Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Tearsheets | Media Kit | All Access E-Edition | Routes | Home RSS

Romney – money only requirement?

February 8, 2012 - John Stack
Mitt Romney seems to be the anointed candidate for the GOP nomination. The only reason he seems to be this candidate is because he has spent the most time and money trying to be the candidate. New ideas? Can’t think of any. Long standing unswerving principles? If longstanding means ‘since the last news cycle’. How about an appeal to the everyman? Hmmm. Al Gore has Rodney Dangerfield personality compared to Romney.

Romney has explained his position well. He relishes the fact that he nearly bankrupted Ted Kennedy when he ran against him for Senate. But not because of any hatred of kennedy. No, he reasons that if you can’t afford the race easily, you shouldn’t be in the race. If the candidate is horrible, mean and racist? Doesn’t matter. If he has the money, he deserves to be the candidate. And if the challenger has great new, bold ideas to help the Satte or Country out of its financial mess? Doesn’t matter. Ideas only matter if you are rich enough to spread around those ideas. Clueless? He claims he made an inconsequential amount in speaking fees in 2010. Inconsequential is $375,000. Right in touch with the common (millionaire) man.

But what is amazing is that his machine has been so tone deaf, yet his prediction that the most money wins is bearing fruit. Whenever Romney is forced to make a decision on one side of the fence or the other, without the benefit of a backing political wind, he seems absolutely clueless. To the point he will make strong comments that completely be in opposition to what he previously stood for. For example, Romney is drifting so far right, he has been attacking Gingrich’s nuanced ideas on immigration – as in not all immigrants should be treated the same – a new person alone with no skills is not the same as a grandmother who has been here 25 years and raised her kids and contributed to her community. Romney claimed last fall it was a mistake for Gingrich to say some aliens should get priority over others. But Romney himself in 2006 petitioned DHS to just such a thing when a Boston teacher was being repatriated to Ivory Coast.

The most egregious and confounding is Romney’s pro-choice/pro-life stances. As governor of Massachusettes, there is no doubt he was pro-choice. Going as far as to claim he was more pro-choice than Ted Kennedy when he ran against him for the Senate. Now, he (claims) to be pro-life, which coincidentally coincides with his desire in 2006 to move up to higher levels in the GOP/Conservative party of no. How about signing a ‘pro-choice pledge’ when running for governor in 2002? Ironic that this week he sided with the far – by siding with the horrible decision by The Komen Foundation to defund Planned Parenthood. OK. He made the far right claim even though no one in the Conservative Party seemed to notice (As Rick Santorum swept a tide of Conservativism to beat Romney soundly in yesterday’s caucuses). Now, the uproar over Komen was bipartisan. And by bipartisan, I mean when people had to make a choice on which side of the Planned Parenthood debate to take, when they saw that political ideology was actually harmful healthwise for them, they came down solidly in favor of Planned Parenthood. Komen has tried to stay as apolitical as possible, but with outgoing disgraced VP Karen Handel Komen has hurt the cause of women for years to come. Planned Parenthood took a huge leap in trust and fundraising during this time. Komen’s name was sullied by its overt ideological decisions. Komen will most likely lose millions of dollars, millions of supporters who are both left and right leaning because their support was for women, not politics or an agenda. How does Romney spin this if he is the GOP candidate? You don’t think this just got packed into Obama’s holster. His so called attempt to garner conservatives may get him evangelical conservative votes - which don’t go to Obama anyway – but he sure did lose 1000 times as many independent or not so right leaning voters.

Ironically Romney tries to say he is the party’s best candidate to stop Obamacare. That would be a nice rallying cry if it hadn’t been RomneyCare in the first place.

Romney has tried to claim he is presidential timber compared to Rick Santorum. Maybe he is truly less ideological than Rick. He backs up his credentials with ‘I was the GOP governo of a Democratic state’. Well, yeah. You also governed like a Democrat Mitt. See if that slogan goes well at your next appeal to the far right goons…


Article Comments

No comments posted for this article.

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web