ANN COULTER: THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM (Who is the REAL Conservative?)

January 16, 2008

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

Unluckily for McCain, snowstorms in Michigan suppressed the turnout among Democratic "Independents" who planned to screw up the Republican primary by voting for our worst candidate. Democrats are notoriously unreliable voters in bad weather. Instead of putting on galoshes and going to the polls, they sit on their porches waiting for FEMA to rescue them.

In contrast to Michigan's foul weather, New Hampshire was balmy on primary day, allowing McCain's base -- Democrats -- to come out and vote for him.

Assuming any actual Republicans are voting for McCain -- or for liberals' new favorite candidate for us, Mike Huckabee -- this column is for you.

I've been casually taking swipes at Mitt Romney for the past year based on the assumption that, in the end, Republicans would choose him as our nominee. My thinking was that Romney would be our nominee because he is manifestly the best candidate.

I had no idea that Republican voters in Iowa and New Hampshire planned to do absolutely zero research on the candidates and vote on the basis of random impulses.
Dear Republicans: Please do one-tenth as much research before casting a vote in a presidential election as you do before buying a new car.

One clue that Romney is our strongest candidate is the fact that Democrats keep viciously attacking him while expressing their deep respect for Mike Huckabee and John McCain.

This point was already extensively covered in Chapter 1 of "How To Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)": Never take advice from your political enemies.

Turn on any cable news show right now, and you will see Democratic pundits attacking Romney, calling him a "flip-flopper," and heaping praise on McCain and Huckleberry -- almost as if they were reading some sort of "talking points."

Doesn't that raise the tiniest suspicions in any of you? Are you too busy boning up on Consumer Reports' reviews of microwave ovens to spend one day thinking about who should be the next leader of the free world? Are you familiar with our "no exchange/no return" policy on presidential candidates? Voting for McCain because he was a POW a quarter-century ago or Huckabee because he was a Baptist preacher is like buying a new car because you like the color.

The candidate Republicans should be clamoring for is the one liberals are feverishly denouncing. That is Mitt Romney by a landslide.

New York Times columnist Frank Rich says Romney "is trying to sell himself as a leader," but he "is actually a follower and a panderer, as confirmed by his flip-flops on nearly every issue."

But Rich is in a swoon over Huckabee. I haven't seen Rich this excited since they announced "Hairspray" was coming to Broadway.

Rich has continued to hyperventilate over "populist" charmer Huckabee even after it came to light that Huckabee had called homosexuality an "abomination." Normally, any aspersions on sodomy or any favorable mentions of Christianity would lead to at least a dozen hysterical columns by Frank Rich.

Rich treated Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ" as if it were a Leni Riefenstahl Nazi propaganda film. (On a whim, I checked to see if Rich had actually compared Gibson to Riefenstahl in one of his many "Passion" reviews and yes, of course he had.)

Curiously, however, Huckabee's Christianity doesn't bother Rich. In column after column, Rich hails Huckabee as the only legitimate leader of the Republican Party. This is like a girl in high school who hates you telling you your hair looks great.

Liberals claim to be enraged at Romney for being a "flip-flopper." I've looked and looked, and the only issue I can find that Romney has "flipped" on is abortion. When running for office in Massachusetts -- or, for short, "the Soviet Union" -- Romney said that Massachusetts was a pro-choice state and that he would not seek to change laws on abortion.

During the time that McCain-Feingold was being debated, Mitt Romney had a position that was even more radically anti-free speech:

http://www.earnedmedia.org/fred1219.htm

Yet Another Romney Flip-Flop: Campaign Finance Reform

MEDIA ADVISORY, Dec. 19 /Standard Newswire/ — According to an article in today’s Weekly Standard, advisers to Mitt Romney have been attacking Fred Thompson on campaign finance reform. This is ironic given Mitt Romney’s past support for publically financed elections, campaign spending limits, and abolishing political action committees.

2002: Romney Went Further Than McCain-Feingold And Supported Public Financing Of Campaigns By Taxing Political Contributions. “...he suggested an alternative funding method. Instead of providing campaign funds from state coffers, his plan would tap 10 percent of the fundraising of candidates who choose to raise money privately.” (Richard Nangle, “Clean Election advocates keep pushing; Common Cause to ask Romney’s assistance,” Telegram & Gazette (Massachusetts), 11/14/02)

1994: Romney Wanted To Implement A $6 Million Campaign Spending Limit And Abolish PACs. “Romney also said he advocates spending limits on congressional elections, even suggesting that the current race against Sen. Edward M. Kennedy should have a $6 million spending cap...As for campaign finance reform, Romney called for abolishing political action committees and tightening regulations of the process by which limits on campaign contributions to individuals can be legally bypassed.” (Frank Phillips, “Romney, Vowing To Live It, Touts Congress Reform Plan,” Boston Globe, 7/7/94)

Video from 1994: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM0x8WnI4to

Hypocritically, Romney has already contributed $17.5 million to his presidential campaign.

Romney’s History Of Support For Campaign Finance Reform

The campaign finance provisions Romney supported in 1994 and 2002 were similar to what was initially included in the federal legislation.

“A Boston Globe article from July 1994 reported that Romney publicly advocated placing spending limits on congressional campaigns and abolishing political action committees (PACs). McCain and his allies on campaign finance included similar proposals in the first campaign-finance reform package they introduced in Congress in 1995, said Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center, who was at the center of the fight to pass the changes. McCain and his allies later dropped the spending limit s and PAC ban because they proved to be too controversial, she said.” (Alexander Bolton, “Romney’s About-Face On Campaign Funding,” The Hill, 2/8/07)

In fact, Romney’s proposals were even more stringent than what was included in McCain’s legislation.

“Back then [since his days as a Senate and gubernatorial candidate in Massachusetts], Romney advocated more stringent measures than McCain-Feingold ultimately included, such as a spending limit for federal elections and a tax on political contributions.” (Eric Moskowitz, “Romney, McCain Spar On Campaign Finance,” Concord Monitor, 4/27/07)

When running for the Senate in 1994 and for Governor in 2002, Romney supported campaign finance restrictions including a 10-percent tax on campaign contributions and the abolition of PACs.

“Massachusetts Romney called for spending limits on candidates and a 10 percent tax on campaign contributions for state elections to finance publicly funded campaigns. Massachusetts Romney wanted to abolish political action committees because they wield too much power, and he bemoaned the influence of money in politics.” (Editorial, “Campaign Finance Flip,” Washington Post, 5/26/07).

During his 1994 campaign, he bemoaned “the influence of money,” spoke out against increasingly larger contribution limits, and called for campaign spending limits.

“These kinds of associations between money and politics in my view are wrong. And for that reason, I would like to have campaign spending limits...I also would abolish PACS...I don’t like the influence of money, whether it’s business, labor or any other group, I do not like that kind of influence. Lobbyists I want to register, I want to know who they are, I want to ensure that gifts are limited...I think that contributions are fine, I just don’t want them to be larger and larger...The kinds of demand s that are being placed on the economics of running a campaign suggest an increasing power on the part of money, and I think it’s wrong and we’ve got to change it.” (Mitt Romney for Senate Press Conference Video 1994, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktH1FpNqlOc, accessed 7/19/07)

Specifically, he wanted a $6 million spending cap in his race against Kennedy.

“Romney also said he advocates spending limits on congressional elections, even suggesting that the current race against Sen. Edward M. Kennedy should have a $6 million spending cap...As for campaign finance reform, Romney called for abolishing political action committees and tightening regulations of the process by which limits on campaign contributions to individuals can be legally bypassed.” (Frank Phillips, “Romney, Vowing To Live It, Touts Congress Reform Plan,” The Boston Globe, 7/7/94)

Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM0x8WnI4to

In 2002, he was a leading proponent of “clean election” law, which many consider to be a huge violation of free speech as it allows for public funding of candidates for state office who meet strict fundraising requirements.

“Hoping to broker a deal that would stave off a legislative attempt to repeal the Clean Elections law, advocates of public campaign financing are pushing for a meeting with Governor-elect Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney campaigned in favor of Clean Elections, which provides public money to candidates for state office who meet strict fund-raising requirements.” (Richard Nangle, “Clean Election advocates keep pushing; Common Cause to ask Romney’s assistance,” Telegram & Gazette (Massachusetts), 11/14/02)

Also in 2002, he called for a 10 percent tax on campaign contributions for state elections to finance publicly funded campaigns.

“...he suggested an alternative funding method. Instead of providing campaign funds from state coffers, his plan would tap 10 percent of the fundraising of candidates who choose to raise money privately.” (Richard Nangle, “Clean Election advocates keep pushing; Common Cause to ask Romney’s assistance,” Telegram & Gazette (Massachusetts), 11/14/02)

When McCain Campaigned For Romney In 2002, Romney Praised McCain For Standing For “Reform And Change” Saying “Those Are My Values.”

“Romney also praised McCain for his general reform campaign when the Arizona senator came to Massachusetts to stump with Romney just before Romney’s 2002 election victory in the governor’s race. ‘He has always stood for reform and change. And he’s always fought the good battle, no matter what the odds,’ Romney said at the time. ‘Those are my values.’” (Eric Moskowitz, “Romney, McCain Spar On Campaign Finance,” Concord Monitor, 4/27/07)

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.