Patterico's Pontifications

4/5/2012

Mitt Romney’s marvelous speech

Filed under: 2012 Election — Karl @ 7:00 am

[Posted by Karl]

Having written about the subtext of Pres. Obama’s Tuesday speech to news editors, it is worth looking at the speech likely GOP nominee Mitt Romney gave in the same venue on Wednesday.  As reported at National Journal:

“Nancy Pelosi famous [sic] said that we would have to pass Obamacare to find out what was in it,” Romney said. “President Obama has turned that advice into a campaign strategy: He wants us to re-elect him to find out what he will actually do.

“With all the challenges the nation faces, this is not the time for President Obama’s hide-and-seek campaign,” he added.

Romney argued he presents a stark contrast, boldly laying out his own agenda to solve the country’s litany of problems. That was no more true than when he focused on entitlement spending, an issue Obama has attacked Romney on for adopting the budget proposal put forward by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc. The plan, the most prominent feature of which includes plans to convert Medicare into a premium-support model, polls poorly with the public, and is clearly an issue the president will highlight ad naseum through November.

But rather than distance himself from Ryan, he resolutely defended the House budget chairman, even praising him by name for having “the courage to offer serious solutions to the problems we face.” And he went on then offensive, accusing Obama of damaging Medicare first.  Romney adopted the Democrats’ own attack against Republicans, saying that the president “has taken a series of steps that end Medicare as we know it.”

From this speech, folks on the left see Romney taking Obama’s bait — and that is not an entirely unfair assessment, merely an incomplete one.  National Journal reports the Ryan plan polls badly based on its own poll, with an incomplete, misleading question.  Nevertheless, given Democrats’ past success with Mediscare campaigns, it is not surprising some are licking their chops today.

However, the left is also missing the subtext of Romney’s speech, which reflects hard-headed realism.  It reflects realism about our grave and growing debt problem (even if the Ryan plan is insufficient, it is necessary).  It also reflects realism about the general election campaign to come.  The Democrats intend to demagogue the Ryan plan and hang it around the neck of the GOP nominee, regardless of the identity of the nominee or his position on the Ryan plan. Romney knows this.

The establishment media, which has already allied itself with gross fiscal irresponsibility, will gleefully assist Team Obama in this campaign.  Indeed, Obama’s demagoguery got a standing ovation from a packed house of news editors, while a much smaller crowd of journos gave Mitt Romney the polite golf clap.  Romney knows this, too.

In 1996 (surely one of Obama’s models for a Democrat seeking reelection), GOP nominee Bob Dole ran away from the efforts of Newt Gingrich and the GOP Congress to bring the budget under control (even as Newt was driving Bill Clinton to sign welfare reform into law).  This year, things could be different.  Paul Ryan is probably a more stable ally now than Newt was then (or now).  Moreover, even Obama’s budget director has warned that our debt is “serious and ultimately unsustainable.”

On the other hand, it may be — especially if the economy were to perk up between now and November — that Democratic demagoguery on entitlements can succeed again.  But Romney’s speech suggests he recognizes he cannot afford to avoid the good fight, because Democrats and the media will surely fight the bad one.

–Karl

191 Comments

  1. Ding!

    Comment by Karl (6f7ecd) — 4/5/2012 @ 7:01 am

  2. Romney has no choice but to be a stand-up guy on this. If he is consistent and clear, which he has the discipline to be, and can paint Obama as having no plan other than wishing, this might work.

    Perhaps one might change the Obama poster to WISH from HOPE.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 7:26 am

  3. They undermine him, from the headline on, this is known as a ‘coletilla’

    Comment by narciso (f17312) — 4/5/2012 @ 7:52 am

  4. it makes you wonder if Romney is contemplating neutralizing Mr. Ryan by putting him on the ticket

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 7:53 am

  5. On the VP stakes, Ryan delivered WI, and Nikki gets out of the way:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/05/nikki-haley-echoes-sarah-palin-allen-west-would-be-a-good-vp-candidate/

    Then there’s Sununu “Pick someone boring”. What does one do when any pick at all incites ‘Buyers Remorse’?

    Comment by gary gulrud (5fe741) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:54 am

  6. happyfeet not very famous [sic] said that we would have to elect Mr. Romney to find out how he will govern

    he’s certainly piqued my curiosity

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:56 am

  7. Yeah like David Souter, that never goes wrong, why
    does one keep listening to Sununu,

    Comment by narciso (f17312) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:56 am

  8. ‘our debt is “serious and ultimately unsustainable.’

    With oodles of respect notwithstanding, Ryan’s plan, to cut $5 Trillion over 10 years is nothing more than a conversation starter. It is totally inadequate as an opening negotiating position which it will become at best case.

    Why? Because we are spending $400 Billion at ZIRP to finance $16 Trillion. Japan has been running a current account deficit for 6 months, which hasn’t occurred since 1980. UK’s total public and finacial debt is 1000% of GDP and their recessionary collapse is reaching terminal velocity.

    EU post LTRO II is re-entering liquidity lockup. Spain is in a death spiral owing $400 Billion is paying 5.5% on 1-year notes, Greece will default all over again in May.

    Ben isn’t just the sole purchaser of US debt, he’s buying EU debt and soon Japanese debt. Meanwhile the BRIC steadily moves to replace dollars as their means of exchange.

    IOW, the cost of servicing our debt will double and triple in the next 48 months.

    Comment by gary gulrud (5fe741) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:12 am

  9. You know it’s stupid to be this blatant;

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-sheffield/2012/04/03/ap-president-dean-singleton-slobbers-over-obama-gushing-speech

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:17 am

  10. 9. narciso ..and the beat goes on. Urkel was just in W.Va. with the prez of United Mine Workers, essentially putting nails in the coal coffin. Said UMW president complaining there are no current commercial ways to build new coal refineries ubder EPA regs. But at the end of the day, said official continues to desire to be an anal suppository for Obama. Of course O’s minions will insist that unemployment is just great and millions for each Green job produced is the way to go.

    Comment by Calypso Louis Farrakhan (d32e4c) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:42 am

  11. Too complicated for me, I’m no pundit.

    Comment by nk (52d02a) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:46 am

  12. This was one of his promises, Calypso, so ‘Mission accomplished;

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:51 am

  13. feets! (4)

    I dunno if Romney would put Ryan on the ticket. He’d clearly be the best guy to defend his plan. But Romney may have to choose someone who could help him win a state like FL, VA, NV…

    Comment by Karl (f07e38) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:24 am

  14. I very much hope Ryan stays where he is… he keeps people honest.

    I think Mr. Governor Romney needs Rubio not just for FL but also to help him walk back all that nasty immigration demagoguery he had no choice but to indulge in whilst Rick Perry was seemingly a threat.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:38 am

  15. Yeah happyfeet, no doubt Romney will walk back more than that. Shake that etch-a-sketch….

    Comment by foxbat (1f348d) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:43 am

  16. Interesting piece, Karl. Thank you.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:45 am

  17. Yes, Romney does (sometimes) give marvelous speeches. And people like Karl will swoon and vote for him. Ah, but if only Romney meant a word of it. If only he had even a single conservative bone in his body. If only he had even a solitary cause he would stick to steadfastly, save for his own ambition.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:28 am

  18. Kevin,

    I think Karl called Romney’s speech “marvelous” because his prior post had called Obama’s speech “marvelous” … and I suspect both descriptions were sarcastic.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:42 am

  19. Yep. Just exactly the same as BHO, right?

    I have held my nose in every election since I turned 18. The choice, as always, is between awful and not so good.

    Politicians are liars. But some of them can do far more damage than others.

    Your mileage may vary. But don’t whine if BHO gets Four Worse Years, okay?

    Comment by Simon Jester (41db3e) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:42 am

  20. That wasn’t for you DRJ.

    Comment by Simon Jester (41db3e) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:43 am

  21. Compare and contrast, with Santorum, there’s a man who’s flip flops we can trust. Why? Just because.

    Lifetime conservative rating below Lindsey Graham? Gives me a thrill up my leg.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:45 am

  22. FL, VA, NV…

    Comment by Karl — 4/5/2012 @ 10:24 am

    Ohio–Portman. Although I do love Sandoval’s resume.

    Comment by madawaskan (89a442) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:51 am

  23. Kevin Stafford,

    I appreciate where you’re coming from. Your criticisms are fair and good faith. You are not supporting Obama in any way to take your principles seriously.

    However, Obama really is sufficiently bad that we must support whoever the GOP nominates. I am not saying you won’t decide the same. I am simply saying that Obama has got to go.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:54 am

  24. And GOP unifier defense force: please keep in mind that it’s not persuasive to conservatives to ridicule them for having principles. The time for reform is now, and the need is urgent. The instinctive reaction to ridicule of such principles is that the GOP is not serious and never will be. In other words, such arguments tend to actually push people away from unity.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:56 am

  25. DRJ–
    Yeah, undoubtedly Karl’s headline was some labored attempt at drollery. But Karl was praising Romney’s speech–giving Romney credit for “hard-headed realism,” etc–so I stand by my comments. It just seems to me that the Willard In ’12 campaign is being greased not only by obscene amounts of cash, but also obscene amounts of gullability.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:56 am

  26. 19. “I have held my nose in every election since I turned 18.”

    Generosity bequeathing you an age of 42 or less.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:00 pm

  27. My thought on Romney at the moment: You have to inaugurate the man to see what’s in him.

    Sad, but true IMO.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (cd7afe) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:02 pm

  28. Like a box of chocolates;

    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/mitts-new-advisor-lobbied-natl-ind-mandate/466396

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:19 pm

  29. Opinion are like a**holes, everybody has them. Making claims that Romney doesn’t have a conservative bone in his body or will immediately back off campaign rhetoric is an opinion and people are entitled to express such opinions. Many people hold contrary opinions such as that Newt Gingrich is a legacy hungry, unelectable, mercurial candidate, which makes him a dangerous presence in the campaign. Rick Santorum has run a valiant bootstrap campaign, but he is a big government conservative at heart, pretending to be otherwise and a social issues nutcase which distracts from his other messages and makes him unelectable.

    If people have their facts wrong, correcting them is one thing. Opinions are not facts. I have no interest in people telling me my opinion is wrong. We’ve already had enough of that.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:19 pm

  30. The R’s could nominate a syphilitic camel and I would vote for it over BO. Is Romney my first choice, no. If Romney is the guy, he has my vote. I pray that we don’t have another four years of Obama. God help us if we do.

    Comment by Ipso Fatso (7434b9) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:19 pm

  31. My thought on Romney at the moment: You have to inaugurate the man to see what’s in him.

    Sad, but true IMO.

    Comment by Stashiu3

    He very well could be a great president. I would be shocked, but also delighted to say I was wrong.

    He could also be a rather average president. I think that’s probably the worst case scenario and thus a huge improvement.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:25 pm

  32. Let’s not pretend he is something he is not,

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:26 pm

  33. Comment by Dustin — 4/5/2012 @ 12:25 pm

    My thoughts exactly. I’m not a Romney fan, don’t like Gingrich for exactly the reasons daleyrocks described, and barely know Santorum but would lean towards him against Romney. You could also classify me as ABO at this point. I console myself with the thought that at least it’s not McCain.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (cd7afe) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:28 pm

  34. “In other words, such arguments tend to actually push people away from unity.”

    Dustin – Some people are usually with the outcome of a presidential primary process. But to characterize it as people of principle versus the establishment or purity versus RINO or any or such comparison is just a chicken and egg type question in my mind.

    Not pointing at you, but one candidate wins. The rules are the same for everybody. Deal with it. Stop whining and move on.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:28 pm

  35. usually unhappy

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:29 pm

  36. I console myself with the thought that at least it’s not McCain.

    Amen to that.

    And amen to ABO. This isn’t even a tough call.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:45 pm

  37. ON the topic of Obama getting help from the news editors he gave the speech to the other day,I think Rush Limbaugh observed that Obama was giving a speech to one of his Super PAC’s.

    Romney is going to get hammered harder than anyone before, as the media goes all in to save Obama.
    He can’t buy enough ads to counter a 24/7 pro Obama free news cycle.
    The networks and outlets won’t run some of his surrogates ads, denying to run them and will call out the ads as dishonest and misleading all the while running whatever Obama’s opposition research people can fabricate

    Comment by SteveG (e27d71) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:47 pm

  38. “Romney is going to get hammered harder than anyone before, as the media goes all in to save Obama.”

    I think the media gave Obama 10 points at least in 2008 by failing to vet him or follow up on stories and by its slobbering, fawning coverage.

    No reason to expect anything different this time.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:56 pm

  39. Compare and contrast, with Santorum, there’s a man who’s flip flops we can trust. Why? Just because.
    Lifetime conservative rating below Lindsey Graham? Gives me a thrill up my leg.
    Comment by daleyrocks — 4/5/2012 @ 11:45 am

    – IMHO, this one is a bit beneath you. There are many reasons why Santorum’s campaign is sputtering. “not a true conservative” or “not conservative enough” is NOT one of them.

    Comment by Icy (4e88b4) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:56 pm

  40. Picking up on SteveG’s theme above, is it any wonder that the story of the day is that Augusta doesn’t admit women and how the media can play that for all it’s worth trying to make old rich white men (i.e. Republicans) look bad? And consequently Obama (and D’s look good?) Funny how this wasn’t an issue last year—must be a presidential election year.

    Comment by Ipso Fatso (7434b9) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:57 pm

  41. The National Journal is hacktacular, from local gal
    Beth REinhart, to Rezai pen pal Hirsh,

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 12:58 pm

  42. And the fact that the American Conservative Union’s lifetime rating for Graham is higher than that of Santorum suggests two possibilities:
    1) perhaps Graham is more conservative than some people give him credit for being;
    2) perhaps the ACU scoring system is flawed.

    Comment by Icy (4e88b4) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:05 pm

  43. raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens

    bright shiny future with president mittens

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:06 pm

  44. My thought on Romney at the moment: You have to inaugurate the man to see what’s in him.

    *******

    Obama you know-

    -Romney cannot be worse.

    Comment by madawaskan (89a442) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:07 pm

  45. Romney: market-centered, federalist, competent, numerate, disciplined, experienced, rational

    Obama: state-centered, dictatorial, incompetent, innumerate, undisciplined, inexperience, irrational

    Hard choices.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:27 pm

  46. Romney: market-centered, federalist, competent, numerate, disciplined, experienced, rational

    FTFY.

    Still a good argument. But federalism got its ass kicked in this primary. The GOP is firmly in the position of paying it insincere lip service. This is not just Romney, but also Newt and Santorum. And mostly the voters.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:37 pm

  47. 2) perhaps the ACU scoring system is flawed.
    Comment by Icy — 4/5/2012 @ 1:05 pm

    Deeply flawed. Flawed enough to completely ignore because it has no credibility.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (cd7afe) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:56 pm

  48. Thank you, Stashiu3!

    Comment by Icy (4e88b4) — 4/5/2012 @ 1:59 pm

  49. I think the media will attack Romney and puff piece Obama in a fashion that will make 2008 seem fair and balanced

    Comment by SteveG (e27d71) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:16 pm

  50. It looks like Barack Obama is trying to turn Mitt Romney into Newt Gingrich circa 1995 (as portrayed by Democrats)

    This is all about how bad budget cuts are.

    His criticisms, while exaggerated, and he uses plays a few imnportant omissions – failing to put cuts into perspective – how much $1.000 less for student grants in the scheme of things – he wants to vuit Medicare too, but just in a different centralized way – and exaggerations, still rest on a true point – the budget cuts can’t be done withouyt results that people wouldn’t want.

    Not enough budget cuts to eliminate the deficit anyway.

    Obama adds his own lie, which is that tax increases on the highest brackets would amount to very much.

    Meanwhile Newt Gingrich has become – Ronald Reagan? Deficits don’t matter, growth does.

    This is the right approach. You can’t solve thgis either by budget cuts or tax increases iunless you make a lot of small changes, which can’t be done by a master plan.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:29 pm

  51. I think the media will attack Romney and puff piece Obama in a fashion that will make 2008 seem fair and balanced

    Comment by SteveG

    It’s going to be ugly.

    It has to be. For much the same reason the primary was ugly. to get us off the most important subjects.

    Obama has had years to show us what kind of leader he is. What we get is leadership on how stupid the Boston PD is, how Trayvon could be Obama’s son, how Augusta’s golf policies are no good. And Iran has nukes now, Afghanistan is a disaster, there is no budget passed in years, the deficit is as high as any number any of us will ever come across in non-astronomy settings.

    It’s a mess with a pattern, and that pattern is The Chewbacca Defense. Look over there. Don’t worry about this, but look over there.

    Romney can beat Obama if he calls him out.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:29 pm

  52. Romney, and/or his campaign people are very much afraid of him making a blunder (showing his ignorance)

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:30 pm

  53. You know, it wasn’t much fun taking up for Newt. I’ll vote for him, anyway, but it’s not like I feel good about it.

    Perry, however, I genuinely appreciate. Admire is the wrong word. Just appreciate. Idiot or genius matters very little to me. I’m sure Jimmy Carter is smarter than Rick Perry, actually.

    It’s very unfortunate that Perry was unable to make the case for his excellent policies. I kinda wish he hadn’t run, and I also kinda wish he had never dropped out.

    But what’s done is done. Romney has experience, he’s smart, and he is going to be the next President. I hope he proves to be very conservative, but I already know that replacing Obama with Romney is good news.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:34 pm

  54. Kevin, DRJ (17-18),

    Indeed, the “marvelous” is a goof on Obama’s goof on Romney.

    It’s entirely possible that Romney could nevertheless “pivot” at some point. However, it’s notable that the people expecting it most tend to be the losers who ran the McCain campaign. Having made the speech as the MSM basically declares the primary campaign over is at least a decent sign Romney gets it. And while the right correctly worries about what a Pres. Mitt might do, the main thing he will want to do is get reelected, which will require servicing the base, signing a GOP budget, etc.

    Comment by Karl (f07e38) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:36 pm

  55. “Obama you know-

    Romney cannot be worse.”

    - madawaskan

    That’s the great thing about American politics: no matter how bad it is, it can always be worse – and usually will be.

    Comment by Leviticus (870be5) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:45 pm

  56. “IMHO, this one is a bit beneath you. There are many reasons why Santorum’s campaign is sputtering. “not a true conservative” or “not conservative enough” is NOT one of them.”

    Icy – BS. I did not relate it to why Santorum’s campaign is sputtering. I do not consider him particularly conservative except on social matters. He’s a big government, Davis-Bacon supporting insider. If he wants to claim he is now something else, why should I believe him?

    I do not believe he is electable because his stridency on social issues scares too many people, in spite of his promises not to impose his views on the country.

    Plus his attacks on capitalism adding to the earlier ones of Gingrich did not win him any points in my book.

    His campaign started picking up steam as others lost steam or others dropped out, but I remain convinced he is unelectable. I want Obama out.

    Just my opinion.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:50 pm

  57. “1) perhaps Graham is more conservative than some people give him credit for being;
    2) perhaps the ACU scoring system is flawed.”

    or 3)Santorum is indeed less conservative than they believe him to be.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 2:56 pm

  58. Karl (54)–

    In the unlikely event Romney wins, he’ll move left to win re-election, not right. He’ll figure he can count on Republican base voters sticking with him, however much they might find it distasteful (and he’s not wrong–witness the festival of capitulation in the comments above), so the voters he’ll want are soccer moms, swing independents, etc. That is one reason (among so many) for true conservatives to play tough in ’12.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:00 pm

  59. @ Dustin,

    He could also be a rather average president. I think that’s probably the worst case scenario and thus a huge improvement.

    I would take average in a heartbeat. I don’t want a president who is so above average that the zombie masses seriously believe he can part the seas, walk on water, and on the side, turn loaves into fishes.

    I will be happy with Mitt as president if only to get us through the next four years and see one of the up-and-coming pols get in the mix (Ryan, Rubio, etc)or if they are his v.p. move into first position.

    I think average would be stupendous, and a great improvement. I don’t really see (nor believe) how Mitt could make it worse – even if he seems to be a bit of a squish, that’s still light years to the right of Obama.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:04 pm

  60. turn loaves fishes into fishes loaves.

    Oops.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:06 pm

  61. Well ‘Dr. Evil’ is expected. Dan Schnur, the wit
    behind Pete Wilson, and it’s Ben Smith, Journolister
    extraordinaire,

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:10 pm

  62. I will be happy with Mitt as president if only to get us through the next four years and see one of the up-and-coming pols get in the mix (Ryan, Rubio, etc)or if they are his v.p. move into first position.

    I don’t think you’re intending to say that Rubio or Ryan will attempt a primary challenge to Romney. So we’re really talking about 2020.

    That’s why Kevin is irritated. The soonest we can have a bona fide conservative in the white house is 2020, and I sincerely doubt that’s going to happen anyway. May Romney prove me wrong.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:11 pm

  63. 55. Word.

    EU equities are down 5% over last couple weeks, now liquidity is drying up. The Swiss, of all people, are defending their currency buying francs on the FX market.

    Draghi will print again presently.

    Japan has to follow suit competing with the German’s(say with an insidious Aryan Peter Lorre lilt).

    Ben will have no choice but to join in with QE3 seeing the dollar rise and kill exports dead(Operation Twist has already purchased all the 30 notes it can, 80%.

    Get ready for the most serious inflation since Carter’s last days.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:15 pm

  64. I don’t know whether those complaining about Romney are comparing him to an ideal candidate not in the race, which does not make any sense, or a candidate remaining or who exited who may or may not have a chance of winning the nomination.

    I see fantasy, mud covered glasses, but unfortunately as voters we have to deal with reality.

    Wrapping myself in a snuggly blanket of resentment and pity, even with a bottle of my favorite adult beverage, was never a big help for long, but the mileage of others may vary.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:15 pm

  65. @ Dustin,

    You’re right – 2020. It was wishful thinking on my part.

    daley,

    My complaint would be one of puzzlement: are these 4, I guess 3, the best the GOP has to give? If they could be morphed into one being, then I’d be a lot happier with the selection, but barring the Tea Party becoming a bigger influence in the old guard, this particular brand of GOP squish has become the standard.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:28 pm

  66. ‘Now who’s being naive’ the whole point of this exercise, has been to either crush or coopt the tea party. Schmidt and Schnur do inadvertently say the truth, that Mike Murphy won’t currently say.

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:38 pm

  67. DaleyR (64):

    Wonderfully florid bit of prose, but it’s not fantasy, mud, resentment, or pity that’s at play here. It’s the reality that the conservative movement has no chance if we keep nominating the likes of Bush ’41, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. These guys lose presidential elections, and along the way don’t even move the ball down the field for the future by making compelling arguments for conservative principles (see Romney, Willard M….support for indexing the minimum wage…etc. etc). When we as conservatives vote for these poseurs, the party will only send us more of them. If we withhold our votes, we’ll get fewer of them. (Constituences that let themselves get taken for granted will always and invariably see their influence diluted.) So as I say, not an ounce of pity or resentment involved….it’s just a matter of principles and tactics.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:44 pm

  68. FTFY.

    Dustin, Romney understands federalism and can distinguish between state and federal powers. In this day and age, that makes him a federalist. Particularly in juxtaposition to Obama.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 3:57 pm

  69. If we are fortunate enough to see Mitt Romney elected, I think he will surprise quite a few people. He’s a proven problem-solver and a leader. I expect good things from him and his administration. One thing is for certain: this country can ill afford another four years of this disastrous Obama administration.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (e91731) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:09 pm

  70. The soonest we can have a bona fide conservative in the white house is 2020…

    What, pray tell, is a bona fide conservative? What are the irreducible policy positions? The word “conservative” would mean “don’t change a thing” when I’m sure that’s not what is meant.

    But are we talking social conservatism, economic conservatism, law&order conservatism, all? If it’s all, there have been no conservatives in the race. Lots of one or the other, and there is some hope that Romney is economically conservative at least (which would be fine by me).

    People throw this word around, and is always turns out to mean “policies I like.”

    There’s a lot to be said for the Nolan chart

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:09 pm

  71. But are we talking social conservatism, economic conservatism, law&order conservatism, all?

    Any of the above.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:22 pm

  72. Gawd, how utterly tiresome it is to, once again, paint in insubstantial pastel water colors the ineffable nothingness that is Willard son of George.

    Today Egan Jones downgraded USofA, S&P will again do so ahead of the Fall’s Debt Ceiling fiasco.

    Even with the Executive and Legislative in GOP hands we are in for 4 or 5 years of Tribulation.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:26 pm

  73. Particularly in juxtaposition to Obama.

    Comment by Kevin M

    See, that’s how it’s always gotta be. Conservative, federalist, suitable… but just compared to Obama. And you’re right about that, at least.

    What, pray tell, is a bona fide conservative?

    It’s not constructive to criticize Romney anymore. But he did encourage Obama to support a federal ind mandate. He apparently thought it was constitutional. Then Obamacare became terribly unpopular, contradicting that column’s assertion the GOP could be led by Mccain et al to support it.

    He also proposed a ten percent increase in a single year to a state budget when he should have proposed a 66% decrease in my absolutely perfect opinion. I could go on and on. I don’t see the point, though. Romney’s the nominee and he’s better than Obama. I’ll fight when there’s a constructive goal, but I don’t see one right now.

    A bona fide conservative must actually believe… meaning not by virtue of political expediency, that budgets must be balanced, people cannot be forced to engage in economic activity, and gun ownership is a human right that should be exercised instead of ‘strongly controlled’.

    It is my opinion that none of the three remaining candidates is really up to snuff, despite my view that I’m not actually asking for a hell of a lot.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:29 pm

  74. When someone says “social security is a ponzi scheme” and notes how destructive the QE cycles have been, bona fide conservatives probably nod their heads.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:31 pm

  75. “Get ready for the most serious inflation since Carter’s last days.”

    Time to lock in near record low mortgage rates then.

    Comment by aggs (64270f) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:45 pm

  76. 75. True but we’re at 5.00%, so it would take 7 or so to pay off. By then much of America’s cities and states will have defaulted and interest rates might have seen 50% for a few.

    If one has real money, say $500K, buy an Irish hotel, a Scottish craft distillery, or an Aegean isle.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/5/2012 @ 4:58 pm

  77. Bankrate.com says 15 year rates are around 3.2 – 3.3 % or so. If you think you’re smarter than the mortgage market, and inflation is going to be over 3.25 the next 15 years, then sign up for some free money.

    Comment by aggs (64270f) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:06 pm

  78. A bona fide conservative must actually believe… meaning not by virtue of political expediency, that budgets must be balanced, people cannot be forced to engage in economic activity, and gun ownership is a human right that should be exercised instead of ‘strongly controlled’.

    I’d go along with that, but others would talk about abortion, gay marriage, the death penalty, a strong military, etc.

    The real point I was trying to make is that I never expect to see a Republican nominee that is everything I want, and people who are going to stay home until they do are staying home a lot or joining a third party.

    This is a center-right party, not a conservative one, and sometimes it is more center than right. Romney isn’t that bad. Nixon was to the left in many ways (e.g. wage and price controls). Ford had less “belief” than Romney. Romney is somewhere around where HW was. No Reagan, certainly, but who is?

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:26 pm

  79. Bankrate.com says 15 year rates are around 3.2 – 3.3 % or so. If you think you’re smarter than the mortgage market, and inflation is going to be over 3.25 the next 15 years, then sign up for some free money.

    Worked in the 70′s.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:32 pm

  80. The left throws up one crazy social issue, every decade from abortion in the 70s, to gay marriage in the 00s, polygamy or some equivalent next,

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:37 pm

  81. If we are fortunate enough to see Mitt Romney elected, I think he will surprise quite a few people.

    I suspect that, if Romney is elected and the Republicans control Congress (i.e. Romney is not force to compromise to get things passed), that he will be impressively conservative economically, at least. My main concern is that he’d be a tad too corporatist and disfavor Main Street, actually.

    I also suspect his Supreme Court choices would be Lochner-ish but a disappointment to social conservatives.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:41 pm

  82. Abortion and gay marriage don’t sound so crazy.

    Comment by aggs (64270f) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:43 pm

  83. “I suspect that, if Romney is elected and the Republicans control Congress (i.e. Romney is not force to compromise to get things passed), that he will be impressively conservative economically, at least.”

    Grover Norquist makes this point, that Romney will go along with a wingnut congress just like he went along with a liberal MA legislature. Precisely the reason to keep him out.

    Comment by aggs (64270f) — 4/5/2012 @ 5:45 pm

  84. The real point I was trying to make is that I never expect to see a Republican nominee that is everything I want,

    Me neither. And while this is a good point let’s not pretend those balking are really asking for purity or perfection or everything they want.

    and people who are going to stay home until they do are staying home a lot or joining a third party

    Such people are misguided and must be engaged in a constructive manner. I think the best way to do this is to explain to them how we can achieve reforms despite a less conservative president.

    if Romney is elected and the Republicans control Congress (i.e. Romney is not force to compromise to get things passed), that he will be impressively conservative economically,

    I agree and this is a great example of the constructive argument I was speaking of.

    Congress is where the reform is really at. Romney is unlikely to stand in the way if we keep pushing for a more conservative congress. He is rather likely to get on board, actually.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:02 pm

  85. Except Romney’s faction, has been the one that pushed more consistently against the conservative candidate, in primaries, last time, do we need to go back down every wrong call that Cornyn made.

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:10 pm

  86. Yes, Narciso. The ‘moderate’ faction fighting bitterly against conservatives in primaries is the root of the problem. Right there is where the real fight is. Getting the GOP conservative is the real threat to the beltway’s gravy train. The democrats know it, the Republicans know it, the press knows it, the activists in the GOP know it.

    Tea Partiers need to focus on fighting hard in primaries at all levels. For example, I encourage all Texas Republicans to donate to Ted Cruz for US Senate.

    However, once the primary is over, it’s time to pick the least bad option remaining.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:15 pm

  87. sometimes all you can do is trade out one depraved whore for a better-dressed one

    I’m in

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:19 pm

  88. “aggs” is just soooooooooooooooooo cute.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:20 pm

  89. he reminders me of Mr. alphie

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:29 pm

  90. Well last time we got McVain, as far as I’m concerned this isn’t a step, even a feint in the Right direction.

    If I can’t vote against the majors this time out I’ll never see a conservative elected again. At least I won’t be shooting my brother. Some of his crowd slipped away to Amish country ahead of Y2K.

    You youngsters are on your own.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:38 pm

  91. at least this time we’re nominating someone what actually wants to win

    baby steps

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:42 pm

  92. I was for Guiliani, and then for Fred, Huck played
    guard against any McCain challenger, this has been much like Susstein’s ‘nudge’ except with a sledgehammer.

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:47 pm

  93. iowahawkblog “BREAKING: salary squabble kills reported blockbuster Olbermann – ShamWow hosting deal”

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (e91731) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:53 pm

  94. at least this time we’re nominating someone what actually wants to win

    Indeed. Romney wants to win, and this is a very valuable trait considering how important it is he beats Obama. Mccain had many flaws, but the greatest was his failure to fight Obama like he needed to win.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 6:57 pm

  95. I think Obama should stick to Bracketology and creating fake republican wars on women old people young people all races and ethnicities not white and especially republicans that have the exact same views on same sex marriage as Boy Blunder

    Comment by JD (23d22f) — 4/5/2012 @ 7:35 pm

  96. I can only see neighbors from inside the house to the West. Gas is $3.90. The in-laws’ cabin on a 3000 acre lake is a half-hour away. We’ve got lettuce, beets, eggplant, peas, tomatos, sweet potatos, annuals and herbs under the light table. Have no more than 2 weeks of hot humid weather during the summer, no droughts, and tornados are rare.

    Why anyone would live with people is beyond me. Maybe Big Sur or Cape Cod I could understand but the rest of you are whacked.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/5/2012 @ 7:55 pm

  97. “aggs” is just soooooooooooooooooo cute.

    I’m reminded of the SNL “Landshark” skit, where you get a completely different name every time you ask who’s at the door.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:20 pm

  98. I think the best way to do this is to explain to them how we can achieve reforms despite a less conservative president.

    I should point out that I voted for Perot in ’92, out of disgust with the deficits, so I do know the temptation to bolt. In my defense, I’ll say that the 19% that Perot got led inexorably to the Contract with America and the balanced budgets later that decade — the message was sent and received. Such opportunities for effective dissent are rare though, and not always a good idea (Wallace in ’68 was a rear-guard action, and led to nothing good).

    But this time around, the Republicans seem to have heard the message and are talking about change — and the Democrats seem hell-bent on digging our grave deeper — so I don’t see any alternative to voting for “pretty good” over “effing terrible.”

    There is “a dime’s worth of difference,”

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:31 pm

  99. “It’s the reality that the conservative movement has no chance if we keep nominating the likes of Bush ’41, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.”

    Kevin – That’s one way of looking at it, but I look at it differently. I wanted a candidate with private sector experience who understands how government can impede growth of the country. For me that left Bachmann, Cain and Romney. Huntsman was not a Republican. Bachmann unfortunately flamed out. Cain was an inconsistent loose cannon.

    The propaganda about Romney’s record in Massachusetts is worse than his actual record and its disappointing to me to see folks on this site buying into it. He kept increases in government spending on his watch below that of inflation and population growth, the same record that Governor Perry’s supporters love to tout. He left Massachusetts with a surplus and in his final budget to ensure it stayed balanced, he used his emergency powers to cut $425 million of spending in his next to last month in office rather than use the state’s rainy day fund. Deval Patrick restored the funding cuts once he took office and the fiscal year ended with a $1.3 billion deficit. Unemployment rose during the first six months of Romney’s term as governor, as it did nationally, then declined back to where it was at the beginning of his term, again not much different from the national experience. With a stagnant labor force in the state, the result is an unimpressive number of new jobs. That’s the way the math works, but nobody wants to look at the math or the tech industry recession in Massachusetts during that time or financial services industry cuts.

    Implying people who support Romney are not part of the conservative movement or are part of the moderate branch of the Republican party is just a way of factionalizing people to your liking. I prefer to see it as not believing the other yahoos having a chance and not wasting my breath, but if one of them got the nomination, I would support them. I think that’s realism versus fantasy or wishful thinking.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:35 pm

  100. plus he found that poor drugged out little girl before she could o.d. or get turned into a sex slave like liam neeson’s daughter

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:46 pm

  101. I’ll say that the 19% that Perot got led inexorably to the Contract with America and the balanced budgets later that decade — the message was sent and received.

    I think that’s a fair summary.

    But there are a lot of differences in this situation. The one you named and of course: Obama just plain has got to go.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/5/2012 @ 8:53 pm

  102. Correct, Dustin. You only have effect in numbers, and you only get numbers in a third party effort when there’s a big issue the majors are ignoring.

    Today, the Republicans are not ignoring it. Romney may not be as willing to embrace radical change as, say, Newt or Ronpaul, but he does intend to make significant changes in the right direction. Now, there are other issues than economics that people may care about but if we don’t get the economy back to sanity there rest won’t matter.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:20 pm

  103. “I’ll say that the 19% that Perot got led inexorably to the Contract with America and the balanced budgets later that decade”

    I would argue that Perot led to Clinton and disgust with Clinton led to the Contract With America and a slight drop in the rate of growth in government spending, which coupled with revenue growth, led to balanced budgets.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:35 pm

  104. who am i why am i here

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:45 pm

  105. Well lets go back, Bush encouraged by Sununu and Darman, walked back the no new taxes pledge, which
    the Democrats relished with mustard, along with other subsequent moves, he lost much of his support,

    Comment by narciso (37c8bb) — 4/5/2012 @ 9:55 pm

  106. but mittens was govna of a blue state, so he could not be conservative. Just what we need in a leader, someone that will be led a round by a lib.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:27 pm

  107. we’ll just have to make do

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:42 pm

  108. DaleyR (99)–

    You miss my point. I don’t accues Romney suppoters of being closet moderates. Exactly the opposite: I credit their conservatism, which is why it’s so disturbing to see these voters being duped by a lying opportunist who claims to be a conservative but isn’t….no matter how taut an argument you make that he was a better governor than Deval Patrick.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/5/2012 @ 10:59 pm

  109. Comment by daleyrocks — 4/5/2012 @ 2:50 pm
    Icy – BS. I did not relate it to why Santorum’s campaign is sputtering
    – You related it to why you think it should be sputtering. Got it.

    I do not consider him particularly conservative except on social matters.
    – Meme-tastic! You don’t think that his fiscal and foreign policy positions are conservative? Really?

    He’s a big government, Davis-Bacon supporting insider.
    – He’s not perfect; but then, who (that’s running) is?

    If he wants to claim he is now something else, why should I believe him?
    – I wonder if we could ask that same question about any of the other candidates. Hmm . . .

    I do not believe he is electable because his stridency on social issues scares too many people, in spite of his promises not to impose his views on the country.
    – MSNBC’s fear-mongering HAS worked on too many people . . . perhaps one too many.

    Plus his attacks on capitalism adding to the earlier ones of Gingrich did not win him any points in my book.
    – He fell prey to the ‘attack your opponent in whatever way is effective’ mentality. It’s unfortunate. MORE unfortunate is that all of them do it to one degree or another.

    His campaign started picking up steam as others lost steam or others dropped out, but I remain convinced he is unelectable. I want Obama out.
    – Agreed. For myself, his positions are pretty solid, but his performance on the trail has come up wanting too many times.

    Comment by Icy (4e88b4) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:05 pm

  110. Perry/Palin 2012!

    Comment by redc1c4 (403dff) — 4/5/2012 @ 11:47 pm

  111. Silly.

    Comment by Icy (4e88b4) — 4/6/2012 @ 12:18 am

  112. how about “Palin/West 2012!”?

    Comment by redc1c4 (403dff) — 4/6/2012 @ 2:55 am

  113. I am checking the price on a 4 year stay in Manzanillo.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/6/2012 @ 3:21 am

  114. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/mitt_hits_bull_eye_A17FXfKFe9V5PQ7qf2YIcP

    Podhertz has a different take on the speech.

    Comment by vor2 (6c8528) — 4/6/2012 @ 4:59 am

  115. I’ll bet the CTO of Staples will be appointed WH Czar of Shiny Things and get to the bottom of this:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8876656/US-weapons-full-of-fake-Chinese-parts.html

    98. And I remember telling co-workers who pledged to vote Perot that it was a wasted vote.

    2016 we be doing that dance all.over.again with Gov. Cuomo.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:01 am

  116. how about “Palin/West 2012!”?
    Comment by redc1c4 — 4/6/2012 @ 2:55 am

    – I’d vote for ‘em

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:07 am

  117. I am checking the price on a 4 year stay in Manzanillo.
    Comment by sickofrinos — 4/6/2012 @ 3:21 am

    – Need any help packing?

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:12 am

  118. ==You miss my point. I don’t accues Romney suppoters of being closet moderates. Exactly the opposite: I credit their conservatism, which is why it’s so disturbing to see these voters being duped by a lying opportunist who claims to be a conservative but isn’t….==

    Kevin Stafford–your powers of persuasion are awesome! Positing that the only reason people (at this late point in the race) might support Romney is that they are being duped? Yeah, that’s the ticket.

    My thesaurus defines someone who is “being duped” as a person who is unaware, someone who is easily deceived. Other descriptors in the thesaurus are “chump” “fall guy” “patsy” “soft touch” “sucker” “fool” and “easy mark”.

    Interestingly, the insult word “duped” is much more frequently tossed around in the fever swamps of the lefty blogs than on threads where supposedly mindful and intelligent right-leaning folk are discussing politics. Just sayin’.

    Comment by elissa (a87a4d) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:51 am

  119. We’re talking about people, who believed Newt was for the Sandinistas, was a crook, instead of a victim of Alinsky and voted accordingly,

    Comment by narciso (2ee288) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:58 am

  120. 117- No need for your help, your party has done plenty. Would you be voting mittens, if he was running as a democrat?

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:41 am

  121. Recovery or Greater Depression:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/nfp-big-miss-120k-expectations-205k-unemployment-82

    Small business Joan of Arc Mitteh “I’ll get right on that. I’d lower corporate taxes to developed world’s average, and if a bipartisan effort of Congress passes a VAT to cover the revenue shortfall I’ll consider signing.”

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:35 am

  122. 118. “Positing that the only reason people .. might support Romney is that they are being duped?”

    Yeah, roughly analogous to positing the Jug-eared Dog is a nice man who loves his country but is simply out of his depth having no experience in the private sector.

    If it walks like a duck and quacks..prove it’s not a platypus wingnut.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:39 am

  123. Bah. What’s the point now. We’re stuck with him.

    Comment by SarahW (b0e533) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:40 am

  124. Perry/Palin 2012!

    Comment by redc1c4

    I wish, my friend.

    Would you be voting mittens, if he was running as a democrat?

    Comment by sickofrinos

    I think this is a good test.

    I would vote for Bill or Hillary over Obama. I think the question really amounts to: is Obama bad enough to justify yet another annoying and alarming compromise come general election day.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:48 am

  125. 124. Seminal reduction, may not agree with the conclusion but that is the choice before us.

    I distinctly remember voting for H.W. and believe I voted for Dole but I merely hated BJ.

    If Willard doesn’t choose Ryan he will lose and even if he does it will be close.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:00 am

  126. To borrow Glenn Reynolds line, I would vote for a syphilitic camel over Obama.

    Comment by Ryan (4536bb) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:09 am

  127. “Ryan”–

    Try not to be too disappointed if nobody clicks on your link.

    Comment by elissa (a87a4d) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:17 am

  128. _____________________________________________

    I would vote for Bill or Hillary over Obama.

    Talk about a desperate scenario. Calls to mind the saying of “meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” Although I guess Bill is a tiny bit less socially, economically leftwing than Barry is, but just a bit. As for integrity, Bill’s wife sometimes is so busy dodging sniper fire on airport tarmacs that it’s hard to know which end is up with her.

    In some Banana Republics or Third World nations, I imagine Bill and Hillary would be seen as the centrists or traditionalists, while Barack would be the progressive.

    Comment by Mark (31bbb6) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:23 am

  129. If Willard doesn’t choose Ryan he will lose and even if he does it will be close.

    Comment by gary gulrud

    I hope he does as you ask. And I’m not trying to criticize those who are still trying to accept that he’s the nominee. Trust me… I empathize totally. And I don’t see a way out of this problem until the voters are more informed.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:24 am

  130. If he wants to claim he is now something else, why should I believe him?
    – I wonder if we could ask that same question about any of the other candidates. Hmm . . . ”

    Icy – Seems like many people already have and have determined double standards are the order of the day.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:25 am

  131. 120. I believe Icy was correct in maintaining Nor Luap will not run third party. Looks more likely he’ll endorse the Libertarian and Constitutional parties, et al.(I forget the third), like last time.

    Well it will be worth losing his 6% to the GOP when they pick up the “just looking for a change” vote in NY, NJ and RI.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:26 am

  132. In some Banana Republics or Third World nations, I imagine Bill and Hillary would be seen as the centrists or traditionalists, while Barack would be the progressive.

    Comment by Mark

    Sir, I think we are almost there. That’s one of the biggest reasons Obama has got to go.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:26 am

  133. 129. “until the voters are more informed”

    And this world has passed away.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:31 am

  134. “You miss my point.”

    Kevin – I don’t believe I have, but it’s nice to see you add the charge of being dupes as well.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:33 am

  135. Managing the statist leviathan, only more efficiently is an inspiring platform going into November.

    Comment by JD (23d22f) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:55 am

  136. _____________________________________________

    Indeed, Obama’s demagoguery got a standing ovation from a packed house of news editors, while a much smaller crowd of journos gave Mitt Romney the polite golf clap

    There is lots of talk about how the media slants economic news depending on whether a Democrat or Republican is in the White House. That they’ll downplay negative news if it hurts a liberal, highlight negative news if it hurts a conservative. That if a Republican were in the White House right now, the MSM would be trumpeting the underwhelming job growth statistics that came out today.

    Some have claimed that both the media and a blatantly opportunistic president (ie Obama) will do even more manipulation and tinkering with reality than that. But when I see unemployment figures for a country like Mexico that are supposedly vetted by our own CIA, I can’t help but wonder where — regardless of the politics in the US — the truth ends and the lies (or peculiar distortions) begin.

    Mexico Unemployment Rate

    2000: 2.5
    2004: 3.3
    2005: 3.2
    2006: 3.6
    2007: 3.2
    2008: 4.0
    2009: 5.5
    2010: 5.6

    Source: CIA World Factbook

    cnbc.com: U.S. payrolls rose far less than expected in March, keeping the door open for further monetary policy support from the Federal Reserve, even as the unemployment rate fell to a three-year low of 8.2 percent.

    Employers added 120,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department said on Friday, the smallest increase since October.

    Comment by Mark (31bbb6) — 4/6/2012 @ 8:56 am

  137. The issue ABOers will not address as they’ve ambushed every DC outsider while maintaining their devotion to their overriding concern is that of government reform.

    “This is an emergency, this is serious, reform can wait until we have control and have time to sway the nation with our consumate utilitarian proficiency.”

    Reformers are left to wait for their day, electing local chairs and hope that the frogs jump the pot before they boil while the insiders die of gout and dissipation.

    Not entirely accurate. Seeing that the insiders lose and bereft of employment and influence is an essential tool.

    We do not have your back.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:09 am

  138. That’s quite an eye opener, Mark.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:09 am

  139. *are left* bereft of

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:10 am

  140. The reason I’m supporting Romney is that I cannot abide Santorum, who is a union man and a prude, and a social warrior at a time when that is at best a distraction. I don’t believe I’m duped on that.

    I would prefer another candidate but they are either not running or not running well enough to matter. Given Romney or Santorum, it’s not even a close call.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:29 am

  141. Lot’s of media people have been saying the economy’s no longer an issue for Republicans.

    Jobs Report: The Beginning of a Disappointing Trend?

    BTW, the writer Daniel Gross is generally a dyed in the wool Democrat propagandist.

    On another topic, a Navy jet has crashed in Virginia Beach and there’s reports it hit an apartment complex.

    Comment by Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:44 am

  142. Gerald – when they start reporting the decrease in the labor pool used to deflate the unemployment numbers … Never mind.

    Comment by JD (23d22f) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:49 am

  143. “Managing the statist leviathan, only more efficiently is an inspiring platform going into November.”

    JD – You mean like the “Contract With America?”

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 9:56 am

  144. “Not entirely accurate. Seeing that the insiders lose and bereft of employment and influence is an essential tool.

    We do not have your back.”

    gary – I would not label Bush I or Bush II raging right wing small government conservatives, yet somehow they are omitted from discussions of Republicans winning elections whereas Dole and McCain are highlighted.

    As Kevin S. claims there is no legitimate reason to support Romney if you are a conservative, because it must mean you are not a conservative or stupid enough to be a dupe, it is pretty easy to see where a lot of the polarization is coming from.

    Me, I’d rather just focus on my own opinions and motivations and not try to be a mind reader.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 10:04 am

  145. It is 1994?

    Comment by JD (23d22f) — 4/6/2012 @ 10:13 am

  146. The issue ABOers will not address as they’ve ambushed every DC outsider while maintaining their devotion to their overriding concern is that of government reform.

    What does that mean?

    Comment by Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 4/6/2012 @ 10:27 am

  147. “It is 1994?”

    JD – I’m addressing those reliving the glory days of the “Contract With America,” which, as you suggested, “Managing the statist leviathan, only more efficiently” by reducing the rate of growth in spending by 1% was a triumph beyond all measure. Seems like we need some actual cuts this time.

    Comment by President False Choices (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 10:38 am

  148. 144. Post 9/11 even a reactionary like myself must admit the world has changed radically. I missed Shrub’s first contest working past poll close-45 minutes distant-on a major software release and got married a couple weeks later.

    It just wasn’t all that important.

    We now know it was and I was wrong. The Donks manufactured 4500 votes in WI, Bush II was a far better POTUS than his far ‘better’ qualified daddy and Gore, well, nuff said.

    Would the nation be better off had H.W. won and 9/11 had happened on B.J.’s watch? Bet not.

    Ideology is a red herring, a false dilemma. Willard is not and will not be a better man than H.W. If he does win the GOP turn will be history 2016. Why am I wrong?

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 10:41 am

  149. Lot’s of media people have been saying the economy’s no longer an issue for Republicans.

    It isn’t to one Republican candidate, at least.

    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/6/2012 @ 11:04 am

  150. Only the stupid, which do make up a plurality,

    http://www.homernews.com/stories/040412/news_murk.shtml#.T38wptl-jct

    Comment by narciso (2ee288) — 4/6/2012 @ 11:11 am

  151. 146. Per usual hyperbole, but on review syntactically correct English.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 11:40 am

  152. 150. I think the appropriate response from Lisa’s formative years would be:

    ‘Gag me with a spoon’.

    AK Republican’s mascot, Moosetick.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 11:46 am

  153. 117- No need for your help, your party has done plenty. Would you be voting mittens, if he was running as a democrat?
    Comment by sickofrinos — 4/6/2012 @ 6:41 am

    – What party do you think I belong to? Did you not read my discussion with daleyrocks above ^^^ in which I expressed my preference for the more conservative Santorum over Romney?

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 12:36 pm

  154. 120. I believe Icy was correct in maintaining Nor Luap will not run third party. Looks more likely he’ll endorse the Libertarian and Constitutional parties, et al.(I forget the third), like last time.

    – Nor Luap will not, will not, will not take any action that would have the guaranteed side effect of ruining his son’s political career. He will push for a prime speaking gig at the convention, and then he will shuffle off and endorse whomever he feels is closest to his views.

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 12:51 pm

  155. 153- Santorum is no fiscal conservative. 51 bills to increase spending, zero to cut. Yes, your party.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:02 pm

  156. Icy – Seems like many people already have and have determined double standards are the order of the day.
    Comment by daleyrocks — 4/6/2012 @ 8:25 am

    – Santorum suffers from criticism of positons that he has always held. Romney suffers from criticism for fundamentally changing positions that he held either recently or for a long period of time. Now, I am the one that said it’s important that the views he holds now are the correct ones, but that doesn’t mean we can overlook the ‘adjustments’ he’s made. Conservative voters need a measure of confidence that once in office Mitt will not be shifting with the political winds.

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:05 pm

  157. 153- Santorum is no fiscal conservative. 51 bills to increase spending, zero to cut. Yes, your party.
    Comment by sickofrinos — 4/6/2012 @ 1:02 pm

    – Never claimed that he was perfect. Ascribing perfection to a politician is a liberal failing. Just saying that IMHO his conservative bonifides are the best of the bunch that’s running. YMMV; but then, your mileage stretches over “candidates” that did not choose to run, so . . .

    BTW, while you may think that my views put me in the GOP, there is a reason why I expressly refuse to register as a Republican or join the party.

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:16 pm

  158. DaleyR + Elissa–

    If you think Mitt Romney is a conservative, I think you are being duped. Sorry.

    If the word “duped” is offensive to you, my apologies–I’m intending to direct my fire here at Romney, not at you. Feel free to substitute any of the following words: fooled, misled, deceived, bamboozled, punk’d.

    Mitt Romney is not a conservative. He merely plays one on TV.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:27 pm

  159. 157- I am sorry for accusing you of being a gop rump swab. I am stuck with mittens, as is the rest of the sane world.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:36 pm

  160. That’s right, WE are “stuck” with Mittens.

    And that is STILL a big step in the right direction.

    Comment by Icy (91e0b5) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:44 pm

  161. I have did grunt work for the romneyquins in the past. There is a good chance they will screw us in the end. But what the hell, when Rome is burning, grasping at the only alternative, is, after all what the gopeons had concocted.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/6/2012 @ 1:55 pm

  162. Will’s advice for Willard:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/romney-needs-a-heavy-hitter-as-his-vice-president/2012/04/06/gIQAB0sVzS_story.html

    I don’t think a play for Hispanics, Blacks, Women, Fiscal Conservatives, TEAs, all those groups he’s incapable of convincing by dint of his inauthenticity, can be made in a stroke.

    May as well gain the confidence of the party.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 2:24 pm

  163. Mr Stafford @ 1:27pm–

    I’m quite certain that Mr. daleyrocks can and will speak for himself. As for me, I am quite sure that if you were to do a thorough search of this site you would discover that I’ve repeatedly said the candidate that I preferred chose not to run. A thorough search would also turn up no occasion upon which I publicly orgasmed to Mitt Romney’s conservative credentials. In fact, that was not even remotely what my comment up above @ 5:51am (which you apparently think you are so cleverly mocking) was about, now was it?

    Sorry, Kevin, but your dupey the straw man just blew over and scattered to the wind. And since you’re all about casting aspersions, here’s one back at you: I’m now even less convinced that you’re not a concern troll.

    Comment by elissa (cedaef) — 4/6/2012 @ 2:28 pm

  164. Elissa–

    Your abusive tone is unfortunate, except for the look it offers at your state of mind and state of grace.

    Comment by Kevin Stafford (1d1b9e) — 4/6/2012 @ 2:34 pm

  165. “A thorough search would also turn up no occasion upon which I publicly orgasmed to Mitt Romney’s conservative credentials.”

    Comment by elissa

    oh… oh… OH! it’s magic… you know… never believe it’s not so.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0a9a62) — 4/6/2012 @ 2:38 pm

  166. #162… Gary…

    “So, the big question: did Romney develop any signs of momentum last night (4/3)? In other words, was there any evidence that the signs of his “inevitability” shift some would-be voters his way?

    The answer is, yes. We saw Romney make some strides among Santorum’s key groups – the rural vote, the socioeconomically downscale vote, and the very conservative. Let’s take each in turn…”

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-wisconsin-romney-develops-momentum_635374.html

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0a9a62) — 4/6/2012 @ 2:43 pm

  167. 166. I’m afraid any real insight from me awaits my pilgrimage home for the youngest sibling’s 50th in May.

    My sense tho, looking at the map of returns, like the 60%:30% return of my home county, Waukesha, the most reliably Republican electorate, is that the GOP brought the victory home and is not really a major coup for the anointed.

    Yes, it was a solid performance but WI was one of the birthplaces(Ripon, WI) of the party and the only grassroots sign of life, perhaps rebirth.

    The battle for Walker’s retention, currently polling about even or a little behind, has the party very motivated. Ryan and Ron Johnson went all in. Romany benefited.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 3:09 pm

  168. The battle for Walker’s retention, currently polling about even or a little behind, has the party very motivated. Ryan and Ron Johnson went all in. Romany benefited.

    So… the “he won but didn’t win by enough” meme continueszzz and is augmented by the coattails gin-up.

    Suhweeeet!

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0a9a62) — 4/6/2012 @ 3:59 pm

  169. That Lisa Murkowski sits in that chair, because of the affirmative efforts of Cornyn, makes a joke of everything the party believes, a Russian appeasing,
    amnesty flacking, mark for Planned Parenthood who
    blythly denies the death panels, and isn’t even
    a dependable vote on ANWR.

    Comment by narciso (a66fe7) — 4/6/2012 @ 4:07 pm

  170. plus she looks like Willem Dafoe with a hangover.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0a9a62) — 4/6/2012 @ 4:10 pm

  171. now it can be told
    obama’s first term one big
    shovel-ready job

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0a9a62) — 4/6/2012 @ 4:28 pm

  172. 160, 161. Re: Independents. The in-laws have sometimes derided my protestations of independence, when after all “You always vote Republican”.

    Naturally one is less disposed to ‘discuss’ politics with the sort who view Republicans as lower life forms when, in fact, one is decidedly more conservative still.

    Perhaps evading further scrutiny by mouthing honestly held criticisms and no more makes one unduly critical in general towards the species out of a routine of cowardice?

    Nah, this feeling will pass.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 4:38 pm

  173. 168. My suspicion is Republicans turned out very well with independents uninspired. But as I said, just a subjective impression.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 4:41 pm

  174. 168. Cont. The polls, the electoral college arithmeticians(like CAC at Ace’s) all have WI Blue for POTUS.

    We didn’t see anything in the primary to change that calculation. June 5 recall election will tell us something more, but again Walker is one hot potato, Rummy quite the opposite.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:12 pm

  175. 164. Don’t be too hard on them. They take their licks without landing blows in return. Smiling while sporting missing teeth is understandably eschewed.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:33 pm

  176. Well the Jack Ryan experience, which did illustrate his stupidity and the very presence of Dick ‘Dhimmi’Durbin, in the Senate can make one cynical,

    Comment by narciso (a66fe7) — 4/6/2012 @ 5:39 pm

  177. Alaska has never once in history sent anything but corrupt and McCain-like whores to Congress

    it’s a thing

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:08 pm

  178. jug-eared narcissist
    he stumble down Lake Shore Drive
    he got no shadow

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (322895) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:10 pm

  179. You live in California, pikachu the best was Pete Wilson, and it’s been ‘turtles all the way down’
    on the positive side, Murkowski did replace that space cadet, Gravel.

    Comment by narciso (a66fe7) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:14 pm

  180. that’s not really a very safe place to stumble about

    let’s be careful out there

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:14 pm

  181. lies without a care
    no one to call him on them
    ‘cept his enemies

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (322895) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:14 pm

  182. I only live in California because I have a limited skill set

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:14 pm

  183. “my administration has…” “like I’ve always said…” “let me be clear…” “unprecedented…”

    biggest bum ever elected! fool the people who voted for him and the shame is on him… fool them into voting for him again and the wheels are off the effin’ wagon.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (322895) — 4/6/2012 @ 6:19 pm

  184. “Feel free to substitute any of the following words: fooled, misled, deceived, bamboozled, punk’d.”

    Kevin Stafford – Very big of you Kevin.

    More looking for excuses in all the wrong places.

    How does blaming the candidates who are running for the actions of the candidates who chose not to run or garnered not enough support to continue campaigning work logically? Seems like a whole lot of fever swamp lefty pretzel logic to me.

    Comment by President False Choices (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:45 pm

  185. damn sock

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:47 pm

  186. we had just nothing but crappy choices this year it was like being a guy and trying to shop at Forever 21

    I mean… really? They can’t be serious. What I think is that I do not think anyone was thinking of the customer it was all an exercise in self-indulgent establishmentarianism commingled with garish santorumian accessories.

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/6/2012 @ 7:54 pm

  187. wow. That is some gay 21 style. But would look good in a space craft built for two.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 4/6/2012 @ 10:24 pm

  188. Poor starcrossed Mr. Stafford is the crazy one:

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/04/massachusetts-health-care-system-model.html

    You know if you reward incompetence often enough you’re sure to hit it big.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:05 am

  189. Here’s a more concrete insight into the Greek ‘bailout’ that actually gave Greece just 7.5 billion euros in March, 1st quarterly handout, and mainly bailed continental banks excluding Greece:

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/04/crunch-time-for-greece-case-for-bank.html

    Meanwhile EU’s 7th largest economy will be in Greece’s shoes by November.

    Yeah, having robber baron in WH will be better than having a Marxist.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:43 am

  190. Jeff Snider via zerohedge:

    “Throughout this entire experimentation period of monetarism (essentially the past forty years, but really since 1989) the nature of business itself has changed in response to these intentional monetary expeditions into financial risk. We have seen the rise of the age of unrelenting stock repurchases, where companies buy back shares, using scarce cash resources, to further engineer asset inflation. Building upon the base of the central bank’s efforts to create a wealth effect, these companies respond to these central incentives and invest their funds first in financial projects (including M&A) rather than real economy capital expenditures. It started out at the margins, especially in the 1980’s during the junk bond bubble, but since 2003 it has become an all-consuming focus. Businesses, regardless of their internal situations, will divert resources to stock repurchases, even resorting to borrowing money to fund them. Stock price over productive value is the name of 21st century business, and the real economy suffers for it.”

    Sorry kittehs, Republican boilerplate while walking into the chipper, will be a shock and awe, the bad kind. S&P will downgrade the US again by September’s opening debt ceiling volley.

    A rise in the prime to 5% will mean a yearly charge of $800 Billion just to finance the debt. That’s like a third of revenues!

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/7/2012 @ 10:48 pm

  191. Comment by gary gulrud — 4/7/2012 @ 10:48 pm

    A rise in the prime to 5% will mean a yearly charge of $800 Billion just to finance the debt. That’s like a third of revenues!

    The Wall Street Journal, in its editorial of March 12, 2012 Uncle Sam’s Teaser Rate said $535 billion this year if the debt was financed at 5% and $642 billion if it was running at 6%. It currently averages 2.24% and costs $225 billion.

    One of the problems with Obama’s management is that he’s not refinancing the debt even if it raises this year’s deficit more. Slightly more than 50% of the debt is due in 3 years or less.

    Maybe Obama figures he still has time, but what if he’s not re-elected? Does Romney understand the problem? Bear in mind the debt has already been run up. It doesn’t matter if it shouldn’t have happened.

    There are some obvious questions and answers

    Q. Who is most for keeping interest rates down?

    A. Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.

    Q. Who wants to not renominate Ben Bernanke?

    A. Mitt Romney

    Q. Who would he pick instead?

    A. Unknown.

    Q. Does Romney understand the effect of higher interest rates on the deficit? Does he have a plan?

    Q. Is the policy of low interest rates sustainable in any case?

    Q. If not, will the debt be refinanced in time?

    Q. If not, can a $2 or $3 trillion balance transfer be arranged?

    Q. Are bigger deficits caused by high interest rates on the federal debt maybe not a problem?

    But if it [The Federal Reserve Board] raises rates, interest payments on the debt will soar, the deficit may not fall from its Obama trillion-dollar levels, and pressure could build for a tax increase.

    President Obama may not mind this outcome but Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum should, which is why they need to talk about this fiscal nitroglycerin that Mr. Obama and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have created. The two Republicans might also take a moment to wonder how much they really want this job. The next Presidential term may be spent trying to defuse the Obama debt bomb.

    - Wall Street Journal editorial, Monday, March 12, 2012.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (033fec) — 4/10/2012 @ 2:21 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4589 secs.