Skip to comments.Mitch Daniels: Truce Directed at Liberals, Not for Social Conservatives
Posted on 12/28/2010 2:55:21 PM PST by ChicagoConservative27
Indiana governor Mitch Daniels has given yet another interview in which he talks about a social issues truce he put forward this summer that upset pro-life conservatives.
The interview with WANE follows on the one he gave the Indianapolis Star in which he appeared to shift position and suggest the truce was meant for liberals, not social conservatives concerned about issues like abortion.
In the Star interview, Daniels suggested the truce was meant for liberal activists like those who favored repealing the Dont Ask, Dont Tell policy and he continued that line of thinking in the WANE question and answer session.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
He’s spinning like a top. Not a good sign.
“...a social issues truce he put forward this summer that upset pro-life conservatives.”
How did the pro-death liberals like it?
No, it’s not a good sign.
If he just said what he really thinks he’d probably make more sense.
Yeah, not sure I buy that one. We’ll see in the debates.
Looks like he checked which way the political winds are blowing and decided to ‘adjust’ his socially-liberal ways. We don’t need a half conservative, we need full conservatives.
His remarks were blown WAY out of context.
IF he really meant this latest version, why did he not explain it that way on his first couple of attempts?
Unless he says he can he see Chicago from Ft. Wayne, he belongs on the short list. At 5’-7”, he’s probably too short anyway.
This has been out there for weeks, why wait?? It is too late even if its wrong because opinions are already formed. If this is true then he is too thick and slow to ever consider for President.
Although I think the stories were right in the first place and he’s not on our side.
Voted for him and liked him because of his conservatism. I totally disagreed with his nanny state do-goodism by banning smoking (outdoors!) on government property. Indoors, OK, but outdoors?
Ya right I got that... sure ... Why not ... I believe him.....NOT!!!!!!
A couple of them may have fed the to get some Conservatives to criticize him ~ but silence speaks in this case, and they did not say "yes".
Actually, there's no hope of converting the Leftwingtards to the cause of truth, justice and the American way of life.
They say he has been successful in Indianapolis, but isn’t he tied to that awful Lugar?
This latest version doesn’t really make sense.
A truce involves both sides of a dispute.
If just one side concedes then that’s a surrender.
Yeah, Mitch Daniels Presidential aspirations are dead before they even began. His efforts to distance himself from Social Conservatives have been ongoing and continuous for months, while at the same time he shamelessly reaches out to every RINO and Liberal special interest he can shake hands with.
This man is NO Conservative. It’s one thing to build consensus. It’s quite another to surrender former principles and eschew old friends in order to accept new beliefs and embrace new “friends” for the sake of political advancement. There’s an old saying where I come from — “Dance with the one who brung ya.” Well, Daniels, like SO MANY OTHER Establishment Republicans, has ignored that wisdom. And they ain’t gonna be at the dance in 2012 as anything more than wallflowers....
I got so stressed and sick about things that happened lately that I ended up in the ER.
Daniels looks like a politician here, trying to win back social conservatives. Better to stand by comments and move on than do this. However, I cannot back him in the primary if he is not clearly on the side of appointing judges that support repeal of Roe v. Wade.
It tells me he is scrambling to find the “right” answer, which in turn, tells me he is running for POTUS.
I think it’s odd how people are willing to assess a candidate on what they say (however inartfully) versus what they actually have done.
Romney was a socially liberal governor. He now says he’s conservative - do we trust what he says or what his record indicates?
Huckabee was a fiscally liberal governor. He now says he’s conservative - do we trust what he says or what his record indicates?
If you answered “record” to those two, I’m not so sure Mitch’s highly awkward statements should really unwind his record as a fairly conservative governor (he’s not perfect, and his position on smoking is puzzling). But frankly, he may have the most effective, conservative gubernatorial record of all of the serious candidates that were governors. I think what he’s really saying is that he wants to focus on financial matters instead of running on wedge issues...but I will be keeping an eye on this.
Rush, Sarah, Mitch...our guys and girls don’t rely on the teleprompter so they’ll come off awkward sometimes. I think Sarah knows that SOUTH Korea are our allies, and I think Mitch isn’t suddenly going to become Giuliani 2.0 because of his goofy truce statements.
“Truce” is an inflammatory word, no matter how much Mitch tries to walk it back. There really is a culture war. The liberals have unceasingly bombarded our culture for many years. And yet WE are the ones offering a truce?
I wish he’d give it up. There aren’t that many stupid people who will vote for him in the Presidential primary.
He should hang out with Mitt, Newt, Huck and the rest....hey, maybe try that no-labels gig.
Mitch’s track record in Indiana has been to reduce spending and reduce government employment. He has been solidly pro-life and has always had the support of the pro-life community in Indiana. He was allegedly prompted out of the Bush administration because they felt the budget cuts he wanted to make were draconian. I can’t stand Lugar but Daniels also worked for Reagan and I’m not going to fault a guy for what he did in an entry-level job in the political world. These forum comments strike me as awfully knee-jerk because they aren’t based on what the man has actually done. Rather, they sound to me as so much leaping to conclusions while Daniels tries to find his footing on a national stage. I’d rather have Daniels than Hucksterbee or Romney, by far.
He isn’t tied to Lugar and he has always been pro life. He is a health nut and tends to nannyism. I don’t think he must be too tough on immigration either. But then, none of them are but Steve King or Bachmann.
So are you part of the “My Man Mitch” political machine?
The key words are “trying to find his footing on the national stage”. That’s code for, he’s going to go all over the place until he finds a position that sells, kinda like Mitt.
The guy is marked by his own words and deeds. He did cave to the State Dems and spent most of Indiana’s surplus.
I’m more comfortable with someone who has solid conservative positions and articulates them well on the national stage.
No more RINOs .......ever!!
Not part of the Mitch machine, haven’t worked for a candidate for any office higher than sheriff since Pat Buchanan.
I don’t do “code.” My point is that Mitch is a neophyte a lot like Sarah Palin and no question Sarah has had to learn how to speak differently to keep from having her words twisted. Now the press doesn’t twist her words anymore because Sarah has become more speech-savvy—they just attack directly. I think Daniels is going up the same learning curve. Frankly, it stinks that it works that way but the MSM is statist to its core and that’s what we get in 2011 America.
I’m mostly bothered by the kneejerk reactions of people who have no idea as to his track record, good or bad.
Having said that, I wasn’t nec. responding just to you. I’m a long time lurker on Free Republic and still learning how to post.