Posted on 08/27/2008 7:52:58 AM PDT by MeanWestTexan
ROTFL!....had to look "neuticle" up...
And Cantor's more conservative than Romney and he happens not to be a complete phoney.
Willard Mitt Romney:
Olympics = neutral.
Staples = good.
Mass. governor = very negative (only a far left could elected).
Romney-care = bad, total fraud.
Bain Capital = bad (Corporate Raiders)
ROTFL!....had to look "neuticle" up...
Being a Governor of a midsized state is far different than being one of hundred in the Senate in terms of executive and supervisory experience. No comparison when it comes to being the CEO of the largest corporation in the world, i.e., the USG. Romney not only has government experience as an executive, but also, he ran his own successful business and was in charge of the Winter Olympics. Frum is talking thru his hat as usual.
You caught my point exactly.
Wasn’t Frum pimping for Rudy?
Do I have to go back to your previous posts on other threads and provide the proof of my assertions or are you going to come clean?
No worries. Frum’s disdain for Romney is more than made up for by Hugh Hewitt’s 24/7 kneepadding for the guy.
Fred didn’t have the “want” to be president, that could be seen in the way he campaigned. He would, for that same reason, not be a viable VP.
I like David Frum, but he’s no conservative. He may even be a Democrat...I know he once said at a luncheon I went to, that he was a Canadian liberal. His list is meaningless.
True. Romney has been consistent on these two points. To the right of McCain.
Fred!
Because you know you want to make doubly sure our ticket’s wives are hotter than the other side’s.
“An honest critique of these 10 reasons:
1. Family dog— stupid argument. Never gained traction in the primaries.
2. Accomplishments as governor— mainly valid argument, although Massachusetts was in less economic trouble when he left office than when he came in. The default setting for any lieberal state is economic trouble.
3. One term pledge— stupid argument. I’ve never heard McCain make a one-term pledge, either implicitly or otherwise.
4. Windsurfing and hedge funds— somewhat valid. Yeah, Romney is rich, just like Kerry. But he earned it rather than married it.
5. 2006 re-election— stupid argument. Robert Erlich, who did a great job for Maryland and had high approval ratings, still lost in 2006. The default setting for Lieberal states is electing anyone with a “D” after their name. Especially in 2006.
6. Pro-life flip-flop. Valid argument. On the other hand, always pro-life McCain has Warren Rudmen advising him on judicial appointment. The same Warren Rudmen who gave us David Souter. How is a guy in the #2 slot going to improve this situation?
7. Everybody ganged up on him. Stupid argument. Hucksterbee was the only one totally focused on getting Romney out of the race, and for his own reasons of personal and religious hatred. McCain wanted him out only because he was his most serious challenger. Guilani’s campaign was pathetic and he was never a factor. Fred Thompson actually cooperated with Romney by pulling out of Michigan so Romney would pull out of South Carolina. The strategy worked great for Romney, not so well for Fred.
8. Thin skin— stupid argument. Nobody got attacked more and nobody held up better. He was the only one of the majors who had the backbone to actually run negative advertising against McCain.
9. Economy— partially valid argument. He did a credible, but not a bang-up job on Massachusetts. Club for Growth said so. He did a bang-up job on the 2002 Olympics and Bain Capital where he was working with rational business people, not an overwhelmingly Marxist legislature.
10. Inexperience— stupid argument. We could actually use more successful business people in government. Yeah, Paul O’Neill was a disaster, as have been other successful business people. But the pool is small compared with the pool of professional politicians who have been even bigger disasters. Ronald Reagan was a successful businessman before he went into politics. He wasn’t the only one. The idea that our political leaders should be selected only from our pool of professional politicians is stupid.
The final score:
1. Valid arguments- 10%
2. Partially valid- 30%
3. Stupid arguments- 60%”
.
Thank you. You have articulated what I was thinking
BTTT!
**Whether one is pro-choice or pro-life, Romney’s flip-flop on abortion seems terribly insincere.**
Agree with this wholeheartedly. It will NOT be Romney.
It's just amazing so many people like Romney, and conservatives no less.
He is liberal record and is notorious flip-flopper and liar.
Why on earth should would any conservative want a man with his record and history of political expediency to be next in line to President, all while undermining the chances of REAL conservatives like Bobby Jindal?
Could you tell us the difference between Romney and Giuliani, especially on the issue of abortion? The only I see is that Romney is a bigger liar.
No. It endorsed Romney.
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.