Skip to comments.10 Serious Questions for Mitt Romney
Posted on 02/12/2010 6:48:17 PM PST by Welshman007
With the latest Gallup Poll showing that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is leading the pack of potential GOP Presidential nominees, serious questions need to be asked of the candidate.
Although Sarah Palin comes in 2nd in the polls and is actually in a statistical tie with Romney, Palin is the one who has been scrutinized to the point of navel-gazing. Romney, on the other hand, has so far received a pass from the media.
If Republican voters are going to turn to a moderate governor of a very liberal state to be its standard bearer even after the policies of both moderate and liberal Democrats and Republicans have been resoundingly rejected by voters, it is necessary to place Romney under intense scrutiny.
Romney needs to give clear, direct answers to the following questions.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
1. While you were the Governor of Massachusetts you introduced legislation that created a state-run healthcare system, funded by taxpayers, which many referred to as ‘RomneyCare.’ The plan that Obama and the Democrats wish to impose on the entire country is based in part upon your program in Massachusetts. How can the voters trust you with the healthcare issue when you are one of the very politicians who implemented a program they have clearly indicated they do not want?
2. Do you support a revised version of RomneyCare for the entire country, and if not, why? And if so, why would you expect GOP voters to choose you as the Party’s standard-bearer?
3. Do you believe that the individual states are free in this Constitutional Republic to implement programs such as a government-controlled healthcare system that requires citizens to purchase HC policies?
4. Do you believe that such programs in the individual states are Constitutional?
5. While you were Governor of Massachusetts you were known for your hostility to Second Amendment rights for individual citizens. Several gun rights organizations gave you a rating of ‘F’ on protecting the gun rights of individuals. Do you believe that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects the individual’s right to own, possess, and use firearms, or do you view the amendment as a so-called ‘collective right’ that is reserved only to the militia?
6. If you believe that the 2nd Amendment refers to an individual right as the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed last year in a landmark decision, then why did you support so many attempts by gun-control activists in Massachusetts to place severe limits and restrictions on that right nearly to the point of rendering it useless?
7. Do you believe that the federal government should be keeping a national database on gun owners, such as those who apply for concealed carry permits?
8. Do you support microstamping laws for ammo and firearms that gun-hostile states such as California have enacted?
9. Do you believe that the use of eminent domain by local governments to condemn private property so that big businesses can build on that property, thus increasing the tax base for those communities, is an appropriate use of the law?
10. Will you support measures to halt the confiscation of private property on the part of federal agencies, such as the EPA that claims such tactics are intended to ‘preserve endangered species,’ leaving property owners liable for taxes while depriving them of the use of their property?
I hope Mitt is not the best we can do. Everytime we allow the “next in line” to take the nomination we lose. Bob Dole and John McCain were our two most recent moderates to get trounced.
Shades of McCain.
I WILL NOT vote for Mitt!
1. Why are you for free healthcare? I have to buy mine.
2. Do Mormons really believe the angle Maroni came to New York?
3. Did “Bring em Young” actual embezzle millions from the group?
4. How will you handle getting your tail whipped by Newt?
Note that these questions do not even broach Romney’s support for the radical gay and abortion agendas during his tenure as governor. Bob
Romney spent plenty of money to finish third.
Lots and lots of slick mailers, as befits his slick image.
He came unglued on WHO Des Moines morning host Jan Mickelson's show when Mickelson pushed his Mormon buttons; then went on and on about hidden video cameras.
WHO Des Moines afternoon host Steve Deace pushed Huckabee and bashed Romney, reflecting the conservative Christian audience.
Romney is not pro-life, is anti-gun, is pro-socialist-healthcare.
He is a loser.
Did I mention Mitt Romney is a loser.
I have one question for Mitt Romney:
Will you please go away?
wonder why some are exercised about Mitt when
the Conservative Republican, Sarah Palin is the person to
Some need to read her several articles she writes each week and OpEds, speeches. Also has the executive experience
At least Sarah’s son is serving in the war.
More than I can say for Mitt’s 5 sons.
1. Why did you impose RomneyCARE=ObamaCARE=HillaryCARE
on the Massachusetts taxpayers to coverup your company's
removing peoples' lost medical insurances
after you wiped out their businesses and companies
for your personal profit?
2. Why did you coverup the BIG DIG for campaign donations?
3. Why did you not help Gov. Palin against the slurs from Team Romney during Election 2008?
4. Why did you skip GOP candidates for judges?
5. Why did you usurp the Massachusetts Constitution,
to impose by improper executive authority, your personal (carpetbagger) whim
rather than the peoples' will?
Romney imposed gay marriage by his fiat against the Mass. Constitution by using improper executive authority.
"While former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney claims he did everything possible to throttle homosexual marriage in his state his campaign now saying he took "every conceivable step within the law to defend traditional marriage" several constitutional experts say that just isn't so.
"What Romney did [was] he exercised illegal legislative authority," Herb Titus said of the governor's actions after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court released its opinion in the Goodridge case in 2003. "He was bound by what? There was no order. There wasn't even any order to the Department of Public Health to do anything."
Titus, a Harvard law graduate, was founding dean of Pat Robertson's Regent University Law School. He also worked with former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, ...
Romney's aides have told WND that after four of the seven court members reinterpreted the definition of marriage, he believed he had no choice but to direct clerks and others to change state marriage forms and begin registering same-sex couples.
Some opponents contend that with those actions, Romney did no more or less than create the first homosexual marriages recognized in the nation. And Titus agrees."
"....But the court's decision conflicts with the constitutional philosophy of three co-equal branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial, Titus said. It also violates with the Massachusetts Constitution, which states: "The power of suspending the laws, or (suspending) the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature..."
And it cannot even be derived from the opinion itself, asserts the pro-family activist group Mass Resistance, which says the decision did four things:
* First, it acknowledged that the current law does not permit same-sex marriage.
"The only reasonable explanation is that the Legislature did not intend that same-sex couples be licensed to marry. We conclude, as did the judge, that G.L. c. 207 may not be construed to permit same-sex couples to marry."
* Second, it said it is NOT striking down the marriage laws (among other things, the Massachusetts Constitution forbids a court to change laws)
"Here, no one argues that striking down the marriage laws is an appropriate form of relief."
* Third, it declared that not allowing same-sex marriages is a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.
"We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution."
* And fourth, given that the court is not changing any laws, the SJC gave the Legislature 180 days to "take such action as it may deem appropriate."
"We vacate the summary judgment for the department. We remand this case to the Superior Court for entry of judgment consistent with this opinion. Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion."
After the Legislature did nothing during the 180 days, Romney then took action "on his own," the group said.
"Gov. Romney's legal counsel issued a directive to the Justices of the Peace that they must perform same-sex marriages when requested or 'face personal liability' or be fired," the group said."
[Did I mention Mitt Romney is a loser.]
Lol, yes you did!
|From The Vitamin Press|
Romney will never be President.
Could we please get through the November 2010 elections and then see who wins the Presidential Primaries before we start all this crap about who we will or will not vote for?
11. Do your really believe the Garden of Eden was in Missouri? Seriously. You can’t believe that.
12. If you’ll fall for that line of cultish garbage, no way I want you having the keys to the nuclear kingdom.
Great post. I did not know all of that. He is Toast. It’s Newt all the way baby.
Regarding gay marriage: Bias reporting from a bias group:
Here, from Mitt Romney himself:
“ROMNEY: Well, yes. I’m going to want to see a marriage limited to a man and a woman. I don’t want to see civil union either.”
Imagine how one can get their owns answers thanks to the internet and not have to rely on others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.