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

Skip to comments.

Romney Needs a New CEO (WSJ-Noonan)
WSJ ^ | September 21, 2012 | Peggy Noonan

Posted on 09/21/2012 2:32:36 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle

...There were wistful notes from the Republicans who'd helped run previous campaigns, most of whom could be characterized as serious, moderate conservatives, all of whom want to see Mr. Romney win because they believe, honestly, that the president has harmed the country financially and in terms of its position in the world. They're certain it will only get worse in the next four years, but they're in despair at the Romney campaign. Some, unbidden, brought up the name James A. Baker III, who ran Ronald Reagan's campaign in 1984 (megalandslide—those were the days) and George H.W. Bush's in 1988 (landslide.)

What they talked about, without using this phrase, is the Baker Way.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: campaign; election; leadership; romney
First, although I used to really like Noonan, she has over the past several years proven herself to be more a fan of and commentator on political gamesmanship than a person with clear convictions. Someone needs to wake her up and impress upon her that this is 'real', the stakes are high, and America is not impervious to destruction by its own incompetent government.

That said, I think it is always good to assess if what you are doing is working (i.e. the campaign) and determine ways to do it better. However, articles like this give the impression that the campaign is in disarray, and I don't think that is true at all. The campaign has been the subject of an onslaught of biased media coverage, and they would like nothing better at this point than to be able to report 'disarray' in the Romney campaign. Pieces like this one from Noonan are a bit like 'chum' in the water in that regard. The reality is that despite incredibly biased news coverage Romney is well-positioned, and the democrats are scared.

1 posted on 09/21/2012 2:32:45 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

I would agree....in the states that matter, Romney is in a better position than the media admits. Noonan’s commentary doesn’t really deserve to be discussed... irreverent is the term that I’d use.


2 posted on 09/21/2012 2:37:50 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
"Peggy, you're nothing to me now. You're not a sister, you're not a friend. I don't want to know you or what you do. I don't want to see you on television, or read what you write. I don't want you near any conservative conferences. When you see my friends, I want to know a day in advance, so I won't be there. You understand?"

With apologies to Michael Corleone.

3 posted on 09/21/2012 2:41:11 AM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
Gallup poll, 1980, two weeks before the election, Gallup had it Carter 47, Reagan 39.

I am not saying Romney is a Reagan but I am saying Fraud-in-Chief is worse (only by a little bit) than rabbit Boy (JIMMAH)

4 posted on 09/21/2012 2:41:28 AM PDT by DeaconRed (Don't get discouraged by the lying LSM polls. ZERO is toast even with Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

As rush would say she’s part of the beltway, elite club


5 posted on 09/21/2012 2:42:29 AM PDT by personalaccts (Is George W going to protect the border?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

I’ve noticed this about the Romney campaign: there is a knee-jerk reaction on the part of his employees everytime the ‘conservative’ Romney appears. The recently released videos, for example.

Oh, and I like the idea of “democrats are scared”. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside!


6 posted on 09/21/2012 2:43:29 AM PDT by SatinDoll (NATURAL BORN CITZEN: BORN IN THE USA OF CITIZEN PARENTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

I kind of doubt any insiders in the know are confiding in Noonan these days.

Anyway, Romney’s got a pretty good string of successes in his life even if you don’t agree with what he has been successful at. I’m inclined to trust him on how to win this thing.


7 posted on 09/21/2012 2:48:26 AM PDT by expat1000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Miss Piggy must have slept through this past week.


8 posted on 09/21/2012 2:50:16 AM PDT by MestaMachine (obama kills and bo stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
Peggy Noonan looks through the bottle and sees Maureen Dowd. (hic)
9 posted on 09/21/2012 2:51:41 AM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hussein: Islamo-Commie from Fakistan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
Is unfortunate for a reasoned analysis of the Romney campaign that the criticism here comes from Peggy Noonan whose recent history could not be more calculated to antagonize conservatives. Let us not forget the Peggy Noonan supported Barack Obama four years ago.

But the real question before us is not the faithlessness of Peggy Noonan rather it is the health of the Romney campaign.

This campaign is being conducted by those who believe on one side of an issue and it is being criticized by those of us who believe the other side of the issue. The issue is whether a political campaign should conduct itself to attract uncommitted voters whom we call "independents" or "undecideds." This side of the question is invariably the side favored by Rinos.

The other side of the debate, advanced by conservatives, is that the campaign should energize its base and that pandering to the mushy middle is counterproductive in that it diminishes turnout among the party faithful.

So far, Romney has conducted a campaign designed to appeal to independents and he has disappointed many movement conservatives. Let me move quickly to acknowledge that the selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate put many of us offguard and caused us to believe that Romney was prepared to conduct an aggressive attack on Obama and a full throated endorsement of conservative values. Many of us thought that Romney was capable of an aggressive campaign, questions of ideology aside, as we watched him systematically and even ruthlessly dismantle his conservative opponents in the primaries.

It is in this context that the criticisms outlined by Mr. Lombardo who worked in the 2008 Romney campaign, as quoted by Ms. Noonan, ought to be analyzed.

Please note that neither of these critics of the Romney campaign are criticizing Romney ideologically, to the contrary, they are talking tactics, perceptions, professionalism. We conservatives will instinctively react to say, "the Rinos are laying the predicate to blame Romney and his advisers for incompetence in the event of a loss of the election rather than accept that Romney lost implementing the Rino side of the age old argument."

We conservatives believe that a full throated conservative attack and advancement of conservative values will not only energize the base but will also draw in undecideds and independents. We cite Ronald Reagan as the candidate who could articulate the conservative message and we cite the millions of "Reagan Democrats" who flocked to his banner and gave him landslides as evidence that our side of this argument is correct.

For months now I have been posting on the subject but I have always been careful to note that Romney undoubtedly has the best polling and focus group data that money can buy and these data must undoubtedly be telling him that the Rino side of the argument is statistically sound. After all, we all know that we would all crawl over broken glass to vote against Obama even though we might not cross the street to vote for Romney. But consider, the tape recently released showing Romney conceding 47% of the vote and telling his potential dollars that he must concentrate on the remaining 3% of undecideds and independents could mean that Romney has carried a Rino preconception right from the beginning of the campaign and has refused to abandon it in the face of objective polling data. In other words, Romney is not informed by current polling and focus group data but he is locked into a prejudice.

If Romney loses this election, Peggy Noonan will have no ground upon which to stand and say, "I told you so." Rather, it is we conservatives who will own the high ground but that will be of small comfort as we watch from our elevated height the Republican Party being torn asunder.


10 posted on 09/21/2012 3:06:32 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

Great post. Noonan0 supported BHO in 2008? Nuff said. There’s a reason she’s on Morning Joe. There is no longer a reason she should be at the WSJ.


11 posted on 09/21/2012 3:25:36 AM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

General - very insightful. From my perch in NH I feel I can agree with much of what you say, particularly that Romney likely has access to the best data available.

We were seething here as folks were saying NH was lean Obama and we never even saw a Romney ad. Lo and behold the Granite Staters popped up for Romney by a decent margin this week. Romney and his mushy crowd (Old Bill Weld and Paul Celucci people) of campaign staff have a unique experience in running as GOP in Boston. They know how to win when the Dem advantage IS REALLY +15 not just imagined by some pollster’s research designer.

We shall test their conservatism once they are in, but its best to get them in and save the American ideal before it’s too late. I believe that of all who tried to run this year, we have the very best crowd to deal with Obama’s leftist media amen corner and actually get into office.


12 posted on 09/21/2012 3:27:38 AM PDT by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
“Many of us thought that Romney was capable of an aggressive campaign, questions of ideology aside, as we watched him systematically and even ruthlessly dismantle his conservative opponents in the primaries.”

Thanks for a very thoughtful assessment. I think it's still relatively early, and to be honest, I haven't heard many of Romney's stump speeches, so I'm not sure how aggressive he's been verbally. Also, to be fair, the media weren't covering for his Republican opponents in the primaries like they are for Obama. If anything, because they saw Romney as less conservative than some of his opponents, they were probably more than happy to help him beat those opponents.

I believe that a viable campaign approach has to include efforts to divide some of the coalitions that make up the democrat base, and to work on suppressing their support. I know this sounds distasteful, but its what they do, and to me it's much more ‘distasteful’ to lose our nation as we know it.

I also think that Romney needs to really hit hard on the economic front, and point out to all of those saving for retirement that they may lose much of the value of everything they've saved and invested because of a looming collapse of what is now a financial house of cards. Also, point out to home owners that they've lost a significant amount of their equity (if they have any at all and aren't underwater), and that this is not going to get better unless we have significant economic growth. People respond most predictably to what they perceive is in their best interest.

13 posted on 09/21/2012 3:39:19 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

These libtard republicans who can’t keep their big bloviating mouths shut really torque me! Fiest it was Bill Kristol who called Mitt Romney’s remarks about the 47% “stupid and arrogant.” And now Ms. Noonan’s wisdom from on high!

What irks me is the fact that Romney is THEIR CHOICE! Most of us wanted someone more conservative, etc. But now that he’s the candidate, even WE are in favor of his victory, even if our reason for it IS “anybody but Obama”! The Kristols and Noonans should be orders of magnitude MORE committed to Romney than WE are; he being THEIR guy, and all!

They SHOULD back him up and take his side on every issue, at least until we get him elected and Zero out to pasture! THEN we can work to steer Mitt a little more to the right. But the LAST thing Romney needs right now is to have his own so-called supporters bad-mouthing him and egging on the slimeballs in the media, and giving THEM even MORE crap to dump on our own candidate!


14 posted on 09/21/2012 3:41:05 AM PDT by Tucker39 ( Psa 68:19Blessed be the Lord, who daily loadeth us with benefits; even the God of our salvation.KJV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Noonan is one of those ‘chin-pullers’ that Michelle Malkin called out.


15 posted on 09/21/2012 3:47:16 AM PDT by SueRae (See it? Hell, I can TASTE November from my house!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Recall the glowing article she penned aout 0bama around this time in 2008. Now she has buyer’s remorse. Please, Peggy, don’t offer anymore ‘advice’ on how to do it right this time. You’re disqualified.


16 posted on 09/21/2012 3:49:05 AM PDT by SueRae (See it? Hell, I can TASTE November from my house!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: major-pelham
It is essential that we do not permit our ideology to interfere with our tactics. If it takes a Rino to defeat Obama than I am all for Rinos.

The question is, what is the right approach?

I believe this election is sui generis in that I would be much more inclined to give ground to Rinos, because as you say, "We shall test their conservatism once they are in, but its best to get them in and save the American ideal before it’s too late."

I am trying to keep an open mind as a foaming at the mouth, flopping on the floor conservative so that my emotions do not control.

However, I think if we take a very long-term view, assuming the Republic survives Obama, the future of the Republican party and the conservative cause is doubtful. The demographics alone tell us that. Immigration reinforces it. The media compels it.

It is so difficult to conduct an election campaign upon conservative values if the media diverts the agenda every day, as we have seen so explicitly in this campaign. Romney has not been able to break through with any message, much less a conservative message. Noonan criticizes him for a rookie mistake of speaking out too early about that assault on our embassies, this is small beer, but it is illustrative of the inability to gain traction even when Romney is right. People like Noonan play the traitor and her remarks are further quoted to undermine Romney. Later she will say, "I told you so."

So we have a short run accommodation to make but a long-term decision to finally bring to a conclusion.


17 posted on 09/21/2012 3:50:51 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
I believe that a viable campaign approach has to include efforts to divide some of the coalitions that make up the democrat base, and to work on suppressing their support.

very good point.


18 posted on 09/21/2012 3:55:50 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Buy more ammo.


19 posted on 09/21/2012 3:55:52 AM PDT by gotribe (WTF?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
That's a terrific analysis (wish I had written it).

You're leaving one thing out, though, maybe because it's just speculation.

Romney said, during the primaries, "I'm not going to set my hair on fire (to appeal to conservatives)". I believe that Romney, and the Romney faction in the GOP, fear a conservative ascendancy and a sweeping conservative victory more than they fear Obama. Romney's faction never amounted to more than about 35%, but under rules that allowed a plurality "winner" (stupid, stupid, STUPID), they were strong enough to prevail.

This is partly a class problem. Mitt and his crew are just not comfortable with the NASCAR demographic. But I think it also reflects that they are in fundamental agreement with the post-1965 compromises, but believe that they are being badly implemented or that they "go too far".

We believe (I believe) that the post-1965 social and political Grand Compromise contains the seeds of its own destruction, that it CANNOT be properly implemented because it is improper to start with, that it was inevitable that it would "go too far" because that was the intent of its designers.

The problem we have (the reason I believe that Sarah could not have won) is that the People are not ready to fold the tent on the post-1965 arrangements. Politicians, at all levels except a few specific Congressional districts, must lie to the People in order to win elections.

This means that the Democrat, who can lie openly and unashamedly, will usually have an advantage over a Republican who often will be in coverup mode, with an opponent and baying media trying to "out" him as to his true beliefs and true agenda.

I voted for Gingrich, and I would have been much, MUCH happier watching him campaign against Obama. But I acknowledge that, until things get much worse, that overturning the Great Society by a direct appeal to the voters is not possible, and that, therefore, much worse is how things are going to get.

20 posted on 09/21/2012 3:59:34 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
That's a terrific analysis (wish I had written it).

You're leaving one thing out, though, maybe because it's just speculation.

Romney said, during the primaries, "I'm not going to set my hair on fire (to appeal to conservatives)". I believe that Romney, and the Romney faction in the GOP, fear a conservative ascendancy and a sweeping conservative victory more than they fear Obama. Romney's faction never amounted to more than about 35%, but under rules that allowed a plurality "winner" (stupid, stupid, STUPID), they were strong enough to prevail.

This is partly a class problem. Mitt and his crew are just not comfortable with the NASCAR demographic. But I think it also reflects that they are in fundamental agreement with the post-1965 compromises, but believe that they are being badly implemented or that they "go too far".

We believe (I believe) that the post-1965 social and political Grand Compromise contains the seeds of its own destruction, that it CANNOT be properly implemented because it is improper to start with, that it was inevitable that it would "go too far" because that was the intent of its designers.

The problem we have (the reason I believe that Sarah could not have won) is that the People are not ready to fold the tent on the post-1965 arrangements. Politicians, at all levels except a few specific Congressional districts, must lie to the People in order to win elections.

This means that the Democrat, who can lie openly and unashamedly, will usually have an advantage over a Republican who often will be in coverup mode, with an opponent and baying media trying to "out" him as to his true beliefs and true agenda.

I voted for Gingrich, and I would have been much, MUCH happier watching him campaign against Obama. But I acknowledge that, until things get much worse, that overturning the Great Society by a direct appeal to the voters is not possible, and that, therefore, much worse is how things are going to get.

21 posted on 09/21/2012 3:59:34 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
The reality is that despite incredibly biased news coverage Romney is well-positioned, and the democrats are scared.

Dead on! The Marxist and his wicked cohorts were very cocky and self assured that they could kill off Romney early, and when that didn't happen and the real polls show him even or leading in the swing states, they are scared. And this is before Romney has even started firing the heavy guns. Team Empty Chair fired their best shots multiple times and the shots bounced off the side without much damage.

22 posted on 09/21/2012 4:07:33 AM PDT by MrDem (Founder: Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Reagan fired the b!tch... there was a reason. Now we too know what it was.

LLS


23 posted on 09/21/2012 4:16:26 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("if it looks like you are not gonna make it you gotta get mean, I mean plumb mad-dog mean" J. Wales)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
Like him or not, one thing that weighs heavily in Romney's favor is that -- despite his political background -- he is not a politician. He's an effective, capable executive (maybe the most capable person to run for that office in U.S. history) who approaches everything he does with a clear objective in mind and then goes about trying to get it done.

Remember this, folks -- he is not a politician. He's not pursuing a political ideology and he's not running for this position on a lark. The stated objective is to mount a winning presidential campaign, and based on what I know about how these CEO-types operate, I can assure you that everyone in his organization is working to meet that objective. Any bloviating you hear from "conservative" talking heads -- none of whom have any idea what it takes to be an effective, competent leader -- is just background noise.

24 posted on 09/21/2012 4:19:35 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Peggy has been inside the Beltway far, far too long. She has lost all perspective on the country.


25 posted on 09/21/2012 4:21:24 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
I voted for Gingrich, and I would have been much, MUCH happier watching him campaign against Obama.

I will not criticize anyone here on FreeRepublic for their support of any particular candidate in the Republican primaries, but Newt Gingrich would have been a complete disaster for the GOP. For one thing, he hadn't even been a face on the American political scene for more than a decade before he crawled out from under a rock somewhere and announced that he was running for President in 2012. And it's not as if he had spent 10+ years off on his own running a business or doing something else productive with his time, either. He was a Beltway lobbyist for all those years -- which meant that he was part of the problem in Washington.

One of the best quotes I ever heard during the 2012 political campaign season was from a producer on Don Imus' radio show: "Jerry Sandusky will be a guest on Sesame Street before Newt Gingrich wins a presidential election."

26 posted on 09/21/2012 4:30:23 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Ms. Noonan brings conservatives “advice” directly
from the bed of Obama the Undocumented Moslem Marxist.


27 posted on 09/21/2012 4:35:06 AM PDT by Diogenesis (Vi veri veniversum vivus vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

She’s probably one of the advisers who advised against the “Tear down this wall” line.

Pray for America


28 posted on 09/21/2012 4:38:29 AM PDT by bray (If you vote for a communist what does that make you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

“Romney conceding 47% of the vote and telling his potential dollars that he must concentrate on the remaining 3% of undecideds and independents”

Is Romney also assuming that 47% will vote for him, no matter what and is going after the remaining 3%-6% of undecideds and independents? If so, it is a very large assumption.

The simple fact of his nomination, has created a large pool of “undecideds” among usual republican voters.


29 posted on 09/21/2012 4:45:26 AM PDT by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Wasn’t she part of the Republican smart set that kept telling us that Romney was the only GOP nominee that could beat Obama?


30 posted on 09/21/2012 4:53:01 AM PDT by tips up (Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
When an elected leader governs according to his ideology and succeeds, he is said to be governing according to his principles.

When an elected leader governs according to his principles and fails, he is said to be governing according to ideology.

in If we look at the career of perhaps the most successful businessman and politician and certainly the man most qualified in the 20th century by virtue of his biography and accomplishments to be President of the United States, Herbert Hoover, we see a man who could not lead as president at the time of economic crisis but who could lead companies and entire nations as he did, for example, in feeding millions in Russia.

I suppose the point is that a businessman might be a good leader in a business environment but not in a political environment and a politician to be successful in a democracy must be seen as a successful leader. Franklin Roosevelt confronted the same economic crisis, his results were no better than Hoover's probably because his policies were much different, but Roosevelt fooled most of the people most of the time and therefore succeeded as a leader.

Romney seems to have been successful in at least three disciplines, business, international sports (Olympics) and politics (Governor of Massachusetts). As a candidate he has a mixed record. Although he won the governorship of Massachusetts he lost the race for Senator and he lost the race for the nomination last cycle for president. It remains to be seen whether Romney is on the right path or not.

Sometimes chaotic campaigns that revolt the button-down mind of corporate Republicans like Governor Dewey (and perhaps Mitt Romney) are not as effective as chaotic campaigns conducted by charismatic Democrats like Bill Clinton.

But the point of my post is to clear the argument of underbrush and understand that there is a dichotomy between conservatives and Rinos, between those who want to stimulate the base and those who want to reach out to undecideds, between those who want an aggressive attack and those who want to conciliate women. These are different considerations from tactics, deficiencies, and professionalism. We ought not confuse the two but we certainly ought to understand that there is always an interaction between these two sets of considerations.

I concede that a poorly run chaotic conservative campaign runs at a disadvantage. I have already conceded that Romney is undoubtedly privy to the best data that money can buy. The question is whether it is such data that is guiding his campaign or simply a Rino mindset.


31 posted on 09/21/2012 5:15:54 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
but believe that they are being badly implemented or that they "go too far"....

...it was inevitable that it would "go too far"

Boy, did they ever go "too far" when they enacted Obama care!

I entirely agree with you about Gingrich. It is inconceivable to me the Romney team has not pulled Gingrich in and asked him to be campaign manager emeritus to oversee the entire operation and focus the attack. It is Gingrich who knows how to identify the inevitable excesses, dramatize them, and promote a solution that is both conservative and attractive to everyone. What stops Romney taking this obvious step? One can only chalk it up to ideology or ego if it is not entirely dictated by internal polling data.

There is a companion thread in which a FREEPER asks, why is energy not being emphasized by Romney? I just heard Gingrich yesterday laying out a campaign focused on energy. I cannot believe that Romney's internal polling data tells him not to make this a major issue.

To continue on the theme of energy and apply it to Obama. We all knew before the 2008 election what Obama was going to do to the coal industry and by extension to energy in general, yet the media simply ignored the story to death. So you are right in your long-term pessimism. Things will have to get worse but that raises the issue whether the Republic will survive?


32 posted on 09/21/2012 5:32:20 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle; All

Seems like whenever Romney says something truthful and conservative....all the PhonyCon RINOs come out of the closet.

Peggy....time to join the DNC...if you have not already done so


33 posted on 09/21/2012 5:47:14 AM PDT by SeminoleCounty (Blaming Terry Jones for the recent Muslim riots is like blaming the St Louis Rams for football)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STJPII; nathanbedford

The fact that the Rupert M’s WSJ keeps this washed up pundit Miss Peggy on board should be a clue as to the worthlessness of it’s Editorial Board. Great statement by NB about Conservative thinking and the mishmash of Romney.


34 posted on 09/21/2012 6:10:44 AM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Who died and left Peggy Noonan a political expert? All she ever did is write a few speeches for Ronnie in the 80’s. She’s a smarmy Blanche Dubuois who was gaga over Obama when he was elected. STFU Peggy. Nobody cares.


35 posted on 09/21/2012 8:03:35 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Okay. Let’s see which liberal columnists are out there talking down Obama...

*crickets chirp*

Dammit, Noonan. Stop your whore mouth. You’re just adding to the MSM narrative. There’s plenty of time after Election Day to talk stuff about Romney all you like.


36 posted on 09/21/2012 8:06:01 AM PDT by Cruising For Freedom (Don't be the proof that MSM PsyOps works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

ping to self for future reference.

The RINOs are Johnny-one-notes. Their RINO appeal mushies is the only trick they know. Then again, their approach is the only effective one in heavy DEM-liberal districts, where GOP candidates can come up with creative ways of appealing to liberals without insulting conservatives.

I know a few solid conservatives in DEM-liberal districts who are trying to run an “energize the base” campaign. When they inevitably fail, they’ll say that it was due to lack of effort and that next time, the voters will see the light. People with such a blind spot are likely as useless to our cause as the knee-jerk RINOs.


37 posted on 09/21/2012 5:09:34 PM PDT by campaignPete R-CT (and we are still campaigning for local conservatives in central CT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

I’m convinced Americans will support a conservative agenda once they see it working again ala 1982 until 2007. But, there’s no chance for it to re-emerge if we lose.


38 posted on 09/22/2012 6:16:05 AM PDT by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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