Everything Mr. Will says about Mr. Romney is true. It is odd that I still find
him to be the best choice in the GOP field.
Will the Tea Party and the core Republican base decide that it is better to
compromise their values and vote for Romney because he may be the best
opportunity to defeat Barack Obama? Perhaps. The dislike of Obama within the
Republican base may be so great that they would do anything to obtain his loss
in 2012. Although Romney is the antithesis of what the Tea Party Republicans
may want, they may just hold there nose and vote for him just because it may be
the only way to get a Republican in the White House.As for the
Republlican nomination, the support is there to nominate a Tea Party favorite,
but Independents would reject that candidate and give the election to Obama only
because they fear the Tea Party extremists and their unconventional ideas. The
problem for Romney is how can he shift his views to appeal to the Tea Party for
the nomination and then redirect them to appeal to Independents without adding
to his flip-flop, beige reputation? It's not a nice place to be in, but then he
knows he has to move Right to play in the game and that's dangerous.
He's asking Romney for a clear stance on ethanol? Doesn't George Will know
Romney's position on making positions?
Republicans and Democrats both seem to be headed for extinction. Romney typifies
all that's wrong within the GOP: vague sloganeering with ambiguous
"specifics." This is what happens when both parties become so large
that they have to appeal to many diverse factions nationwide. How anyone can
stomach this steady diet of waffles for so long is beyond me.
I would love to see more discussion based on competence, not ideology.
Where's the guy(oops, person) who is supposed to ride up on the white horse at
the last minute and save the day for the Republican party?Still wishing,
and hoping, and praying, and watching............
"NO"!. We don't trust any of them anymore since 2008. K Street is a
major thoroughfare in the United States capital of Washington, D.C. known as a
center for numerous think tanks, lobbyists, and advocacy groups. The K Street
Project is a project by the Republican Party to pressure Washington lobbying
firms to hire Republicans in top positions, and to reward loyal GOP lobbyists
with access to influential officials. It was launched in 1995, by Republican
strategist Grover Norquist and House majority leader Tom DeLay. K Street in
Washington DC is where the big lobbying firms have their headquarters and is
sometimes refered to as the fourth branch of government. Lobbying firms have
great influence in U.S. national politics due to monetary resources and the
revolving door policy of hiring former government officials. It is common
practice for politicians to request money from lobbying firms for an exchange in
better access to officials and to buy favoritism in policies. DeLay of the
House, Rick Santorum of the Senate, and Grover Norquist took this opportunity to
expand the K Street Project by pressuring major lobbying firms to hire only
Republicans in any new or open positions. My views.
Will the Republicans settle for the candidate that lost to the candidate that
lost to Obama? If McCain was running again, would Romney be leading?
"must conservatism settle for Mitt"?--------If
they want a shot at the general election they must.The American
isn't ready to gut social security, medicade, the insurance of food stamps while
at the same time drastically lowering taxes on the most wealthy.Most
people believe sacrifice must be shared.
The tea party will run a third party candidate.
And if the tea party does run a third candidate they will insure the reelection
of President Obama.
Before Romney can use his business skills to overturn the destruction being
caused by Mr. Obama, Romney has to be in office. What kind of political fool
would alienate the people of Iowa? What kind of political fool would cater to
people within his own party who told him to destroy his chances of being elected
to satisfy those on their fringe?Mr. Romney, if he hopes to be
elected, must have answers that more than 50% of voting Americans accept as the
best policy for America. He will not get those votes by being appealing to Mr.
Well "conservatism" (definition please, Mr Will) hasn't settled on
Mitt.Nor does it need to, to answer GWill's question.After studying all the candidates I would say that "conservatism"
(those who want to minimize taxes, and cut government spending: MY definition,
there needs to be one) has a near-perfect representative in Mr Paul.Explanation:Mr Paul will minimize taxes: he aims to abolish income
tax altogether and replace it with nothing. He plans to reduce corporate tax
MORE than Mitt (to 15% rather than just 25%). Mitt wants to extend a tax break
to the Middle Class and other lower paid working people (so far so good) but
"Ron" will abolish the income tax altogether. Mr Paul
aims to reduce spending dramatically and has a definite and detailed plan,
including the reduction of the annual budget (first year in office) by one
trillion dollars. Also the bringing home of troops from all of the Middle East
and shutting down hundreds of military bases. Mitt has said nothing of this
nature. Ron Paul has a complete budget plan available for public scrutiny and
Must Conservatives settle for Herman Cain? You see Mr. Will if you pick and
choose there is much more to be said! Herman Cain supports Abortion with NO
OPTIONS! As a Conservative I find this a unacceptable position! No exception for
Rape or Incest? Mr. Cain would have you believe that if his wife,child or
grandchild were a victim he would not want them to even have an option away from
that unacceptable position! Where is the logic Mr. Cain? Conservative is one
thing, over the top another! Forcing a woman or child to endure with an UNWANTED
PREGNANCY IS EQUAL TO TORTURE! Why would you Mr. Cain, if your in your right
mind, force TORTURE on a Female citizen of any age? Where is the Compassionate
Christian heart here? It appears to be missing. You may not Sir have had to deal
with this situation before, but I would rather that Mitt Romney be President and
allow this choice to a woman than an unbending heartless businessman dictating
ALL RULES and REGULATIONS! You Mr. Cain claim you want to divest power from the
Ferderal Government, but only no the States not to the people?
It's one thing to win a political party's nomination. It another, more
complicated, thing to win the office. Then, it is a much more difficult task to
work with Congress and get policy that the Supreme Court will accept.Campaign pledges are to be taken with a heavy grain of salt. Does anyone
actually think tax reform as proposed by the Tea Party favorites-of-the-week
will ever be enacted into law? Corporations and those who have the power would
love to have a flat tax but they don't want to lose their tax loopholes. They
paid dearly to get their special consideration in the formulation of the current
tax code and will fight with huge contributions to selected congresspeople to
maintain their advantage.
@EarlPoliticos who seem comfortable, on both sides, of every issue,
as well as all politicos in general, be forever warned... Make a
place in the Pantheon of Political Pundentry.The "Earl of
Sandy" has coined my new favorite phrase..."...vague
sloganeering with ambiguous specifics...".When, not if, I use
this term, let it be known among all who dare to comment on the DN Forum, that
the "Earl of Sandy" is the originator of this classic decsription of
the "disease" which seems to bedevil politicos of all types and
stripes, on a daily, sometimes hourly basis.Again, Earl, my
George Will picked a most confusing and divisive issue for Republicans -
ethanol. Oil states despise it - corn states love it. Romney is caught in
the middle. Where does H Cain stand on this one?Will's
other example, the union issues in Ohio, should have been left alone. It is, as
Romney said initially, a state issue. Romney should have left it at that. George Will must have an agenda for this little piece. Hope he shares
it with us.
George Will has always relied on the notion of an emasculated conservative party
that he alone can speak for. He is main stream media personified. Now we see a
political bubble not unlike the real estate bubble that burst. Some see it,
others just don't. Romney has the right mix of common sense and compassion to
bring us together as a nation. If he can't do it, then Bachman will use tough
love as the medicene. If the American people reject both, then we only have
ourselves to blame for the accelerated decline that is sure to follow.
I like reading George Will most of the time but not today. I wonder which
candidate he likes, if not Romney? Would it be Perry or Cain? Bachmann or
Santoris? Huntsman or Ron Paul? (Smile.) Which of these does he think
independent voters will go for in numbers? Hard to imagine. But maybe Mr. Will
sees something the rest of us can't. Maybe he wants to run at last . . .I believe Romney will be a good president, and George will likely come
to recognize that.
So, George starts off with the old claim that Obama, said ATM's are to blame for
high unemployment. Not True! He said structural changes, allow businesses to do
more with less, and then used ATM's at banks and Kisoks in airports as examples
that everyone would recognize. Then he said, the point is we need to make sure
that we are training people for jobs that are available and will be avialable.
ATM's and kisoks are in fact examples of productivity gains and,
U.S. productivity growth doubled from 2008 to 2009, then doubled again in 2010,
according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. No
where did the President say productivity gains were responsible for high
unemployment.Try again George, you are usually better than this.
However, if George Will is resorting to blatant lies to discredit the President
repbulicans should be very afraid of next November.
George Will is analyzing the problem of why the Republican field candidates are
going up and down in the polls faster than an elevator, but Mitt Romney is stuck
in every poll solidly in the 25% range. He points out the numerous problems with
his candidacy not the least of which his need to please one and all and the
impossibility of doing that in a party that has a right wing that will not vote
for Romney. In Utah, we don't have that problem because he is the darling of
the Mormon vote much like Kennedy was for Catholics in the sixties.Bottom line: he will get the nomination because the others are like the seven
dwarfs next to him, but is he electable? Hence the reason for George Will's
16 reasons why Romney will be a very bad president.1.Obamacare was
one of the worst pieces of legislation ever passed by the U.S. Congress. Mitt
Romney says that he would repeal Obamacare, but the reality is that Romneycare
was what Obamacare was based on.2.During his time as governor of
Massachusetts, Mitt Romney significantly raised taxes.3.Government
spending in Massachusetts increased significantly under Mitt Romney. An
advocate of smaller government he most definitely is not.4.It turns
out that Mitt Romney is a believer in the theory of man-made global warming. In
fact, Al Gore recently praised on Mitt Romney on his blog.5.If Mitt
Romney becomes president, we may actually have cap and trade shoved down our
throats. While campaigning for president in 2007, Mitt Romney said that he
would support a cap and trade carbon tax scheme for the entire world.6.Mitt Romney had a horrible record of creating jobs while governor of
Massachusetts. According to Boston Herald business reporter Bret Arends, only
one state in the entire country was worse at creating jobs while Romney was in
continued7.Mitt Romney was a very enthusiastic supporter of the Wall
Street bailouts. When the time comes for more Wall Street bailouts it seems
almost certain that Mitt Romney will bail them out again.8.If Romney
becomes president, get ready for a flood of liberal judges. While he was
governor of Massachusetts, there were actually significantly more Democrats
among his judicial appointments than there were Republicans.9.Mitt
Romney is incredibly soft on illegal immigration.10.While he was
governor, Mitt Romney received advice on global warming and carbon emissions
from the man who is now the top science adviser to Barack Obama. His name is
John P. Holdren, and he has some very, very disturbing ideas. 11.Mitt Romney once claimed that he was more pro-choice than Ted Kennedy, but
now he claims that he is pro-life. 12.During this campaign season,
Mitt Romney has stated that he only supportspartnership agreements for gay
couples and not gay marriage, but what Romney actually did while governor of
Massachusetts suggests otherwise. In the WorldNetDaily article referenced
above, Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt detailed how Mitt Romney
aggressively implemented gay marriage in the state of Massachusetts.
continued13.As late as 2007, Mitt Romney was a member of the
Republican Main Street Partnership. They often work in conjunction with the
pro-abortion group, Republicans for Choice, and the Republican homosexual group,
the Log Cabin Club. They also opposed the nomination of Supreme Court Justice
Samuel Alito and set up a 527 campaign committee that received funding from far
left funder George Soros.14.According to the Huffington Post, Mitt
Romney has raised more money from lobbyists than all of the other Republican
candidates combined.So if Mitt Romney becomes president, who do you think he is
going to listen to the American people or the lobbyists?15.Mitt
Romney is a big time Wall Street insider. It is estimated that Romney has a
personal fortune of approximately a quarter of a billion dollars, and Wall
Street money is being absolutely showered on his campaign.16.Mitt
Romney has been a huge supporter of gun control laws. When he was running for
governor in Massachusetts, he made the following statement.We do
have tough gun laws in Massachusetts- I support themI believe they help protect
us, and provide for our safety.
I put this on my FB page.
FYI. I'm not for or against gay marriage in any way. This is just a cut and
paste article that I put in the comment section.
I'd be in favor of canning Ethanol subsidies yesterday. Grow corn for food, not
ethyl alcohol. George needs to fix his glasses. He's getting a little myopic.
We don't need to settle for Mitt Romney. The reason so many people are willing
to accept Mitt Romney is because they don't realize that there's a true
conservative who is willing to do what is necessary to restore our republic to
its glory.Ron Paul 2012!
So Edward L. just when was our republics glory? Before or after the Keynesian
economics of the 30's and 40's, before or after social security, before or after
margianal tax rates of 70 to 90%? If you think it was before you must think
rampant poverty, blatant discrimination, and 80 hour wook weeks are glorious.
Here's my take on the GOP candidates: Jon Huntsman, Jr. is irrelevent and if
elected will probably quit half-way through term and form a rock band. Michelle Bachman is good in the Congress and should stay there. Her
voice is both grating and monotonous (if that's possible), that I can't handle
to listen to her for more than 30 seconds at a time.Newt Gingrich is
clever, but should remain a commentator, despite his squeaky voice.Ron Paul, bless him, is a Libertarian. I love his quick liners, but not his
foreign policy. Or his sqeaky voice.I love that Rick Santorum
brings up family values at each debate. He's should stay in the Congress and
remain a strong voice for good values. Herman Cain and Mitt Romney
are the only candidates with voices that I could handle listening to for hours.
Aesthetics are important.Cain's 999 plan is good for business, but
is not broad enough for the whole country.Romney's 57 point plan is
considered to be complicated, but we're going to need it to fix complicated
problems. He's conservative enough for me, and that's saying something.Ooops, did I forget Rick Perry?
...Rick Perry is like George W. Bush, but doesn't have Bush's sense of humor,
his affablility, nor his higher intelligence. I look at Perry and see a
religious bigot who can't think for himself. Besides, he supported algore in
2000. That should tell you everything we need to know.It wouldn't
be "settling" to have Mitt Romney as the Republican presidential
candidate; it would be an honor. If he were candidate, for the first time in 28
years, we would not be settling, or having to choose the lesser of 2 evils.Romney is middle-right. If he were far right, it would not do anything
to heal our divided country. We just need to survive this next year with the
far left president that was elected in 2008, and has divided our nation more
than ever.And he doesn't flip-flop. Read his words in context
instead of from the spin doctors.The tea party movement is a good
thing, but a lot of them are newbies at politics and don't see the big
picture.That's my analysis.
The tea party is attempting to bring down government, a least the occupiers just
want to stop excessive greed, not obstruct bankrupt government like the radical
No, the tea party movement came as a reaction to the socialistic politicians and
such things as ObamaCare. It's a movement to return to the Constitution. Which
will strengthen our country. Obstructing our government? I don't think so.The movement is made up of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, all
races and creeds. And whenever the tea party meets for a rally, they wave flags
with their kids on their shoulders. Then they clean up after themselves. And
get on with their lives responsibly and go out and vote.The Occupy
Wall Street movement doesn't have much direction. They have occupied parks and
have not allowed the park personnel to clean the parks in quite some time.
There is a stench. And the parks have become not family friendly if you know
what I mean. They shout anti-Semitic epithets and go to the bathroom on parked
police cars. They also have done other illicit behaviors beneath tarps and
illegal drug use is quite common. It's like Woodstock, but worse. And without
the good music.TP is clean and well-informed. OWS is dirty and
There have also been some rapes reported at OWS. Obama, Pelosi, and
others of that ilk have praised Occupy Wall Street and have condemned the tea
party movement as dangerous and unAmerican. And the reason why is
because the OWS groups and supporters are the clueless people who voted for
Obama and will vote for him again. They are his only hope for reelection--along
with the illegal immigrants.