Posted on 02/08/2008 3:05:07 PM PST by AFA-Michigan
One party, at least, is sad to see him go.
...When Democrats looked at Romney, we also saw the perfect candidate — for us to run against. The best presidential candidates have the ability to change people's minds. Mitt Romney never got that far because he never failed to change his own mind first.
So when Romney gamely suspended his campaign this afternoon, there was heartfelt sadness on both sides of the aisle. Democrats are sorry to lose an adversary whose ideological marathon vividly illustrated the vast distance a man must travel to reach the right wing of the Republican Party.
...Romney's farewell at the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting shows how far the once-mighty right wing has fallen. In an introduction laced with barbs in McCain's direction, Laura Ingraham's description of Mitt as "a conservative's conservative" said all there is to say about Romney's campaign and the state of the conservative movement. If their last, best hope is a guy who only signed up two years ago and could hardly convince them he belonged, the movement is in even worse shape than it looks.
...Romney pandered with conviction. He even tried to make it a virtue, defending his conversion on abortion by telling audiences that he would never apologize for being a latecomer to the cause of standing up for human life. Conservatives thanked him for trying but preferred the genuine article. In Iowa, Romney came in second to a true believer, and New Hampshire doesn't have enough diehards to put him over the top.
...McCain was authentic, Huckabee was conservative, and Romney couldn't convince enough voters he was either one.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
How sad and true.
The guy who was so offended by Ronald Reagan that he registered as an independent during the Reagan Administration and voted in the Democrat presidential primary when the elder Bush was running for reelection now lays claim to being the future face of the conservative movement?
Well, he can spend another $40 million of his own money in 2012, but as long as true conservatives still draw breath and have functioning memory cells, he will not hijack the conservative movement and turn it into the Gay Ole Party without a fight.
To say nothing of the 700 FR members who supported him only as a cheap consolation prize after Fred and Hunter dropped, and then only because he wasn’t McCain. Then to have them beat their breast and tear their hair when he is gone, like he was some kind of conservative savior... while all the while he was only a trojan horse “also-ran.”
It baffles the mind.
I was listening to Glenn Beck on radio earlier today interviewing Rick Santorum., and he said Romney has suspended his campaign, not quit the race, and still has control of his delegates. He said it is possible for Romney to jump back in if something unforessen happens between now and the convention. I was not aware of this, anybody else?
huh? The once-mighty right has fallen? Who the ... oh, its Slate.com ok... whatever.
Oh, please, the media is ecstatic over McCain. They led him this far and are leading him to slaughter in November. Those are alligator tears over Mitt.
Don’t worry Bruce, the Democrats will wipe the floor with McCain, who by the way, is about as “authentic” as a celibate Bill Clinton.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
The Democrats have to do the analytical thinking for the Republicans
That is not a winning situation
Mitt was the most conservative person on the Republican ticket and still, people like you LIE about it.
It’s amazing!
Now you have two Demoncrats running as Republicans.
On the issues:
Candidates on the Issues
Monday, January 28, 2008
By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer
ABORTION: Support abortion rights?
Clinton: Yes.
Edwards: Yes.
Obama: Yes.
Giuliani: Yes.
Huckabee: No.
McCain: No.
Romney: No.
EDUCATION:
Clinton: $10 billion for universal preschool. Replace No Child Left Behind law. $10,000 higher-education scholarships per year of national service.
Edwards: Universal preschool for 4 year olds. Change or replace No Child Left Behind.
Obama: $18 billion plan for preschool, teacher pay, $4,000 college tax credit for community service.
Giuliani: Vouchers for school choice.
Huckabee: Give states more authority to run education.
McCain: Vouchers for school choice, more community-college aid.
Romney: Supports school choice and No Child Left Behind law.
GAY MARRIAGE: Prohibit it with constitutional amendment?
Clinton: No.
Edwards: No.
Obama: No.
Giuliani: No.
Huckabee: Yes.
McCain: No.
Romney: Yes.
GLOBAL WARMING:
Clinton: $150 billion, 10-year energy package for new fuel sources; backed stringent caps on greenhouse gas emissions.
Edwards: $13 billion annual fund to double budget for efficiency and renewable energy, favors stringent caps on greenhouse gas emissions.
Obama: $150 billion, 10-year program for “climate friendly” energy supplies, favors stringent caps on greenhouse gas emissions.
Giuliani: Agrees humans contribute to global warming, opposes mandatory caps on greenhouse gases. Consider expanding nuclear power and alternative energy to free nation’s dependence on foreign oil.
Huckabee: Supports increase to 35 mpg fuel efficiency standard by 2020, and emission caps.
McCain: Led Senate effort to cap greenhouse gas emissions; favors tougher fuel efficiency.
Romney: Says tougher mileage standards are a burden on automakers. Opposes mandatory caps on greenhouse gases unless other countries take similar steps. Says answer is to free the country from dependence on foreign oil.
More here:
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Jan28/0,4670,WhereTheyStand,00.html
Have fun deciding between two LIBERALS - McPain in the arse and the Huckelbilly. As conservatives we won’t be voting for either of them. We may do a write in for Mitt. I cannot in good conscience vote for the McPain in the arse or the lying, backslidden Baptist, Huckabilly. It will be the first time that we don't vote - ever. Sometimes TOUGH LOVE is needed. We can not bend over any more ... it's a matter of Principle.
Romney was pro growth and tax cut and for winning the war. That is a combination that is simple and hard for Dems to beat.
That is why Dems and libs attacked him and only him during the campaign...and still do today. 2012 isn’t far away.
He can still accept donations to RESUME or perhaps run again in 2012.
He got my vote.
I will not vote for any Demoncrats even if they pretend they are Republicans - can’t hold my nose anymore. Won’t do it.
When your enemies tell you how much they want to run against this or that canidate, you can figure they are lying.
Who has a better chance of winning?
Whole Country is in a foul mood. They hate the Political class with a passion. Everyone from the President to the least member of Congress has record low sustained political approval numbers.
The GOP, because they hold the WH, is seen as the party in power.
Given the country’s furious Anti DC mood who has a better chance of winning against Clinton Inc?
A tired broke old 25 year member of the DC Establishment who is running on a Leftist agenda with a long politically corrupt history who virtually no one in the Conservative Movement likes or trusts who’s stated political agenda is to be Democrat Lite
or
an articulate successful business man and former Gov with a $250 million war chest who at least is running on a solidly Conservative agenda who can credibly run a Reagan style “we got to go clean up DC” campaign?
9 months ago according to all the National Polls the only person who could beat Clinton Inc was Rudy G. Where is he now?
That is where the GOP and McCain will be in Nov 2008. The GOP will be lucky to win 10 states. We are going to get massacred down ticket also. The Democrats are fired up. They are going to have huge turnout since it will be the 1st chance in 15 years for them to control the whole Govt. They are like we were in 2000. They will be ground glass Democrats.
The Mods-Indys are NOT going to vote for McCain’s style of Democrat lite politics. The are in a foul anti Establishment mood and McCain is as Establishment as they get. A career old WASP politician. The Mods/Indys are going to vote for the the Democrat real deal over the Democrat Lite GOP brand.
The Conservative/Republican will not be energized and so many will not show up, certainly will not volunteer their time and money to campaign. McCain’s GOTV will be a sad joke. After all, what the difference between one tax hiking big Govt authoritarian Liberal or the other to them. Either way Conservatives get nothing
Ronald Reagan was originally a liberal Democrat, sign abortion rights into law in CA while governor, and signed an amnesty deal while President.
Sometimes men can change. Romney was far superior to mccain.
You know something, at one time I was a hell of a lot less conservative than I am today. Intelligent people educate themselves and learn from mistakes. One definition of life is change. It’s funny how Romney’s changes are called flip-flops and and McCain’s changes are called re-assessments. It’s so much pure BS. I admire Mitt Romney and I’m sorry that he dropped out.
I really don’t think that “suspending a campaign” is any different than dropping out.
Seems to me someone in the MEDIA would be pointing out this little nuance if it were true. Perhaps there is some kind of RNC rule that allows “suspension of campaign” and still controlling the delegates that we can find?
This is the exact same situation as democrat John Edwards.
By suspending the campaign as opposed to ending it a candidate does retain his/her delegates, can continue to solicit donations to pay financial obligations, etc.
If McCain or Hucka bee do not have a clear majority of delegates by convention time Mitt will have some negotiating power until he releases his delegates.
“Seems to me someone in the MEDIA would be pointing out this little nuance if it were true.”
I doubt it, because we can still vote for him too.
Hi NMH,
Please identify which of these is a “lie,” as you so gently phrased it.
Mitt Romney declared himself so at odds with Ronald Reagan in his late 30’s and early 40’s that he registered as an independent during the Reagan Administration.
He voted in the 1992 Democratic prez primary.
He contributed to and attended functions of the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.
He endorsed Roe v. Wade and promised ever so passionately and indignantly that he would protect and preserve a woman’s “right” to have her prenatal child killed, and that he did “not take the position of a pro-life candidate.”
He was endorsed by the Republican Majority for Choice PAC and twice by the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans.
He endorsed gays in the military.
He opposed the Boy Scouts ban on homosexuals.
He promised to co-sponsor Kennedy’s federal “gay rights” legislation.
He endorsed tax-financed spousal-type benefits for the homosexual partners of state govt employees, and even criticized some Mass Dems for opposing it.
When running for governor, he opposed a Marriage Protection Amendment to the state constitution being promoted by pro-family groups.
He supported legal recognition of homosexual domestic partnerships.
Without any court order to do so, he issued an executive order instructing justices of the peace to perform homosexual wedding ceremonies, or resign.
Then, posturing himself to run for governor, he flip-flopped on some but not all of the above.
In December 2007, he reiterated his endorsement of state-level “gay rights” laws, the same kind of laws used to discriminate against and punish the Boy Scouts, Salvation Army, and other individuals and groups who believe homosexual behavior is wrong. For example, forcing Catholic Charities in Boston to either process homosexual adoptions or abandon its adoption services altogether.
Overruling the finding of his own administration’s Department of Community Health, he required Catholic hospitals to dispense the morning after pill in violation of their religious conviction.
He still to this day opposes the Boy Scouts of America’s nationwide ban on homosexuals, saying local councils should be left free to decide. (Well, why not each individual troop?)
He appointed more Dems than Repubs to the bench in Mass, including a board member of the Lesbian & Gay Bar Association.
He signed into law a Kennedy-endorsed mandatory universal healthcare plan that includes tax-financing of abortion on demand, not just “medically necessary” abortions as required by a Mass court. And the plan statutorily provided a seat on the governing board to Planned Parenthood — both items he could have line item-vetoed but did not.
According to the Republican National Coalition for Life, he supports medical experimentation on existing lines of human embryos.
A CNN reporter reported last week that Romney said he does not support so-called homosexual “marriage” but does not support “gay rights.”
Now again, which of these facts do you assert are “lies”?
You’re right, it is a matter of principle.
And I repeat: “As long as true conservatives still draw breath and have functioning memory cells, (Romney) will not hijack the conservative movement and turn it into the Gay Ole Party without a fight.”
Vort: “You know something, at one time I was a hell of a lot less conservative than I am today.”
Vortigen, did your philosophical evolution happen overnight at the impressionable, still formative age of 58 on just about every issue imaginable, and just by happenstance right before you announced your campaign for president?
Or was is different than that?
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.