Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are you kidding me, Mitt, John Holdren?
Washington Examiner ^ | October 19, 2011 | Douglas MacKinnon

Posted on 10/20/2011 7:24:41 AM PDT by libstripper

As the Republican primary process continues, there is no doubt that the establishment GOP is winning and the Tea Party is losing.

Worse, as we accelerate toward the first votes finally being cast, many who believe in the simple and powerful message of the movement -- myself included - believe it now looks more and more foolish and naïve as it bounces from one flavor-of-the-month candidate to another.

* * *

As their standard bearer going into battle with Barack Obama next fall, do Republican primary voters really want the person who drew up the blueprint for Obama-care?

Worse, do Republican primary voters really want the person who the out-of-control job and freedom killing Obama EPA looked to for some of its most draconian ideas?

As reported in the conservative blogs Moonbattery and HOTAIR; “the Romney administration in 2005 essentially did what Barack Obama’s EPA wants to do now. He imposed CO2 emission caps — the “toughest in the nation” — in an effort to curtail traditional energy production.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: election; romney
It strikes me that Perry and Cain are blowing it by not attacking Mitt on both Romneycare and the AGW scam. All they need to do, over and over, is point out that he is the step father of ObamaCare, having supplied two of ObamaCare's most important designers and, with Holdren and what HOldren did in Mass. under Romney's direction, also one of the worst culprits in the whole AGW scam. Indeed, looking at the Obama Regime, the two worst, most economy destroying things Obama has done are pass ObamaCare and push the AGW superstition and accompanying EPA action. Any pubbie candidate who pounds away on those two and Romney's total complicity in them should squash him.
1 posted on 10/20/2011 7:24:43 AM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: libstripper
As the Republican primary process continues, there is no doubt that the establishment GOP is winning and the Tea Party is losing.

Really? I must be looking at the wrong polls because what I see is that the Tea Party candidate is ahead in virtually every state except NH.

2 posted on 10/20/2011 7:37:24 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Yup. The debate format sucks. They will need to get their message out daily. Perry has more money to make ads, while Cain is better at getting on TV shows. May the best conservative win. And sorry Newt, you blew the AGW issue big time.


3 posted on 10/20/2011 7:39:20 AM PDT by rfp1234 (RFP's Law: Whoever blames Bush first shall lose the argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Perry isn’t going to touch AGW because it is close to Al Gore. He wants us to forget he was a high level Al Gore operative.


4 posted on 10/20/2011 7:40:14 AM PDT by lodi90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

“Barack Hussein Obama has clotted the executive branch with unaccountable “czars”... Among the most alarming of these malevolent lunatics is Science Czar John Holdren, a participant in ClimateGate who has advocated de-developing America and putting sterilants in the public water supply…

…Holdren has also spoken in favor of forced abortions, confiscation of babies, targeted as well as mass involuntary sterilization, bureaucratic regulation of family size, and global authoritarian government...”

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/10/14/oh-super-romney-consulted-with-obama-mass-sterilization-expert-and-science-czar-john-holdren/


5 posted on 10/20/2011 7:42:27 AM PDT by Qbert ("The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry" - William F. Buckley, Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lodi90
Perry isn't going to touch AGW because it is close to Al Gore. He wants us to forget he was a high level Al Gore operative.

That is B.S. Look at any of Perry's speeches, they are all about using America's coal and ignoring the EPA and the anthro warming weenies.

6 posted on 10/20/2011 7:43:57 AM PDT by palmer (Before reading this post, please send me $2.50)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

A dedicated block ov voters is not forgeting or forgiving however.

A Perry nomination means the Republicans locse that block.


7 posted on 10/20/2011 8:02:27 AM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Qbert
Global warming has been identified as being influenced by cosmic rays and the sun. (CERN study) This was proven by this scientist and suppressed. This also confirms what some Danish scientists said several years ago. The candidates opinion on the global warming hoax and the FACT that carbon dioxide has nothing to do with must be asked in these TV debates. That will get rid of several candidates at last. I love Newt but I want to hear his answer to this question as well.
8 posted on 10/20/2011 8:24:39 AM PDT by DanBorg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

A vote for romney is just taking the foot off the gas and coasting towards the cliff.

the only ones I see making a U-Turn are Cain, Bachman, and Santorum.

Gingrich, would be better than Romney for sure.

The others: Huntsman, and Perry would just tap the brakes a bit but the car would still roll over the cliff.

Ron Paul would just crank the wheel while stepping onthe gas causing the car to roll and then roll off the cliff in a spectacular crash.


9 posted on 10/20/2011 8:30:44 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DanBorg

"The candidates opinion on the global warming hoax and the FACT that carbon dioxide has nothing to do with must be asked in these TV debates. That will get rid of several candidates at last. I love Newt but I want to hear his answer to this question as well."

Yep.

I've never understood why such a smart guy like Newt could fall for that nonsense. If he could explain why he did- and own up to his mistakes in a credible fashion, I think it would help him tremendously.

10 posted on 10/20/2011 8:36:59 AM PDT by Qbert ("The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry" - William F. Buckley, Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Weary But Not Beaten!


Click The Pic To Donate

Consider Becoming A Monthly Donor

11 posted on 10/20/2011 8:40:35 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

The reason Perry and Cain are not double-teaming Romney is because it wouldn’t do any good. The 20% or so of Republicans that support Romney already know he passed Romneycare, believes in AGW, etc. They support him anyways, and harping about these conservative issues they don’t care about will not erode Romney’s base of support.

Perry and Cain both need to knock the other one out of the race if they want to wrap up the conservative wing of the party. THEN, they will be able to go toe to toe with Romney without having another strong conservative candidate sniping at them from the sidelines.


12 posted on 10/20/2011 9:05:57 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

“A Perry nomination means the Republicans locse that block.”

Huh? A whole bunch of conservatives would rather have a 2nd term of Obama than a guy who supported Al Gore a few decades ago, then recanted? That’s really your contention?


13 posted on 10/20/2011 9:19:13 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Romney still has a chance to walk away from his AGW ideas. If he doesn’t I cannot vote for him.


14 posted on 10/20/2011 9:20:15 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Almost every day, the Wall Street journal editorial page has posted an article, warning that Romney is no conservative and that unless he is pushed further right, he will be a huge disappointment for conservatives. Most of the focus has been on Romneycare, but AGW and carbon credits are just as big an indicator of who Romeny really is. We cannot fix the economy as long as we are afraid of fossil fuels.

Romney is a pure pragmatist. He has no true core values and the end seem to always justify the means. Romney also seems to believe that the government must do things for the “greater good” Sounds Marxist, to me.


15 posted on 10/20/2011 9:26:23 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Perry supported Gore in the eighties, when he was a Democrat and much younger. Reagan was once a Democrat, also.

Besides, Perry is not the only other candidate running for the nomination.

Both Newt and Santorum have the brains and the ability to push Romney further right. Bachman is in there to, but I just don’t have the confidence in her that I once had.

Unfortunately, Romney is not a conservative at all. Either he moves right or he moves out.


16 posted on 10/20/2011 9:31:36 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
a guy who supported Al Gore a few decades ago, then recanted?

Your delusional fantasy that you or anyone else can convince people who have watched Perry for ten years that he is not still a liberal falls flat.

Unlike your strawman construction, we realize that if the liberals control both major parties that writes conservatives out of the picture.

Perry is no more a conservative than Mitt Romney.

Obama is producing a Backlash in favor of conservatism. 2010 saw a backlash against the liberal wing odf the republican party. If the Rockefeller wing manages to get one of their little globalists into the nominee seat in 2012 but can't deliver the election then they will be finished in the party power structure for a generation. Absolutely the benefits of not compromising are greater than any benefit from slowing the slide into socialism...but still continuing the slide and having the Republican party share the blame.

So absolutely we will not vote for Romney or Perry.

17 posted on 10/20/2011 10:04:02 AM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Eva

Even if Romney moves right, which he has already tried to do, I’d never believe it wasn’t simply political maneuvering. To me, he’s almost worse that Obama, because at least I know Obama has some solid values. They are values I despise and will fight to the death against, but at least I know where the guy stands. Romney’s just an opportunist and nobody knows what he really believes about anything.


18 posted on 10/20/2011 10:09:27 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I hear you. I don’t that Romney has any core values. That’s why he’s so hard to read. All he has is a huge ego.

I keep telling the story of Romney at the WA State GOP convention last year, when he tried to imitate Glenn Beck, who was then at the height of his popularity. I guess that Romney thought that since Beck grew up in WA state that he was especially popular here. So, toward the end of his speech, while talking about American exceptionalism, Romney cried. I wanted to throw up.


19 posted on 10/20/2011 10:31:09 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Romney is doing a good job of knocking Perry out and greatly helping Cain in the process.

Undecided voters and those supporting the weaker candidates will break heavily towards Cain.


20 posted on 10/20/2011 10:39:03 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

LOL. You are reading a helluva lot more into my comment then what was said. I think you are the one who is tilting at strawmen, since I never endorsed Perry. I simply asked you to clarify what your contention was.


21 posted on 10/20/2011 11:05:56 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

Perry was an ALGore operative in 1988, 24 years ago. Twenty four years before 1976, when Ronald Reagan made his first serious run for the presidency, he may have ben a liberal Democrat. People change and grow. I’m worried about what Perry is now, not 24 years ago.


22 posted on 10/20/2011 12:18:45 PM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Qbert
If he could explain why he did- and own up to his mistakes in a credible fashion, I think it would help him tremendously.

The important word is "could." Indeed, that's why Newt is not on my list of candidates to vote for vs. Mitt. So far Newt has talked the conservative talk in the debates better than any other candidate. Indeed, if that were all there was to it, I'd vote for and support him. Unfortunately, it's not. Ever since the Clintons blackmailed him in 1995 he's consistently flipped against conservatives when push came to shove, on the couch with Nancy just being the most egregious example. All of this leads me to believe the DemonRats have some kind of very serious hook into him that they can pull whenever they want to, meaning I'll vote for him vs. Obama, but not vs. any pubbie other than Romney.

23 posted on 10/20/2011 12:28:05 PM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson