Why is Mitt Romney only running nasty ads against Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, but not Ron Paul? Does anyone even bother taking George Will seriously?
If the conservative “elite” were honest, they would admit that, now that Mitt Romney thinks he is home free, his liberal roots are showing. They would realize they’ve been played for fools, but they’re too intellectually dishonest to do any such thing.
This is The Pink Flamingo’s very favorite time of the year! No, it’s not about Christmas or the holidays, it’s about the throat biting, eye gouging, stomach punching, blood letting we call the American Political Scene. I don’t know about you, but I’m not afraid to admit I live for this stuff.
Yea, I’m a little ticked because Romney is being his usual hypocritical nasty self. He is repeating what he did to John McCain, who was basically in Newt’s position four years ago. Umm….look who won that little battle. Mitt Romney is un-electable.
To The Pink Flamingo, when someone goes as nasty as Romney, it is a sign that he is more than a little disparate?
Mitt Romney is beginning to remind me of one of the greatest scenes in movie history. Mitt Romney is shocked, shocked to discover that a superPAC is going after Newt Gingrich – for him! It is terrible, he complains, just terrible, but he can’t legally stop it.
“…”…Anything short of that is baloney,” Gingrich said. “We’ve got to understand these are his people, running his ads, doing his dirty work while he pretends to be above it. He can demand that every ad be positive.” ...In an appearance Tuesday on “Morning Joe,” Romney tried to put some distance between himself and the spending done on the air on his behalf. “They set up these new entities, which I think is a disaster, by the way. Campaign finance law has made a mockery of our political campaign season,” Romney said. “We really ought to let campaigns raise the morney they need and just get rid of these super PACs.”…”
“…”Romney has $1.4 million in negative ads next week in Iowa. Now, that is a level of drowning people in dirt that is an embarrassment to the American system,” Gingrich said.
“I’ve had a whole number of candidates — when you are out here in Iowa and people say to you, ‘I’ve gotten robo-phone calls that are negative, I’ve gotten mail that is negative, I’ve gotten six ads in a row in an hour that are negative,’ you take a temporary hit,” he added.
Earlier Wednesday, Gingrich’s campaign circulated a rebuttal to the latest ad by the pro-Romney super-PAC Restore Our Future. That ad insinuates that Gingrich lobbied on behalf of troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac, worked with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on global warming legislation and co-sponsored a bill providing aid for a program that supported China’s “one-child” policy….”
Restore Our Future, Romney’s super PAC is being financed, in part, by Bain Capital. Romney says that Federal law prohibits him from telling them to stop. The problem is that’s not quite true. To me, Romney is coming across as increasingly nasty. When you go on Letterman and make fun of your opponent, you’re losing something important. People are quite fair about things, but they don’t like an ungracious winner, or someone who appears to be an ungracious winner. Romney is being just that – and he hasn’t won. He’s acting a little over-confident.
“...But in Mr. Gingrich’s case, the holiday schedule may provide a bit of a break from the relentless barrage of negative ads. And the calendar may create a dangerous situation for Mr. Gingrich’s rivals — especially Mitt Romney — if they continue to pound the former House speaker in the days ahead.
Candidates who continue to attack during the week between Christmas and New Year’s Day risk a backlash from voters who may view the negativity as especially dissonant with the spirit of the holidays….”
“…Appearing in Iowa Monday, Gingrich said he wasn’t concerned, and expected he’ll make the numbers climb again as he steps up his campaign appearances in the final two weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
“You get enough negative ads before you start answering them, your numbers go down for a while,” Gingrich said. “It will rapidly become obvious to the people of Iowa: One that the ads are false; two, that they can come to me in our Ask Newt program and anyone who wants to can phone me and they are going to get my voice answering the questions. Three, it reflects badly on other Republicans that they haven’t got anything positive to say for themselves and they have to rely on their consultants putting down a fellow Republican so they are in effect doing Barack Obama’s work.”
“I think the average Republican is going to be very unhappy with candidates whose entire campaign is negative.”…”
Romney suggested Newt might no be able to stand the heat of a campaign against Obama. Is Romney delusional? Does he live in the real world? Does he even know what Obama is going to do to him when he gets hold of Bain Capital?
Perhaps Newt should suggest Mitt go and debate himself.
“...Third, on social issues, Romney was about as strong a social conservative as RuPaul would have been. In May 2004, he told town officials across Massachusetts to start issuing marriage licenses for two men or two women. He also signed into law one of the most restrictive anti-gun measures in state history. When it came to appointing conservative judges, Romney failed miserably — at the end of his term, he actually refused to fill certain vacancies, leaving them to be filled by his liberal successor. According to the Boston Globe, a 2005 review of Romney’s appointments showed that he had “passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.”
I hear the New York conservative chorus shouting desperately from the wings: “But he was faking it!”
If he was faking it, he’s an Oscar-caliber conservative. What the record reveals isn’t a conservative attempting to play nice with liberals only to sucker-punch them with right-wing policy that works. The record shows that Romney was willing to change positions repeatedly in order to attain power, and once in power, he was willing to change positions repeatedly in order to maximize it. His road to Damascus conversions on abortion, taxation and other key issues are always conveniently timed to allow him to make a play for the most valuable audience.
Does that make him the “most electable”? Only if you believe, as many conservatives do, that conservatism is a losing argument on a national level. The country has moved consistently to the left since 1928. There’s a reason for that: While liberals run unabashed liberals, conservatives run half-liberal candidates. In a time when further liberalism of any sort will destroy America’s future, half-liberal measures are no solution. Nominating Mitt Romney would be a betrayal not only of conservatism but also of the greatest opportunity for resurrection of American greatness in a century….”