Skip to comments.Dear Mr. Romney
Posted on 07/10/2012 8:21:45 PM PDT by tsowellfan
Dear Mr. Romney:
Since you apparently have advisors that are very clever people, perhaps a word from a troglodyte like me might be refreshing. In the last two weeks, you have tried to explain the difference between "off-shoring" and "outsourcing" with respect to the economy, and despite the great gift handed to you by our addled Chief Justice, John Roberts, you insisted on playing a semantical game between calling Obamacare a "constitutional tax" or an "unconstitutional penalty."
Let me give you a clue: the overwhelming number of people who understand and/or appreciate the nuances in such parsing of the language already know who they're going to vote for. They're the ones who follow politics, have a far higher understanding of economics than the average American, and make an ongoing effort to pay attention to what's happening in general.
The rest of America knows there is an election in November, and not a whole lot else. Luckily for you, most of them won't even be paying attention to the details of that election until September or October. That doesn't make them unintelligent per se. For the most part it means that a lot of them are busy living their lives, trying to get from one day to the next. And while a lot of them know there's something not quite right with this economy, they can't immerse themselves in the kind of facts and figures -- or nuance -- that you and your campaign managers seemingly think they can.
You know why a slogan like "tax the rich" works so well? Because it taps into one of mankind's baser instincts, namely envy. And as you and yours have likely surmised by now, Mr. Obama and Democrats will tap into whatever negative instincts human beings possess, if it means winning the 2012 election. Divide-and-conquer is as old as the Romans, and has been effective for that long as well.
So here's my advice. First, reduce your campaign to its simplest terms. You had it going on when you asked Americans if they want to live in a "government-centered society," yet even that was a bit clever. A simpler question might be this: if you needed a street light installed at a dangerous intersection in your neighborhood, would you rather call your local government representative, or be beholden to a federal bureaucrat in Washington, D.C.? Yet the bottom line here is this: you need a slogan that captures the essence of American exceptionalism. Hold a contest if you need to, but get something simple that appeals to a human being's higher instincts. When Ronald Reagan referred to America as a "shining city on a hill," Mr. Peanuts had no comeback. Furthermore, appealing to Americans' higher instincts will further separate you from the Divider-in-Chief.
Yet even more importantly, maybe game-changing, have the guts to admit that your Massachusetts healthcare plan was a stinker. That's right, admit you made a colossal mistake, even if it was for what you considered all the right reasons. If you don't understand why, let me explain it in political terms that are quite germane, even if somewhat oblique: the cover-up, or in this case the cover-my-ass, is worse than the original "crime." Watergate, Monica Lewinsky, and Fast and Furious are as in-your-face as it gets regarding that truism. A presidential resignation, an impeachment leading to a $90,000 fine and disbarment, and a contempt of Congress citation are a testament to the kind of arrogance and stubbornness that turns people off. So does giving Mr. Obama and his media harpies something to club you with, over and over again.
You know what turns people on? Someone man enough to admit he was wrong.
Understand something else as well. You're never going to be perceived as a regular Joe, no matter how hard you try. It's just not part of your DNA, it's never been part of your DNA, and any attempt to make it so will be taken for exactly what it is: overt pandering. What you need to demonstrate above all else is quite different. You need passion. It's not enough to have the right argument, if you're going to deliver it in measured -- dare I say sleep-inducing -- terms. Ask John McCain how staying "above the fray" works in a presidential campaign. I know this seems like a contradiction, but it's worth remembering Ronald Reagan, in the midst of praising the nation, wasn't afraid to ask the question that became the quintessential slogan of the 1980 election campaign. To wit: are you better of now than your were four years ago?
Hopefully by now you've figured out that any criticism of this president and his policies will be deemed racist by the Democrats and their useful idiots in the media. Get over it. And get over the idea that any topic, from the president's associations with race-baiter Jeremiah Wright and Weather Underground Terrorist Bill Ayers, to the various scandals of this administration, such as the Operation Fast and Furious gun-running debacle and the crony capitalism surrounding Solyndra and LightSquared., are "off-limits" because a bunch of progressives say so.
Finally, stop pretending Barack Obama is anything less than a Constitutionally-contemptuous, Congress-bypassing, fact-challenged, socialist/Marxist, no matter how "appalled" the chattering classes become. This country is hanging by a thread, and if you can't make the case -- and make it with gusto -- that he and his administration are an unmitigated disaster, you're going to lose an election you should win in a walk. In other words, a little righteous anger goes a long, long, long way.
Cleverness is for losers, and nice guys finish last. Step out of the self-generated campaign bubble, sir. Whether you like it or not, you may be the last best hope for our nation.
Start acting like it.
AWESOME! Hope a Rush-lurker reads this on air!!!
To defeat the incumbent, Mr. Romney's first "plan" needs to be clearly defined as being between liberty or slavery for future generations.
Obama's "announcement" this week on extending part of the "tax cuts" is, for instance, just another little "bribe" for votes from citizens who either don't understand the desperation behind his action, or worse, know and willingly participate in the chicanery.
Congressman Allen West must make further appearances like the one on Huckabee this weekend, where he speaks with clarity that the choice voters must make is between slavery and freedom.
His courage in defining the choice in such stark terms has been criticized by the so-called "progressives," both politicians and their media surrogates. West, however, turns that criticism aside as either sheer ignorance of the history of civilization or duplicity in "changing" America from its founding principles.
Allen West is one American patriot who has studied the ancient and modern ideas of liberty versus those of tyranny.
Col. West understands the idea of "slavery" in a context which includes the very real human consquences of a government-over-people concept which is that of the so-called "progressives"--a concept which enslaves entire populations to the whims of petty tyrants and rulers.
Romney and others connected with the Fall election campaign should use opportunities such as this one as a "teaching moment," to explain the Obama strategy for what it is--a simple "concession" to futher his "change" agenda by winning over some voters.
Allen West understands what America's Founders understood that the idea of "government-over-people" makes "the People" slaves to that government, no matter how it describes itself.
"The liberties of our Country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have receiv'd them as a fair Inheritance from our worthy Ancestors: They purchas'd them for us with toil and danger and expence of treasure and blood; and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. Of the latter we are in most danger at present: Let us therefore be aware of it. Let us contemplate our forefathers and posterity; and resolve to maintain the rights bequeath'd to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. - Instead of sitting down satisfied with the efforts we have already made, which is the wish of our enemies, the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that "if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom." It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." Samuel Adams - Essay in the Boston Gazette, October 14, 1771
"When designs are form'd to raze the very foundation of a free government, whose few who are to erect their grandeur and fortunes upon the general ruin, will employ every art to sooth the devoted people into a state of indolence, inattention and security, which is forever the fore-runner of slavery." - Article signed "Candidus," in Boston Gazette, December 9, 1771
"If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them." Samuel Adams- As Candidus in the Boston Gazette, January 20, 1772
"The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave... These may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament." Samuel Adams - Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
"It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave." - The Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
Why should freedom-loving Americans be cowered into refraining from using the word "slavery" to describe the condition which results as a consequence of coercive government power over the lives, rights, liberties, and pursuit of happiness of individual citizens in the society?
It's time for focusing like a laser on the real choice this election, as the men and women of 1776 did:
- the choice in November 2012 is between freedom and slavery to government.
Pose that question to American citizens, as individuals--not as "groups" or "classes," explain to them that "a government big enough to give you everything you want must be big enough to take everything you have," and that freedom is the goal for every individual, of every ethnicity and background, and the tyranny of this Pied Piper of dependency will lose the election.
Continue the silly back and forth on jobs, the economy, health care, etc., and Republicans are playing Obama's game.
If Romney is to win, then he and his surrogates need to understand and articulate what West understands and articulates. It's as simple as that!
If you want to really light a fire under your campaign, you might start with admitting what a rotten lousy mistake it was that you implemented the following while Governor of MA:
1. Gay Marriage
2. Socialized Medicine (RomneyCare)
3. Assault Weapons Ban
4. That you nominated 27 of 36 Extreme Leftists to judgeships.
Once you’ve been honest about these matters, the base, you know, the Tea-Party types, will flock to you in droves and you will run away with this election.
Thus says the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm...Jer 17:5
Defeat Øbama... just needed to test my zero...
And for all of these reasons, Willard Romney as well as all God-fearing and freedom loving Americans, are in grave danger of losing, for all of Eternity, our great country, for which so many brave souls have sacrificed their health, well-being and even lives. Romney is still maxed out when he should be by any reasoning be stomping the marxist America-hating muslim clown of the white house. If the election were tomorrow, next week, or next month, the results would most likely be so close that the supreme court would have to decide the winner.
Video: American Muslims Stone Christians in Dearborn, MI
That’s all I need to know when I vote
Sorry. The video I posted was only commentary on the issue. Here’s the video:
American Muslims Stone Christians in Dearborn, MI
Has Romney issued a statement about that? Romney grew up in Michigan. His father was governor of Michigan.
Is Romney prepared to take on the Islamists in his home state?
PLEASE add hiring of 13,000 IRS agents to oversee health care!!!!!
Romney is not an elected official. I think it's time to hold those we fought to put in power in 2010 to start acting as they now hold the authority. There's a tall stack on John Boehner's desk and the dust is collecting and our freedoms diminishing by the day.
We have a bad habit of putting off all of the wrongs that are being done until the next election and think the next guy will turn things around. Well, if we held those in power at the present time accountable we probably would not have a pResident Obama in office let alone ObamaCare, Amnesty and Russian/Chinese warships heading to the Middle East.
That's the stupidest reason I have ever seen for a candidate for President to refuse to take a position on an issue of global significance.
You Romneybots have no shame.
Romney is an empty suit. He lied and cheated and relied on democrat crossover and independent voters to get the nomination. He'll be the worst president since Obama. He will not rescue the US from the economic abyss. He generates no confidence. I have yet to see any conservative give a good reason for voting FOR him other than the sorry excuse that he ain't Obama.
Piss on him. He won't get my vote.
The reality is, nothing's getting done with our majority in the House. You can blame an unelected candidate if you want but know where the buck stops. There are some that claim that the Tea Party is dead. I disagree. You may find that they are discouraged and as unimpressed as I am with all that Obama has gotten away with in the last 2 years of a republican controlled House.
The buck stops at those who are elected already. If we keep giving them a pass we are only encouraging the RINOs by allowing them to think there will be no consequences for their actions.
It just may be your giving those elected a pass that helped Romney become the GOP candidate, when you really think about it.
As for me, Romney was second to last on my list next to Ron Paul (who I suspect you are clinging to - my suspicions are as credible as yours).
I will never vote for a Muslim. They see Christians and Jews as the pigs of society.
I haven't given anyone a "pass" and i won't give Romney one either.
At this point I am praying that God intervenes and either Romney or Obama will withdraw from the nomination of their party.
At this point I am ready for whatever God has in store for our nation, whether it be blessings or cursings. We have systematically murdered an entire generation of children. We, as a nation, clearly deserve judgment. We can only pray for mercy. May God shed his grace upon this nation. Romney will not save us. Your support for the pro-abortion, pro homosexualist, gun grabbing statist is not going to save our nation. We need a miracle. If it isn't coming, then prepare for another 4 years of judgment.
I have nothing positive to say about Mitt Romney, Paulbot. There is (as far as I can see) nothing positive about the man. Have not even considered giving the man money and certainly not the GOP. I certainly cannot go door to door for the man. So, your claims about my support of Romney are simply false.
One false statement in a comment invalidates the rest of what's written. So, nuff said.
For the record Ron Paul is insane. I have never supported him for anything. His followers are equally insane (as are Romneybots).
It seems to me that you have posted this thread as a thread to try to help Romney win the nomination and the presidency. Are you denying that?
So, your claims about my support of Romney are simply false.
If you are not supporting Romney, then why did you post this thread? Why aren't you fighting for some legitimate alternative? The convention hasn't even occurred and here you are throwing in the towel and trying to push the empty suit to tell more lies about his false conservatism.
First of all I posted the article I did not write it.
Secondly, I would hardly consider an article that points out weaknesses in Romney as a candidate and his refusal to admit RomneyCare was a huge mistake to be anything positive to "help Romney defeat Obama" in November.
I've posted articles about Obama's wanting to raise taxes - does that mean I support Obama and his tax hikes?
I've posted articles about Obama granting amnesty for illegals - does that mean I support Obama?
I think you should lay off Alex Jones for a few days. Next you'll be hearing black helicopters outside your window.
Rick Santorum was only in it to help Romney win by splitting the conservative vote. (he also endorsed Romney in the past as "the only real conservative - because of that alone I'd never trust the man)
Michelle Bachmann is good at what she does now in the House (she lost my vote when she accepted Obama's first faked birth certificate as legit on national TV)
So, as far as who I support - I am and have been a Newt Gingrich supporter. But I'm also a realist. It's most likely going to be Romney.
TSO, I had some earlier yesteday, I think, suggest that I was a Ron Paul supporter because I do not support Romney. I'm not quite sure where that comes from.
I do not support Romney because I am a conservative.
FWIW, my candidates throughout the primary season were Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum...in order as they were getting knocked out by a liberal who shamelessly lied about his own record and poured mega-millions into lying about minor mis-steps in that of their opponent. They were assisted in this by a complicit GOP-E braintrust that included both entrenched "name" Rinos and their media cohorts.
I was never a Ron Paul supporter. However, since he is a pro-life candidate, I would have supported him over Mitt Romney.
You need to return to your conservative principles, tso. You know they are what you really believe. Join us. We are the rebellion!
Mr. RomneyCARE is doing exactly the right thing.
Mr. RomneyCARE’s goal is to make money. Make money.
Install RomneyCARE. Install Romney Agendae.
Go. Mr. RomneyCARE.
Go Make GOP the party of DEATH PANELS
AND ROMNEYCARE AND ROMNEY TAXES.
Romney needs to awaken America to some of the info here:
The best Obama exposure site on the net:
The Obama File
The United States Library of Congress has selected
TheObamaFile.com for inclusion in its historic collection
of Internet materials
Just a few pages:
Yup. We were on the exact page except for two things. For me, Herman Cain came after Rick Perry and before Newt and I never got behind Santorum. Your support for Rick Santorum gave us Mitt Romney. And that's exactly what Rick Santorum was in it for.
Rick Santorum endorsed Mitt Romney only a few years before running against him, you know it and I know it. Because of that I did not fall for the trick... you did.
You my friend gave us Mitt Romney and now you run around claiming you'd never vote for the man.
It's a real shame some "conservatives" could not unite around one candidate during the primaries instead of giving Romney a split conservative opposition to run against.
Actually, that’s a bit of a strange comment, ts.
I think I remember Cain being gone before Perry, so I was for Perry while Cain was in the race. Then Cain wasn’t.
Then Gingrich was in the race, and then Gingrich died and left.
Then there was Santorum.
Each of the above were pro-life, anti-gay agenda, pro-limited gov’t conservatives.
Romney is not now, nor has he ever been, a pro-life, anti-gay agenda, ltd gov’t conservative.
Perhaps you were one of the few that agreed with Perry's "you got no heart" statement if you think my comment was so strange.
Perry didn't necessarily lose a lot of his support simply because he dropped out, if you remember correctly. Perry lost me when he had said "I don't have a heart" if I don't support paying for the education of illegals.
He didn't just drop out the night he said it. It was quite some time after before he dropped out. But he lost a lot of support including my own with that one statement of his. It was then that It I went on to the next guy in line whether that was Cain or Newt.
I'm not going to bother looking into the chronology of it all now. Whatever order it was Perry, Cain and Newt. If Cain was still in it when I was told I had no heart then it was Cain that came after Perry (and as far as I can remember that was indeed the order).
And never Rick "Romney Is A Real Conservative" Santorum.