Skip to comments.Mitt Romney: Tom Dewey All Over Again
Posted on 11/25/2011 9:01:55 AM PST by ReformationFan
They arrive now with monotonous regularity. Another day, another announcement by a New Hampshire politician of his or her endorsement of Mitt Romney for President. Former Governor John Sununu. Former Governor and U.S. Senator Judd Gregg. Senator Kelly Ayotte. Umpteen members of the New Hampshire House and Senate. Romney's the one. A businessman. A leader. The one who will create what all America wants jobs, jobs, jobs! Overseas, seas, seas. Yet the Romney record suggests he'll be creating the jobs overseas, seas, seas, and that's what we'll be hearing from the Obama camp from here to reelection.
Oh, how those beltway bandits love to promise jobs, jobs, jobs. That was the promise of the first President Bush. When we went to war with Iraq to liberate Kuwait, it was, said Secretary of State James Baker, for o-i-l and jobs, jobs, jobs. A year later, GOP challenger Pat Buchanan would ridicule the promise of new jobs, noting that Bush never told us they would be in Shanghai, Tokyo, and other ports of call. Manufacturing jobs. Good pay. Jobs that are gone and aren't coming back any time soon.
By their fruits, you shall know them. Our largest employer used to be General Motors. Now it's Wal-Mart. The siren song of free trade has carried off the best of American jobs and creativity. Our institutions of higher education are increasingly educating foreign students who go back home and create companies that beat American businesses with American training and know-how. Our government borrows and spends to create jobs, adding to deficits and tax burdens that kill jobs. We rescue businesses too big to fail with the money of people too small to count. And Mitt Romney is okay with that. Twenty-four years ago, it was Dukakis and the Massachusetts miracle that would
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewamerican.com ...
Who’s next to endorse Romney?? Warren Rudman?
Tom Dewey is exactly right. A worthless loser candidate. We should have gone with Taft. But the powers that be wouldn’t have it.
Thomas Dewey was a Rockefeller Republican before the term came into use.
Yep, then Bill Cohen.
"I endorse Milt. He is one of us.
Politics aside, I could and can respect the men, Dewey and Romney. I'd have no problem awarding either a civic award. I wouldn't want to see Romney anywhere near the White House, just like my father couldn't bring himself to vote for Dewey. Harry Truman was the only Democrat Presidential candidate who my father voted for in his life. He just didn't like Dewey's politics.
I was watching a mob documentary the other day. When Tom Dewey was putting heat on the mob in his role as special prosecutor, Dutch Schultz wanted to assassinate Dewey and talked to Lucky Luciano and the Commission about it. Luciano told Schultz that the mob wasn't going to kill honest cops. This policy was not based on the morals of the action but on a more practical reason - it would bring too much heat on the mob. Lots of irony in this situation. Because the Commission didn't think that Schultz was going to take their "advice", a contract was put out on Schultz, who was whacked. The one who would have benefited the most from Dewey's assassination would have been Luciano who made the decision which probably saved Dewey's life and ultimately led to Luciano's deportation. Given the era and the social mores of the time, I think it speaks volumes of Dewey's character that he was seen by the mob as being incorruptible.
Taft didn’t run in 1944, and he was rejected by the Republican delegates before there were many primaries in 1948. People said they wanted “a winner”; so Dewey was the one. Then in 1952 ol’ Ev Dirksen supposed pointed his finger at Dewey and talked about being led to defeat. Alas ol’ Ev was as much a compromiser as Dewey.
No one born in MI has been president, or I have missed one; Ford was born in NE. Was mitt born in Detroit?
Dewey was born in MI, not NY. He missed only one day of school, an afternoon to attend a grandfather’s funeral. Before he death, he was planning to marry the widowed actress Kitty Carlisle.
I thought Mitt was born in Belmont, here in MA but never looked too much into it. Hopefully I won’t have to either!
‘I was watching a mob documentary the other day. When Tom Dewey was putting heat on the mob in his role as special prosecutor, Dutch Schultz wanted to assassinate Dewey and talked to Lucky Luciano and the Commission about it. Luciano told Schultz that the mob wasn’t going to kill honest cops. This policy was not based on the morals of the action but on a more practical reason - it would bring too much heat on the mob. Lots of irony in this situation. Because the Commission didn’t think that Schultz was going to take their “advice”, a contract was put out on Schultz, who was whacked. The one who would have benefited the most from Dewey’s assassination would have been Luciano who made the decision which probably saved Dewey’s life and ultimately led to Luciano’s deportation. Given the era and the social mores of the time, I think it speaks volumes of Dewey’s character that he was seen by the mob as being incorruptible.’
Interesting story. Thanks for posting.
I never checked; maybe George W. Romney had not yet come to Michigan by 1947.
Aren’t you afraid the Republican primary voters will again make the wrong choice?
Mitt Romney makes John F. Kennedy look like Ron Paul...
I think of Mittens as Harold Stassen. No one wants him, but he keeps running.
Dewey was defeated twice by the "moderate" liberal Harry Truman.
The others were soundly defeated by the hard-core Leninist/Stalinist communist FDR, the second worst communist president in the history of the USA.
The intention was to encourage readers to go spend an hour or so researching Trotsky and Lenin, the differences between their proposed methods of implementing and spreading communism, and how they came back together to work together, once one of their methods (Lenin's) achieved momentum.
Within just a very short time of reading, one can see how their policy proposals and methods have long been the prevailing alternates among the two establishment political machines in the USA for the past century.
It is meaningless and useless to let political chameleons set their own political labels. As the article of this thread suggests: by their fruits ye shall know them.
It is necessary to judge politicians by their records, by their policy proposals, by their behavior.
Of the several million people in the USA who major in Political Science, why doesn't anyone question why so very, very few of them graduate with a favorable view of a Constitutional republic, USA-style, as a suitable form of government?
Sad but true.
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.