Skip to comments.Mitt Romney: A Liberal's Liberal Republican
Posted on 04/22/2012 4:13:13 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
The most prominent candidate for the GOP nomination is former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. He's a prolific fundraiser and enjoys widespread name recognition, and he's the darling of the GOP establishment. George Will lists him as one of the few serious presidential candidates.
But should Romney be the GOP's presidential nominee? The answer is "absolutely not."
Although there is no "perfect conservative," and although conservatives have serious issues with every candidate running, Mitt Romney is nothing more than a strident liberal masquerading as a moderate. As Selwyn Duke rightly wrote in 2007, Romney is the Barack Obama of the GOP. Every Republican has made his share of mistakes, but Romney is a committed liberal on the whole spectrum of issues.
Conservatives know that Romney was pro-abortion for a long time before he first ran for the presidency in 2007, at which time he "changed his position" because he was now asking for the votes of conservatives. Romney has also supported "gay rights," and as Massachusetts governor, he implemented same-sex marriage by executive fiat.
In 2004, the MA Supreme Court ruled that the state's marriage law was unconstitutional -- but the Court did not rule, contrary to what is claimed, that gay marriage must be legalized and that the state constitution contains a "right" to marry. Yet, as soon as the ruling was issued, Romney commanded state agencies, by executive order, to start issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples.
Romney is stridently liberal on fiscal and economic issues. He did not initially support the Bush tax cuts; he has long opposed (and continues to oppose) the flat tax, calling it "a tax cut for fat cats"; he used fee hikes and "loophole-closing measures" to balance the Massachusetts state budget;
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I agree. But it’s too late. It is going to come down to MR or BO. I am going for MR and hope a GOP/Tea Party congress will keep him “relatively” honest.
That's it in a nutshell.
And what's become evident to me this time around is that, although he has a big smile, he is, like Obama, a malignant narcissist. Like Obama, he thinks he's God. He was destined from birth to rule. And his followers support him because they think so, too.
We are going to be more involved with the Mormons than we would care to be. In the Mormon faith, if you’re not a Mormon, you’re a 2nd-class citizen.
Haven’t we had enough of leaders with personal agendas?
Do you not understand the basic dynamics of opposition?
A GOP Congress will give Mitt Romney a degree of latitude and compliance that they would never give to Obama. They're not going to keep Romney honest. They'll roll right over for his liberal agenda because he's the head of their party. Not so with Obama, who they'd lock arms against.
We did not get our conservative candidate( the establishment won this one). It’s looking like Romney. So what does attacking Romney do? Nothing! Stop eating our own. It will be us, and the tea partiers ( which I feel I am) to keep congress in line. They will listen to our pressure, they have since this ... guy.. Got in office.
PS. I hate that the Roves, and Coulters, and Wills, did this. But let’s make lemonade, Mitt has done some great things in his life, much more than “ anointed one” has. BTW.. Still love Newt
Socon should vote 3rd party or vote for Hussein, that’ll get rid of the Republicans. Hey, this ain’t the Federalists vs the anti-Federalists. People that oppose Hussein but refuse to vote for Romney need to make the case as to why Hussein would be preferable to Romney.
Here are some examples why Romney, though flawed, is better than Hussein:
Romney flip flops on abortion- bad. Hussein, pro abort to the max and even supported infanticide in IL
Romney- Romneycare- bad for MA, Hussein- 0-care, worse by 50x
Romney- inconsistent on 2A, Hussein, consistently against 2A
Romney- inconsistent on taxes, Hussein, wants higher taxes even if less revenue because of ‘fairness’
One election will not restore the Republic, but this election, if won by Hussein will completely destroy it. Waiting till 2016 for a better candidate will be meaningless because we will have a Chavez style socialist dictatorship.
Is a civil war what some here really want? Because, I see a very real possibility under zero.
OK, you moron. Take Obama and his agenda and unending debt.
If I had all the Rep. candidates to choose from, I would vote ABR (anybody but Romney). But I dont! So if it’s Romney vs. Obama, I will always vote ABO (anybody but Obama)
I do not consider that lying weasel, Progressive, statist, liberal Democrat to be one of my "own". The fraud should be rejected out of hand by every conservative with a conscience.
The more folks like you play okey-doke with the RNC, the more liberal our candidates are going to become. They've been moving further and further to the left for decades now - don't you see that?
Then you are sending the establishment the message they want to hear...you will walk in lockstep with whatever rino they put up for president. The Tea Party fought long and hard during the 2010 election and won; they fought for Walker in Wisconsin and recently sent Hatch a message.
Rove and Co. snubbed the newly elected Tea Party candidates..many said the death of the Tea Party is near and it was just a fluke. If we cave now..it will be hard to rebound.
Consider what Gingrich accomplished as Speaker against Clinton..and consider that IF we win the senate and maintain the house ..we can stop Obama. It is a historical fact. In the meantime..the elitists will get OUR message.
Careful, Katie. You're gonna make some folks go crazy, if you force them to look at the plain truth in front of their faces.
"Republican Revolution" of 1994
In the 1994 campaign season, in an effort to offer an alternative to Democratic policies and to unite distant wings of the Republican Party, Gingrich and several other Republicans came up with a Contract with America, which laid out ten policies that Republicans promised to bring to a vote on the House floor during the first hundred days of the new Congress, if they won the election.
The contract was signed by Gingrich and other Republican candidates for the House of Representatives. The contract ranged from issues such as welfare reform, term limits, tougher crime laws, and a balanced budget law, to more specialized legislation such as restrictions on American military participation in United Nations missions.
In the November 1994 elections, Republicans gained 54 seats and took control of the House for the first time since 1954. Long-time House Minority Leader Bob Michel of Illinois had not run for re-election, giving Gingrich, the highest-ranking Republican returning to Congress, the inside track at becoming speaker. The midterm election that turned congressional power over to Republicans "changed the center of gravity" in the nation's capital. Time magazine named Gingrich its 1995 "Man of the Year" for his role in the election Thank YOU Mr. Speaker
I can name ONE, but he's buried in Simi Valley, California.
It's tough to find another living Republican who's done as much, or worked as hard for the conservative cause, as Newt Gingrich.
Can you even believe we're having this argument on Free Republic, of all places? I think it's a testament to how shell-shocked and panicked our side has become. Some folks are just terrified witless, and can't think anymore, it seems.
NO way - I’m not a complete idiot!
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.