Posted on 03/07/2012 3:31:20 PM PST by Para-Ord.45
Yesterday, Mitt Romney said he’s “not going to say outrageous things about the president.” Trouble with that statement is that “outrageous” is a pretty subjective adjective. Outrageous to whom? Apparently, Romney meant to say he’s not going to say anything about the president that would outrage the left — because he doesn’t seem to be afraid to say something about the president that would outrage the right. In fact, he did just that earlier today, when he essentially said the president shouldn’t be held responsible for the high price of gas.
“I think people recognize that the president can’t precisely set the price at the pump,” Romney said in an interview on CNBC.
Oh, Romney, you’re right technically — but don’t you realize that precisely setting the price at the pump is also precisely what Obama longs to do? He wants to set the price of gas not so as to alleviate the burden on American consumers but so as to make his favored forms of energy more economically appealing to them.
In an excellent article in National Review magazine this month, Kevin D. Williamson illuminates this clearly. Williamson writes:
"As it happens, the Obama administration has been busily undermining domestic energy production in the United States, because its central-planning manifesto says that the U.S. economy should cease to run on petroleum and begin to run on other forms of energy: wind, hydro, geothermal — air, water, and earth being the favored elements, fire being in the political doghouse. (Like I said: occultism.) In his latest budget proposal, President Obama proposes to continue offering tax benefits to U.S. manufacturers in the hope of increasing exports, but he intends to exclude from that benefit energy firms — which just happen to be positioned to export a great deal of natural gas to a world market hungry for the stuff …
So we are to double our exports, which were going to double anyway, but we’re to do so by favoring goods that nobody wants and that are not made here … over goods that are made here that everybody wants and that just happen to fall into the category of goods that represent the majority of our trade deficit."
That’s the trouble with Romney’s pledge: If he’s unwilling to unmask the president for who and what he is, he doesn’t stand a chance in November.
( Excerpt)
That's because he's a very inexperienced politician, having spent a mere 4 years doing so, as governor of Massachusetts. No city council, state legislature or congressional stints. Gaffe-a-minutes performances like this is why it's generally a mistake to run political novices for high office. Starting from a City Council position in 1992, Palin spent 16 years in office before serving as McCain's running mate in 2008. This was why most of her missteps related to lack of substantive knowledge (re foreign policy and federal issues) rather than outright gaffes. Like every other experienced politician, she knows how to say things, although not necessary what to say. Romney has the opposite problem - lots of substantive knowledge, but no political reflexes in terms of avoiding gaffes. If Romney becomes the candidate and keeps on making rookie mistakes like this, I see Obama getting re-elected, and Palin running in 2016.
LOL!
Soros says Romney’s the same as Obama.
That’s enough to make me hate him.
” So, the RINO leftist thinks that despite his ideological pal Barry Hussein EXPLICITLY stating he wants higher gas prices, his Energy secretary ADMITTING high gas prices is POLICY, and Barry Hussein ADMITTING his policies mean electricity rates will NECESSARILY SKYROCKET , it`s not his fault !? “
TOAST !
You nailed it!
Romney appears to be taking a page (or three) from the McCain 2008 playbook. Yeesh.
Of course, picking Sarah Palin as VP would be the one useful page from the playbook the he “O-Mitts”.
Now thats funny raught thar, lemme tell ya, Idon’t care where ya from!!!
And they pummeled Rick Perry for his gaffes...
I predict the republican party is toast after this election...
It’s almost unbelievable. Reminds me of mccain. As far as I’m concerned a vote for Romney is an act of treason.
My first choice was Perry, because of his record as governor, in spite of my disagreement with him with respect to immigration. However, it has to be said that Perry seriously lacks the fast twitch reflexes needed to be a debater. The reason a lot of gaffes get made is because of the time pressure - people get put on the spot and need to say something quickly. A slow response under the glare of TV cameras makes the interviewee look stupid. Well, Perry alternated between non-responses and factually-wrong responses. Romney is better than Perry in this regard. His phraseology is crummy, and clearly that of a political novice, but his facts are accurate, as you might expect from someone with a sterling academic and business background.
From a biographical standpoint, I think Romney has a lot of advantages vis-a-vis Obama compared to McCain. McCain was a lousy student going up against Obama*, a Harvard Law graduate and Chicago Law professor. Romney's Harvard Law and Business School degrees, combined with his record of being a founding partner of a multi-billion dollar private equity firm neutralizes Obama's aura of being highly-qualified.
So why did I prefer Perry? Because Perry is a conservative.
* You and I know that affirmative action means McCain was probably a better student than Obama, but that's not the way these things get reported in the media.
Spot on!!!
But I look at it this way...I do not want a good debater in the WH...
I want a leader who understands their position in this government, and looks for ways to get that government out of our lives (physically, economically and socially) as much as possible...
We no longer have that kind of government...
We have a government, by the government, for the government on the backs of its citizens, utilizing socialistic methodologies to ensure and justify its existance and power over the very people they are supposed to serve...
How the hell can we beat that animal back into submission...Instead of the other way around???
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.