The Romney Scorecard: RINO
September 24, 2009. Updated; October, 2011
“We don’t intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.”
“A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers. “Let our banner proclaim… and if there are those who cannot subscribe to these [conservative] principles, then let them go their own way.”
Don’t give up your ideals, don’t compromise, don’t turn to expediency — and don’t, for heaven’s sake, having seen the inner workings of the watch — don’t get cynical.” — Ronald Reagan
As we enter the 2012 presidential race, many are questioning why Mitt Romney is being touted as the ‘perceived’ Republican Party leader. Do Tea Party activists, social and fiscal conservatives and other key voting blocks really know who this cat is? If you will permit me…
Maybe it is just hard to understand who Romney is… Mitt’s a flipper. A flopper. Maybe even a full-fledged flip-flopper (unless he reverses an already reversed belief). Unprincipled? Yes. Consistently inconsistent? Yes. Convictions? Questionable. A chameleon? Yes. An opportunists? Seemingly. But, I hate having to guess.
“He can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s really believing his argument, but he’s not.” – Ann Romney, the wife of Mitt Romney
You see. Mitt Romney has a truth problem.
As you compare what Romney stood for in Massachusetts with what he says now, it seems fair to ask, was Mitt Romney telling us the truth about himself then, or is he telling it now? Which leads many to ask the question what he is willing to do to get elected. Would he fabricate the truth? What can be seen cannot be unseen.
In the 1994 campaign, Romney proudly labeled himself a moderate. “I’m not a partisan politician,” he said in an interview with The Post that fall. “My hope is that, after this election, it will be the moderates of both parties who will control the Senate, not the Jesse Helms’.
Mitt Romney opposed the two most successful conservative policy efforts of the last 30 years… the Reagan policies of the 1980`s and the Contract With America of the 1990`s. In fact, in his 1994 debate with Kennedy, Romney refused to endorse the “Contract With America,” which House Republicans had proudly presented as their campaign manifesto, and he balked when Kennedy tried to link him to the Reagan administration. “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush,” Romney retorted.
“He does not appear to be credible in his deathbed conversions — pro-life, anti-homosexual agenda and so on,” says Paul Weyrich, a founder of the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority, the intellectual and religious bulwarks of what was once known as the New Right. “People simply do not believe him.”
Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007. Critics say his four years in office produced very little. “There’s two ways to look at this guy. One is that the glass is half empty. The other is that the glass is totally empty,” says Stephen Crosby, a Republican who served in the Swift administration and is now dean of the graduate school of policy studies at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Mitt Romney represents everything that is wrong with our party and everything that has left us dying in a ditch. Romney is a RINO. A progressive Republican. A pretend conservative. Pretend conservatives are what got us to where we are and are what will completely destroy us if allowed. Romney will be an exact repeat of John McCain.
ALL politicians play to their extremist base to get the nomination. WINNING politicians then play to the moderates in the general election. That is simple campaign 101 stuff. Walk to the extreme during the primary to win over the base and then run to the middle as party nominee. But who is Romney’s extremist base? It’s not conservatives. And, isn’t that exactly the type of RINO politician that Tea Party members and conservatives rally against?
Conservatism cannot be redefined to fit the mold of whoever the candidate is. It can’t be reshaped, reformed, bent or molded. Yet, Romney wants to redefine the term conservatism to fit his narrative, such as his socialized medicine plan in Massachusetts or his big brother mandates. By the end of his first and only term, Romney managed to limp out of his governorship with an approval rating at an embarrassing 34%. Put another way, Romney managed to get barely-over 3 in 10 people who thought he was competent.
There is nothing in Mitt Romney’s record that indicates that he is anything other than a tax and spend liberal Republican, once again, ‘masquerading’ as a conservative. This man was Governor from the liberal bastion of Massachusetts: Frank, Dukakis, Kennedy, Kerry, and Mitt Romney. Why would conservatives consider nominating a Republican from blue New England, especially from the state of MA? Romney can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube. His governing record spells doom.
Despite recent statements across the country by Romney claiming he’s pro-life, pro-family and a committed conservative, if you investigate his actual statements, actions, and public positions over the years one will learn that he has spent his entire career speaking and governing as a liberal Republican and that his new found conversion to conservatism very likely coincides with his candidacy for the presidency. A quick cursory of his 2002 website as he ran for Governor is testament to his Progressiveness; increasing and indexing minimum wage, anti-2nd Amendment, pro-choice, socialized medicine and government mandates.
Mitt Romney is no Reagan conservative… And, as this Huntsman ad illustrates, he is another two-faced politician willing to say whatever is necessary to get elected. Romney is the Republicans version of Bill Clinton but shares a commonality with Barack Obama: a resonant voice, good looks, statesman-like bearing and he’s a liberal in his party-thinking masquerading as something more palatable.
And, Rush Limbaugh agrees. On his radio show, Thursday, October 13, Limbaugh said what a lot of Republican voters have been thinking all along:
“Romney is not a conservative. He’s not, folks. You can argue with me all day long on that, but he isn’t… What he has going for him is that he’s not Obama. This isn’t personal, not with what country faces and so forth. I like him very much. I’ve spent some social time with him. He’s a fine guy. He’s very nice gentleman. He is a gentleman. But he’s not a conservative.” [Listen to the audio here]
THE CASE AGAINST ROMNEY
For starters, as Governor, Romney pledged to build the Massachusetts Republican Party, but in fact he did nothing. During his tenure there were two elections for the entire Legislature (2004 and 2006). In each election the Republicans lost seats. After Romney was through, Republicans held the fewest seats in the Legislature since the Civil War. According to the Boston Globe (11/2/2006), during the four years of Romney’s tenure, the number of registered Republicans in Massachusetts fell by 31,000. During that same period, the Massachusetts Democratic Party gained 30,000.
Another politico that you can compare Mitt’s new found conversions to is Al Gore. Like Gore, Romney has flip-flopped on abortion, only in the other direction. Here is Romney and his wife on abortion; you be the judge. And, besides his wife’s $150 dollar donation to Planned Parenthood, the Boston Globe published a photo showing Romney at a Planned Parenthood fund-raiser. And, while he now claims to be pro-life, he supported legalization of the “morning-after” abortion pill, RU-486, known as Plan B. This report from the “Boston Catholic Insider” is so well documented, so well laid-out chronologically, that I have no reason to doubt its veracity. It shows overwhelmingly that Romney forced Catholic hospitals to provide abortifacients. And, as recently as his 2002 run for governor – his platform stated:
“The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.”
Of course, Romney says that his views have “evolved.” But one can strongly suspect his adaptation and intellectual journey relates more to the evolution of political ambitions than that of conscience. Call me cynical, due to this document, but unless you’ve been cloistered in an ancient monastery for the duration, I’m very suspicious of deep personal growth occurring between ages 55 and 65. Romney is 64.
And Romney and his high-profile stand against anti-marriage has garnered him much publicity. But here, too, Romney has been about as consistent as March weather in Chicago, with a track record that belies his new-found traditionalism. Romney supported gay rights until it was time to run for president. And, during his 2002 gubernatorial run his campaign distributed pro-gay right bright pink flyers during Pride that declared ‘Mitt and Kerry [running mate Kerry Healey] wish you a great Pride Weekend! “All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference.” Then, Romney opposed the Boy Scouts’ policy prohibiting homosexuals from serving as scoutmasters and prevented the organization from participating publicly in the 2002 Olympics.
Equally disturbing, is what the Boston Globe wrote in 2005: “Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) 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.” Judicial appointments are one of the most lasting effects of any U.S. President’s years in office, so it’s vitally important to examine this aspect of Romney’s record.
The Boston Globe in 2005 said the following: ‘Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show.’ In all, Romney nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats to be judges or clerk magistrates.
Mr. Romney also continued [former Governor] Weld’s tradition of appointing openly gay people to key positions in his administration and promoting “gay rights” stating: “We must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern.” Click here to learn why InsideCatholic.com does not trust Romney. Romney and his Department of Education also opposed federal legislation that would stop public schools from actively promoting homosexuality. And in 2004, Romney issued an official state proclamation celebrating “Gay Youth Pride Day” even though there was no legal reason requiring him to do this. Here is the Proclamation from the Governor’s office.
Significantly, two of Romney’s appointments also now found a home in the Obama White House. Gina McCarthy, the chief EPA clean air regulator, leads the fight to make coal fired electric generating plants extinct. And, John Holdren, Obama’s Director of Science and Technology Policy is leading the effort to regulate “greenhouse gases”. Dr. Holdren has some exotic views. In 2003, Romney also chose a hard-core environmental activist to be Secretary of Commonwealth Development, Douglas Foy. In this position, he was charged with developing a scheme to restrict “greenhouse gas” emissions.
But, it is Romney’s association with Holdren that is most concerning. Holdren has spoken in favor of forced abortions, confiscation of babies, mass involuntary sterilization, bureaucratic regulation of family size, and a planetary regime to enforce climate regulation and population control. In 2005, a memo, from the governor’s office noted Holdren’s input and advice in crafting the carbon tax legislation in Massachusetts, and in 2006, the state became the first in the nation to pass legislation to regulate carbon emissions. This is what Team Obama is trying to do through the EPA’s job-killing regulations and mandates. Click here to learn more about Romney’s Troubling Appointments.
In 2005, the Boston Globe reported Romney lauded Cap-and-Trade as “good for business.” And, as this video shows, Romney, while campaigning in Manchester, NH on December 27, 2007, briefly answers a question about carbon caps saying: “I support Cap-and-Trade on a global basis but not the USA going alone. I want to do it with other nations involved and on a global scale.” This is sufficient reason to eliminate Mr. Mitt for consideration for national office forever.
Romney’s position on global warming is clear. In a June 3rd, 2011, speech he stated “I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that.” To recall, Romney ‘likes mandates’, so don’t expect Mitt to rid the nation of the EPA.
Equally damning, though, is that in a very ominous way Mitt can be compared to yet another infamous poseur, Hillary Clinton. In 2006, Romney signed a bill into law that creates a universal health system intrusive enough to be the envy of socialists everywhere. The plan mandated that every MA resident must obtain health insurance by July 1, 2007, or face a fine. Sound familiar? Of course, this scheme includes the creation of a new bureaucracy, one that will, using Big Brother’s infinite wisdom, determine how much you can afford to pay.
Yes, it’s called RomneyCare. RomneyCare is Obamacare done at the state level. And yet, when Governor Mitt Romney instituted a universal healthcare plan for Massachusetts in 2006 he proclaimed it a conservative idea! Click here and here and here and here to learn more about the disastrous RomneyCare. Or click here to watch a video by the Cato Institute on the parallels of RomneyCare and Obamacare. Better yet! Click here to watch Romney state he’d keep ObamaCare: ‘repeal the bad. Keep the good.”
Notably, A 10-member Massachusetts state healthcare advisory board (sound familiar?) unanimously recommended in July, 2009 that the state begin rationing healthcare to keep the state’s marquee universal health care program afloat financially.
Romneycare is the cadaver that proves Obamacare would be a national disaster. Yes, Romneycare explicitly provided government funding of abortion and was included under covered benefits and ‘illegal aliens’ received publicly subsidized care at virtually no cost to them.
Romney used his line-item veto authority to strike eight sections of the bill that he found objectionable, including the expansion of dental benefits to Medicaid recipients. Yet, he did not strike Planned Parenthood’s guaranteed Board representation and he did nothing to prohibit taxpayer-funded abortions as part of his plan. The Massachusetts plan:
• Punitive To Individuals. Everyone must buy health insurance or face tax penalties equal to 50% of cost of standard policy.
• Hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on free hospital care were converted into subsidies to help the needy buy insurance.
• A health insurance “exchange” was established to help connect the uninsured with private health plans at more affordable rates.
• Health plans can offer consumers higher deductibles and more restrictive physician and hospital networks in order to lower costs.
• Punitive to Businesses with 11 or more workers that do not offer insurance must pay a $295 per employee fee.
• Established payment policy advisory board; one Board member must be from Planned Parenthood. No pro-life organization represented.
• Provides Taxpayer-Funded Abortions for copay of $50.
Source: Massachusetts Health Connector Authority
So how is the Massachusetts health-care system these days? “Romneycare” has, in fact, not made healthcare better or saved costs in Massachusetts. It’s done just the opposite. Massachusetts has the highest state borne health care costs in the nation. Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52% and Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers too, have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums. In this Beacon Institute report, dated September 2011, research reveals how the MA health care reform escalated costs on families, businesses and the MA economy.
Even more striking, the 2006 law has done little to ease the burden on emergency rooms, a central goal of all heath care reform plans. Then, the Boston Herald on Oct. 29, 2011 revealed that 55,000 illegal aliens received a whopping $100 million of free healthcare for illegal aliens paid courtesy of the Massachusetts taxpayer. A state budget watchdog is now asking for a full accounting of all state spending on illegal’s and how much the bill for illegals has increased since Romneycare was introduced. Massachusetts is still afloat thanks only to generous federal subsidies (50%), Medicaid waivers and gobs of recent stimulus money. Most disturbing is that Romney once touted parts of ‘Romneycare’ as a national model as witnessed in this video.
To this day, Romney defends his own RomneyCare policy. At Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-SC) presidential forum on Sept 5, 2011, Mitt stated RomneyCare is “one of my best assets.” It’s going to be difficult to criticize Obamacare when you’re defending Romneycare. To justify his socialist brainchild, Romney used the argument that it is no different from requiring people to carry car insurance. All of the key features in the Obamacare national health care plan were in Massachusetts Romneycare plan. ObamaCare is RomneyCare 2.0.
Then on October 11, 2011, came this damning report from NBC News: “Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the Act now derided by Republicans as “Obamacare.”” Three Romney Advisers silently met at the White House a dozen times.
On fiscal policy, remember this when Romney touts his credentials as a fiscal conservative. While he may boast of his steadfast refusal to raise taxes, it rings hollow when he turned around and mandates citizen expenditures and levies fines. Moderates and liberals are adept at revenue-raising sleight-of-hand; when another tax increase would raise voter ire, they simply deem it a toll, fine, fee or a “surcharge.”
While Romney ran in 2008 on a platform that claimed he hadn’t raised taxes as governor of Massachusetts, the claim was based upon a simple deception: he called his tax increases “fees.” During the presidential campaign, NBC’s “Meet the Press” host, the late Tim Russert, exploded Romney’s claim he hadn’t proposed tax increases as Massachusetts governor. Click here to read that transcript.
Barbara Anderson of Massachusetts’ Citizens for Limited Taxation revealed that many of Romney’s “fees” had nothing to do with services and everything to do with the purpose of taxes: raising revenue. Romney increased fees upon gun owners and for people who needed duplicate licenses. Neither of these are “services” that the government provides; they are simply licenses needed to comply with government-established mandates. One such ‘fee hike’ was clearly excessive – a 2-cent-per-gallon increase in a special gasoline fee.
As governor of Massachusetts, Romney raised state government fees and taxes by three quarters of a billion dollars a year. During his four year tenure, Romney nickeled and dimed Massachusetts families and individuals with over a hundred fee increases. Cato found that Romney increased annual state fees by $500 million as governor and proposed two corporate tax increases totaling close to $400 million a year. The local tax burden increased from 10% to 10.6% of per capita income during Romney’s governorship, according to analysis by the Tax Foundation [Boston Globe, 6/29/07]. In real dollars, the per capita tax burden increased $1175.71 during Romney’s term.
Under Romney’s stewardship, Massachusetts manufacturing jobs declined by more than 14% – double the national rate (Boston Globe, 7/28/07) and the third worst record in the country. Nationally, manufacturing dropped only 7%. Romney also refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts. On his watch, state spending grew from $22.3 billion to $28.1 billion, an annual budget increase of 6.5% during his tenure. Romney’s spending record started off good, but like most politicians, it degraded over time.
During his first two years in office, the general fund budget grew at 0.1% and 4.1%, respectively. The next two years, however, spending skyrocketed. In FY 2006, spending jumped 7.6%, and in FY 2007, it grew a whopping 10.2%, hardly indicative of “fiscal conservatism. ”Overall spending increased 20.7% and government employment in Massachusetts also grew 7.2% during Romney’s tenure. Empirical evidence shows that RomneyCare failed to control health care costs, increased the size of government, and by its very nature, introduced more sizable government.
Romney claims to have cut the MA budget by ‘2 billion.’ Sometimes he claims he cut it ‘3 billion.’ These cuts were merely budget games. According to Factcheck.org, the deficit was $1.3 billion and Romney balanced the budget with mostly tax and ‘fee increases’; with spending cuts predominantly coming from government consolidation and duplicative waste. Romney’s last budget was 10.2% larger than the preceding fiscal year and, per Deval Patrick, Mr. Mitt left a billion dollar deficit for his successor. As government grew under Romney, private sector jobs did not. Massachusetts ranked third lowest in job creation and would have ranked second lowest if Hurricane Katrina had not devastated the Louisiana economy.
By the end of his fourth year in office, Massachusetts jobs growth was an ‘anemic’ 0.9%, compared with job growth of 5.3% for the nation as a whole during the same period. This, after four years! And notably, the decline in the state’s labor force, which was influenced in large part by high levels of out-migration of working-age adults, helped hold down the official unemployment rate of the state. And, ‘that’ is what Romney doesn’t want you to know. This high level of net domestic out-migration was equivalent to 3.5% of the state’s population, the third highest rate of population loss in the country.
Between July ‘02 and July ‘06, over 222,000 residents left Massachusetts for other states than came. The rest of New England created nearly 200,000 jobs. Yes. The state’s unemployment rate fell from 5.6% to 4.7% during the same four-year period, but, it took four years and out-migration contributed to a lower unemployment rate. On all key labor market measures, Massachusetts not only lagged behind the nation as a whole, but often ranked at or near the bottom. Mitt Romney’s jobs record was worse than Michael Dukakis’. Nobody can choreograph political theater and distortions of failed policies like Romney and Obama. Romney has gone beyond exaggerating his dismal fiscal record.
Massachusetts was 47th among all 50 states in job creation from 2003 to 2007. Net result: 50th out of 50 after first year, 47th after four years. That puts Romney and Obama on a level playing field. What makes this worse for Romney, according to MarketWatch, is that he actually ran on a jobs platform. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, published a fiscal-policy report card for 2006 that gave Romney a C grade, ranking him behind 11 other governors, including former Democrat Bill Richardson, then governor of New Mexico, but ahead of Mike Huckabee, Governor of Arkansas, who received a D grade.
Romney’s history is marked by statements at odds with his gubernatorial record and his campaign rhetoric; overstate the accomplishments and understate the side-effects. His state ranked 47th in job creation, wages for workers fell nearly 2%, and he raised taxes on individuals and businesses. While Romney might like to claim that he’s the Republican candidate with the economic experience needed to be president, his record tells a very different story. Business experience does not guarantee a person will govern as a conservative.
No matter how you slice the data, under Romney’s stewardship, job growth was devastated by Romney’s policies. The level of real output of goods and services over this four-year period was 9% in Massachusetts while the rest of the nation was 13%. And, this chart from the Boston Globe on Massachusetts’s economic performance during Romney’s tenure brings home the point. No wonder then, that out of the 25 freshmen Republican Governors rated by the Cato Institute on fiscal issues, Romney had the 2nd worst score.
Presenting his fiscal plan in USA Today in early November 2011, Romney’s spending “cuts” would expand the federal budget, not decrease it. According to Jacob Sullum’s excellent analysis of Romney’s budget plan, “he does not eliminate a single cabinet-level department. That doesn’t suggest a strong commitment to fiscal responsibility. Using honest math rather than DC math, Romney’s budget plan would increase spending by 8% over the next four years . By contrast, the plan outlined by Ron Paul, would balance the budget by 2015.”
While Romney claims he wants to “eliminate every government program that is not absolutely essential.” That sounds good until you realize his plan follows the business-as-usual Washington scam of claiming that a reduction in the projected growth of spending is actually a spending cut. It is not. The implication: Mitt Romney thinks 89% of what the federal government does is “absolutely essential.” And, Dan Mitchell of International Liberty agrees; ‘Jacob’s analysis is on the mark.’
To note, President Bush was often excoriated for betraying his conservative base, a perception that contributed to his poor poll numbers. What is forgotten, however, is that while campaigning for the presidency in 2000, Bush accused the Republican Congress of trying “to balance the budget on the backs of the poor,” a line that could have been culled from Democrat talking points.
Bush never cast himself as anything other than what he exactly was – a pro-life social conservative. Nothing more. We just weren’t listening. Are we listening now?
While visiting Manchester, NH on June 3rd, 2011, Romney also stated that global warming is real and influenced by man. Video here. Mitt, of course, was just being consistent, as he was with his ethanol support statement earlier in the same week. On May 27th, while visiting Iowa, Romney stated, per the Wall Street Journal: “I support the subsidy of ethanol, I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution for this country.” Romney supported ethanol subsidies during his unsuccessful 2008 presidential run too. If eliminating wasteful subsidies is a litmus test for any candidate. Romney fails.
Beyond RomneyCare and a love for government mandates, you remember TARP, right? The $700 billion mortgage-bailout turned bank-bailout, turned auto-bailout, turned everybody-bailout, turned government-union slush fund. Yeah, that TARP. Well, Romney supported TARP, with gusto! In 2005, Human Events listed Romney as one of the Top 10 RINO’s in the Republican Party. Romney was listed as No. 8. Romney is a “Country-club Rockefeller Republican,” a manufactured candidate, bearing no verifiable resemblance to a conservative.
During his tenure, at least four Massachusetts cities enacted or renewed legislation declaring themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants. As far as anyone was able to determine in research, Romney made no attempts to penalize, censure, or cut funding to them. And, as you will see from his own lips, Mr. Mitt believed that illegal aliens here in the U.S. should be able to receive residency or citizenship, aka, Amnesty.
As part of their Meet the Candidates 2008 series, NBC’s “Meet the Press” host, the late Tim Russert, nails down Romney on his Immigration and Amnesty position: “My own view is consistent with what you saw in the Lowell Sun, that those people who had come here illegally and are in this country–the 12 million or so that are here illegally–should be able to stay sign up for permanent residency or citizenship.” Click here to read the transcript, or watch “The Meet the Press” video …or watch this interview of Mitt stating: “12 million illegal immigrants should be granted citizenship.”
On gun control, Romney favored support of the federal assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill. And, despite claiming so, Romney did not receive support from the NRA; his Democrat opponent received a better grade. Watch Romney speak with forked tongue on “Meet the Press” as the late Tim Russert smokes him out on his record and click here to watch Romney discuss gun control at a Town Hall meeting in New Hampshire. No one can doubt that Romney is a shape-shifter par excellence even when he claims he’s “been as consistent as a human being can be”. Excuse me for being a skeptic.
On Affirmative Action, Romney believed there should be disclosure, by income group, on the number of women and minorities in top positions of public companies and federal agencies in government. As a supporter of minimum wage, Romney proposed indexing the Massachusetts minimum wage with inflation, telling the Boston Globe: “I do not believe that indexing the minimum wage will cost us jobs. I believe it will help us retain jobs.” – Boston Globe, 7/25/2002. Time and time again, as governor, Romney worked to reassure liberals as a “token Republican”.
Romney supported ‘No Child Left Behind’, according to an August 31, 2006, AP report. Then there’s his 2002 gubernatorial bid in which Romney came out opposed to school vouchers after aggressively supporting them in his 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy. And, while he said he supported charter schools, he never met with charter schools leaders. Then in September of 2011, Romney came out in favor of Obama’s education reforms, and praised Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan’s ‘Race to the Top’. Want to see how Romney operates? Here is vintage Romney praising Arne Duncan’s reforms then denying it the next day. Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ program epitomizes everything that is terrible about the liberal approach to education policy.
And then there is this. Everyone wants to believe the Massachusetts governor’s Mormonism won’t be a problem, but, think again. If the Gallup poll and other polls are to be believed, Mormons, who are good citizens, rank among America’s most disliked religious denominations. While Americans have indeed become more religiously tolerant, a significant number of voters – especially evangelical Protestants – say they would be less likely to vote for Romney. Click here to read journalist David Frum discuss this issue. Click here .
But, Romney’s big weakness is his character. No one fabricates a story and embellishes better while looking at you straight in the eye than Romney. He is a Republicans version of Bill Clinton. Mitt’s just another opportunist who has no driving principles other than self interests. When the facts don’t fit the data, Romney just changes the facts. Obama is in the Oval because the Republicans sold its soul to becoming more liberal and Progressive. And, as you will see in this video below, Romney has no soul:
Romney is also not a team player. Romney is poison who, it is alleged, sent silent attack teams against Sarah Palin. The evidence keeps piling up that Romney plays by a very different and underhanded set of rules. Mitt’s folks can never resist the temptation to engage in character assassination whenever they are confronted by an uncomfortable reality they can’t explain away. It’s vintage Romney.
Romney’s little “motor” is always backstabbing supporters, and conservatives. Conservatives4Palin.com has identified Mark Mckinnon, Tucker Eskew, Nicole Wallace, John Feehery, Carl Forti, Kevin Madden and Michelle Laxalt as Romney supporters who worked for McCain’s camp. Click here and here and here to learn more about Romney members spreading snipes and rumors about Palin and Fred Thompson. This is a “Tee-It-Up” or “Divide & Conquer” mentality.
And now, it looks like Romney is going negative on Rick Perry. On Oct, 19th, 2011, the Washington Post reported Romney for President Inc. launched several anti-Perry websites aimed at undermining his best funded opponent. The Romney camp just bought $2,851 worth of domain names at GoDaddy.com. Anti-Perry Web domain names gobbled-up include stickittorick.com, rickperrynot.com, and buryperry.com.
Romney has a major identity problem. Mr. Mitt has tried to go from claiming to be a super-moderate New England Republican to being a super-conservative national primary-type Republican. “Romney has some issues with authenticity,” says Whit Ayres, a GOP pollster. “It’s very difficult to make a seamless transition of being a governor of a liberal state to being the nominee of a very conservative party.” Yes. Mitt Romney has an identity problem. And, it starts with flip flops:
THIS is a prime example of why Romney should never be president. He has no core beliefs and people do not trust him. There is nothing conservative about him. Romney will be “untruthful” as often as required to get his desired outcome. He is not true to any convictions, changes his platform with the wind, and he is not someone conservatives can trust! During 2008, Romney lamented, “My campaign is not based on Washington lobbyists.” But, click here to see Romney deny to a AP reporter and argue that lobbyist do not work for his campaign.
Fast forward to today, and among Romney’s supporters are some of the biggest Republican lobbyists in Washington. Romney is the favored candidate for wealthy special interest groups and lobbyist-linked political action committees, according to disclosure reports. He has raised more money from lobbyists than all of the other Republican candidates combined. The watchdog group Public Citizen, states Romney’s lead in lobbyist cash “strongly suggests that Romney is the favored candidate for wealthy special interest groups, especially K Street.
Romney is bad news for conservatism — all you have to do is to read his words and listen to his speeches in their entirety, not just to the grand-sounding platitudes that are music to conservatives’ ears. Platitudes are like that — the devil is in the details, and Romney’s “details” always entail more, bigger government, mandates, and meddling, the opposite of what his platitudes promise. If you can accept John McCain again then you should accept Mitt Romney.
There’s just one requisite for being a conservative political leader, and that is that you actually are one. Fabricating about being one doesn’t make you one. Clearly, too many GOP insiders within the ‘DC Establishment’ are somehow smitten with Romney. Former Republican Charlie Crist is the best example of how the GOP Beltway brass will support a Republican that ‘they think’ can win. There is a disconnect between Party leaders and grassroots that may only be addressed at the polls.
Romney is that type of politician that believes government does belong in every aspect of our lives, how much is the only question. Mitt honestly believes he accomplished something with Mass’ Healthcare. But, as Massachusetts has shown us, mandating insurance, restricting individual choice, expanding subsidies, and increasing government control has produced a system riddled with waste, diminished quality of care and higher cost to taxpayers.
Once you learn about Romney’s record, you learn that his selective memory is disingenuous, at best. On his watch, Massachusetts saw unemployment rise, jobs leave, higher taxes and fees, increased cost of living and a 65% disapproval rating at the end of his governorship. While Romney changes his position on every issue he once supported to once again appeal to the right wing, it raises the real question of why he thinks they will believe his new positions this time, when they didn’t buy his makeover last time. Mitt couldn’t pull it off against McCain, who couldn’t pull it off against Obama. Expect the same results if Mitt wins the primaries.
Romney is the enemy within and should never be put in a position of leadership within the party. What he promises today, he flip-flops on tomorrow. It all depends on which way the political winds are blowing. Republicans won’t ‘win’ by voting in progressively more liberal Republicans. Romney is another globalist stooge. Under his leadership, UN Agenda 21, open borders, 50-state Romneycares and carbon taxes will be promoted as conservative ideas.
Lets recap: What Romney supported as Governor of Massachusetts:
1. Pro-abortion with full taxpayer funding.
2. Pro-state mandated healthcare.
3. Pro-government mandates in taxes and fees.
4. Pro-gay marriage; full-state sponsorship (1rst Governor).
5. Pro-transgendered education in public schools.
6. Pro-global warming caused by humans hysteria.
7. Pro-amnesty for illegal immigrants.
8. Anti-second Amendment.
9. Support of Ethanol Subsidies..
10. 75% of his Appointments were of Liberal Judges.
11. 47th state out of 50 in job creation.
12. Increased State spending 20.7% during his tenure.
13. Government employment grew 7.2% during his tenure.
14. Pro-Affirmative Action.
The list goes on… Support of Arne Duncan’s “Race to the Top”, support of Obama’s education reforms, support of man-made global warming and TARP bailouts. Romney has friends on the left. Don’t let the media play you like a fiddle. They like Mitt. They want Mitt to be the GOP candidate. If you look at his political history, Romney would search for a way to look like he was governing as a conservative, but in every case, the liberals would ultimately be the victors.
Romney is undeniably a liberal Republican, not a conservative. On almost every single important issue facing America today, Mitt Romney has fought against conservatism. In the October 11, 2011 debate at Dartmouth, Romney said: ‘I can work with ‘good’ Democrats.’ Do we not learn? With no principles or a core, Romney will say anything, and do anything, to get elected. So much so, even his Republican label is beginning to peel off.
The Tea Party’s goal may be to beat Obama and flip the Senate, but it is NOT to elect a progressive Republican in its place. Romney would be disastrous for the conservative movement and for the country. And, as Ronald Reagan proclaimed: “We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support.”
The next President will likely name two Supreme Court Justices and numerous appointments to Federal benches. Romney’s record on appointments in MA is deplorable. His support of man-made global warming is inexcusable. And, equally disturbing is Romney’s nanny state health care blueprint. It’s going to be very difficult to criticize Obamacare when you’re defending Romneycare. I rest my case, your honor.
“It is now my pleasure to introduce my collaborator and friend, Senator Edward Kennedy.” – Mitt Romney
In his own words… Drip, drip, drip…
Mitt Romney on Ted Kennedy.
Will the real Mitt Romney stand up?
The Real Romney?
Romney likes Mandates…
Shoo-be-doo-be-doo…. So essentially, Mitt Romney is just an offbrand Democrat. A world-class fraud and con-artist. A nation that allows itself to be governed by the lying & the corrupt deserves the polluted government it gets.