From The Boston Globe.
Mitt Romney has landed another prominent perch from which to stay in the political conversation — and enhance his political prospects.
The former Massachusetts governor will be among those writing a new column in the Washington Times, well read by the party’s mover’s and shakers.
Editor & Publisher reports that the newspaper says that the “Reinventing Conservatism” columns will “showcase a revolving series of essays by some of today’s biggest thinkers in the conservative movement.”
The first column, published today, is from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
Romney ran for the Republican presidential nomination last year and subsequently created a political action committee to support GOP candidates. He is a frequent talking head on the cable TV news shows, most recently critiquing President Obama’s economic stimulus plan. And he is in the early scuttlebutt about the 2012 presidential race.
Governor Romney appeared on The O’Reilly factor last night, disecting on the Obama stimulus plan. He was very effective in his opposition. Watch the video and/or read the transcript here.
Is Governor Romney looking to ’kill time’, or is this an opportunity to keep his name in the headlines, especially in Republican circles…? Your thoughts?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Romney writing about things with guys like Newt Gingrich isn’t going to hurt him any, that’s for sure.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Um, yeah. Don’t think so, Lorelli. As much as I’d love to see him on the talk show circuit rather than on the next GOP ticket, dream on.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
This is Romney’s way of staying in the headlines and making his case. I think it is a smart move.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Great Interview. I am glad to see that he also is speaking against this crazy stimulus plan.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
staying relevant and keeping company with Newt – pretty good move
February 11th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Should make for some interesting reads.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
What a stupid title! I don’t understand how this could hurt him or that because he is now choosing to do this he somehow jeopardizes his chances for running for POTUS. I am really excited about these columns and the book he will come out with. The last 2 op-eds he wrote were off the hook. Romney has a huge gift for isolating the main problems of an issue and articulating the best solutions. That’s why he has been so successful in the Olympics, Business, and as MA Governor. See inks below for some of his recent op-eds.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/06/romney.stimulus/index.html
February 11th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Romney’s acting more like a candidate than anyone right now. Palin’s skipping events and Huckabee’s appearing on Red Eye and acting like a celebrity.
He wants to run. And, barring bad health from Ann, is almost certain to do so using his economic expertise as his primary platform.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
This sounds like very much a part-time gig (“a revolving series of essays by some of today’s biggest thinkers”). It’s a good platform for Romney (and Gingrich, and apparently others) and may contribute to conservatism.
Do you think Mitt will say, as some of his followers do, that what the party needs to do is throw out as many people as possible?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Of course Romney can’t just “choose” to be POTUS, to the eternal disappoint to his legion of fans here, but I would say that this would be a good way for him to keep his options open.
And I’m sure his writing will be heavily scrutinized before they go to press, lest he say anything that comes back to bite him. But at least it won’t be on YouTube, like when he was disowning Reagan, and swearing fealty to Big Abortion!
February 11th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Bob,
“Do you think Mitt will say, as some of his followers do, that what the party needs to do is throw out as many people as possible?”
No. Romney is too smart and diplomatic for that. Despite the temperament of some of his fans here, Romney is no jihading absolutist. At heart, he is a pragmatist, which makes his fanbase here all the more ironic.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
8:
I doubt it. What would be the point of dividing the party? I would bet that Romney’s articles will be 75% policy, 25% Obama critisism.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
My comment was in jest, as I think you know. Of course Mitt is too smart for that stuff.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
#2, Knepper, did not understand your response. Please expand.
#9, we probably has a 1/3 shot at the nomination in 2012 if he runs…If other high profile candidates drop out, he might be the guy.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
this is kind of a lame headline. romney isn’t choosing anything over anything. hes taking a writing gig. if sarah palin did this, you’d be over the moon right now. negative headline is unnecessary. if it was palin writing for the times the headline would be: “palin burnishes credentials!”
February 11th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
“Palin Burnishes Credentials!”
http://www.fortmilltimes.com/124/story/455233.html
February 11th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
I agree the headline is kind of dumb, but in what way is it negative?
Of course I know the standard Romnut answer: Any headline other than “Romney is the most wonderful person on earth” is negative.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Romney needs to run against Reid in 2010 and stop the nut jobs in washington.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Lol nice wishful thinking Kris. Gov Romney will have been an ex governor for 6 years before 2012 so obviously he needs to stay relevant and stay in the news. It’s clear who the effective leader of the opposition is and his name isn’t Michael Steele.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Worst headline eva btw behind “Romney picked as VP”.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
“It’s clear who the effective leader of the opposition is”
Newt?
February 11th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Romney is looking to kill time AND keep his name in the headlines.
He is one step closer to completing the Reagan journey.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Matthew,
“He is one step closer to completing the Reagan journey.”
The “Reagan journey?”
?????
Is the point of this to simply re-create the life of Reagan? Maybe Romney should get a ranch, wear a cowboy hat, and eat jelly beans. I know Romney talked endlessly of his (new found) love for Reagan, but give me a break.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
22-23, well, I for one am all for Romney laying the proverbial smackdown on the moonbats here in California like Reagan did the hippies. However, I think it unlikely. Romney has his own journey.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
“Do you think Mitt will say, as some of his followers do, that what the party needs to do is throw out as many people as possible?”
Some republicans have to show that they have balls. I wouldn’t say throw out of the party but throw them under the bus, a real bus, then we don’t have to see things like this:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30667
February 11th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Dumb headline, but caught people’s attention.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Sorry off topic but steele seemed to get worked by kaine in this interview. I wasn’t very impressed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=907aj9ZX0B4
February 11th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
The Reagan Journey isn’t being repeated 100% – but Romney’s path is unquestionably similar.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Is anyone upset at the “Comparative Effetiveness Research”
February 11th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
falz,
“I wouldn’t say throw out of the party but throw them under the bus, a real bus”
Weren’t you the one saying Huckabee should be shot or hanged or something?
Dude, you’ve got some serious issues to work through.
Seriously.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
MatthewK,
“The Reagan Journey isn’t being repeated 100% – but Romney’s path is unquestionably similar.”
Right, like that part of Reagan’s journey where he disowned Reagan in his quest for public office. Ah, I remember that story like it was yesterday……
February 11th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
31 – How would it have benefited Reagan to disown himself? Other than his time as a Democrat and Hollywood star. Not to bash Reagan, definitely the best president in my lifetime, but you’re being almost as silly as the guy you’re arguing with.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
31:
So you forgot that Reagan was a proud Democrat for half his adult life?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Getreal and Thomas,
What I am alluding to is the fact that Romney disowned Reagan in his public debate with Ted Kennedy while running for Senator.
That was before he tried to run as the re-incarnated Reagan last cycle.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
lol. to #33.
True of course. Reagan didn’t disown Reagan – he disowned the entire party.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Thomas,
And Romney did not disown the Democrat Reagan. He disowned the Republican Reagan.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
MattK,
In the Huckabee thread I asked you why you think Israel is “our most important ally.” Have you come up with anything yet?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Romney is paving the way for another run, be it Senate, President ’12, President ’16 or other. I think he’s the best in the party right now, followed closely by Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, and Sarah Palin (in no particular order). I’m very excited for the Republican party of the future. If this economy doesn’t get better (it won’t) or even gets worse (it will), Romney will be the absolute best face of our party…no one can deny he’s got the econo cred.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Slick Willard is just doing whatever he can to stay relevant. This is no easy task considering his opposition for the GOP nomination in 2012 is a sitting Governors with an 80%+ approval rating.
Landing a job writing a column for a newspaper with a weekly circulation of barely 100,000 is an ideal starting place. ::eye roll::
February 11th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Man I hope Romney runs again. I can’t see what’s in it for him, but the nation could use a going-over by a brain like his. We’ll need it even moreso in four years.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Brian,
You may be correct. I have been a pretty good predictor of economic trends over the years – I predicted the Carter malaise, the Reagan boom, the Clinton recession of 1999 and the strong economic growth of 2002-2007. I believe that the Obama recession will worsen and that Republicans will be in a great position to say, “I told you so” with their near unanimous opposition to the doomed stimulus package. This strategy worked in 1993 when the GOP stood in opposition to the Clinton tax increases and then won sweeping majorities in 1994. The Contract with America helped stabilize the economy weakened by Clinton’s failed policies. Mitt (or Sarah or Newt) could stand a good chance by drafting a “Contract with America – Part 2.”
February 11th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Romney and say, someone like Sanford, I just heard a clip from that guy and he was extremely bright and reasonable also….thinking about that possibility would give me some real hope from all this pseudo hope’n change flying around right now.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
My thoughts are that this board is obsessed with Mitt Romney.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
“Have you come up with anything yet?”
Yeah – they are the country that, more than any other, will provide us with unwavering support when we move against terrorism, Radical Islam, Rogue states, etc.
Even England, who is pretty good about that too, doesn’t have (or better, doesn’t recognize that they DO have) a major stake in the success of the US…
And yeah, Israel isn’t that big, but they have experience in the region, and both their air force and their intelligence services are pretty damn good.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
One thing is for certain. The American people will eventually grow tired of Obama’s shtick, just as they grow tired of all Presidents’ shtick. Sooner or later, no matter how good their sales pitch, they have to deliver the goods. If he delivers, he will get re-elected. If he doesn’t, he is vulerable.
Obama is at a distinct disadvantage. Throughout his life, he has only used his current job as a platform to get to his next job. He has never actually held down a job, delivering the goods. Now, there is nowhere to go, nowhere to hide.
It’s been said by others besides me. A President can’t vote “present”. He is rapidly finding that out. Will he grow into the job, or will it break him.
He has four years to deliver the goods.
Romney ran very strongly in 2008 on the desire to tear into the Federal Budget. He wanted to clean it up. One can only suppose that the need for such scrutiny will be even more apparent by 2012 given the projected trajectory of all these “stimulus” and “bailout” packages.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
mokanconservative.#43<blockquote?My thoughts are that this board is obsessed with Mitt Romney.
Him and Sarah Palin. Do you find it odd that a board dedicated to the 2012 Presidential election should be obsessed by the front runners?
February 11th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
((corrected post))
mokanconservative.#43
Him and Sarah Palin. Do you find it odd that a board dedicated to the 2012 Presidential election should be obsessed by the front runners?
February 11th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
MattK,
Okay, Israel has an airstrip I don’t think we ever use. I’ll concede that they probably give us some good intelligence (they spy on us after all). But other than that? We provide their weapons. We provide a lot of the training. So they have little to nothing to offer us there. And what do we get in return for a little intelligence and 30 seconds of airspace? A whole lotta’ trouble, and a big foreign aid bill.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Three-fourths of the folks supporting Israel for goofy religious reasons aren’t even Jews. Evangelicals are one of the biggest fans of the Israeli regime.
Evangelicals prefer Israeli terrorists (settlers) over non-violent Christian Palestinians. “Prefer” is a weak term, since many Evangelicals want the Christian natives of Palestine kicked out for the sake of the European Jews who’ve recently immigrated into the land.
Something very weird and warped is going on there.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Doug,
It has a lot to do with end-times theology. Some think that God will have special blessings for anyone who supports any country that happens to be named “Israel.” Some of them seriously want war over there because they think it will bring about the rapture and the final judgement. I guess they think God needs someone to hurry Him along. I grew up in a rabidly pro-Israel evangelical church, and yes, many don’t seem to give a whit about Christian Palestinians. Yet they think all these Jews are going to hell.
It’s very strange indeed.
But Israel’s behavior- if it was some ethnicity we weren’t so devoted to- would be properly called, “ethnic cleansing.”
February 11th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
This kind of post should include a direct link to the washington times Newt Gingrich article at the very least and preferably a link to the reinventing conservatism blog or whatever they want to call it at the washington times. I haven’t been able to find it yet.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
The repubs 2010 #’s in New Hamp senate look good:
http://www.hedgehogreport.com/
now put Rommey in there with his name ID/$’s/ and endorsements, ie say john mccain + palin coming to campaign for him, he should win and other than ny gov race, it would be the show for 2010…the ? is would the new hamp gop like the idea?, would he like the idea? + he would need to pledge not to run for the white house in 2012 if he goes after this seat.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
Found the gingrich post:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/11/where-does-the-conservative-movement-go-from-here/
February 11th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
I do not think this is it. Newt;
http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/02/02/a-blunt-newt-gingrich-on-blago-palin-and-limbaugh/
February 11th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Putting Romney in the Senate is a waste of his talents. He is a leader – an executive – someone who grabs the problem by the horns and fixes it. Given eight or even four years in the White House, he could do a lot of good, but relegated to some pathetic freshman senate position in a DNC-controlled body, stuck on some boring committee, passing resolutions to applaud the Apple Growers of Arkansas.
NO.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Exactly right, MatthewK. Putting Mitt Romney in the Senate would be foolhardy, at best.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
blue, why take senate, when Romney can have it all? I doubt the losing team of McCAin/Palin would help Romney at all. Remember? THEY LOST?
February 11th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
one step back, two steps forward would be romney’s thinking if the presidency is his goal…what the heck is mitt romney gonna do for the next 4 years? nothing, he has no job other than to get himself elected president if that is his goal… so he can do all the talk show things, travel the country and write pieces in newspapers but its still a huge ? if he can even get the GOP nomination in 2012 + a huge ? mark if obama will lose in 2012 general…now if romney gets elected to the senate, he has a platform…if a repub wins in 2012, romney could be veep, maybe endorse palin in the primary or sec of treasury…if obama wins in 2012, romney could run in 2016…the only danger to him would be if he lost the 2010 NH senate race and he might not want to risk that and instead just go for a white house bid…yet if he can’t win that senate seat in 2010, i doubt very much he could have won anything in 2012.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:03 am
Romney’s a great manager, no doubt about that, but I wouldn’t confuse so quickly that with leadership. Leaders are intelligent, foresighted individuals, which Romney is without a doubt, but they are also creatures of intuition and passion. Romney certainly has a commanding presence, but he still comes across like too much of a human calculator. And calculators sound and look good, but they struggle to be heartfelt and passionate relying so heavily on logical thinking and business acumen. No leader exists without the capacity to inspire, and that is what Mr. Romney has to develop to be one. Please don’t write this off – obviously, to the convinced he is clear as a bell, but it doesn’t take much analysis to find that he’s still got plenty of work to do.
We’ve seen Mitt’s brain, quite functional – what I think many of us are looking for is his soul. As he works to develop a clear vision for his leadership, he also needs to work up the passion to inspire people with those ideas. That’s leadership.
February 12th, 2009 at 1:28 am
I finally put my picture with Mitt Romney in a box in the garage. I am willing to wait a couple of years before getting all worked up again. The rest of you carry on.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:48 am
#59 MPC – I have a passion for results – Mitt Romney inspires me.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Gingrich seems to think the same as those who have yet to jump on Sarah’s bandwagon: “Alaska’s Governor Palin, John McCain’s running mate in 2008, could be “very formidable” as a presidential candidate in 2012, Gingrich said. But he stipulated that would be the case only if she “seeks out a group of sophisticated policy advisers” and “spends time developing a series of fairly sophisticated positions.” So from now on when some of us mention she’s not ready, just realize that Newt thinks the very same thing.
He also brings up that Mitt Romney will be a very strong candidate, particularly if the economy is still a mess.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:29 am
“So from now on when some of us mention she’s not ready, just realize that Newt thinks the very same thing.” Just like the Romney camp does not agree with Mr. Gingrich 100% of the time, the rest of us do not have to agree with him 100% either.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:47 am
On Romney: It’s very sad when even a man as smart, knowledgeable and experienced as he is repeats the mantra that middle-class tax cuts will restore the economy. He knows as well as anyone that it’s mainly the folks in the upper tax brackets (and those who want to get there) who start the businesses, create innovation and create the jobs. Taxes should be cut across the board to help the economy.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:55 am
That is correct Marksal.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:57 am
On Israel: I’m surprised to see such misleading anti-Israel sentiment on this board. For those who don’t know, Israel’s Jewish population is approximately fifty/fifty between those whose ancestors migrated from Europe and those who escaped persecution and migrated from Arab, Turkish and Persian lands. And, of course, Jews have “always” lived in what is now known as Israel. Second, it is not the Israeli settlers who are the terrorists or who believe in ethnic cleansing, it is the Arabs. To my knowledge, the settlers do not agitate to remove millions of Arabs from the West Bank; however, as part of any so-called peace deal, the Arabs always want the West Bank free of settlers, or any Jews at all. They are the ones who pursue an ethnically pure state.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Marksal,
So to your knowledge the Israeli government has not forcibly removed Palestinians from their homes to make way for Jewish settlements?
Is that what you are saying?
February 12th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Marksal, I for one am neither Jewish nor Arab, so to a degree, it is not my fight, but these days, I sympathize with Israel for the most part because I believe that no country should be in subject to terror like Israel is.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:08 am
MWS, you do have a point, that some Israelis are bad actors. I do know a Palestian man who lost his home to the Jews, but I still do not think terrorism is right. I do not think that many Native North Americans are creating violent terror against Canadians and Americans.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:20 am
falz,
“I wouldn’t say throw out of the party but throw them under the bus, a real bus”
Weren’t you the one saying Huckabee should be shot or hanged or something?
Dude, you’ve got some serious issues to work through.
Seriously.
********************************
What would you do with a traitor?
About Huckabee. Dude, you don’t have any sense of humor, I’ve never said he should be shot or hanged or anything, I’ve always say that politically:
HUCKABEE MUST DIE
February 12th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Unfortunately, the fair tax might politically die as well.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
falz,
“Dude, you don’t have any sense of humor”
Actually, my posts are full of lame sarcasm.
I just don’t think killing people is funny.
February 12th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
“What would you do with a traitor?”
Disagreeing with you politically is treason?
February 12th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Good point BobH, which is among other reason why the word treason should not be thrown around like popcorn.
February 12th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Prediction: Romney/Jindal 2012
February 12th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Romney/Jindal 2012…I like how that sounds. I would prefer Romney/Sanford though.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
From what I know, I like Sanfordism, but I fear Mr. Sanford as a candidate is a non-starter.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
MWS,
No, I believe that the Israeli government, under various leaders, has done a minimal amount of it. But certainly not to any great extent. If so, there wouldn’t still be millions of Arabs in the West Bank, and even more than a million even in Israel as defined by the narrow 1948 borders.
February 12th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Bonnie Newman just got punked…guess the idea of romney running for senate in nham in 2010 is probably toast but i think it could work if the utah senate seat opens up and huntsman didn’t want to run for it + he could still turn around and run for the white house in 2012 since utah voters wouldn’t care.
February 12th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Mrs Romney (or the voice of Mitt actually lol) denying/downplaying her cancer did a huge disservice to the thousands of cancer sufferers out there, many MDs and Boston news stations also sounded out on this.
The Romneys are too intelligent to imagine that they could snow the public by calling Ann’s cancer “pre” cancer. Doctors claimed it was NOT pre-cancer at all.
So why did they do it? Most likely, they’re very protective and defensive over Ann’s deteriorating health with over 10 years of multiple scelrosis and now cancer too (which both of her parents died from).
February 12th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Dear Romney Keep Your Day Job,
At the risk of being banished from this board, let me just say that you are a jerk.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
#80
your a sick fxxx
February 12th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Looks like Gingrich and Romney are not the only ones to showcase their conservative principles:
More than a dozen other major conservatives have agreed to participate in the project, a release added, noting they will each provide one column every four months. Others include Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, activist David Keene, Republican Sen. Jim DeMint and congressmen Eric Cantor, Mike Pence, Thad McCotter and John Shaddegg.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
80: Go away.
February 13th, 2009 at 4:30 am
#80, It appears you are either a troll or a nut. Please watch what you say.
February 14th, 2009 at 1:19 am
I think Romney’s doing this to pay back conservatives who backed him in the primaries. He failed to win it for conservatives, and I think he feels a debt of gratitude to them for their support. I don’t expect Romney to run for president again, I think it’s wishful thinking to think otherwise. I don’t expect that he’ll ever run for public office again. I think he feels he can do more good advocating for conservative principles.
#34 If you had actually watched the debate, Romney distanced himself from cold war time spending, which Teddy was accusing him of wanting to do.
#70 Huckabee should get the treatment his son gave that dog – politically I mean.
#80 Let us know your real name so we can put you in charge of how people deal with their cancer from now on.
February 14th, 2009 at 3:40 am
After attending law school in Mass while Romney was at the helm, I, being a devout conservative, could not support him as I witnessed him catering to the “money” schools and not doing what’s good for the state. Typical politician!