Think again

Quote:As Romney courted the Michigan vote, he proposed a $20 billion energy research/auto industry bailout plan likely to appeal to the Motor City state. Later, touting himself as the turnaround guy for a flailing economy, Romney released his own $233 billion stimulus package -- a price tag that dwarfs President Bush's $145 billion proposal

In the package, Romney cooked up a pricey way to court Florida's powerful senior vote: He proposed a permanent elimination of payroll taxes on seniors. And he opposed "any increase in Social Security taxes."

Quote:In 1994, when he was running to unseat Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy, Romney supported abortion rights, distanced himself from Ronald Reagan and courted the gay and lesbian vote. While he opposed same-sex marriage, Romney convinced the largest gay GOP organization, the Log Cabin Republicans, that he could support civil unions -- and won their unanimous endorsement when he ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002.

Kerry - Romney - Flipper... separated at birth?

THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:Kerry - Romney - Flipper... separated at birth?

No joke.... Romney Campaign proudly bears this...

This is the inverse of your Huckabee post yesterday with article excusing his record based on Reagan's record as Gov. of California.

Quote:Reagan had just served two terms as the governor of California. His record was not all that conservative. He signed the biggest tax increase in the history of the state. He got the best he could get with a Democrat-dominated general assembly. He signed a bill legalizing abortion. But governors have different challenges than presidents.

this is all politics, 'conservatism' is basically taking the libertarian philosophy and applying it to real world realities.

Both Huckabee and Romney had to govern in Dem. dominated states, that means some compromise and pragmatism. Taking a so called "Principled stand" would just get you run out of office in a second, if ever elected to begin with.

you have to convince over 60 Million Americans to go vote for you to get elected, which means you have to take various stands on different issues and come accross as a convincing leader.

whats potentially giong to happen is a significant portion of the Repub. base is going to, in their effort for ideological purity and "one issue trumps all others" thinking, either sit out election day or do a protest vote. Then after being out of power, watching Amnesty and National Health Care get passed, taxes go up and the economy go into shambles with heavy regulation, and courts go Left again. Get away by 2012 from seeking ideological purity....history repeating itself.

and in 2009, no matter who is elected, our nations enemies will test that POTUS to see what he's made of...

as for McCain, I think we'd know more about where he stands to go back and look at his record before he became a national face and was positioning himself nationally as a "Maverick". His early Senate career.

which I haven't looked into yet.

his liberal tendacies worry me more than Huck and Romney, because he's not in a Governing role (1/1), its alot easier to be more idealistic when you are 1/100.

take Rudy for example as Mayor of NYC. It is said he ran a "Sanctuary" city. Its not exactly true, the Feds weren't deporting the illegals and he was stuck with over 500k of them in his city, he was responsible for governing. So what do you do as Mayor of NY? Deny them access to Schools, putting those kids(probably around 150k or more) out in the streets which would lead to higher crime? Deny them access to hospitals, letting them stay sick and spread Communicable disease to others? ......Or make the best of the sitution?

So GG,

You thinkin about backin the cross dresser?

GGniner Wrote:This is the inverse of your Huckabee post yesterday with article excusing his record based on Reagan's record as Gov. of California.

Quote:Reagan had just served two terms as the governor of California. His record was not all that conservative. He signed the biggest tax increase in the history of the state. He got the best he could get with a Democrat-dominated general assembly. He signed a bill legalizing abortion. But governors have different challenges than presidents.

this is all politics, 'conservatism' is basically taking the libertarian philosophy and applying it to real world realities.

Both Huckabee and Romney had to govern in Dem. dominated states, that means some compromise and pragmatism. Taking a so called "Principled stand" would just get you run out of office in a second, if ever elected to begin with.

you have to convince over 60 Million Americans to go vote for you to get elected, which means you have to take various stands on different issues and come accross as a convincing leader.

whats potentially giong to happen is a significant portion of the Repub. base is going to, in their effort for ideological purity and "one issue trumps all others" thinking, either sit out election day or do a protest vote. Then after being out of power, watching Amnesty and National Health Care get passed, taxes go up and the economy go into shambles with heavy regulation, and courts go Left again. Get away by 2012 from seeking ideological purity....history repeating itself.

and in 2009, no matter who is elected, our nations enemies will test that POTUS to see what he's made of...

It's not that I don't think people's philosophy can't evolve over time, it is the intentional misstatements or LIES that Romney has made that call his character into question.

Quote: Romney -- "I am an avid hunter"

He never owned a hunting license, tried to smooth over by saying he only hunts small animals, I guess rats or mice not sure what he meant.

Quote: Romney -- "My father marched with MLK"

Tried to smooth over by saying he meant symbolically that he supported MLK and what the march stood for.

If you will lie about small stuff that really doesn't measurably improve your political standing, what kind of lies are you telling about the things that are important.

GGniner Wrote:as for McCain, I think we'd know more about where he stands to go back and look at his record before he became a national face and was positioning himself nationally as a "Maverick". His early Senate career.

which I haven't looked into yet.

I'll save you some effort...

Google "Keating Five" or "Keating 5"... and you will see what the "Amigo" was up to back in the late 1980's...

Romney is as conservative as he needs to be to get the nomination. That's my problem. He has no consistent world view. I don't trust McCain because well living in the DC area, I know enough people who know him very well and they aren't supporting him even though they would be in the category of people you would expect to support him, (ExPOW's and Annapolis grads) and they seem to use the word "trust" as a quality he lacks. I also have a problem with McCain-Feingold in the big Brother mode. Huckabee is a social conservative, but not sure if he will be a fiscal conservative or not. His past is spotty in that regard. Rudy is an economic, law and order, walk softly and carry a big stick, conservative, but on social issues (and lifestyle) is off the reservation. Paul is libertarian and thus not conservative, but entirely libertarian. At least he has a world view, just not one I subscribe to. At this point, I'm supporting Huckabee, because he's the most consistent on social conservative issues and seems to at least have a world view. Obama and Clinton are not even in the statosphere of Conservative. Any one of these guys would be more conservative by comparison.