latest Romney howler: “Romney said that he doesn’t spend his nights worrying about the taxes wealthy people pay and is instead concerned about modest and middle-income families”

December 24, 2007 in 2008, campaign communications, campaign literature, conservatism, election 2008, GOP, media, mitt romney, policy, republicans, rhetoric, romney, stupidity, the dark soul of Mitt Romney, triumph of unreason
Tags: buffoonery, cbsnews.com, class, class warfare, cott conroy, formerly conservative NRO, from the road, NRO, wealth

… so writes Scott Conroy in a CBS From the Road post titled Romney: A Compassionate Conservative?

Romney is worth upwards of US$250 million dollars. So when Romney refers to “wealthy people,” precisely to whom does the troubled candidate refer?

This may be the logical question. The political question would be why the super-wealthy CEO, Romney, suddenly wants to sound like a populist. Here would be the answer. Please note how the WSJ perceives Gov. Huckabee—both the man and the message—as a legitimate expression of the concerns of the Republican base, unlike the gibbering goofballs at the formerly conservative NRO.

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

Advertisement

Rappaport, former head of the MA GOP: “[Romney’s] word is no good…Mitt Romney would say one thing in a meeting and literally go out of the meeting to the press and tell the opposite story”

December 21, 2007 in 2008, campaign communications, campaign communiques, campaign literature, conservatism, election 2008, GOP, incompetence, Iowa, media, mitt romney, policy, polls, republicans, rhetoric, romney, strategy, stupidity, the dark soul of Mitt Romney, triumph of unreason
Tags: byron york, character, duplicity, formerly conservative NRO, jim rappaport, lies, Massachusetts, Massachusetts Republican Party, national review online, NRO, pathology, political skills, serial liar, snake, sociopath, trust, trustworthy

A scathing attack on Mitt Romney today from Jim Rappaport, the former head of the Massachusetts Republican party who just held a conference call with reporters to announce his endorsement of Rudy Giuliani,” writes Byron York in a post for NRO’s The Corner titled A GOP Attack on Romney

Rappaport praised Giuliani’s record in New York and said Romney “has a strong record of showmanship as opposed to actual performance.” Discussing Romney’s relationship with the Massachusetts state legislature, Rappaport said of the former governor, “His word is no good…Mitt Romney would say one thing in a meeting and literally go out of the meeting to the press and tell the opposite story. There was no desire in the legislature to be accommodating to him because they couldn’t trust him.” Romney, Rappaport continued, “will be clear today on what he believes today, and he’ll be clear tomorrow on what he believes tomorrow, but they may be different things” …

Yuh-huh. See:

Lizza: Romney is a passionate advocate of each new stance he takes

Yet York’s own National Review Online—another proud Blog for Mitt and apparently a subsidiary of Bain Capital, who also recently acquired Clear Channel Communications, carriers of Rush Limbaugh et al—endorsed this troubled man to be our president.

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

P.S. What was it Neil Stevens wrote at Redstate.com?—Trust the man, trust the plan?—i.e. character should matter?

NRO organizes conference call to defend questionable decision to endorse Romney—eyeon08.com reports that they received not one supportive question, and no one spoke in favor of the endorsement

December 20, 2007 in 2008, argument, campaign communications, campaign communiques, campaign literature, conservatism, election 2008, gaffs and pratfalls, GOP, incompetence, media, mitt romney, republicans, rhetoric, stupidity, the dark soul of Mitt Romney, triumph of unreason
Tags: conference calls from hell, eyeon08.com, foreign policy, formerly conservative NRO, national review online, security, Sen. John McCain, stupidity

“[The issue of foreign policy, which the NRO ignored in their rationale for endorsing Romney] shines an important light on National Review’s endorsement of Mitt Romney, which I discussed previously,” writes the Coptic Eye of eyeon08.com in a post titled McCain, Putin, and why experience matters

They had a conference call today to defend it. I didn’t hear a single supportive question, and no one spoke up in favor of their endorsement. Ari Richter of the Concord Monitor asked why so little discussion of foreign policy twice. The first time, Rich Lowry responded that all the candidates were pretty similar. They shared the same views, so the only differences are execution.

But you know what? I don’t think that’s true. Experience and demonstrated judgment matter in this stuff. A lot. And it says a lot about National Review that they are playing that down. And John McCain’s statements today and almost 8 years ago demonstrate that … etc.

See:

Shocker: “In this most fluid and unpredictable Republican field,” the super-geniuses at National Review endorse the most fluid and unpredictable Republican, Willard Milton Romney

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

Romney, reality, and revelation—why are the three never quite in synch?

December 19, 2007 in 2008, argument, campaign communications, campaign communiques, campaign literature, conservatism, election 2008, gaffs and pratfalls, GOP, incompetence, media, mitt romney, polls, republicans, rhetoric, romney, strategy, stupidity, the dark soul of Mitt Romney, triumph of unreason
Tags: associated press, byron york, formerly conservative NRO, mormonism, mormons, NRO

… “the problem, for Romney, is that, to my knowledge at least, he has not said simply that the LDS church was wrong to exclude blacks from the priesthood and top leadership positions before 1978,” writes Byron York in an NRO The Corner post titled Mormonism, Romney, and the Race

Voters don’t mind it – they even like it – when a candidate says something in the past was wrong but that now it is right. But today, on “Meet the Press,” Romney wouldn’t say that.

For non-Mormons, like me, the question seems to focus on the issue of revelation. The LDS church policy was changed in 1978 when the president of the church said he had received a revelation dictating that leadership positions should be open to everyone. At the time, church officials sent out this letter:

In early June of this year, the First Presidency announced that a revelation had been received by President Spencer W. Kimball extending priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members of the Church. President Kimball has asked that I advise the conference that after he had received this revelation, which came to him after extended meditation and prayer in the sacred rooms of the holy temple, he presented it to his counselors, who accepted it and approved it…

I asked about the revelation several weeks ago, when a few of us in the NR Washington bureau met with Mormon Elders M. Russell Ballard and Quentin L. Cook, who had come to Washington to meet with staffers of several publications. (They were concerned about the image of the church; they did not discuss Romney or his candidacy and offered no opinion on it.) When I asked why the church changed position in 1978, the answer was, if I recall correctly, that they did not know. It wasn’t a flip answer; they were saying that they could not know why God had given that revelation to Kimball at that particular moment. They were not inclined to say that the church had been wrong before. That’s a built-in dilemma of the system; if a church says it is led by revelation, and then says it was wrong, it’s kind of like saying God was wrong …

Um, OK., but what about when Romney flatly denies empirical evidence? Is that based on revelation too? Is it kind of like saying G-d was wrong? Regard:

“Mitt Romney dismissed a picture on the Internet on Tuesday that apparently showed him attending a fundraising reception for Planned Parenthood in 1994 during his Senate campaign,” writes someone, we know not who, in an associated press tory titled Mitt Romney Dismisses Photo Suggesting He Attended Planned Parenthood Even

“I attend a lot of events when I run for office. I don’t recall the specific event,” the former Massachusetts governor said as he campaigned for the Republican presidential nomination. “I think I’ve made it very clear. I was pro-choice, or effectively pro-choice, when I ran in 1994. As governor I’m pro-life and I have a record of being pro-life and I’m firmly pro-life today” …

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

conservative elites smack down the Republican base—can they do so with impunity?

December 19, 2007 in 2008, analysis, argument, campaign communications, campaign communiques, campaign management, conservatism, election 2008, Evangelicals, GOP, incompetence, Iowa, media, mitt romney, republicans, rhetoric, romney, strategy, stupidity, the dark soul of Mitt Romney
Tags: arena of ideas blog, christopher adamo, formerly conservative NRO, gov. mike huckabee, Jonah Goldberg, Jonathan Adler, mormonism, mormons, paul seale, reality check blog, rich lowry, Victor Davis Hanson

The formerly conservative NRO—apparently a subsidiary of Bain Capital and another proud Blog for Mitt—overreached when to curry favor with their imperious master, Romney, they savaged Gov. Huckabee. Perversely, the super-geniuses at NRO  slimed Gov. Huckabee on grounds of his religion, after arguing strenuously that Romney’s confession was somehow out of bounds.

Evidence?

Jonah Goldberg, Rich Lowry, Jonathan Adler, and Victor Davis Hanson—each issued their alibis, rationales and lame excuses for sliming Gov. Huckabee on grounds of his faith.

Yet the backlash continues apace.

“Thus far in the 2008 presidential campaign cycle, ‘religion’ has played a far bigger role than in any recent elections,” writes the estimable Christopher Adamo in a Reality Check post titled Conservative Elites to Christians: Remember Your Place

This does not necessarily translate to actual issues of importance to one religious constituency or another, but rather that the religion of individual candidates themselves is a major topic. And as this pattern continues, a glaring hypocrisy is emerging. In short, all religions are to be beyond criticism or question, with the sole exception of Biblical Christianity.

At the slightest suggestion that a candidate’s religion might call his or her judgment or fitness for office into question, the instant and universal response from across the political spectrum is a chorus of accusations of “religious bigotry” and intolerance. No less an icon of punditry than Robert Novak made essentially that case in his October 4, 2007 column. Unless, of course, the religion in question is Southern Baptist and the principal involved is Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, at which point the preacher becomes fair game … etc.

“Gee, lets think about this,” writes Paul Seale in an Arena of Ideas post titled Dear Rich Lowry … So ya think the Romney advertisements are having an effect, eh?

Romney’s campaign which already spent millions of dollars already in Iowa, dumps a few more million and blitzes the airwaves with negative advertisements against someone with next to no cash flow.

Compound the advertisements with the two plus weeks of intensely negative news in which even a simply Christmas advertisement is labeled as “using religion as a political weapon“ and what do you think the results will be?

Just be forewarned that there will be a backlash.

While I do not agree with much of Huckabee’s substance (looks to me as another “big government” conservative), the constant attacks on someone presenting a positive message a vision by Washington elites will be remembered.

I think Byron York today best put his finger on what is driving Huckabee. I dont mind writing that I agree fundamentally with darned near everything Mike Huckabee is saying with regards to what we should do as individuals to solve problems. The difference for me is that Christ asks for those things to be done on the personal level – not through the government.

Similarly I dont mind telling you that a lot of what Huckabee is saying with regards to how those in the media and Republican establishment ring true with me. I’ve seen the same treatmeant with Fred Thompson.

What do both of these men have in common? They refuse to kiss the rings of you guys in the Beltway. The continued implied labling of someone who is otherwise a good man as lazy or some sort of religious fruit loop by those in Washington and the Romney campaign has burned a mark in me so deep that I will remember it for a very long time.

I know you guys in Washington think that many of us can be brought back on board with just a hot button words, but I promise you that is not the case. We want someone authentic – not some synthetic poll driven individual. Remember, we rejected that in 2004. Or do you think we really are that stupid?

While you might be scorching earth on your way to a win in the primaries, remember those burns are going to last long afterward and leave a bad taste in many mouths come November … etc.

The emphases are ours, all ours.

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

Geraghty of NRO: Romney “seems hell-bent on proving he’s a social conservative despite a less-than-ideal record.”

October 16, 2007 in 2008, campaign literature, election 2008, gaffs and pratfalls, GOP, incompetence, mitt romney, republicans, rhetoric, romney, strategy, stupidity, the dark soul of Mitt Romney
Tags: campaign spot, formerly conservative NRO, jim geraghty, John McCain, mr. fix-it, real republican, tom bevan

“Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics believes that John McCain beat Mitt Romney in their fight this weekend over which candidate is a “real Republican,” writes the tame and tedious Jim Geraghty in an NRO Campaign Spot post titled Would Romney be better off running as ‘Mr. Fix-it?’

An adviser to one of Romney’s rivals told me this morning, as we were discussing the “Real Republican” fight of the weekend, that he doesn’t understand the Romney strategy: “I’m not a huge fan of what Romney did in Massachusetts, but it was successful enough to be the foundation of a his message: I’m Mr. Fix-It, I’m the the can-do, get-it-done governor” … etc., etc.

Our response: Snarf! Guffaw!—shouldn’t Romney try to fix his ailing campaign before he tries to sell himself as the fixer of nations? We will refuse to believe that Romney is anything other than completely incompetent until we hear him articulate a clear, compelling, and unequivocal message consistent with his life and values.

• Rubens on Romney: “Beware Candidates Trying to Purchase a Conservative Label”—NH Republicans “ought to heed the attacks” by other GOPers on Romney “by remembering the the last time a wealthy businessman spent millions of his own money in a campaign to re-define himself as a conservative”
• Berry: “to Mitt Romney, politics is just another product”

yours &c.
dr. g.d.