Posted on 11/22/2010 7:01:21 AM PST by Bigtigermike
Mitt Romney hasn't changed a bit, and carries even more damning baggage.
The serious rumblings are already out there. Undaunted by the failure of one of the most expensive presidential primary runs in history, Mitt Romney apparently wants to take another shot at getting the GOP’s nomination. Utah Senator Orrin Hatch is “quite sure” Romney will run, and has said that the former Massachusetts governor “would be my preference.”
Sadly, there’s a hoary tradition in the GOP that certain establishment-favored candidates, even though they’re not the best available, have somehow earned “their turn.” That belief has usually led the party straight to the presidential political graveyard, which includes the campaign corpses of John McCain (2008) and Bob Dole (1996). Following that tradition this time around would mean that the party’s “it’s my turn” nominees would have moved from a somewhat conservative and usually credible war hero (Dole), to an occasionally conservative and all too often not credible war hero (McCain), to a decidedly not conservative and not credible guy who didn’t serve (Romney). There’s a reason why the GOP is often called the Stupid Party.
Perhaps the most potent portent that Romney’s 2012 aspirations are serious lies in an attempt by some to explain away his 2008 defeat as supposedly the result of his membership in and the public’s bigotry against the Mormon religion. In a pair of presentations on the program at the Mormon Media Studies Symposium earlier this month, a trio of Brigham Young University professors attempted to “prove” this claim. According to the Salt Lake City Deseret News:
[BYU prof John] Gee cited examples of counter-cult activity by the John McCain and Mike Huckabee campaigns. These politicians would slip false information about Mormons into a casual message.
… “[The media] need to know some of these things that have been going on that haven’t been covered, the way the coded language and off-hand remarks can be inserted in,” Gee said.
… “Mitt Romney will not be able to overcome half a century of hate and bigotry, but I would love to be proven wrong,” he said. “The media has to get the story correct, and it’s too much to ask for.”
Cry me a river. As far as I know, and I followed the GOP primaries very closely, the only evidence that anyone attempted to use Mitt Romney’s religion against him was one alleged early-December 2007 push poll in Iowa. Oddly enough, the only people who came forward to claim they had received the offensive phone calls were Romney campaign operatives, who “somehow” forgot to tell the press that they were on the candidate’s payroll.
The alleged push poll gave Romney, whose Hawkeye State campaign was already in serious trouble, an excuse to garner national attention with his “Faith in America” speech. Patrick Ruffini, who was blogging at the site of Romney cheerleader Hugh Hewitt at the time, observed:
This is relatively unexpected. Romney’s Mormon faith, though ever-present, has not been as big an issue as could have been expected earlier in the year. Questions still linger as to whether the most recent Mormon “controversy” (the push polls) actually reflected any real concerted anti-Romney strategy.
Apparently Professor Gee won’t let the lack of real evidence of a “concerted anti-Romney strategy” based on Mormonism get in the way of a historically revisionist fable.
The fact is that Mitt Romney lost in 2008 for a huge collection of reasons having absolutely nothing to do with his religious affiliation. Here’s the short list:
• His heinous betrayals of social conservatives in Massachusetts when he was governor. On Romney’s watch, abortion became a legislated, subsidized, state-sponsored “benefit” for the first time. Regarding same-sex “marriage,” Romney broke his sworn oath to uphold the state’s constitution by implementing the Goodridge decision before the Bay State’s legislature enacted the enabling law the court’s ruling required (to my knowledge, the legislature still has not done this).
• His proactive pursuit of state-controlled health care legislation in Massachusetts, signed with the late Ted Kennedy standing behind him approvingly. By late 2007, it was already clear, despite sympathetic media attempts to portray it as “pioneering” and a “grand experiment,” that Commonwealth Care (aka RomneyCare) was turning into a coercive, failing statist monstrosity. Despite its self-evident flaws, RomneyCare was often cited by leftists as the prototype for ObamaCare.
• A host of life story and resume inconsistencies, including but not limited to: his antiabortion “epiphany,” after which he signed the abortion-enabling Commonwealth Care law; his assertion, having hunted twice, that he was a “lifelong hunter”; and a completely disproven contention that his father George “marched with Martin Luther King” in Michigan.
On the ground, the real reason why Mitt Romney lost is that a few brave conservative activists whom Romney abandoned while governor banded together to get the truth out to a legion of sympathizers and then to the electorate — first in Iowa, then in New Hampshire, and finally on Super Tuesday. There’s your “conspiracy,” Professor Gee.
There are even more reasons why, if he chooses to run this time, Mitt Romney should again be summarily rejected. Among the new ones are at least these two biggies:
• At crunch time in March 2009, when the Obama administration was orchestrating a statist boardroom coup at General Motors, Romney went on CNN and applauded the president for his “backbone.” Seriously.
• After all these years, Romney refuses to concede that creating Commonwealth Care was a mistake. In March, he even called its imposition of an individual mandate to purchase insurance “the ultimate conservative plan.”
The majority of the USA’s population, which Frank Luntz recently found is sensible, constitution-loving, and conservative, cannot and will not abide Mitt Romney receiving the GOP’s presidential nomination in 2012. We’ve had more than enough of this Mitt.
Has anyone actually CREATED a site called “WankersForMitt.com”
I think that would be funny
And they should collect donations. (Mitt supporters are stupid enough to send)
For some Republicans, Conservatism is just a political strategy.
Who hates Mormons? Most people I know are indifferent to the religion.
What is sad is these folks are willing to condemn an American for being Mormon but say we must all respect Muslims.
Of course Romney is a terrible candidate an RINO to the core so anything that hurts his chances will help America.
If Romney wins the nomination we might as well just hand over the victory to the opposition. Do us all a favor and yourself Mr. Romney...spare us and...spare YOURSELF the humiliation.
The majority of Mormons, Harry Reid notwithstanding, are great people who could field great candidates but Mitt Romney is not one of them. He is a flawed candidate who many Mormons will reject due to his flip flopping on an issue that is very important to them: abortion.
O’Reilly thinks Romney will be a great candidate because he has money. That didn’t seem to help Meg Whitman.
How true. Bears repeating.
This guy makes me sick!
Mitt Romney is an unacceptable RINO-progressive.
Hasn’t anybody learned from the John McCain loss? Just because a person has a name doesn’t mean they are any good or electable. Enough of the “smiling boobs” for president stuff. Nominate a real person with real life experience and common sense, not a proven loser like “pretty-boy” Romney...
This is the biggest test of the Tea Parties for this election cycle... keeping scumbag Mitt as far out of the running as possible.
If we fail at that... well, let’s just don’t fail at that.
Elegant snake oil salesman.
The old establishment ‘my turn’ mentality worked in the past (to disastrous effect) but it won’t work any more. This is the Tea Party Age and we are sick unto death of the Old Boys giving us RINO candidates and telling us to like it. There is no way on earth Mitt can win this time around. A person less in love with himself would see that and move on. Mitt appears to be too enamored of the image he sees in the mirror.
I am speaking as someone who lived in MA during Mitt’s entire tenure. He was a disaster in more ways than one—not the least being the way he jacked fees through the roof so he could hypocritically claim he hadn’t raised taxes. He profoundly damaged the state’s economy, and then, maybe sensing he hadn’t outright killed it, he passed Romneycare—the death blow.
O’Reilly thinks Romney will be a great candidate because he has money. That didn’t seem to help Meg Whitman.And it didn't help Romney last time around.
How much did he spend? How many votes did he get?
Obviously these "professors" have discovered all of us are bigots.
Despite the fact that Romney is a socialist liar who laid the foundation for Obamacare and has literally been on every side of almost every issue. Despite the fact that he does not represent in the least conservative values or ideals and he and his minions tend to back stab real Conservatives for political gain the only REAL reason we oppose him is his LDS membership.
We are all illiterate hateful pigs.
While true, the fact is that Romney's religion is fair game. Government is forbidden from having a religious qualification for office. But voters have every right and duty to consider the whole man, including his religion, and what that religion says about Romney's values.
Even if Romney was a conservative, which he is not, I wouldn't vote for him because he is a member of a whacky cult that has twisted traditional Christianity until it's not recognizable. That's not the role model this country needs.
All Religions and All cultures are not equal. The country just got burned electing someone who didn't share our religious and cultural experience. Let's not do it again.
Add in the fact that in NH and FL, Romney will probably be favored, two of the first three primary states. If MI is added in, that makes three of the first four primary states Romney has a good chance of winning. That momentum may be insurmountable.
The key to defeating Romney is making his candidacy crash in the beginning.
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.