Tag Archives: Romney

Michael Barone: “Romney Corny Because He Missed the 60s”

Michael Barone

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr

When I saw the headline “Untouched by 60s, Romney Reflects Corny 50s” I at first thought it some left wing hack from Salon.com, The Nation or Daily Beast desperately looking to start a new brand attack strategy for to attack Romney. But when I clicked on it and it led me to the Washington Examiner with Michael Barone as the byline, I was surprised to say the least.

But this is what passes as journalism these days in the GOP 2012 presidential race.

Barone’s Pulitzer Prize winning piece centers around what everyone is wanting to know about Mitt Romney: Why does he sound so corny? I’ll let the culture expert explain:

But as I look back on his biography, it seems to me that Romney missed one experience which changed the outlook and even the vocabulary of most of his schoolmates. This is a man who never experienced the ’60s. You know what I mean: peace demonstrations, dope smoking, ironic detachment, all that.

But though smooth and articulate in debate, he is awkward in chitchat and often sounds corny, as if he is still living in the ’50s. That’s natural for someone who missed the ’60s.

So there you have it. If you didn’t experience peace demonstrations, attend Woodstock or smoke pot in the 60’s then you are most likely to experience awkwardness when chit chatting with others, and may come off corny like Mitt Romney.

I’ve seen Michael Barone on Fox News a few times and I find him rather dull and uninteresting. Maybe it’s because he never left the 70’s.  But that is up for debate.

Tagged , , , , ,

Bill Kristol Wrong on Romney’s Immigration Stance

Bill Kristol on Fox News Sunday

Bill Kristol was on Fox News Sunday this morning as part of the panel and when host Chris Wallace brought up Newt Gingrich’s much publicized comments on immigration from last Tuesday’s debate. And I was surprised to hear him regurgitate the same false statement that Mitt Romney held the same view as Gingrich four years ago.

I’m sure he’s referring to the 14 seconds of selectively edited video of Romney talking with Russert on Meet the Press in 2007 that Gingrich and many of the conservative media reported about last week. Surprised that Kristol, who usually does his homework on all topics, doesn’t know Romney’s true stance on immigration.

Here is the excerpt from Fox News Sunday

WALLACE: Let me ask you about that, Bill, because Gingrich’s opponents are clearly treating this as a major blunder. Mitt Romney said that this idea of giving legal status to long-time, law-abiding immigrants, illegal immigrants is amnesty and it is a magnet that encourages more people to come across the border. And Michele Bachmann, who’s got everything riding in Iowa, said that this shows that Gingrich is the most liberal Republican candidate when it comes to that issue. They clearly think it is a weakness.

BILL KRISTOL, WEEKLY STANDARD: Yes, Mitt Romney does — I believe he had the exact same position four years ago, so he can explain why Newt Gingrich is now wrong to take a position that he himself took four years ago.

Newt Gingrich knew what he was doing. I was at the debate Tuesday night. He said I am going to get attacked for this. He went out of his way, I would almost say, to propose this, I think showing, because he doesn’t want to run as a presidential nominee of a party that looks ridiculous, honestly, on the immigration issue.

Is the Republican — is Michele Bachmann’s and Mitt Romney’s position — let’s put aside Michele Bachmann, she’s trying to stay alive in Iowa — is Mitt Romney’s position really that we are going to send back 11 or 12 million people who are in this country illegally, including the one million or two million or however many there might be who have been here for 20, 25 years, whose kids are citizens, et cetera? I don’t really believe Mitt Romney believes that. I don’t believe Romney believes that for a minute. And I think Gingrich is willing to run the risk–

 

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The Left’s “Evolving” Obsession of Romney

The Washington Post wants you to know that Romney’s “Evolution” on issues knows no bounds–including his time as a lay pastor for his church…get ready for it…30 years ago! Yes, they are dragging out an 80-year old woman to share her outrage on advice he gave her 30 years ago!

Does the Washington Post understand how lame this story is? Apparently, desperation knows no bounds. Here’s a short excerpt:

As the local bishop, Romney conducted annual interviews with all the members of his flock, and he used his time with the newcomer to express both his disapproval of divorce and to remind the middle-aged woman, who had begun dating again, about the church’s opposition to premarital sex.

“I got awfully mad,” said Caci, now 80. “I told him it was none of his business and he said it was.” Romney persisted, she said, and also warned her to avoid consorting with a group of devout but independent Mormon women who had eased her transition into the church. Caci said she reported her “run-in” with Romney to those women, who published a Mormon feminist journal titled Exponent II.

They were “appalled at the fact that he was harassing me, which is basically what he was doing,” she said.

Caci left the church soon after.

Nothing like a feminist scored…

Tagged , , , , ,

Romney The Conservative

I have stuggled to find–or come up with myself–an article that I could send to my non-Romney friends that explains Romney’s conservative credentials.

Until now.  Courtesy of the great Article IV blog:

The entire article is great, but here’s my favorite part:

Governor Mitt Romney of MA

Image via Wikipedia

On Mitt Romney

Even a glance at Romney shows a deeply conservative man. He is his father and mother’s son. At great cost, he has held to the religious faith of his fathers. He chose to be a Republican when many of his background (see Reid, Harry) would have joined the Democrats.

Why?

He is a conservative man, but not a reactionary. Most of his “flip-flops” are due to different responses over changing times or conditions.

Health care in Massachusetts is a prime example. The voters of Massachusetts are to the left of the American center. They wanted more coverage for the citizens. Options on the table all would increase state power.

In this case, it was not a choice between doing nothing or something. It was a question of what would be done. Romney gave Massachusetts a plan that honored the free market far more than “single payer” or other more strongly socialist plans would have done.

As a result, voters in Massachusetts got what they wanted, for good and bad, but at less cost and harm to liberty than if Romney’s political opponents had defeated him.

Romney got the best deal he could get and did good for uninsured people as well. He should be proud of his plan.

The US is not Massachusetts. By the time of Obama Care, the electorate had also changed. Obama Care is similar to the Massachusetts plan, but imposes it on Utah and Texas and other states where it is far inferior to other possibilities. Passing Romney’s plan also allowed Romney and other politicians to see the strengths and weaknesses of the plan.

Romney learned from this, but Obama did not.

In short, Romney got the best plan he could in Massachusetts. Obama crammed down the worst plan that could pass. Single payer might have happened in Massachusetts, but it had no change at the Federal level.

Romney-care was conservative in Massachusetts. Obama-care was liberal for the entire United States.

On abortion, Romney changed his mind. Unless he is lying, he had horrible family experiences that had made him pro-choice. The experience of dealing with the abortion extremists in Massachusetts began to change his mind. Finally, he came to a position more mainstream to his deeply held LDS faith.

That seems a natural evolution for a deeply conservative man.

Finally, Romney is a human being and one that is ambitious. He has made mistakes and been inconsistent. I don’t think he is more inconsistent than any other politician.

Romney is no ideologue. He will preserve what he can while allowing change the people or times demand to happen. He respects the past and the Constitution.

Mitt Romney has lived out the ideals where compromise is impossible: liberty under law with God given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Romney is not a libertarian, but he favors a smaller government than President Obama.

Romney is likely to respond to the demands of the American people in as conservative a manner as possible. As Americans become more libertine, Romney will not follow in his personal life and he will protect traditionalist from the government.

Romney the businessman, is well equipped to save the free markets from the reaction to the abuses of some robber barons.

A critic might respond that I have missed a change in circumstance. GOP voters have grown more conservative. I think the loud voters are more conservative, but one quarter of the voters have stuck with Romney all this time in a broad field. Sadly to me as a conservative, programs like Social Security and Medicare are still popular. Most GOP voters  want them improved not cut.

If GOP voters have really moved so far right that Romney cannot win, then the GOP cannot win. Romney is center-right . . . and the majority of the nation is center-right . . . not hard right.

But I am not worried really. I think voters know Romney. He is not a fresh face. They are looking for someone more exciting, but will settle, as GOP primary voters always do, on the sensible candidate.

The Republican Party is lucky that Romney betrayed what is expected of a man of his background, wealth, and education and stayed in the GOP. If he wins, America will be lucky this wealthy and happy man was willing to serve.

Tagged , , , ,

“Drive-By” Reporting on the Right

Rush Limbaugh booking photo from his arrest in...

Image via Wikipedia

Rush Limbaugh’s moniker, the “Drive by Media,” is a term he attaches to those media outlets who casually and half heartedly report the news. Instead of digging in and doing real reporting, they simply give a  “drive by”  account of what they saw and most of the time they get it wrong.

I’m sorry to say that many in the conservative media  are doing the same thing when it comes to their favorite punching bag Mitt Romney. Instead of digging in and looking into what Romney faced as governor regarding the health care bill:

  • the things he couldn’t change in the legislation because of state law
  • the parts he vetoed but was overridden
  • how he consulted the Heritage Foundation and other conservative approval (including Newt Gingrich

…they take the easy way out and simply declare that RomneyCare is the same as ObamaCare. End of story. They also call him “unprincipled” who will “say and do anything to get elected.” And my personal favorite “he lacks a core.” Yet we are to believe them when they say they will vote for him should he get the nomination. Would you vote for someone you think is “unprincipled”? I don’t think so.

That’s why the ascendancy of Newt Gingrich is so baffling. Here is a man who has baggage for his baggage. The conservative media  and tea party factions apparently are willing to forgive his personal failings (divorce and adultery) and his not-so-conservative positions (global warming ad with Princess Nancy, support for prescription drug entitlement), yet they cannot–and will not–give Mitt  a pass on RomneyCare.

But now that Newt is tied or ahead in the polls,  and is the latest in a long line of candidates to wear the “Not-Romney” crown , I hope the conservative media will attempt more than a “drive by” account of his less than stellar record.

Tagged , , , , , ,