Posted on 02/02/2008 4:33:02 PM PST by bugseye
Real Romney record in Massachusetts By Matt Kinnaman Article Last Updated: 02/01/2008 01:08:08 PM EST
Saturday, February 02 LEE Massachusetts has suffered for nearly 50 years under a growing Democrat monopoly in the Legislature, leading to one of America's most inhospitable business and economic climates. When Mitt Romney was inaugurated governor in 2003, the Massachusetts Legislature was drunk with deficit spending, and awash in regulatory revels, suffocating entrepreneurial energy and reducing incentives for existing companies to stay in the state, never mind relocate here. These same lawmakers routinely ignored the will of the voters on ballot initiatives, including their smack-down of the people's approval of an income tax reduction which the Legislature refused (and still refuses) to implement.
It's no wonder that Mitt Romney inherited a state economy that trailed overall national numbers in manufacturing, output, job growth, and employment. The real wonder is that, as a Republican governor entering this morass of economic opposition and obstructionism he was able to pull the budget into the black and build a big surplus, while forestalling an adversarial Legislature on income and capital gains tax increases.
(Excerpt) Read more at berkshireeagle.com ...
It’ll be a damn shame if Romney isn’t able to pull off a primary victory.
So true, I’ll be voting for Romney here in Massachusetts next week, I wish he was still governor.
Romney in ‘08.
Nice to see someone telling it like it is!
No. McCain it will be representing the Repubs in the general. Then it really won't matter who wins.
*** Back in 2005, Romney was calling the McCain-Kennedy-Bush comprehensive immigration reform package, which btw included amnesty, “reasonable proposals”. Since that time Romney has unbelievably morphed into a Tancredo clone. Mitt the Phony!
*** In 1994 Romney was trying to run to the left of Fat Ted Kennedy on the abortion issue. He says he had an epiphany a few years back and now calls himself pro-life. Yet he was still upholding a womans right to choose in 2005. Mitt the Fraud!
*** Romney has stated, he would sign a federal assault weapons ban if it came to his desk. Recently, Romney said he was a lifetime hunter and supported the NRA his entire life. We now know that is BS. He joined the NRA in 2006. Mitt the Liar!
*** Romney has a record of advancing homosexual rights, in a leading liberal state that has elected Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, election cycle after election cycle, decade after decade. Mitt the Panderer!
*** Also, Romney has a long history of supporting campaign finance reform and restrictions even more stringent than McCain-Feingold legislation. He supported banning Political Action Committees (PACS) and called for a ten percent tax on campaign contributions, along with capping campaign spending on congressional elections. Mitt the Hypocrite!
Romney’s only real accomplishment as Governor of Massachusetts was to propose the first ever statewide health care program in America. Romney wants the federal government to take over 1/7th of the US economy by shoving a version of his RomneyCare down the throats of the American people. Mandates, subsidies and regulations aren’t what the US health care system needs. That is the first step on the road to socialized medicine. Mitt the Social-Liberal!
Romney has a lousy track record on the issues. An unconservative track record. People who have chosen to follow him, are selling out to a cult candidate. Nothing conservative or constitutional about Willard the Myth.
I’m not engineering anything. It’s just happening. Like they say, stuff happens.
Tis true, because those of us , who Lived in Massachusetts, and I did for 20 LONG YEARS... Know what Mitt Romney did and what he was dealing with. I became a Republican in Massachusetts, because it was there that I was made well aware, that I was not a democrat.
OK, if the anti-Huckabee FReepers buy this graph, would they please explain how this is distinct from Arkansas, as explained by one author on another thread a while back?
When former Democratic Arkansas Governor Jim "Guy" Tucker committed so many crimes I don't have time to list them here, Huckabee--who was Lt. Governor at the time--took over Tucker's job. Remember, this was in a state controlled by the Clinton machine and 87% of its General Assembly were Democrats. Arkansas had the worst roads in America, according to many trucker magazines; and its school system was ranked 49th out of 50 in the nation after Bill Clinton and Tucker had left. Now Arkansas' roads are rated some of the best in America and its public education system has its head above water and children are learning. Huckabee brought Arkansas back from the brink of oblivion. Yet groups like the Club for Growth have been on his case, claiming Huckabee would tax and spend Americans to death. But nothing is as simple as the Club for Growth would make it seem. Arkansas' public schools had been decimated by corruption, someone had to fix them and Huckabee did so. [Source: "First Huckabee is Attacked: Then Huckabee is Blamed for Attacks, Misquoted, etc., etc." --placed at ttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1956099/posts ]
Why is it that so many folks' estimate of Romney the $ administrator doesn't seem to match the Cato Institute's eval of Romney? (The Cato Institute gave him a "C" rating for his MA guv years...the same rating it gave NM guv Bill Richardson)
Why is it that so many FReepers are harder on Huckabee's current economic stances (I'm not talking about his track record) when he has promised not to raise taxes, if elected, whereas McCain refused to sign President Bush's tax cut which put billion of dollars back in the pockets of Americans.?
Why is it that so many FReepers harped on Huckabee's current economic stances (again, I'm not talking about his track record) when he has promised not to raise taxes, if elected, whereas Fred Thompson would not make such a promise? (Why the free pass for Thompson when he was running?)
If the Huck crit-ters keep insisting that you can't size up him economically by excluding his track record, then if they are pro-Romney, why is it that Huck's poor track record on taxes is relevant but Romney's poor track record on abortion & social issues is not?
It just seems politics as usual: Double standards galore.
Obviously written by a shill who’s been bought and paid for by Romney’s millions. </s>
When they get to the convention and nobody has the quantity of delegates necessary to garner the nomination after the first ballot, they will haggle and out of that there is a good chance that Fred Thompson will be the nominee because he is the only candidate who will satisfy all the different conservative "factions" represented by the RINOs. |
When you say, “It’s just happening”, you mean to say the convention delegates will look to the ones who couldn’t garner 2 digit vote percentages in the various state primaries or collect donations sufficient to keep their campaigns going? Or do you expect someone like Newt Gingrich or Jeb Bush to come to the rescue?
Well stated.
I understand the “hope” that a candidate’s rhetoric causes people to believe. Romney’s trying to sell us all that he is a true-blue conservative. I’m not buying it and I’ll never buy it. The record doesn’t match the reality and Mitt has repeatedly proven himself a world-class panderer.
Look at just this campaign thus far. He’s promised $20 BILLION to bail out the auto industry in Michigan. He also came down in favor of Catastrophic Federal insurance coverage in Florida. Both ideas are terrible and not even close to being conservative.
Stuff happens, but I hope stuff doesn’t happen this time, I don’t think I can take having Hillary in the White House, because she ran against the “hand picked” McCain, the chosen one of Bill Clinton. I haven’t felt this bad since Dukasis ran for President. I was in Massachusetts at the time, and I kept saying, I can not believe Dukasis is the Democrat running for President. I remember how the media hyped him , it scared the hell out of me. Of course , my instincts were right, Dukasis was defeated. I just hope my instincts are right now, because for the life of me, I do not see the attraction of Hillary in the Oval Office.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday Hillary Clinton with an eight point lead in the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. It’s now Clinton 45%, Obama 37%. (see recent daily numbers).
In the race for the Republican Presidential Nomination, it’s John McCain at 30%, Mitt Romney at 30%, and Mike Huckabee at 21%. Ron Paul is supported by 5% of Likely Republican Primary Voters (see recent daily numbers). Romney leads by sixteen percentage points among conservatives while McCain has a two-to-one advantage among moderate Primary Voters.
Today is the first day of daily tracking for the general election. McCain leads Clinton 47% to 41%. A week ago McCain had an eight point advantage. New match-ups will be added in the coming days.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
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.