Some highlights of an interview with Ann and Mitt Romney that aired on Fox.
Romney says President Obama should be more like President Clinton, when asked about Obama’s fallen approval ratings: “You know, I had higher hopes for him. I knew he was a smart individual. I thought that he would learn that governing from the middle was the right way to go, as President Clinton learned in his second term,
-
Essential Reading – Mitt Romney;
_____________________________________________
Kristofer Lorelli is the Senior Editor of Race42012 and can be contacted at lorville@rogers.com, on Facebook and Twitter/Kris_Lorelli
January 6th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Why do people assume that Obama is smart? What scant evidence of that is there?
January 6th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
#1
He got elected President and he went to Harvard… Wait, that’s President Bush.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:05 pm
You know, Obama is probably the only one on this planet that can get me to miss Bill Clinton.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
Romney is definitely smarter than Obama, unfortunately he just is not as charasmatic…
For perspective, in under-grad at BYU he graduated at the top of his class. Then he got a dual law degree and MBA at Harvard where he was top 5% in both programs. Then he went on to run Bain Capital. If that is not intellectualism, I am not sure what is… As people from Mass would say…”He’s wicked smart.”
Not sure I like the quote of “governing from the middle” from him though…Hope he does not plan to do the same if elected…That was all of our fears during the last primary…
January 6th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
While I agree Romney may not be that charismatic, but maybe its just me, I just don’t find Obama that charismatic either, to me that’s just a line the Main Stream Media like to use.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Like Clinton, Romney is a pure politician driven by personal ambition and a desire for power. No principles. He’d govern from anywhere – left, middle, right, even from hell if that’s what it took to get elected.
BSR
January 6th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
5:
No he’s not really. His speaches were pretty much uniformly boiler-plate Democrat speaches from the time. I knew of Obama going into the 2004 convention and was deeply unimpressed by what I saw. But apparently, some people felt that his giving the exact same speech as everyone else that week was some sort of coup.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Well, CK, there’s governing from the left middle, and there is governing from the right middle. Most Republican executives (including Ronald Reagan) govern from the right middle. Clinton governed from the left middle.
Obama is governing from the far-left.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Well of course Obama should be governing from the middle! He campaigned on it, and this is a center right country.
However, just because Romney said Obama should be governing from the middle, it does not necessarily follow that Romney believes a Republican should govern from the middle.
Everyone is waiting to jump all over Romney if he says anything remotely moderate. Fine. But I haven’t seen him change one single position yet. And I also have not heard him utter anything moderate.
BTW – good interview with both Ann and Mitt. Classy people.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
I was wonder how long it would take someone to take a swipe at Romney from left field. While we are all entitled to our opinions, I find Romney one of the more ethical candidates to come along for a long time. But, that’s just my opinion.
January 6th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
#6.BSR.
I take it that Mitt Romney sat down and exposed his inner-most soul in an in-depth heart-to-heart chat with you. I am curious how you managed such a coup?
January 6th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
BSR,
Romney is not a natural politician, he’s an executive. He’s much more comfortable in the real world, yet he is driven – personally amition as you call it – to do things. It’s not about the glory, it’s about actually making a contribution.
He was a pragmatic, yet conservative governor. You can dream up all sorts of scenarios if it makes you happy, but his record is proof of what kind of POTUS he would be.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
BSR is part of Huck’s army – he wrote a comment on a pro-Mitt site defending Huck – you all know – the one that is soft on crime…
January 6th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
This is what BSR wrote – Governors are elected to operate their states in the manner necessary to best serve the people. Massachusetts and Arkansas are very different states, with very different people, with very different needs. In Arkansas, for example, Huckabee inherited a state whose Interstate road system and bridges had been allowed to deteriorate for decades. On his watch, something finally had to be done about it. The difference between Gov. Huckabee and Gov. Romney is that Huckabee actually governed. He did the job, and served the people, instead of just using it to pad a presidential resume.
BSR
BSR – so sad that Huck didn’t “serve” the people by letting criminals out early – guess Huck was too busy serving only the criminal. Betcha those police officers’ families in Washington aren’t too concerned that Huck “repaired” your roads and bridges.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
Hey, Frank…seeing that again makes me realize that I write pretty well, don’t I? Thanks for posting it here. Saves me the time
And, by the way, you are smart and politically educated enough to know that Huckabee’s commutation of Clemmons’ sentence, as reported by nearly a dozen major news outlets’ editorial boards, was both reasonable and had nothing to do with Clemmons being released from prison.
You may not like what I have to say about Romney, but at least what I say is based on facts and the truth.
Can’t say that for you.
BSR
January 6th, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Funny thing is, I lived in Arkansas just when Huckabee got elected, and now I live near Arkansas now. And you know what, the Roads are in about the same condition now as they were when Huckabee became Governor, so what roads did he improve?
January 6th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
15. BSR,
We all know that Huck’s actions led directly to Clemmons being paroled. There’s just no way to pretend otherwise.
Huck is toast.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
Thats another lie, Thunder. Oh, and for those of you who need a refresher on things, try this:
Washington Post: Top Romney Flip Flops http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/04/AR2008020402805.html
January 6th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
would LOVE to see this guy cut loose on the present situation
he has the skills
the one thing I would still love to hear from this guy is an accurate assessment of the Global Warming Fraud
then I’d really bust the bank
Romney is very shrewd about what he says….I wonder what he’d be like unplugged. I know he’s got it in him. He’s saving up.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Programming Note: Rudy Giuliani will appear on Larry King Live tonight to discuss President Obama’s handling of national security matters.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Thunder,
I’ve never found Obama particularly charismatic, either. We assume all identity candidates like Obama and Palin are charismatic, I guess.
Obama is an utterly boring speaker, and I can’t listen to him. When Palin speaks, there’s a high chance of a train wreck, so I’m uncomfortable listening to her, as well.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Exactly what is the lie? I lived in Benntonville Arkansas for a while, traveled a lot to Oklahoma (talk about a state with bad roads), and I travel a lot to Memphis. I know live in Memphis, and had to travel to Oklahoma alot, to me, the roads never really changed that much.
If your going to call someone a liar, and least have some evidence to back it up.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
My thinking is there’s no way Huck is leaving his cushy Lawrence Welk show. No worries.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Funny thing is, I don’t think either Huckabee nor Palin will run in 2012. Might see Huckabee make a play for the VP slot, but otherwise you are correct.
I expect the real race to come down to Romney and Pawlenty, which are the two most qualified candidates (IMHO). Of course, if Jeb Bush where to run, It would really change things.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
Incorrect, Martha. Huckabee commuted Clemmons’ 106-year sentence for non-violent crimes committed as a youth, to 47 years. This made Clemmons’ sentence consistent with the sentences of other criminals’ sentences for similar crimes. Because Clemmons had already served 11 years, he became eligible for parole after this commutation. To get paroled, Clemmons had to convince a 5-person parole board he deserved to be let out. The prosecutor’s office did not object, and a sentencing judge supported parole. So the parole board let him out. A few months later he violated parole and went back to prison to serve his full term, where Huckabee left him. He’d have been there until 2015, except that the prosecutor’s office failed to file proper paperwork for THREE YEARS, and a judge then forced them to drop all charges and Clemmons was set free. It was after that he moved to Washington state. So…Huckabee’s commutation of Clemmons is not the reason he was free and in Washington state last November.
BSR
January 6th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
OK Martha this is a phenomenon I have also experienced, where people rave about what a great speaker he is, whereas I can barely stomach the boor. When he gave the Mussolini speech, I forced myself to watch out of civic duty, and I felt…..nothing. Absolutely nothing. He didn’t move me, he spoke of nothing I could relate to or identify with, and the pillars and fireworks were just retarded in the context of this country. The one lucid thought I had was…this is going to be one expensive regime headed up by this guy.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:43 pm
Thunder, I would love to see Palin run, but I don’t think she will either. She’s in a great position right now, where she can speak her mind and almost every Facebook edict she issues does serious damage. No matter. I think the pain everyone is yet to feel will be so intense by 2012, that Romney will be unrivaled in the minds of thinking people.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
I’m amused Huckabee is considered a serious candidate in this specific time frame. Personally, I feel my humble little self possess more education than he does, more backbone, I feel I am more grounded in religion than he is, I have more federal experience than he does, I could go on – to illustrate that in a country like this, we don’t have to pick a presidential candidate out of sympathy. We can get a truly qualified pick, because there are some great, great folks in this country. If we are going to choose someone with fewer qualifications than your average housewife, pick me first.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Unfortunately, the Repubican Party has it share of those who don’t have think, see BSR above. But all one has to do is look at the tell tale signs of potential candidates. Only Romney and Pawlenty are doing what candidates normally do before a run for the President. Palin and Huckabee are creating too much ammunition for their opponents, and are not putting together the kind of organization required to make a run.
In the end I think all the debating about Huckabee and Palin will be moot as both of them are heading in different directions which do not look like a Presidential run.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
Thunder…what “evidence” do you have that the roads were not improved? Its your opinion. I however, thanks to the wonders of Google, have ample evidence – including photos – of just a few of the MANY complete re-creations of Arkansas Interstates from the dirt up. Everyone in Arkansas remembers the years when Interstates were closed one side at a time, ripped completely out of the ground, and concrete re-poured for hundreds of miles. It’s a fact, and your “opinion” just doesn’t hold water.
Evidence: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.weaverbailey.com/IMG_1073a.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.weaverbailey.com/projects.htm&usg=__Xh_jeAg4igvaMfzGgclJfYiiz3M=&h=697&w=975&sz=81&hl=en&start=7&um=1&tbnid=ZITOCUIZc4OaFM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Darkansas%2Broad%2Bproject%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1B3GGGL_enUS351US351%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1
BSR
January 6th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
Y’know? Guarantee ya I won’t be letting violent criminals out of jail en masse. And I am very dedicated to cutting/eliminating taxes. And fashion is definitely a weak area for me, but I could dress a heckuva lot better than Michelle Obama. Let’s hijack this thread for a moment to say what the heck happened with her wardrobe? Maybe she’s just trying to show that with her it’s intelligence and great personality, and classy clothes would just detract from the real her. I can respect that.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
29 you make a good point.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
30. BSR,
Huck is the person who made Clemmons eligible for parole. Period. It doesn’t much matter what happened after that, and in light of his other 1000+ pardons, he is responsible for a lot of heartache.
Sure, there were other mess-ups along the way for Clemmons. But Huck started it all.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
Reply to 30: I just drove over highway 40 to the Arkansas airport just before Christmas, and it was quit a traffic jam because the lanes where all closed except for one on each direction, been going on for years. So when was the last time you drove over highway 40 near the Tennessee border?
January 6th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Liz,
26. Exactly.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:01 pm
Thunder and Liz,
I still believe both will probably run. Palin is unconventional, so I’m not sure it matters that she doesn’t have an organization just yet. She’s out there hinting at a third party. I think everything she’s doing is an indication that she intends to.
Huck’s situation is more problematic, but I still think he’s a lot more likely to run than not. He really does seem to have an obsession with Romney. He may run for no other reason. Even so, I don’t think he has a shot.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
#6 BSR,
Are you a Liberal? I am just curious, really. You sound just like the Liberals attacking Romney at some other blogs I’ve been to. I guess, no I know, that is what happens when you are so dependently minded as to allow the MSM shape your views of people.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
You have to look at it from their point of view. For Huckabee, if he makes a run, he has to quite his TV and Radio Gigs. This is bring him a lot of attention and money, so unless he thinks its in the Bag, which it is not, he is not likely to quite his day job for a long shot run at the Presidency.
As for Palin, she ran away from her problems in Alaska, has no money to speak of as far as running for President. She is doing a great job of selling books, but has ignored key primary states like New Hampshire. For her to make a serious run, she would have to stop selling books and start hiring staff, she would need to start raising money and she would need to start smoozing. It is more likely she will try for a TV Gig like Huckabee than make a run for President. Of course, leaving people hanging sells a lot of books.
To get an idea what a potential candidate does to prepare for a run at the Presidency, look at Pawlenty, while he has made some mistakes, he is basically doing what a potential candidate does this far out. Hiring Staff, raising Money, writing Op Eds, and making appearance once in a while.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
Martha, I don’t know that Huck’s obsession is solely with Romney. I think you have a guy there that has struggled with …jealousy…superiority complex….he’s the kind of guy that strokes you to your face, then schemes with your best friend to do you wrong. I don’t think that’s the DEFINING characteristic, he’s got some virtues, but it comes down to the fact that I don’t trust the guy. I think he’s ethically challenged.
Now, Romney elicits jealousy in quite a few people. Did you see McCain completely fail to veil his feelings of inadequacy during at least one debate?
Bottom line with that is, I don’t care. Romney doesn’t attempt to provoke those feelings in his rivals, his accomplishments and character do it – naturally. They compare themselves to him unconsciously, they fall short, and it manifests itself on their faces with involuntary sneers and eye twitches.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:09 pm
#22
It’s obvious this BSR dude is just a negative toxic individual. Calling people liars without any evidence, saying Mitt Romney is “just like Bill Clinton” is just out there.
Ignore him, he is too emotional to have credibility.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
I think some of you sell Palin short. I think she wants to help the cause, and I think her character is sufficient that she won’t force herself into a role that doesn’t fit just for self-aggrandizement. I like her. She’d be light years better than Obama. But I reject the character flaws some of you attribute to her. I think she is to be admired. If there were no first class candidates available for 2012, I would push Palin as the best of the 2nd classers.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:14 pm
OK quick poll for the 3 people on here, does a Palin endorsement help or hurt the Massachesetts guy?
January 6th, 2010 at 4:15 pm
I honestly can’t spell Massachusetts 75% of the time.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
I’m going to say it helps. Just because it’ll create buzz, and Mass people are probably sheeple like everywhere else. I hope that guy makes it. He is potential trouble, he does have that strong self-love vibe going on, but the pig pen we have in Congress right now will still only be improved by his conservative presence. What’s the latest Scott Brown poll?
January 6th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
Dang it I put you all to sleep.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
I am okay with Palin doing what she is doing, but I am not okay elevating her beyond that. I just don’t see her as Presidential material.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
As long as she does it outside of Massachusetts and its not too overt.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
I agree with Thunder in #38. Romney and Pawlenty are the only ones that are really, truly acting like they are going to run. Huckabee and Palin are acting like people that want to keep their names in front of the public in order to sell books, garner viewers, and have a say in the affairs of the nation. They are NOT putting in the key efforts needed to build a national run.
This is most obvious in Huckabee. He has already done a National run. He knows the logistics necessary to succeed. Yet he is not doing them.
The real kicker for me is Huckabee himself said that it is not likely he will run. He didn’t say he might not run. He said he isn’t likely to run. Therefore he is either lying throw his teeth, or he is telling the truth. Neither choice is particularly appealing to his more ardent fans.
Palin has a top PAC. She has a best-selling book. She is getting paid handsomely for making speeches. The liberal media hangs on her every word, and broadcasts it to the nation. She is sitting pretty. Yet we see a woman who seems content to just sit back and let things happen. Beyond the book and the book-tour, she really isn’t doing anything concrete to further any future Presidential run.
Of course we need to remember that there is a full year before anyone has to make up their minds on running or not. A lot can happen in a year’s time, but as of right now I truly believe that it will come down to Pawlenty and Romney. Huckabee and Palin likely will not run.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
Liz – where I live, 75% of people cannot pronounce Massachusetts.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
Liz:“OK quick poll for the 3 people on here, does a Palin endorsement help or hurt the Massachesetts guy?”
Endorsement — helps.
Actively Campaigns for Brown — hurts.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Liz,
I think it’s possible that Brown would rather she not do anything – just like Christie and McDonnell. However, she can’t do nothing, so I hope she keeps it to a few positive comments about Brown and that’s it.
But remember last time when she was spurned by McDonnell? Instead of being quiet and moving on for the good of the race, her spokeswoman made a big deal of it. Not smart, and not team-player material. That’s only one of many reasons I think Palin is all about Palin.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
#39
You couldn’t have nailed it down better. It’s like high school politics of jealousy. Mitt has NEVER engaged the same way because he is an ADULT.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:36 pm
Kristofer, if you truly didn’t know what Mitt was saying when he said ‘governing from the middle’, then you are not as perceptive as I have heretofore given you credit for.
He was obviously talking about Obama governing from the middle would have been the wise thing to do. With the country a center/right country, it was very unwise of Obama to stay so far left. Mitt is three legged stool conservative with a bit of pragmatism where necessary.
As far as Obama’s charisma, I just don’t see it. Maybe he is to the stupid people…
January 6th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Check out Andrew Breitbart’s latest endeavor, Big Journalism.
http://bigjournalism.com/
January 6th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
#42,
I think it would help him more than it would hurt him. Why? Because there are a lot of emotional, or should I say “emotionally attached”, Palin supporters that could easily go to Pawlenty or another candidate. She could help Mitt shore up some Evangelical support.
Any politician with that big of an influence would be a good endorsement for anyone on the Republican side. Some said Mitt needs to stay as far away from McCain as possible, and not seek an endorsement from him, but McCain could really help Mitt grab some Independents and Conservative Dems, as well as help him shore up the Military vote.
I don’t think a Palin Endorsement would put Mitt in the negative.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:43 pm
Problem is, we are talking about Brown running for Senate.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:44 pm
One thing is for sure, this time next year, we will have a pretty good idea who is in and who is out.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
I just realized “the Massachussets guy” is NOT Mitt Romney! I thought we were discussing Mitt, sorry
January 6th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Regarding Palin helping or hurting Brown, I’d say a low key facebook comment or two would help a little. A full blown endorsement televised on all channels would probably do too much to invigorate the Democrats.
As for Palin endorsing Romney, it would definitely help a lot. If she were to do that, it’s game, set match. If she goes with someone else, Mitt will have his hands full.
January 6th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
Liz, I hope you know I respect your opinion very highly.
We seem to have a big disagreement over Palin. I think Palin gets a pass a lot because she’s a woman – an attractive one. I don’t believe any GOP men would get away with the incompetence that Palin displays on a regular basis. She gets a pass on everything, because people want to believe she’s IT. They want her to be the one who saves the day because it makes such a nice story – tough, cute lady from Alaska takes on good old GOP and America! But she’s not the person everyone wants her to be.
No one else would slip out of Toopergate, emailgate, Quit-early-gate, and a host of other Palin happenings so easily. She’s never held accountable. No ther GOP man would be able to skate out of such a terrible lack of knowledge on the issues.
Everything she does is about promoting herself. Her book is all about making herself look good, and reliving petty grievances from as long as 20 years ago. She’s a woman who gets even. She has a problem telling the truth. Her book is full of questionable facts.
She’s threatening third party. If that’s not arrogance, I don’t know what is.
January 6th, 2010 at 5:33 pm
Thunder, last time I checked, Huckabee left the Arkansas Governor’s office some time ago. The road work you are complaining about now is on Gov. Mike Beebe’s watch so why don’t you file your complaint over there?
January 6th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
Mitt flip
Mitt flop
The guy can’t be trusted, folks.
January 6th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
#61,
Ah, so you’re a Huckabee. Makes total sense now.
January 6th, 2010 at 6:49 pm
The point is she is the closest to a national Tea Party leader, it’s what she stands for that is most important, but you have too much contempt for her to even consider it.
January 6th, 2010 at 6:55 pm
64. She stands for the same things that all the potential candidates stand for, except she is only an inch deep. She doesn’t have the market on any conservative issue or principle.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
62. Here’s one guy who is more obsessed with Romney than even Huck is, if that were possible.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
#64
Sarah Palin is the reason people have contempt for her. Look, I loved her when she spoke at convention but when I started to get to know her more, I realized she is not qualified and I can not ignore that, like yourself.
I think she stands for a lot of good. I think she rallies a lot of emotion in people, like Obama did, only a different way.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
Great Fox interviews. Mitt and his wife are class acts. his boys are all great kids as well. If most American families had the Romney’s values, America would be in great shape. Loved the Reaganesque backdrop of riding horses. To change the subject, I’ve been involved in MA politics for over 40 years and I’ve never seen the interest and Buzz that Scott Brown is Generating. If I were asked a month ago if he would have any type of chance against the Kennedy machine and their anointed heir apparent, I would have said, no way in hell could Brown win. Today I’m going out on the limb and predict a Brown victory. Scott could still use financial support if anyone is feeling generous:
https://www.icontribute.us/scottbrown
ROMNEY / DeMINT in 2012!
January 6th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
63.
1. Palin
2. Huck
3. Pawlenty
999. Romney
1000. Obama
January 6th, 2010 at 10:17 pm
1. Pawlenty
Romney
2. Daniels
999. Palin
1000. Obama
Avagadro’s number. Huck
January 6th, 2010 at 10:44 pm
underestimate Palin at your own risk.
her upcoming Tea Party speech could win her the nomination in one day.
January 6th, 2010 at 11:09 pm
Perry and DeMint are the tea party leaders IMO.
Reckon one may run for Prez.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:15 am
Liz, assuming she actually WRITES her own face book postings, and not someone who actually knows about the issues? I’ll belive Palin knows something when she takes unscripted questions on a sunday talk show. Until then…..
January 7th, 2010 at 12:17 am
Narcisco. She stands for whatever way the wind is blowing. She’s a day late and a dollar short on her ‘terrorism in the sky’s’ screed on …FACEBOOK. She’s late to the dance on Health care. But some think she’s the second comming when she speaks. Although she echo’s everyone else who spoke before her.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:19 am
AK report. well, that seals it. Let’s crown her queen, and get it over with.
I don’t care that she’s a ‘teabagger and a half’. All they want is a celeb photo op with her and her ‘son’. Worship her, and only her.
However, more and more have come to the conculsion that she’s not the face of the party, and do not want her.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:28 am
Some of her admirers confuse the fact that she is a pretty face in the party to mean she is the face of the party.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:48 am
Now, that is Romney who was willing to repudiate Reagan in Massachussetts in 1994, who cast doubt on the counterinsurgency strategy in 2007-8, who soft pedaled his critiques of Obama in the spring, as his advisors told him, like supporting the government purge of an auto company. Also you’re argument
works better when you don’t use the derogatory term for the tea party movement.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:13 am
70. That’s funny, Dan
Well played, sir.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:15 am
Dan, so your goin’ with Barack over Mike.
Hey!!! Same as the Daily Kos!!! Is your password up to date over there in crazyland?
January 7th, 2010 at 2:45 am
narciso, unless you are ignorant of the facts, you are purposely distorting the facts about Mitt’s statement regarding Reagan. If you see it in context, you will note that he was specifically referring to the fact that he would not return to the deficit spending during the Reagan administration.
Soft pedaled critiques of Obama?…you must be kidding me! NOBODY has been harder on Obama than Mitt Romney. This entire year Mitt has been very hard on his policies while trying to respect the office.
January 7th, 2010 at 5:21 am
“he would not return to the deficit spending during the Reagan administration.” That is nice spin.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:10 am
OJ,
Everyone wants to go back to that Kennedy debate 16 years ago to skewer Romney. Fine. But let’s go back that far for everyone, shall we? Palin has plenty of issues as mayor, and governor. She left Wasilla 20 million in debt over her pet project, and the case is still in litigation over her use of eminent domain. (Not very conservative, is it, to take private property and build before the case is settled?) She was a big porker back then, too. She even hired a person specifically to find pork for Wasilla. (Not to mention a city manager to do her own job for her.) I’ll take Romney’s moderate rhetoric and actual conservative record over Palin’s record any day.
Nobody’s perfect, Reagan wasn’t. He actually had more crimes against conservatism than Romney. For one, he signed an abortion bill into law. He did other things as gov that weren’t exactly conservative. He was a democrat, for crying out loud. Everyone moved on.
The point is that Romney was a conservative governor in one of the most liberal states. His phenomenal success there speaks to his skill as a leader. He did what they hired him to do – fix the budget mess, and he did it without raising taxes. So, I don’t really care what he said in a debate with Teddy 16 years ago.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:19 am
79, hey I would go with assorted primates, iguanas, and single cell organisms over Huck.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:24 am
She floated a bond issue and the people voted for it, Look she’s made mistakes, clearly the ethics reform was too broadly formulated, that’s the biggest one I can see. Reagan wasn’t perfect he admitted where he went wrong on welfare and abortion, Romney seems not to have, maybe Romneycare was the best thing that could have passed, but Patrick made it worse. I was focusing on policy statements and not personal attacks, I’m generally indifferent to him, I really can’t stand Huckabee.I’ve noted before they pulled the same trick with Jeb, in that same year, burying him under a mountain of lies, in his challenge to Lawton Chiles
January 7th, 2010 at 9:29 am
81 – OJ, I’m a little surprised at you calling that spin. The exact quotes of what he said has been posted here many times, and you have been here for over 2 years now, so I don’t see how you could not have seen it. He was, in fact, talking about not returning to deficit spending. Ask some of your Palin lovers buddies, and maybe they will ‘remember’ and agree, without me having to find it for you.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:40 am
85. IG, I’ve seen it too, do you have a link for it?
84. Narciso, has Palin ever admitted to anything she did wrong? Nada. Romney has admitted many times that he learned over the years. MassCare was not a mistake.
January 7th, 2010 at 10:00 am
No, Martha, but I’ve found it several times and posted it on here, along with others doing the same. I absolutely hate baby sitting!
January 7th, 2010 at 10:34 am
Here is the exact verbage:
Kennedy: And under your economic program, under the program of Mr. Reagan and Mr. Bush, we saw the growth in terms of the unemployment, the growth in the number of children livered [a typical Kennedy slurring of ‘living’] in poverty, the growth in terms of those children out of wedlock.
Romney: Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to take us back to Reagan-Bush. My positions don’t talk about the things you suggest they talk about. This isn’t a political issue
Growth in unemployment – Romney does not want to return to – Good thing
Growth in children living in poverty – Romney does not want to return to – good thing
Growth in terms of children born out of wedlock – Romney does not want to return to – good thing
Other parts of the discussion also had the increase in deficit spending, which Mitt hates, and will fight like crazy to reduce along with out overall debt.
January 7th, 2010 at 10:39 am
Yes, he’s repudiating the Reagan era eonomic boom, which was certainly less of a bubble than the 90s,
he’s going along with the class warfare argument that Kennedy is promoting, the denigration of the tax cuts
January 7th, 2010 at 11:05 am
No, he didn’t repudiate the boom! he repudiated the particular things being eluded to in Kennedy’s portrayal of Reagan!
Do you not have an honest bone in your body?????
January 7th, 2010 at 11:06 am
“Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush.” Yeah, look, it is funny that the quasi-Independent camp is paranoid that their arch-rival will start a Third Party.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:42 pm
91. What does being registered as an independent have to do with Palin running third party???
January 7th, 2010 at 1:00 pm
That was not the answer, Kennedy was slandering the whole Reagan record with a lie, like he did in the Borking speech, and he didn’t call him on that. Reagan had support of independents so that was a dodge as well. She believes that the GOP is the best vehicle for change, but if the leadership refuses to listen, as she prefaced her remarks to Lars Larson, well what is the grass roots to do
January 7th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
93. Narciso,
Refuses to listen to who? Her? She has set herself up as the babysitter of the GOP leadership now? (Remember that her first remark as Governor to the Alaskan legislators was “I heard you all need some adult supervision!” – and I’m not making that up.) I don’t think too many people are buying that, especially since she isn’t out there promoting anyone but herself. She doesn’t have time for GOP events or people. Not only that, she cancels at the last minute, and leaves groups hanging.
This one point is very important: Even if the GOP stays EXACTLY as it is now, and does not change as Palin demands, she WILL NOT be justified in running third party. NO HOW NO WAY.
It does make one wonder why she threatens, does it not?
It’s all about Palin, it’s not about defeating Obama. She’s as much a narcissist as he is.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:18 pm
“She has set herself up as the babysitter of the GOP leadership now?” Ah yeah, people who act like babies tend to need baby-sitters. Sorry if I insulted babies. The fact is Martha, Mrs. Palin is not an independent or a member of a Third party, unlike somebody else once upon a time.
“This one point is very important: Even if the GOP stays EXACTLY as it is now, and does not change as Palin demands, she WILL NOT be justified in running third party. NO HOW NO WAY.” Yes, that is actually true, but the GOP swells, still need a sitter to prevent them from sliding off the deep end further.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:23 pm
95. I don’t think the GOP needs a babysitter, but I do think the leadership should listen to the people – not necessarily a former gov who quit early because she couldn’t take the heat, and one who does not wish to participate in building the party.
I think that it’s extremely arrogant and ignorant for Palin to suggest that she needs to babysit GOP leadership.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Hey, when they decide to grow up, than they no longer need a sitter.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
ooosp, than should be then.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
OJ,
Do you admit that Palin has done precious little to actually help the party – the one she thinks needs to shape up?
She has spurned the GOP since the election. She’s not a team player.
January 7th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
OJ,
Can you imagine Romney threatening to run third party if the GOP does not change according to his rules?
That’s not leadership.
January 8th, 2010 at 12:18 am
44. Hurts.