The Candidates
Featured Archives
For those of you who said Team Romney should work to proactively dissolve these flip-flopping charges before they get out of control (and I agree with you), the Romney campaign sent out two press releases this morning: one to defend his stance on campaign finance reform and one to defend his support of the Bush tax cuts. Both make the proponents of these flip-flopping charges look, well, absurd quite frankly.
You can read the press releases here and here, so I won’t repost them in their entirety. But here is the gist of them:
Campaign Finance Reform
The charge is that Romney has flip-flopped on campaign finance reform. But what has he changed his position on? Romney has always supported transparency and disclosure in the campaign finance system, and has never supported McCain-Feingold. There are quotes from 2007, 2006, and 2005 where he spoke on CFR and McCain-Feingold to show this.
But what about 2002, when Mitt Romney supported “dramatic changes” to campaign laws in Massachusetts? As usual, the quotes used against him are taken completely out of context. What Mitt supported was changing the MA Clean Election Law so taxpayer money could not be used to finance public campaigns. However, when this couldn’t be done, he supported repealing the law altogether. There are quotes from newspaper articles in 2003 detailing the process.
This whole hoopla seems to be much ado about nothing after reading the press release.
The Bush Tax Cuts
This one makes the charges of flip-flopping even more silly than the last.
The charge is that Romney did not endorse the Bush tax cuts until last week in South Carolina, and in fact, opposed them prior to that. However, Team Romney responds by saying “Those currently questioning Governor Romney’s support for the Bush tax relief are citing blind quotes from Democrats.” Romney was in a closed door meeting with all Democrats, and one of the most questionable Democrats of the bunch has come forward saying that Romney did not support the tax cuts. Of course, no one else was in the room to verify this, and the MSM (and many on the right side of the blogosphere for some reason) jumped all over themselves to run the story.
But instead, shouldn’t we look at what Romney said about that meeting? Indeed, in an article from 2003 is a quote from Romney – as he was walking out of that very same meeting: “I very much support an economic stimulus … An economic stimulus is a good thing for Massachusetts. … I don’t wade into national politics.”
For those worried that that wasn’t a strong enough endorsement of the tax cuts, in 2004, Romney said in another interview that “‘It helps America to have George Bush as president, and Massachusetts is part of America – still,’ he chuckled. He said Bush, using the ‘powerful’ tool of a tax cut, has worked hard to stimulate the economy.”
At the RNC, later in 2004, Romney had this to say: “We step forward by insisting on Ronald Reagan’s vision of a compassionate and fiscally conservative government that promotes the opportunity of ownership and leaves more money in the hands of the taxpayers.”
And of course, in 2007 Romney still supports the President’s tax cuts. So he supported them in 2003, in 2004 (even campaigning for Bush because of them), and now in 2007. Where’s the flip-flop?
The Bottom Line
Look, it seems silly to me how quickly folks here form a circular firing squad. I’ve been guilty of it in the past, but have apologized when it has been pointed out to me that I have. But with friends like some on the right side of the blogosphere, we don’t even need the Democrats anymore! This primary season is going to be ugly, but it doesn’t have to be ugly because of us. This meme of flip-flopping for Mitt Romney has carried water because the blogosphere, instead of working to defend Romney, has played into the MSM’s hands and attacks Mitt right alongside of them. The facts are pretty clear, when they are all there. Mitt has not flipped on guns, taxes, the tax cuts, gay rights, or campaign finance reform. Mitt has changed his position on abortion and stem cell research and has been very public and transparent about that. That’s up to you to decide personally whether or not you believe he was sincere in that change. I happen to believe he was and would be happy to explain to anyone why. But this whole thing about Mitt being a flip-flopper melts away in the face of the facts.
February 9th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
[...] post by HeavyM and software by Elliott [...]
February 9th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
He hasn’t defended anything. Misleading and changing this subject. Poor rapid response. Porridge in the eye.
See my post for details: http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/02/09/fisking-romneys-campaign-finance-rebuttal/
February 9th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Edit: Insulting comments will be deleted. The next step is a ban.-KWN
February 9th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Edit: Insulting comments will be deleted. The next step is a ban.-KWN
February 9th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
EDIT: Completely off topic. No threadjacking please.-KWN
February 9th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
HeavyM,
Has it ever occured to you that the reason a lot of conservatives are attacking Romney is because your so-called “flip-flop meme” is in fact not a meme at all? It is fact. Romney is a chameleon, and a panderer, and he is dangerous to the conservative cause. He can’t be trusted, because not even he knows what he is going to support or oppose next week, next month, next year, next election. With a democratically-controlled congress there is NO WORSE person we could put in the White House than Mitt Romney.
Paul S
February 9th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
What is dangerous to the conservative cause are people who have a litmus test for candidates, people that will not and do not tolerate anyone who disagrees whatsoever, people who try to bring some pragmatism (sp?) to the discussion, people who don’t believe that over time what used to be solid public policy may no longer be.
Times do change. Core values and princples do not change, however the approach to fixing the problems that face our nation can (and need to) evolve with the times.
The most dangerous thing for the conservative movement is the direction it is headed – straight into it’s own bubble world that no one else is a allowed in and all dissentors are burned at the stake.
February 9th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Matt, if you think Eyeon08 is a bad site, you should have checked out the Caucus Cooler before they had to shut down the comments section. It makes the Romney-Bashers here seem tame by comparison.
February 9th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Edit: Please no personal insults (that includes blanket statements that someone’s site is bad. Criticize the content, not the site in general)-KWN. You are right BarkTwiggs, the comments on caucus cooler were horrible and made everyone look bad.
I wonder what happened? It wasn’t that bad just days ago. It was as if it got spammed by commentors who hate Romney.
February 9th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Paul S,
I would beg to differ. Romney was able to play hardball with an 87% Democratically controlled Mass Senate and force them to concede on many social and fiscal issues. Unlike our current president, he was not afraid to veto portions of bills which went against conservative principles. I can’t think of better person for handling the herd of cats known as the Democrats.
February 9th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Nice post HeavyM:
I agree that when the facts are laid out un-altered and reviewed fairly, Mitt is not the flip – flopper many are making him out to be.
February 9th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
…your so-called “flip-flop meme” is in fact not a meme at all? It is fact.
Paul S, I think you may be missing HeavyM’s point. When the facts are laid out on guns, taxes, the tax cuts, gay marriage, CFR, immigration, etc, it IS a meme.
The flips on abortion and embryonic stem cells are genuine flips, and Romney’s been perfectly candid about that. What Romney’s detractors have realized is that a single flip during his Governorship several years ago is not going to sink Romney’s chances in the election. That’s why you have all this throwing of spaghetti against the wall to see what sticks. If you think otherwise, feel free to back up your statement. I’d be happy to copy-paste the facts of Romney’s record.
I find it pretty encouraging that Romney’s political opponents are so desperate that they’re using quotes from liberal newspapers which were quoting liberal democrats who were paraphrasing Romney’s remarks out of context. While it’s sad that they’re so rabid and willing to throw one of their own to the lions, it’s encouraging that they’re doing such a pathetic job of it.
February 10th, 2007 at 1:04 am
How does Romney feel about the Bush tax cuts?
Didnt he cut taxes in his own state? Should that tell us where he stands on the Bush tax cuts, and tax cuts in general.
And for campaign finance reform, I have flip flopped on this issue myself. I used to think it was necessary and a good idea. But my position has evolved, we just need disclosure, just as Romney has always said.
February 10th, 2007 at 9:31 am
There is a terrific blog out of New Hampshire called GreenMountainPolitics1, written by the “Monday Morning Clacker.” I’ve always enjoyed reading it because it is smart, well-written and based on real “on the ground” local knowledge about the New Hampshire political scene.
Today, the Clacker has a great post up detailing his impressions about Gov. Huckabee after meeting him at an event yesterday. Titled “Mike Huckabee Brings Hope to New Hampshire,” here just a few highlights from the Clacker:
–after meeting Huckabee tonight for the first time, we find ourselves asking …”What in the hell are supporters of Giuliani and Romney thinking?”
–he is everything that Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani are only pretending to be.
–We think that attacks on Governor Huckabee’s economic record are baseless. Even the best fiscal conservatives know that there are sometimes circumstances where revenue must be raised in order for government to remain economically sound.
–It’s our humble Yankee opinion that so far this Southerner is doing everything right.
The Clacker concludes that McCain, Rudy and Romney better start looking over their sholders. There’s much more, so check out the entire article.
February 10th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
There will be complete disclosure and I think we can trust Mitt to keep his word on the postions he has flopped to now for the next 4-8 years.
February 10th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Romney has in fact flipped and flopped on the homosexual issue, and on the issues he still hasn’t flipped on, it’s where he still is that’s disturbng to many social conservatives.
He endorsed “gays in the military” in his 1994 letter seeking the endorsement of a homosexual activist group, then said in December 2006 that he no longer supports such a change.
He endorsed Ted Kennedy’s federal “sexual orientation” legislation, then said in December that he no longer supports it.
He opposed the state Marriage Protection Amendment proposed in Massachusetts before the state Supreme Court legalized so-called homosexual “marriage,” and now of course, he supports such an amendment.
He has not flipped, so far, though I predict it’s only a matter of time, on the following:
* Endorsed legislation granting formal govt recognition to homosexual “domestic partners”
* Endorsed taxpayer-financed same-sex benefits for government employees
* Disagreed with the Boy Scouts’ ban on homosexuals
* Appointed at least one homosexual activist to the Massachusetts bench, a member of the board of the Lesbian & Gay Bar Association
All the above explains why he was endorsed in both 1994 and 2002 by the homosexual activist “Log Cabin” group.
Now, having said all that, let me defend Mitt against the charge that he’s flip-flopped on gun rights.
He hasn’t. He still endorses gun control. He still endorses the federal Assault Weapons Ban. He endorsed the Brady Bill years ago, and most recently “refused to say” whether he still does.
As you noted, it’s simply beyond dispute that Mitt argued for a decade in favor of Roe v. Wade, in favor of “safe and legal” abortion on demand, etc., yet he still has trouble telling the truth about it.
Just yesterday in S.C. …
“I am firmly pro-life. I have ALWAYS been for life.” (Friday, Feb. 9, 2007, as reported by A.P.)
Sorry, Mitt. Don’t know and don’t care what your personal views may or may not have been throughout your political career, but in a public policy context, that’s a flat-out lie. And because you know full well what your audience will think you mean when they hear you say you’ve “always been for life,” i.e., that you’ve always taken a pro-life stand politically, how can one conclude anything other than that you’re trying to mislead them…until you’re called on it once again and are forced to admit (and explain and explain and explain) the truth.
Watch Mitt debate Kennedy and decide for yourself if his public policy views have “always been for life”:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
“And you won’t see me wavering on that,” he said. As believable as anything else he says.
February 10th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
And to think I already gave Romney MONEY!? Grrrr. Fool me once…