Mitt Romney

[Phil Fiord]

Agreed, Backstop.

[AGEUSAF]

Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up.

The guy has been taped on both sides of major core issues so many times I can't keep track of it all. I give folks credit who are either one way or the other like Bachman to Obama, Hillary, Bush jr. at least you know where they stand. I can respect standing in your spot no matter the crowd whether I agree with the view or not. Mitt will be agreeing with who ever happens to be at oval office meeting, could be an environmental group, coal company, cia, generals, Zbigniew Brezinski or Henry Kissinger who ever.

He has probably made so many promises to financiers I can't imagine all the things that will contradict each other that he will have to try and do.

[Backstop]

Yep.

And the only thing I see him consistent about?

Romneycare.

[Ryan Ruck]

All why he will never see a ballot cast in his favor from me.

Fuck Mr. "Weapons Of Unusual Lethality".

[Phil Fiord]

Mittens. Just mittens.

[Phil Fiord]

or perhaps this...

[Phil Fiord]

Oh this explains it....

btw this comes from a very left website. I pull it here only because with regard to Mittens, it is easy to see it as true.

[Ryan Ruck]

LOL!

The paper doll one is hilarious!

[Phil Fiord]

I knew that one would hit the spot for satire.

[Backstop]

Here is our next President.

Please note that he has all the skills; he flip flops like no other.

Not to mention, he thinks Iraq had no WMD.

Also note, the article is almost misleading, because Romney makes it clear his current position is based on "info then" vs. "info now."

Today at 3:28 PM

Romney Reverses Position on Iraq
By Jonathan Chait

You people don't care about Iraq any more, do you? Didn't think so.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd today, Mitt Romney asserts that “of course” invading Iraq was a bad idea now that we know Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. (“If we knew at the time of our entry into Iraq that there were no weapons of mass destruction, if somehow we had been given that information, obviously we would not have gone in.”) Four years ago, Romney said just the opposite. (“It was the right decision to go into Iraq. I supported it at the time; I support it now.”)

Support:

In the following video, the Iraq parts start at 1:30.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...50840#45750840

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/24/us...gewanted=print

January 24, 2008
TranscriptThe Republican Debate

MR. ROMNEY: It was the right decision to go into Iraq. I supported it at the time; I support it now.

[Phil Fiord]

You know. A lot has been said about no WMD's found in Iraq. While it is essentially true, that negates the lead up to the war. In that lead up, I have read a ton of data that shows Russia aided their client state, Iraq hide conventional weapons and sat photos plus intel about caravans headed to Syria with WMD chem weps.

The attempted chem attack on Jordan, via Syria, had chem signature as Iraqi in origin.

So while true no amount of WMD was really found in Iraq, only remnants, they were moved before Baghdad fell.

[Ryan Ruck]

I still have not heard an adequate explanation about that trailer that turned up. You remember the one claimed to be for weather balloon use?

[Backstop]

So while true no amount of WMD was really found in Iraq, only remnants, they were moved before Baghdad fell.

I agree 100%.

Also, very little of this made the news, but there are miles and miles of bunkers there. Miles.

------------------------------------

I still have not heard an adequate explanation about that trailer that turned up. You remember the one claimed to be for weather balloon use?

Never heard the weather balloon item, but I do remember seeing pics online of chemical plants on trailers.

[American Patriot]

Direct from the New York Slimes!

December 22, 2011, 2:33 pmElder Bush Tells Paper Romney Is ‘Best Choice’

By MICHAEL D. SHEAR and KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

Pat Sullivan/Associated PressMitt Romney paid a visit to former President George H.W. Bush and his wife, Barbara, at their Houston home in early December.


Former president George H. W. Bush offered an informal endorsement of Mitt Romney in remarks published Thursday, saying that Mr. Romney “is the best choice for us.”


The former president told reporters for The Houston Chronicle that he supports Mr. Romney because of his “stability, experience, principles. He’s a fine person,” Mr. Bush, 87, said. “I just think he’s mature and reasonable – not a bomb-thrower.”


The paper reported the comments, made this week, on its Web site Thursday afternoon. A spokesman for Mr. Bush confirmed the accuracy of the comments and said they fully reflect the views of the former president. But the spokesman, Jim Appleby, said Mr. Bush did not intend to make a formal statement.


Ron Kaufman, a longtime friend of both Mr. Romney and Mr. Bush, said the former president apparently wanted to make it clear that he would vote for Mr. Romney in the Republican contest.


“It seems clear to me that he wanted to get out there because the time is right,” Mr. Kaufman said.



Mr. Romney has family connections to Mr. Bush. His father, George W. Romney, the former governor of Michigan, was close to the elder Mr. Bush, a fact that Mr. Bush cited in the interview with the Houston newspaper.


In backing Mr. Romney, Mr. Bush is spurning his fellow Texan, Gov. Rick Perry, as well as Newt Gingrich, who was a rising star in the House leadership when Mr. Bush served as president from 1989-93.


“I think Romney is the best choice for us,” he said. “I like Perry, but he doesn’t seem to be going anywhere; he’s not surging forward.”


The bomb-thrower reference was likely to Mr. Gingrich, who earned that label as a backbencher in the House in the 1980s. In comments to The Chronicle, Mr. Bush seemed to be holding a grudge against Mr. Gingrich after an experience in 1990 in which he believes Mr. Gingrich bailed out on him.


The comments by Mr. Bush were not immediately touted by Mr. Romney’s campaign, which has carefully orchestrated endorsements by other political figures, including Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, and Nikki Haley, the governor of South Carolina.


As president, Mr. Bush was known as a more moderate Republican, a fact that could mean his support is less valuable to Mr. Romney as he courts conservatives in Iowa and elsewhere.


The expressions of support also add to the impression that the Washington Republican establishment is eager to have Mr. Romney as their nominee. That could be a hindrance for Mr. Romney as his rivals argue that what is needed is an outsider with fewer connections to Washington.

[American Patriot]

Romney charity used for conservative donations
By STEPHEN BRAUN, Associated Press – 24 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — In the Republican primary struggle to define the most reliably conservative presidential candidate, Mitt Romney has put his money where his mouth is. Over the past six years and two presidential campaigns, Romney has donated at least $260,000 from his family charity foundation to GOP causes and influential conservative groups that could deepen his ties within the party and establish his credibility on the right.
Romney's campaign said there was no hidden motivation behind his contributions.
Romney gave $100,000 last year to the George W. Bush Presidential Library in Dallas, according to tax records of the Tyler Charitable Foundation, a multimillion dollar Boston-based charity headed by Romney and his wife, Ann. The former president has said publicly he will not endorse any candidate in the Republican primary, but the Romney campaign is studded with former Bush political veterans and appears to lead its rivals in financial support from former Bush fundraisers.
In 2008, Romney gave $25,000 to The Becket Fund, a religious rights legal aid group that is suing the Obama administration on behalf of a North Carolina Catholic college over federal rules requiring employer health plans to cover contraceptives and other birth control. Romney has also contributed tens of thousands of dollars to Massachusetts conservative groups and to core Washington-based conservative think-tanks and publications, among them the Heritage Foundation research institute, the Federal Society legal interest group and a gala dinner for the National Review magazine website.
Romney's gifts came with no strings attached, according to many of the groups, and the Romney campaign says the former Massachusetts governor was simply aiding well-established organizations. GOP strategists and other campaign observers say the moves are smart politics for a candidate trying to establish his conservative bona fides and who has scorned his latest rival, former House speaker Newt Gingrich, as an "unreliable conservative." But some caution that Romney's gift giving could raise questions inside the party about whether he is trying to use his vast personal wealth to buy support on the right.
"He knows he's not looked at as coming from the trenches of the conservative movement, so this is his way of making an appeal," GOP consultant Greg Mueller said. "The question is how it will play among the conservative faithful."
A Romney campaign spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, said the candidate's donations were made with no "hint of a quid pro quo." She called the groups "public charities with worthy missions."
Officials at the Bush library would not discuss details of Romney's donation. Bush's spokesman, Freddy Ford, waved off any speculation about Romney's political motivation. "The former president is going to support whoever the Republican nominee is, but as he's said, he doesn't want to wade into the swamp" during the primaries, Ford said.
Romney may not expect an early endorsement, but his campaign has already benefitted from Bush's top talent. Romney's campaign strategists, Stu Stevens and Russell Schriefer, worked with the Bush-Cheney team in 2000 and 2004, and his campaign manager, Matt Rhoades, was Bush's research director in the 2004 race. Washington lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg, who represented Bush during the 2000 recount, is a senior adviser, and numerous other former Bush staffers are on the Romney team.
Romney's campaign finance team has also out-dueled Gingrich, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and other rivals to win the favor of top Bush fundraisers, known as "Pioneers" and "Rangers," who gave in excess of $100,000 in past presidential campaigns. The Houston Chronicle reported that Romney's former Bush supporters had raised $350,000 compared to Perry's $213,000 by late fall.
In recent weeks, as Gingrich's star rose, Romney questioned his conservative credentials, citing his consulting work for mortgage lending giant Freddie Mac. Gingrich responded by slamming the role of Bain Capital, the private equity firm Romney once headed, in mass layoffs at some firms under its control.
Gingrich's own private charity, the Center for Health Transformation, has donated at least $167,000 since 2005 to traditional charities — ranging from $10,000 to Red Cross relief for Hurricane Katrina victims to $3,000 to the Winn Feline Foundation, a group promoting cat health. But Gingrich made no contributions to conservative groups — which Gingrich supporters say reflects his status as a lifelong conservative.
Gingrich's spokesman, R.C. Hammond, declined to comment on Romney's gifts to conservative groups, but was quick to stress Gingrich's pedigree on the right. "Every notable Republican achievement of recent years has either been driven by Newt or has his fingerprints on it," he said.
With a short history as a conservative political figure, Romney's largess to conservative causes is "definitely a smart move," said Bill Dal Col, former campaign manager for businessman Steve Forbes' two presidential tries. "He may be doing it with dollars but it gets him to the same level playing field as any conservative who has come up through the ranks."
Some diehard conservatives see Romney's gift giving as part of a measured effort to change his stripes. During his first presidential try in 2006, MassResistance, a Massachusetts group opposed to gay marriage, warned on its Internet blog of a "calculated effort by the Romney campaign to revise his history and portray the governor as far more conservative than the record indicates."
Presidential candidates are not normally known for using family charities to donate to interest groups within their political parties, but it has happened before. Dal Col said Forbes donated small amounts to some core conservative groups around the time he ran in GOP primaries in 1996 and 2000. Teresa Heinz Kerry was criticized by conservative groups for Heinz foundation donations to environmental groups in advance of Sen. John Kerry's 2004 presidential run as Democratic party nominee.
Romney's main outlet for charity is the Tyler foundation. It was originally called the Ann D. and Mitt Romney Charitable Foundation and renamed for a street where the couple once had a home in Belmont, Mass. The foundation, which listed $10 million in assets in 2010, has given more than $7 million in charity over the past decade.
Most of its assets come from direct grants from the Romneys or from Romney-owned stocks and other holdings. Until the most recent 2010 tax disclosure, the Tyler foundation had previously provided detailed lists of stock holdings the Romneys had bought and sold to increase the charity's funds. Earlier this year, an AP review of earlier Tyler holdings showed that some investments included companies whose interests conflicted with GOP positions — including firms tied to the Chinese government, companies that did business in Iran and firms working in stem cell research.
Romney had earlier declared that the blind trust lawyer overseeing Tyler's finances would end such investments. A trust official indicated those investments are being eliminated, but the most recent tax filing does not include details of any specific investments and lists only total holdings.
Most of the Romneys' monetary gifts have gone to non-political causes, including more than $4.7 million to the Mormon Church, reflecting the family's faith, and hundreds of thousands more to research on cancer and multiple sclerosis (which afflicts his wife, Ann); academics (Harvard Business School and Brigham Young University) and athletics (a variety of Olympic and other sports groups).
Between 1999 and 2004, the Romneys' giving went almost exclusively to non-political charities. Their gifts helped Boston and Massachusetts-based charities aiding education programs, deprived children and the homeless — although one $5,000 contribution to an AIDS relief group in 2004 was later criticized by conservative activists for supporting a gay rights agenda.
In 2005, around the time that Romney started laying plans for his first presidential campaign, Romney suddenly began directing contributions to influential conservative groups and programs. Late that year, Romney gave $25,000 to the Heritage Foundation and a similar sized donation to the Federalist Society. Tyler records show the Romney charity gave the groups $10,000 donations again the next year.
Both organizations are conservative think tanks that often act as incubators for the development of the GOP's political, legal and cultural ideas. Their boards include top names among conservative leaders and thinkers. Heritage trustees and managers include Steve Forbes, businessman Richard Mellon Scaife, former Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese III and former Bush administration counsel David Addington. Federalist directors include Meese, former Bush Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and C. Boyden Gray, former counsel to President George H.W. Bush.
John Van Kannon, vice president of development at Heritage, said the organization does not make presidential endorsements, but he praised Romney for his gift. "We did not solicit his check, but we certainly appreciated it," he said. Van Kannon said he could not speculate on Romney's motivation, noting: "I would like to hope that no one who runs for president does things for calculation, but on the other hand I live in Washington."
Heritage health care experts developed an early relationship with Romney during his term as governor, providing analysis as his administration developed its health care plan for Massachusetts, Van Kannon said. Romney spoke about his plan during a 2006 presentation and later invited Heritage experts to a signing ceremony. Heritage's experts supported rules mandating that all state residents had to buy health care coverage, but Van Kannon said they now consider mandates to be bad policy and oppose them as part of the Obama administration's health care law.
"We're proud of our work with Gov. Romney on health care but we've changed our views on mandates," Van Kannon said.
The Federalist Society does not endorse candidates. Officials there did not return calls from The Associated Press. Former Nixon administration official Robert Bork, who is on the Federalist Society's board of visitors, is a policy adviser to Romney's campaign.
Similarly, the executive director at the Becket Fund, Kristina Arriaga, said Romney's 2008 donation of $25,000 would not result in his political endorsement. "We specialize only in religious liberty not politics," Arriaga said.
Romney's donations also won favor among several Massachusetts conservative groups that worked with him when he was governor. Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, said Romney's $10,000 check came "out of the blue" in 2007. The group also does not endorse candidates. Anderson said that despite Romney's financial help, she is personally uncertain whom she will vote for.
"I keep leaning toward him but I'm still on the fence," Anderson said. "He helped our cause a lot but as important as tax policy is, there's more to a presidential candidate that I have to consider. Whatever I decide, it won't be because he gave us $10,000."

[American Patriot]

Romney: Why Mitt Romney will win the election and become President. Why he won't

Published: Friday, December 23, 2011, 10:47 AM Updated: Friday, December 23, 2011, 11:23 AM

By George Berkin/NJ Voices

Aristide Economopoulos/ The Star-LedgerMitt Romney and Gov. Chris Christie in Parsippany
As Mitt Romney was responding to another candidate during a recent Republican presidential debate, the former Massachusetts governor reached over and gently touched one of his rivals on the shoulder.
It was a telling gesture, and spoke volumes about Romney and his sense of command among the candidates. Other candidates have risen and fallen in the polls, but Romney has remained remarkably steady, neither greatly exciting nor disappointing his Republican audiences.
In this, our seventh of eight snapshots of the candidates for President (seven Republicans and one Democrat), we look at the man who, until recently, has been the undisputed frontrunner among Republicans. (Previous posts: Bachmann, Gingrich, Huntsman, Obama, Paul, Perry.)
Before the recent rise of Newt Gingrich, it seems, the major assignment among Republican presidential candidates seems to have been to find some credible alternative to Romney. Through it all, Romney has continued to bring some real positives to his candidacy.
Romney has presented himself as a combination of public and private experience. The assessment is accurate enough. In addition to four years as a governor, Romney has also run the Olympic Games and worked as an entrepreneur, restructuring companies to make them more efficient.
With his background in both government and the private sector, Romney is positioned to make the central Republican argument of the 2012 election – that Barack Obama’s prescription of more government is wrong for the nation, and destructive of the nation’s fiscal health.
Romney also brings less personal and political baggage than Gingrich, and seems less polarizing than Ron Paul or Michele Bachmann.
The main complaint against Romney, at least in the Republican debates, is a charge that he is not a genuine conservative. Merely mention Massachusetts, and conservatives get suspicious. The fear is that Romney may prove to be a “Rockefeller Republican” – slowing the continued growth of government, perhaps, but not applying the radical surgery many conservatives believe is needed.
Romney asserts he is a genuine conservative, and turns his rivals’ argument on its head. As a Republican in a mostly Democratic state, Romney says, he has experience in getting cooperation from politicians across the aisle.
During a recent debate, Romney recounted how he came to a conservative position on stem cell research. With a bill before him, Romney sought to clarify what he thought of the issue. Investigating privately, he called upon experts. He was persuaded. He would not create embryonic life in order to destroy it for research.
Romney is no longer running for statewide office in the Bay State, where liberals rule. But I am satisfied that Romney is genuinely conservative on issues that matter to conservatives, from abortion and marriage to the nation’s fiscal health.
It is frustrating to watch the Republican candidates argue whether this or that fellow Republican is a true conservative. During the recent debate in Iowa, mostly everyone on stage was a conservative, certainly more conservative than President Obama. Besides, “most conservative” wins applause among red state Republicans, but a bit of “moderate” may go farther in the general election.
The other complaint among Republicans is that Romney seems a “plastic” candidate. As Warren Zevon sang in another context, “his hair is perfect.” Americans seem to want their candidate to be “human,” with flaws we can all relate to.
But here, Americans confuse presidents with action heroes. Drama works great in the movies. What we want in the White House is a steady, boring, hand. Besides, history guarantees we’ll get drama soon enough.
Until recently, Romney has had the luxury of being the front runner, seemingly barely challenged by the other candidates. Then Newt came alive …
The rise of Gingrich is a wonderful development in the race, not the least for Romney’s fortunes. As some commentators have pointed out, Gingrich will teach Romney a thing or two about street fighting during debates. Romney hasn’t needed those mano-a-mano skills in the previous Republican debates. But he sure will need them once he faces President Obama.
Finally, for those who are unhappy about Romney’s Mormonism, get over it. Romney’s beliefs seem much less offensive than the radical anti-Americanism preached by the pastor of the church Barack Obama attended for 20 years in Chicago.
Why Romney will win: Romney has exhibited a dogged determination to win. He has worked hard at securing the nomination. He has accumulated a huge war chest. The Republican establishment likes him much better than the unpredictable Newt Gingrich or irascible Ron Paul. After years of practice, Romney will be able to articulate the conservative argument for fixing the nation’s financial problems. His perceived moderation, unhelpful in the Republican primaries, will make him a credible candidate among moderates in the general election.
Why Romney won’t win: With everything else in place – money, endorsements, debating skills -- Romney simply fails to catch fire with voters. The rivalry with Gingrich turns bitter, splitting the Republican Party. Conservatives remain unpersuaded that Romney is one of their own, and many sit out the election, bringing several Southern states into the Democratic column.

[American Patriot]

Well, Romney can't be ALL bad if Putin thinks he's evil....

Mitt Romney: Vladimir Putin 'a threat to global peace'

In an attempt to display his statesmanship potential, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney wades into deep foreign policy waters discussing Iraq, North Korea and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

You need to have the Adobe Flash Player 9.0.115 to view this content. Please click here to continue.

11:00AM GMT 23 Dec 2011


Speaking on his campaign bus in New Hampshire, the presidential hopeful spoke bluntly on foreign affairs saving his strongest words for Mr Putin whom he called "a real threat to the stability and peace of the world."

With Republican rival Newt Gingrich invoking former president and party idol Ronald Reagan in foreign policy debates, Mr Romney also referred to the Cold War spirit as he harked back to a time when the US defined itself by its opposition to the former-Soviet Union.

Mr Romney said that Mr Putin, who is seemingly set for a return to the office of Russian President in 2012, had "returned to some of the more heated rhetoric of the past", adding: "I think he endangers the stability and peacefulness of the globe."

The former governor of Massachusetts, a consistent frontrunner in the race to oppose Barack Obama in next year's presidential election, was also stinging in his criticism of the recent withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, claiming that it risked destabilising the country.

"I hope that we're able to see stability there but the president's failure to secure an agreement and maintain 10,000 to 30,000 troops in Iraq has to be one of his signature failures," Mr Romney said just hours after a co-ordinated wave of bomb blasts killed dozens and injured hundreds in the Iraqi capital Baghdad.

Related Content

• Mitt Romney says Barack Obama has ‘chastened’ Israel; he would visit nation in first trip as president
• George Bush senior backs Mitt Romney

Mr Romney was also asked for his views on North Korea after the death this week of its autocratic leader Kim Jong-il. He called on China to "exert its influence" over its ally and neighbour as 28-year-old heir Kim Jong-un takes control of the country and its nuclear weapons programme.
"This is an occasion for China to exert it's influence in a way to move towards a more open society and to encourage the regime to avoid the promotion of nuclear technology," Mr Romney said.
"China has to recognise that North Korea's participation in nuclear proliferation cannot be tolerated forever and that is destabilising for the region."

[Backstop]

The article up there by George Berkin is the biggest load of BS I've seen lately.

It defines exactly what the MSM is trying to accomplish: convince true conservatives Romney is what we want.

[American Patriot]

That has been my POINT all along.... and it IS one of the reasons I posted it (and more stuff over at the Paul thread).

The media is trying to get us on drugs to believe Mitt Romney is the "best guy" out there.

My picks are all but gone now.... Bachman, Cain and Perry. You, Backstop, opened my eyes to Perry's problems. But the other two, the media have managed to fuck over and put them in the back of the pack or out of the game.

Romney isn't by ANY stretch my choice, never WILL be.

[American Patriot]

Romney, for the record isn't a Conservative. he's attempting to "redefine" himself.

But, he isn't.