Within at least three posts, you have claimed an 88% rating for Mittler from the ACU. I had never been aware that the ACU had EVER rated governors and Taxachusetts governor is the only office Mittler ever held (until his 34% approval rating drove him from office). I went to the ACU home page and found reference to ratings for US Senate, US House, and six state legislatures (Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, California, Georgia and Colorado) but no governors. BTW, many years ago, I was a state chair of an ACU affiliate in a state bordering Massachusetts. That proves nothing in itself but I would make two observations: First, John Ashbrook's American Conservative Union and David Keene's ACU were entirely different things as the National Rifle Association now chaired by Keene will find out to its detriment. Second, rating even state legislators much less governors is likely beyond the competence of ACU's staff, giving them every benefit of the doubt. At least with state legislators, their voting records and their bills may be reviewed not unlike Congress or Senate. Massachusetts has an (old colonial era institution) elected Governor's Council which affects gubernatorial actions in many ways not readily discernible to outsiders.
I am the first to admit that I lack computer skills but perhaps you can point me to how I can find internet confirmation that the ACU EVER rated Governor Romney at all, much less at 88%. Are you talking about a state affiliate in Massachusetts? Again point me in the right direction to obtain confirmation. I am not doubting your integrity though I do question your wisdom and your analysis of what constitute reasons to go to political war especially for the likes of Romney. I DO absolutely question Romney's integrity and everything else about him and that goes for both of his now deceased parents as well. Romney's daddy became part of the antiwar left while running for POTUS in 1968 as a stalking horse for Nelson Rockefeller (who never became antiwar) and while Mittens was following the family tradition of avoiding military service by choosing his military draft eligible years to run off to France as a missionary. None of his five sons have served and neither did his daddy.
You characterize Mittler as a "squeaky clean choir boy for a politician." How about a more accurate description? He is and always has been a money-obsessed unprincipled sleazy whore EVEN for a politician and one who never saw a social issue whether babies, guns, marriage, education or whatever on which he was meaningfully distinguishable in policy from Ted Kennedy. It is true that Myth Romney never drove a girl off the Chappaquiddick Bridge and left her to drown.
I understand the argument of some that absolutely ANYTHING has to be to Obozo's right although a Romney presidency, in my estimation, will permanently destroy the GOP and, with it, our nation. I cannot imagine any actual conservative supporting Myth Romney if that conservative is familiar with the details of Romneycare.
Reagan's ex-wife Jane Wyman (probably in later years a far better person than Nancy) was asked by lame stream media in 1980 to tell them about Ronaldus Maximus (most politicos knew that their approximately 1948 divorce had been a nasty bloodbath). Wyman responded to their shock and horror that Ronnie is was a very fine man and that the USA would be blessed to have him as POTUS. If you posted suggesting that he was libertarian during the divorce period, he was not. Any libertarianism on Reagan's part stemmed from his Hollywood background where abortions and sexual perversion were more commonplace than most moviegoers knew. He had a certain tolerance for such things without being a cheerleader for either. By 1948 he was testifying before HUAC against Hollywood communist influence although his circle of friends and allies included ex-communists Sterling Hayden and John Garfield among others.
The last sentence of your second paragraph is the very definition of Romney as a money-obsessed unprincipled whore as noted above.
Finally, I am often in disagreement with Ansel12 over issues of our respective faiths. I am a Catholic and he is a Reformed Christian. Both of us are more than a bit textured in our respective faith commitments. OTOH, I have found ansel12 to be a thoroughly honest FReeper and worthy and principled opponent here even when he disagrees with my point of view. Ansel12 has earned that reputation here over a long posting history.
If you imagine that this post is the product of "irrational hatred," so be your belief and I will tend to view you through the prism you are earning accordingly.
I am just now reading old responses. Thanks for your detailed and thoughtful response. Bottom Line: I was wrong about the ACU rating - I just read the bold print and not the whole thing. Also, I am a big fan of Reagan, and only used him as an example in an effort to highlight that some of the absolute statements made about Romney (no redeeming qualities whatsoever - no difference from Obama) went far beyond what a judicious person would make (i.e., by such standards, even Reagan could be viewed as unsuitable).
It is just so important to get rid of Obama, that I am trying to minimize some of the fratricide on the anti-Obama side. I did not get on the Romney bandwagon until the primary was wrapped up, but when it was wrapped up, I saw it as my patriotic duty was to help him win. I think its time to stop hating on him and focus on defeating Obama. The primary is over and Romney is our only real chance to get rid of Obama - he has to win. I don’t know what effect Romney will have on future election cycles (frankly, I anticipate better economic results as an upside, to counterbalance some downsides). I am confident that four more years of Obama would be catastrophic - it must be avoided.
I wish another Reagan was here for us, but we must make the most of what we have. I do not expect that Romney will be socially conservative, but do I think that Romney will be great for the economy, compared with Obama, and light-years better on budget balancing (Ryan). He won’t be sabotaging us on National security or foreign affairs. The gushing wound of Obama controlling the Presidency must be treated with urgency.
Obama Must Be Defeated!