GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
I don’t usually take up defending my bumbling idiot of a second choice (should Huck fail) in Fred Thompson…But this is too good…Read what Todd Harris had to say when a prominent Mitt Romney supporter questioned the integrity of the Right to Life Endorsement (which was very shady)…
“Gov. Romney is new to the pro-life movement and his campaign clearly has a few things to learn about it. First, they should understand that despite their campaign’s every effort, groups like the National Right to Life Committee’s PAC (NLRC-PAC) cannot be bought. NLRC-PAC is supporting Fred Thompson because of Fred’s 100% pro-life voting record. They know he stood with them yesterday, he stands with them today, and he will stand with them tomorrow. It is unseemly for the Romney campaign and its supporters to suggest that NLRC-PAC’s coveted endorsement is based on a bribe. Second, this unfounded accusation is as outrageou s as it is ironic, given the Romney campaign’s long history of spreading money around to anyone who will take it.
“If the Romney campaign is looking for the reason they did not receive the NLRC-PAC endorsement, they can start with the fact that Gov. Romney was pro-choice just two years ago. They should also consider the fact that Gov. Romney’s own health care plan in Massachusetts offers taxpayer funded abortions for a mere $50 co-pay and requires by law that a representative from Planned Parenthood sit on the MassHealth advisory board. Tellingly, Gov. Romney made no such requirement for a representative from the pro-life movement.
“The Romney campaign was clearly hoping for this endorsement and are now clearly upset. But being denied an endorsement is no excuse to impugn the integrity of the very organization they were just days ago trying to woo.”
OUCH!!!!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Todd Harris also said:
“This latest episode [phoneyfred.org] only serves to prove what many voters are already figuring out: Mitt Romney will do anything, say anything, smear any opponent and flip flop on any position in order to win. The American people in general and the Republican Party in particular deserve better than this.”
November 14th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
So what is the point of the whole pro-life movement if they don’t want people changing their minds? Why does anyone pro-life hold it against Romney that he changed positions? It’s a little hypocritical if you ask me.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Sampo, how are McCain’s poll numbers looking? Thought so! You love jumping all over Romney when McCain can’t even grab 3rd place in NH, but keep trying to divert people from your candidates pathetic poll numbers.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
3, you mean the ones where mccain beats clinton? how bout those polls showing romney losing in a landslide?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Rett,
“I don’t usually take up defending my bumbling idiot of a second choice (should Huck fail) in Fred Thompson . . .”
I’d venture to say that Thompson is both smarter and more successful than you are sire.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Sampo,
Funny thing is that McCain will never get a sniff of the general election, you can watch from the sidelines as Mitt (or Rudy) takes Hillary apart. I will say one thing though, John McCain would make a fine Sec of Defense under a Rudy administration. Don’t even consider anything under a Romney administration, I doubt Mitt would give him a job.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Kavon,
Thanks for letting me back on the site.
My thoughts on this:
“If the Romney campaign is looking for the reason they did not receive the NLRC-PAC endorsement, they can start with the fact that Gov. Romney was pro-choice just two years ago. ”
I would hope that the NLRC-PAC would not base it’s endorsement upon who has been pro-life the longest, rather who has is best capable to represent the pro-life cause going forward. The best warriors to any cause can be those new converts. Apostates can do you incredible damage. Just look at Dick Morris comments on Hillary. Personally, I think Romney can carry the pro-life banner higher & harder than FDT. I think that Romney can bring more new converts to the pro-life cause because he himself is a convert. I still respect FDT for his pro-life stance. He has been my number two since he entered the race.
“They should also consider the fact that Gov. Romney’s own health care plan in Massachusetts offers taxpayer funded abortions for a mere $50 co-pay and requires by law that a representative from Planned Parenthood sit on the MassHealth advisory board. Tellingly, Gov. Romney made no such requirement for a representative from the pro-life movement. ”
This is not Romney’s doing. The liberal veto-proof legislature in MA inserted this. Romney should not be blamed for changes he did not implement. That is certainly an unfair smear.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
Sir.
And isn’t it ironic that you titled your post “Personal Attacks”
Just giving us a real time example of such, eh?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
6, being the ‘i’ll talk to my lawyers’ and ‘generals brainwash americans’ kind of guy that he is.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
#9 Sampo,
You always follow the MSM? Do you have a “normal” thought of your own? Any intelligent person knows that the “lawyers” answer was taken completely out of context, but you keep up the good fight against smearing Romney, everytime you post his numbers go up and McCains go down. Get ready to support either Romney or Rudy in the General. You could
sit out but that would clearly be a vote for Hillary, either way you lose, Sampo.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
So, Rett, what you are saying by your post here is that every personal attack on Romney by you, Metro, sampo or any other RomNot should be assumed to have been directed by the appropriate campaign and that those campaigns should disavow the particular supporter and his comments?
Interesting theory.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Fred’s camp is now bringing up Jerry Zandastra’s old lame argument in taxpary funded abortions.
I really apologize about the cutting/pasting, but when this came up over 6 months ago in circulating e-mail smear campaigns in Iowa Joe Earle of the Iowa Christian Alliance and a Romney advisor responded with the facts.
> Dear Pro-Life Supporter,
>
> They’re at it again! You may have received an
> e-mail from Jerry Zandstra,
> head of a “group” he calls the “Pro-Life
> Federation.” Unfortunately, this
> is a supporter of another presidential candidate,
> and rather than highlight
> his own candidate’s record, he is again turning his
> guns on Governor Romney,
> with more distortions.
>
> In his latest email, Zandstra asserts that Governor
> Romney’s landmark health
> care reform is responsible for taxpayer-funded
> abortions. This is blatantly
> false.
>
> Unfortunately, under Massachusetts law, and
> precedent set by the courts, it
> was decided in 1981 that the Massachusetts
> Constitution required payment for
> abortions for Medicaid-eligible women. Further, in
> 1997, the Supreme
> Judicial Court reaffirmed its position that a
> state-subsidized plan must
> offer “medically necessary abortions,” calling it a
> constitutional right.
>
> Governor Romney, each and every time he was
> presented with legislation on
> life issues, has sided with life. Governor Romney
> will stand on the side of
> life as President as well, and believes laws should
> be set by elected
> officials, not by unelected judges, as was the case
> in Massachusetts.
>
> The underlying factors here are the motives of this
> so-called “federation.”
> Congressman Pete Hoekstra, from Zandstra’s home
> state of Michigan, had the
> following to say about Zandstra’s tactics:
>
> “.The congressman, first elected to the House in
> 1993, has served on both
> the Education and Intelligence Committees, but the
> reason for his brief stop
> in Hull was more immediate: GOP competitors are
> questioning Romney’s
> pro-life credentials.
>
> “‘We’ve had some nasty folks from Michigan who’ve
> tried to undercut some of
> the things that are important for Gov. Romney,’
> Hoekstra said. ‘It’s a group
> of folks who’ve been quite harsh. Some of the
> material that they’ve been
> spreading in Michigan has spread to Iowa.’” -
> “Romney ‘most qualified to be
> president,’ Hoekstra says,” Sioux County
> Index-Reporter, 2/28/07
>
> If you received the e-mail attacking Governor
> Romney, you’ll notice Brian
> Camenker’s name is also signed to the note. He
> heads a group called
> “MassResistance,” that also seeks to distort
> Governor Romney’s record. The
> Iowa Christian Alliance says this of his group:
>
> “The ICA wishes to clarify issues relating to
> Governor Mitt Romney in an
> article we forwarded to you yesterday.
>
> “First, as we have made clear in previous
> communications, the Iowa Christian
> Alliance does not endorses candidates. (ICA
> underline).
>
> “The article quotes Brian Camenker of
> MassResistance, who has openly opposed
> Governor Romney in Massachusetts and is engaged in
> an effort to distort the
> Governor’s record.
>
> “The purpose of yesterday’s email from the Iowa
> Christian Alliance was to
> highlight the attempted deterioration of family
> values in the state of
> Massachusetts. Our intent was in no way to make a
> statement regarding
> Governor Mitt Romney. Unfortunately, the article we
> sent included additional
> information that we now know cannot be supported by
> the facts. We apologize
> for sending out what amounted to be a political
> attack on Governor Romney,
> on the part of Brian Camenker of MassResistance. We
> hope this email helps
> set the record straight.”
>
> Thank you for taking the time to read this email and
> discover the true
> positions of Governor Romney, and the true motives
> of those who seek to
> distort his campaign.
>
> Joe Earle
> Faith Based Outreach Advisor
> Romney for President
November 14th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Sampo….
1. I didnt know that 5% waas a landslide…if so, then McCain is losing everywhere in a landslide
2. Obviously, you are not up to date on the Constitutional debate regarding Presidential War powers, READ UP!
3. I like how you impose Mitt’s fathers comments onto his son, are you willing to impose McCain’s mother’s bogotry n her son. McCain says no, so why are you doing it??
November 14th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
Check out this new article about Rudy trying to cover up the whole Kerik issue. This guy is so morally bankrupt, it’s crazy. This is the scandalous type that some people want in office. Eeeeewwww!
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
November 14th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Sampo…any response??
November 14th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
I am not one of these voters so this is just a guess:
It’s always excellent to win converts, but some longstanding institutions in the conservative movement might not want new converts to lead their flock.
Reagan is a totally different case: he may have been a convert, but he converted when the movement was it its lowest ebb, and more than a decade before he won the Presidency.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
#15 Ilfgo,
Sampo just hits and runs, probably will not respond to you and if he does you can be sure he will put some twisted spin on it. Speaking of running, I’m off, have a great night everyone.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
13, mccain disagreed with his mom. mitt agreed with his dad. there you have it.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Mr. T….true but Reagan was not simply pro-choice by words alone, he signed a bill into law as Governor. Mitt Romney hass not done such a thing.
In fact, Ted Kennedy accussed Romney of being a pro-life person running on a pro-choice platform. So exactly where is the conversion: Personal feelings or how to use his elected position???
November 14th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Where did Mitt agree with his dad??? Link please!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
I think Rudy’s corruption has extended beyond the walls of his own home. It’s going to bring him down.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
November 14th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
As the wheels come off the Romney campaign it will be interesting to see how long it can hold off the 10,000 hours of negative commercials they have already filmed. Get the jack and the air pump!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Sampo….what about your landslide comment??? If true, how deranged is McCain to think he can win NH, when he is getting destroyed?? (based on fact that Sampo thinks 5% lead is a LANDSLIDE)
November 14th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Cliff how have the wheels come off??
November 14th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
I love how Reps on this site criticize the DEMS for their lies, when we have people like Cliff, Sampo, Metro (when he is not being funny) lying through their teeth!!!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
a metaphor:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/09/26/romney_says_he_may_spend_more_on_his_own_campaign/
Mitt Romney said: “He didn’t mean, literally, `brainwashed.’ It was a metaphor, an expression, to suggest we weren’t told the truth. …He said to me, `In politics, being right too early is always a mistake.’ But he didn’t care. He was right too early.”
A regular Aesops his old man is.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Wishful thinking, Cliff. You must not be keeping up with current events, like polls and trends.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Ilfigo,
You are correct about Reagan signing an abortion bill, in 1967, four months into his governorship, six years before Roe v Wade. Whether or not Romney did any such thing, the circumstances are very, very different than our candidates faces today.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
LOL. Why would a member of Romney’s own staff leak a story to the Politico about infighting? Not a good sign.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Wow…Sampo, at least I now know why you can’t understand the “lawyers” comment….you have demonstrated that you have no brains at all. I am glad that you are supporting McCain and I hope you stay aboard his “old-age” express when he once again loses a Presidential primary.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
No comment from the Rudy supporters about hist staff asking the woman to lie in court to protect Giuliani’s presidential aspirations? It’s pretty pathetic.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
31. How Clintonian!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
“Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign has television ads and mailings on standby to attack Rudy Giuliani but so far has not used them because of an internal dispute about the risks of a backlash in going negative on the Republican front-runner, according to numerous sources in and close to the Romney campaign.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/14/dissension-hits-romney-ca_n_72565.html
November 14th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Don’t give Huffington the traffic
November 14th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
It would be easy to attack Giuliani, but he’s already trending downward, and McCain is doing a good job of attacking Giuliani anyway. Maybe Mitt doesn’t need to attack.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
No comment from the Rudy supporters about hist staff asking the woman to lie in court to protect Giuliani’s presidential aspirations? It’s pretty pathetic.
LOL, this is the woman who was going to publish OJ’s If I Did It?, right? LOL. That’s funny.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Are people really surprised that Romney has negtive materials on Giuliani or any other candidate???
I guarantee that every other candidate has similar negative info on their competitors!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
#34. OK, here is the full version:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6870.html
November 14th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Hey did u guys see this quote from clinton
“I didn’t say he shouldn’t do it, nor that he should,� said Sen. Clinton, “I only said I recognize that whatever he does I can understand because George Bush makes us all do irrational things.�
So it is Bush who makes her do the stupid things she does
So a vote for her is like a vote for bush right?
November 14th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
38, reason being Romney knows Rudy’s votes wont go to him.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
I recall reading many Mitt supporters have given Rudy as second choice. Some of them may switch their choice if Romney’s negative ads go a little over the top. Romney’s support is soft and one misstep in the camapign could easily wipe out his lead.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Mr. T,
When you cite a specific fact, make sure it IS a fact. Reagan switched positions and became pro-life in 1975, 5 years before he won the presidency, but only 1 year before he first RAN for the presidency. Actually, 1975 was the year he DECIDED to run for the presidency, by a curious coincidence. Mitt switched positions almost 3 years ago, and was functionally pro-life throughout his term as Governor, and for this, he has been accused of being a flip-flopper by literally thousands of articles, and hundreds of thousands of website posts and letters to the editor.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Videos of dozens and dozens of illegals on Boston and Somerville street corners lie in wait…:) Let’s see who wants to go negative LOL.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Colin,
Most of us who regularly post here for Romney have Rudy as our 2nd choice, but I really don’t think that any of us are in ANY danger of defecting to Rudy. If Romney dropped out of the race for any reason, without missing a beat I would take up the Giuliani cause alongside Metro. I currently find this scenario improbable. Romney has the resources and the determination and the support to stay in the race until the end.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Why would that affect Romney so much Cliff??? Under that assumption, lets show some gay guys in NYC? or an abortion clinic in NYC?
November 14th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Dave,
First of all, I didn’t accuse Romney of anything, so don’t aim your animus at me.
The source on my dates was from Lou Cannon. I thought he was a pretty reputable Reagan biographer. If I am mistaken on that, I apologize.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Why would that affect Romney so much Cliff???
Because he’s spouting off about it, and his record on it is pitiful LOL?
November 14th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
How is it pitiful and remember Constitutional limitations??
November 14th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Huckabee Hits Romney on Illegal Lawn Workers
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/huckabee-hits-r.html
November 14th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
Colin that has already been posted!!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Mr. T,
Lou Cannon has probably assembled more information on Reagan than anybody, so you might be right. My source was a pro-Romney website, which wouldn’t, admittedly, be as authoratative. Maybe I owe YOU the apology. If so, you have it. The timeframe, however is suspect, since Reagan was governor until 1974, and he had, by reputation, an untarnished pro-choice record as governor.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
51. Ooops. So many threads today and I missed some of them.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Colin,
In your argument about the company who hired Mitt’s lawn care workers, you’re attributing causality where there is none. Don’t you get that?
November 14th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Um, Romney is no Reagan.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
In your argument about the company who hired Mitt’s lawn care workers, you’re attributing causality where there is none. Don’t you get that?
“i didn’t inhale.”
November 14th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Reagan was one of the most GENUINE men the nation has ever known. When he died, I stood in line until dawn to pay my respects, and so did grandparents and parents with their little kids, who you’ve never expect to stay up all night.
Reagan believed what he said.
Mitt Romney will never engender that belief or have tens of thousands standing in line all night for him.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
Not many people thought people would do the same for Reagan when he was running for President.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
Oh brother! I can’t wait until the primary season is over!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
If Romney or another candidate can defeat the jihad ass Reagan defeated Communism, I guarantee the line wil lbe just as long and possibly longer!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
ilfigo, untrue. Reagan was a genuine and popular man long before he ran for the President.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
Yes but he was not revered the way he was at the end of his Presidency and at the ned of his life!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Ha! Very well stated
November 14th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Btw, my above comment refers to the quotes in the original posting by Rett.
November 14th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
If voting record matters the most to NLRC, then they have skipped over McCain, as not only is McCain’s record as good as Fred’s, he also has a longer record. And then there is Ron Paul, whose record is the same as Fred, but Ron has been much more vocal about fetus’ right, way more than Fred. He spoke in no uncertain term on why abortion is wrong, unlikely Fred (no one can make a head or tail out of his abortion statement from TWO WEEKS ago, where he also repeated his “criminilizing the girls” comment!). No, NLRC is biased, simple and sweet. They walked over two better pro-lifers to get to Fred.
I know Huckabee is a strong pro-lifer too, but I am emphasizing on the voting records here. I do not know how Huckabee handled the abortion issue in Arkansas. Perhaps he has a strong voting record, too. Anyone knows?
November 14th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
[...] Harris’s rejoinder to race42008.com, added his own apt and precise comments, and titled it Personal Attacks? First, [continues Harris, Team Romney] should understand that despite their campaign’s every [...]
November 14th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
[...] of Harris’s rejoinder to race42008.com, added his own apt and precise comments, and titled it Personal Attacks? First, [continues Harris, Team Romney] should understand that despite their campaign’s every [...]
November 14th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
I love how people out there will attack John McCain, a war hero who has dedicated his life to his country, all the while defending the opportunistic “Slick” Mitt Romney who compared campaign work to military service and got rich and decided that he could buy the presidency by flooding airwaves and mailboxes with ads claiming to be a “true conservative.”
And you people call yourselves patriots?
November 14th, 2007 at 9:55 pm
You can recognize despiration in a campaign when they NEED to distort the facts.
November 14th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Oh no, not that again. Dan, take is somewhere else please.
November 14th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
And I thought Huckabee supporters were Christian. When you pass along the muck you will inevitably be left with dirty hands in the end.
By the way, what does the Bible say about people who bear false witness? Where do liars go in the end? ? ?