and tell me if they think this who they support
— Yeah, well he “praised” some of it; but, of course, no matter how many times he says “repeal comes first” . . .
note how Romney praises Obamacare for using incentives to force people to buy health insurance.
— I was not aware that incentives “force” anybody to do anything.
Now, months later, Romney claims he’ll repeal the whole thing, but not long ago he was on the opposite side.
— Really. Well, I’m sure that any minute now you will provide some proof that Romney opposed repealing ObamaCare . . .
Does anyone else hear crickets?
he seems to like the individual mandate the most.
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:23 pm— Back here in reality land it is the prime reason why he said he’s going to repeal it on Day 1.
But your version was close.
🙄 Bit daring aren’t we romneybot?
I was talking to you Icy.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:25 pmDustin has saddled that mule and is riding it off into FantasyLand.
Colonel Haiku (2add70) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:28 pmColonelHaiku you know saddling donkeys isn’t as bad as saddling Romney.
Nothing wrong with that but I’m just saying.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:39 pmYou can always give guidance to a mule by using a 2×4.
AD-RtR/OS! (75a477) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:43 pmYou can always give guidance to a romney supporter by flip-flopping your positions.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:51 pm“A blatant flip flop.”
Dustin – Why don’t you mention the parts of ObamaCare he doesn’t like in that clip? Strange omission on your part.
No flip flops in that clip, sorry.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:53 pm“Watching the video, it’s clear Romney is praising the individual mandate, over the entire country, as something he LIKES about Obamacare.”
Dustin – Except for the latter part of the video where Romney says he believes in federalism and does not think the federal government should get involved in state decision. Ignoring that, which shouldn’t be ignored, you might have a point.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 2:57 pmThey made a mission impossible 4?
Yeah it’s called the 2012 elections.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 3:15 pmFocus on the legislative branch, because then it really doesn’t matter what R is in the Oval.
BT (188e85) — 12/17/2011 @ 4:40 pm_________________________________________
When Perry implied that gays serving openly in the military was part of some war on religion in this country, he lost me. I don’t support same-sex marriage, but I fully support gays who wish to serve in the military doing so.
Your comment is a good illustration of why I believe there’s plenty of squish in larger percentages of people in modern society than ever before. Not too long ago — certainly before the age of Clinton, Monica and cigars — merely mentioning the subject of homosexuals in the military and their being openly (and nonchalantly) acknowledged as such would have made a larger cross section of the public uncomfortable and even queasy. But now with that topic no longer bothering a greater percentage of people, opinion polls indicate the idea of same-sex marriage also is being supported by an increasingly growing segment of the public.
Regrettably, there are pockets of liberal bias in lots of people who aren’t clearly of the left, which I always keep in mind when analyzing elections and politicians. IOW, I don’t like the left-leaning biases that I see in just about every Republican candidate today, but I realize that when I view that as a negative, other people will not.
BTW, what irritates me most about the “gays in military” controversy and the big embrace of the end of DADT is it feeds into the idiocy of political correctness run amok, best symbolized by Nidal Hasan and the Fort Hood massacre. PC lunacy is nurtured by decades of liberalism, including the newer notion of “it’s mean, hurtful and so racist, bigoted, Nazi-fied and klu-klux-klan-ized to be less than welcoming and loving towards GLBT people!”
Mark (411533) — 12/17/2011 @ 5:10 pmIt’s hard for me to understand why Flake would support the most ideological progressive candidate, who just happens to be the most connected.
Maybe it’s the fact Romney does much better in polls vs Obama than Gingrich. How is he the most connected? Or by most connected do you mean gets the most endorsements?
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 12/17/2011 @ 7:28 pmRaising taxes on the rich won’t solve the deficit.
Raising taxes on the rich won’t make the soroses of the world pay their fair share.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 7:35 pmNewt probably IS the smartest man in any room he occupies. Much unlike Romney, who has to show he’s the smartest, but then turns out to not be able to handle a follow up question. Lazily changing positions every time the polls change is one way for everyone to say ‘he’s right!’, but it’s also not very intellectual.
Of course Newt is the smartest man in the room. He had the brains to go to the same college as I did. (Not at the same time I did, but still…).
Alright, time to be serious.
From where I sit, Romney is more conservative than Newt. Newt has a tendency to think in terms of governmental solutions, or at least authoritarian/statist solutions; Romney is more content to pick solutions that others come up with–meaning, and I think is more amenable to pressure from conservatives than Newt–meaning, that pressured to adopt a small government position, he will, at least as long as the pressure is maintained. He’s squishy enough that he can be squished rightwards. Newt, not so much (unless maybe you could persuade him that it was his idea all along.)
But Newt isn’t the smartest man in the room a lot of the time–if he really were, he would know not to try appear to be the smartest man. That was one of Reagan’s talents–he could be smart but make it seem common sensical–make it seem like something anyone could have come up with, and not something only a very smart person could have thought of.
JBS (14ed7d) — 12/17/2011 @ 7:38 pmhttp://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/17/romney-on-obamacare-in-2010-lets-repeal-the-bad-and-keep-the-good/
Romney the democrat
EricPWJohnson (2925ff) — 12/17/2011 @ 7:49 pmRomneybots head explodes.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:12 pmIf Obama had a brain he wouldn’t call our navy corpsemen.
By the way America will be full of corpsemen if Obama gets his way.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:15 pmRomney the democrat
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 12/17/2011 @ 7:49 pm
— Thanks for catching up to the meme Dustin was spouting several hours earlier. Good man!
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:36 pmI can’t support Romney in any meaningful way because he disgusts me
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:40 pmSo, I guess it’s Huntsman, right pikachu, certainly not Santorum, too lifeydoodle, even though his election was the canary that indicated Hillary care was dead and buried.
narciso (87e966) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:45 pmConservatives don’t want Romney because they want a conservative transformational President, not an incremental one. The problem with that is threefold:
1) He (the REAL conservative) has to get elected first.
2) He has to actually really pursue transformational policies.
3) He has to get Congress to go along.
All three of the above are very iffy IMO in Newt’s case. No. 3 is HIGHLY unlikely even if the GOP captures the Senate. Entitlement reform for example would have to get by a Democrat fillibuster, which won’t happen. Further he would be unlikely to be able to make the Democrats pay a price for blocking it since he likely would not be a popular President. If he did manage to win it would be only because people were anxious to get rid of Obama, not because they love Newt. Even Reagan never managed to translate his personal popularity into Congressional gains.
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:45 pmno no no Mr. narciso I like Mr. Newt if I have to pick… he’s zany!
Santorum I liked but then I googled his name oh my god I almost threw up
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:49 pmBit daring aren’t we romneybot?
Frasier Crane: Hello in there, Cliff. Tell me, what color is the sky in your world?
Icy (a53963) — 12/17/2011 @ 8:53 pm– the rabid liberal Tina Korbe – Hotair
EricPWJohnson (2925ff) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:03 pmThat’s a known dirty trick (in more than one sense of the phrase) put in place by people who really are pushing a “gay agenda”, Mr. Feets. They want you to be disgusted by Santorum.
JBS (14ed7d) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:03 pmit’s a very effective little trick
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:06 pmThen again I recall, you didn’t oppose the truly vile agenda of Kevin Jenning, the Sandusky of educational policy
narciso (87e966) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:10 pmSantorum, I fauly more for this reaction, to Perry’s admittedly tone deaf remarks on QE 2
ANTORUM: Well his comments about Ben Bernanke, they were completely out of bounds. I don’t agree with Ben Bernanke’s policies… but to me the rhetoric that Rick Perry used was sort of the rhetoric I would expect from a John Conyers, talking about President Bush and saying he should be impeached. We don’t do that. We don’t impeach people, we don’t charge people with treason because we disagree with them on public policy. You might say that they’re wrong, you might say lots of things about how misguided they are, but you don’t up the ante to that type of rhetoric. It’s out of place, and hopefully Gov. Perry will step back and recognize that we’re not in Texas anymore.
narciso (87e966) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:12 pmAfter Obama causes the economy to collapse the left will vote Palin in 2016.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:25 pmyeah that’s what I’m thinking too
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/17/2011 @ 9:27 pmI’m a tea party supporter, a staunch conservative, and Romney lines up with my thinking on all the major issues. I’m not in the mood to select another career politician… like the Tea Party. I’m not in the mood to elect someone with no executive experience like Obama. Casting a vote is a lot different than governing. Romney supported most of the underdog Republican candidates against the Republican establishment’s wishes like O’Donnell, Brown, Haley and Rubio when they needed it most, not jumping on their bandwagons later. Sounds like a “Tea Party” thing to me. Some of the Tea Party’s favorite governors are throwing their support to Romney. Thune, Pawlenty, Christie, and now Haley. Jindal chose Perry, another governor and his neighbor but if Perry wasn’t in the race it wouldn’t surprise me if he backed Romney. It’s no wonder Christine O’Donnell felt almost compelled to come out and say the obvious and now Nikki Haley. There’s no “disease spreading” and the only sympton I see on the rise is the refusal to face the reality of the upcoming election and this dillusion that Romney will have more of a hard time beating Obama and ANY candidate except Ron Paul can beat Obama in the next election. Really?
Dave B (982f20) — 12/17/2011 @ 10:12 pmAnother stupid lie.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 10:13 pmYou know it’s funny about that, Romney did endorse her, I think after Palin did, yet she caught the flack, of course he was going to endorse Brown,
narciso (87e966) — 12/17/2011 @ 10:28 pmyet he really hasn’t learned the lesson of that campaign, although we did, don’t believe RINO’s,
I can read a poll, though. What’s the point of an endorsement if all it means is Flake is just endorsing whoever is doing the best in the polls? No… he’s suggesting Romney’s ideologically in like with Flake to great extent, if Flake will trust this guy with the most responsibility of any role I’m aware of.
And Romney is an admitted “progressive”. That’s his term, and he’s laid out how over many comments about his ever changing ideology… which is quite progressive.
So Flake wants a progressive to be President, and I disagree with him. Such is life.
By connected, Romney was born into a highly political family and nearly everyone in that family has run for high office. In particular, his liberal republican father was long time friends with the Bush family, due to their roles in the Nixon administration. Romney has always been excellent at raising funds with wealthy Rockefeller Republicans, too. He’s simply highly connected. And to be clear, there is nothing sinister about this. Connections are good.
But Romney is one of, if not the, best fundraiser in the GOP, and he has a stake in Clear Channel, and I think any politician would find this very well connected guy to be an excellent friend to have, if ever a politician thinks he might need a favor down the road.
I do think this is one reason Romney has attracted so many endorsements, both in 2008, where he lost despite having the most, and this year, where he’ll probably lose despite having the most.
As for those who are disputing my interpretation of Romney’s praise for Obamacare… I don’t understand that at all, and my interpretation seems to be the prevailing one.
I’m not sure what about Obamacare was meant to get everyone to get health insurance, if not the mandate (the fine). That’s the aspect Romney praised most.
For quite some time, Romney wanted to ‘fix’ Obamacare. He did not want to repeal it entirely, and his comments about Obamacare were always a little strange… often with Romney having to deny his comments to reporters (famously, last year, Romney told a reporter he would not repeal the mandate, and then denied that being what he said).
I think Romney’s plan is to reach a negotiated result where the democrats demand they keep the mandate that Romney wants kept. Regardless of what he really thinks, this speech compared with Romney’s current talk are an obvious and blatant flip flop. Romney wanted much of Obamacare to stay in place, and now he claims he’ll end it on day one.
First of all, Romney knows his promise is impossible to keep. Repealing Obamacare will be an enormous and ugly fight. Second, I just think the guy is very likely to flip flop back to something approaching his view in this video, which is far from the ‘repeal it all’ attitude we see now.
We’re talking about a technocrat who thinks the government should have control over this kind of choice, and praised such control over everyone in this country. That is simply a fact. He praised Obamacare for how it gets everyone in the country to do something. If you want to deny this is a flip flop, that’s your business… that’s almost worse. You think Romney is in favor of controlling the entire country’s health insurance choices? Isn’t that the heart and soul of what’s wrong with Obamacare?
This is not someone I’m willing to rely on. If it’s him vs Obama, then I don’t lose anything replacing the terrible Obama with a guy I merely can’t rely on.
Newt is a lot better, because Newt has successfully fought democrats and won. Romney has never managed. Newt is also more principled. He will waver from time to time, but basically his problem is that he doesn’t run his comments by the focus group, and while he’s not as reliable as I’d like, he has the potential to be a great president.
Perry, I find very reliable on the issues that matter the most. I agree that he has made mistakes, but generally these aren’t the issues I have as top priority. For social issues voters or I people who highly value rhetoric (which is important), I understand the hesitation or rejection.
For those who claim to be serious about getting spending under control, I think Perry makes the most sense. I also think he would beat Obama, but your guesses might differ from mine. Perry is the most successful leader running, with little non-policy baggage (which is not really baggage so much as disagreement).
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 10:32 pmYou were unaware that Obamacare forces people to buy health insurance? Seriously?
Did you watch the video? Romney is praising Obamacare, using a stupid slick talk express euphemism “incentive” to praise what Obamacare does to force people to buy health insurance.
And again, mine is a very comment interpretation.
BS. He only very late in the game claimed he would repeal Obamacare. It’s been like pulling teeth to get him to say that, and usually because he uses slick talk to suggest he intends to repeal it.
And if he’s going to repeal and replace with what he is talking about in this video, what’s the damn point? If Romney is in favor of the federal government requiring the entire country to get health insurance, that is not acceptable to me and a rather severe contradiction of his claims he didn’t see this approach as right for the entire country (Which I realize, Romney has been on both sides several times.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 10:36 pmJBS, unfortunately, that kind of gift isn’t good enough anymore. Even then, the seeds were planted. The guy was called stupid by plenty of folks, including a lot of Rockefeller Republicans.
Reagan was a much better communicator than Perry could ever dream of being, but the idea of relating values simply seems to have passed its era. Very unfortunate.
No, it’s not a strange omission. I linked the damn video and twice asked everyone to watch it. You say it’s strange that there’s something in there I didn’t describe? It is so typical for a Romney fan to suggest there is something wrong with not spinning something in a way that helps Romney out of a bind. Just recently you were upset I didn’t bash Perry in a comment where I wasn’t even talking about him at all… I was comparing Newt and Romney.
No, it’s not strange at all.
Romney described the parts of Obamacare he liked in that video. He talked about one of the aspects he has claimed to oppose, that is, Obamacare getting the entire country on health insurance via what Romney called “incentives” but can only mean the only way Obamacare does this, which is called “mandate” or “fine” by those who aren’t so slick. This is a blatant flip flop, because Romney has also claimed he does not think a health are reform should attempt, at a national level, to get everyone on insurance. He doesn’t think the mandate should be undertaken on a federal level, only there are indications he does think this and is trying to talk his way out of it. He also had that line he deleted from his book. Was that not a flip flop either? If you’re strict about it, no, but if you have common sense, it probably was a change of heart about what the line meant (that line meant Romney wanted the rest of the country modeled after Romneycare).
What’s strange is that you ask me to provide the pro-Romney spin. By all means, daleyrocks, you watch the video and describe the aspects of Obamacare that Romney criticizes. I thought they were relatively limited issues, actually. but I linked the video and want everyone to watch it, so it shouldn’t be that hard for you to find and review.
I think you are reliably biased in Romney’s favor and are a pretty reliable spinner of facts in his favor. Not that you’re doing this in bad faith, but for whatever reason, you just don’t see things the way they are.
So my argument has two components:
one, that by “incentive” Romney couldn’t have praised anything but Obamacare’s individual mandate, which was an idea drawn precisely from Romney’s main accomplishment in politics anyway. Thus, Romney supported that policy.
two, Romney now claims he doesn’t support such a mandate.
He also claims he opposes the entire bill, but apparently he used to support a lot of Obamacare. So there’s a more generalized flip flop that should be a little more difficult for Romney to slither out of. But I’m sure he’ll manage.
What’s funny is that Romney has flip flopped so often that he barely ever speaks straight anymore. In other words, he talks like he perceives a need to flip flop in the future, so he wants to make it a little tricky. Instead of naming specifics, he just uses a lot of slick talk.
Anyway, there is no ‘incentive’ to get health insurance in Obamacare but the individual mandate. If anyone is counting on Romney to repeal this aspect of Obamacare, they are misguided. Deeply.
They guy flip flopped on the most basic stuff, such as human life, so I do not see why this would surprise anyone. I was not even mildly surprised when I learned Romney was recently praising the worst part of the bill he claims he totally rejects today.
I usually have a good read on people, and I think Romney is a very professional politician who just wants to win office.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/17/2011 @ 10:53 pmRomney is a “RINO”? No he’s not. I live in the Commonwealth and he fought the forces of evil (liberal tax and spenders) every day, lowered taxes, balanced the budget, took our state out of the red and put us in the black, wore out his veto pen, and “Romneycare” was what we ended up with instead of “Kennedycare” or “Frankcare” in a liberal state that wanted it in the worst way. If he’s such a “RINO” why didn’t he just run as a Democrat in a state like Massachusetts? Why pretend you’re a Republican in Massachusetts? To say you’re a Republican is like saying you have leprosy while you apply for a teaching job.
Dave B (982f20) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:18 pm“I don’t understand that at all, and my interpretation seems to be the prevailing one.”
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:20 pmOh right, Jeff-I’ll-only-serve-three-terms-Flake, who narcissistically photographed himself on his deserted island gataway (with a tripod no less). Whose family is the largest employer of illegal aliens in the neighborhood.
Gazzer (05f379) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:24 pmJust like the rest. seduced by the money and power in DC.
“I don’t understand that at all, and my interpretation seems to be the prevailing one.”
Dustin – Actually your interpretation makes no sense at all even based on that 2010 clip. Romney says he likes the incentive which everyone has to become insured, presumably the mandate under ObamaCare and under Romneycare. He goes on to say he believes in federalism and thinks the federal government should stay out of health care. There is no way to do that without repealing ObamaCare, no matter which way you try to spin it, sorry. You can talk about book deletions until you are blue in the face, but his plain words contradict your interpretation.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2011 @ 11:24 pm– Thanks for catching up to the meme Dustin was spouting several hours earlier. Good man!
Comment by Icy — 12/17/2011 @ 8:36 pm
Another stupid lie.
Comment by Dustin — 12/17/2011 @ 10:13 pm
— Agreed. Eric WAS being less than truthful.
Icy (94b22d) — 12/18/2011 @ 1:20 am94. Why not run as a Democrat?
MA, like the nation, prefers divided government. Mitt was the fourth Republican governor running.
Re: polling we have now devolved to pea soup, possibly reflecting the voters’ disposition–we are flying blind for a time.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/18/2011 @ 2:19 amMitt: ‘[My] stance on issues lines up “pretty darn well” with the [TEA] movement.’
You lie!
Matt Welch: Why would Amerikkka, so thoroughly dissatisfied with the veracity-challenged Presentdent opt for High Princessness to replace him?
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/18/2011 @ 2:48 amYou were unaware that Obamacare forces people to buy health insurance? Seriously?
— Not too surprising that you lost track. Romneycare and “incentives”, remember?
Did you watch the video?
— Yes. Did you?
Romney is praising Obamacare
— Here in the no-spin zone we call it “comparing & contrasting”.
using a stupid slick talk express euphemism “incentive” to praise what Obamacare does to force people to buy health insurance.
— Hence, the meme: “incentive” is a euphemism for “individual mandate”. Well here’s something for you to mull over, Skeezix: Romney has NEVER ‘praised’ Obamacare’s individual mandate, period.
mine is a very comment interpretation.
— Very comment, indeed.
And if he’s going to repeal and replace with what he is talking about in this video, what’s the damn point?
— The “damn point” just might be the FACT that he didn’t say he was going to replace it with anything!
If Romney is in favor of the federal government requiring the entire country to get health insurance, that is not acceptable to me and a rather severe contradiction of his claims he didn’t see this approach as right for the entire country
Icy (94b22d) — 12/18/2011 @ 3:20 am— Since Romney is NOT (and has never been) in favor of such a thing your entire sentence is unnecessary, misleading, obscuring, deceptive, etc, etc . . .
As one commenter points out, this makes more sense than the original Perry ad.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/18/2011 @ 12:34 pmyour entire sentence is unnecessary, misleading, obscuring, deceptive, etc, etc . . .
Dustin is deceptive, misleading, obscuring, etc.? Perish the thought!
Colonel Haiku (caa4c2) — 12/18/2011 @ 7:30 pm