Wake Up, Conservatives: Mitt Romney Is Running As A Leftist

January 30, 2012

Every once in a while, the dumb ass comes out in Stacy McCain. This is one of those times. He's either doing this as he thinks it benefits Santorum, or he's un-officially signed on with Team Mitt in his mind.

OK, so what’s Mitt’s secret? Let me put it in the simplest possible terms: Sex appeal. This will elicit a groan from ideologues who have spent the past year proclaiming that Mitt is a gutless flip-flopper, the worst RINO in the history of RINO-dom. Yet if you set aside mere politics long enough to see the two Florida frontrunners as the average Republican voter sees them, it is hard to miss the contrast between Mitt — the tall, lean multimillionaire entrepreneur with dark hair and chiseled features — and Newt, the pudgy intellectual.

Mitt Romney is doing precisely what Progressives and the media do year after year. He is unable to debate honestly on conservative ideas and win. Scratch the campaign pressed and ready veneer and Mitt Romney is center-Left. If he were in the White House, he'd be crafting legislation with Democrats and liberal Republicans, not conservatives.

Because he can not win on ideas, or ideology, he is resorting to the politics of personal destruction. When the media and more honest Leftists do this, we see it and we are appalled by it. Unfortunately, aided by a multi-million dollar ad campaign, Mitt Romney is getting away with it for now. But make no mistake, the tactic he is employing is just as damaging to conservatism as when the media and Democrats employ it.

If you want to support a guy who will conclude that you, as a conservative, are dumb and behind the times and need to be "managed" as a problem if elected by securing your vote with dishonesty, you're welcome to do it. It's a free country. But you should at least know you are doing it. You may as well be embracing the tactics of Barack Obama, the ones that have infuriated you these last several years. It's Obama and the Left's playbook Romney is using to win, not a conservative one.

Because he can not win the argument on principle, he is destroying his opponent's image, name and reputation. Let's not pretend it's a new tactic, or that he's suddenly become something he is not, a charismatic conservative leader.

AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
  1. EBL says:

    RSM has not forgiven Newt for what he did in NY-26. So I would not be too hard on him, he was there and saw it go down. Of course, take Newt’s tendency to go pragmatic establishment and multiply it by at least five and you have Mitt Romney. I just cannot believe our choice is Newt or Mitt. I agree at least Newt has some proven conservative victories on his ledger. What exactly has Mitt Romney done, in government, that counts as a conservative victory?

  2. EBL says:

    I reread RSM’s column and I did not see it as endorsing Mitt, I see it as trying to explain Mitt Romney’s appeal in Florida. I hope Santorum stays in.

  3. lacoste uk says:

    dao di gai zen me gan

  4. EBL says:

    http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/01/disgust-one-of-six-basic-emotions.html This someone seems appropriate for the current political race we are in.

  5. EBL says:

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/i-just-needed/ This is better than my link. I recommend this.

  6. Greg M. says:

    People are too impressed by the glitz. Romney is all glitz. All show, no substance. When you get to the bottom of Romney, there’s nothing there. It’s like giving cotton candy to a kid in Africa with a swollen belly from hunger. No nutrition, just empty calories. Maybe it is better than nothing, but the hunger remains.

  7. KLSmith says:

    EBL : agree & agree.
    Dan : you make some excellent points on politics of personal destruction and lack of core principles. But it seems to me that is different than the point Stacy McCain is making.
    There are a lot of, let us say, not deep thinkers that get to vote. Looks and a few commercials are what they vote on.

  8. Jim says:

    I’m not voting for any of them. We deserve Obama for 4 more years.

  9. Newt Gingrich (your alleged conservative in the race) has gone Occupier with his attacks on capitalism, but somehow Mitt (the great conservative hope of 2008) is a RINO. The argument doesn’t work.

  10. Bill G. says:

    Uh, the bottom line of Stacy’s article is a request of support for Rick Santorum.

  11. Stacy also denies that there’s a coordinated conspiracy against Gingrich
    I couldn’t believe he wrote that

  12. ljm says:

    Newt’s politics of personnel destruction tactics – yesterday he called Mitt a maniacal liar – are not working. This charge based on Mitt Romney – in the last debate – saying he hadn’t seen the “language of the ghetto ad.” Really? Even if Newt could prove that Mitt hadn’t seen the ad – that makes Mitt a maniacal liar?
    Newt who plead guilty to lying to the ethics committee? Newt who’s personal life amounts to decades of lying.
    Newt is guilty of lies of omission for covering up his Fannie and Freddie investments. Even I know that is a nonsense but it fits Newt’s self serving logic.

  13. Initially, Newt was not my preferred candidate, but if it’s a choice between him and Romney; it’s not even close, for Romney is only preferable over Huntsman and Paul’s foreign policy fantasies. That said, I will absolutely vote for the GOP nominee, I just pray for our Country that it’s not Mitt.
    Regardless of what the Establishment GOP (already on Mitt’s payroll) and Liberal Obama supporting media pundits say, Obama wants to face Romney in 2012 , for he will be the easiest to beat. 1) Conservatives won’t rally for longtime Liberal Romney’s cause 2) Uniformed quasi-Democrats and certified Independents are far less likely to cross over to vote for an “Obama light” candidate and more likely to fall for Obama’s rhetoric , in turn giving their “Hope & Con Man” another 4 years. That said, while one can look back at any politician’s record and label that candidate a “flip-flopper” ((IE) Reagan changed Parties and Churchill changed Parties twice), Romney is an entirely different animal. The evidence shows that all Romney positions depend solely on what he and his advisers think will best serve him in his next election. This Romney trait is unequivocal and a mainstay of the Left. Real conservatives, although circumstances sometimes force their hand once in office, never run on platforms consisting of Statist doctrine.
    Despite flip-flopping, Churchill and Reagan, like Newt, actually had a core set of values that they didn’t alter. I really can’t say the same for Mitt Romney. I couldn’t tell you what he really believes in. On the same note, unlike Churchill, Reagan and Newt, while in office, Romney promulgated a plethora of obscenely leftist policies and he does not have a successful public record. Romney has one term as an unpopular Massachusetts Governor with RomneyCare as his only achievement; that is unless you want to include the fact that Massachusetts was 48th in new job creation during his 4 years at the helm (just to be clear that’s out of 50 states not 57).
    Setting aside the personal attacks, most conservatives agree that a candidate’s record during the time he or she was in elected office takes precedent over all other points of consideration. So, let’s stick with the facts and you be the judge. Keep in mind; I am purposely not stressing his most egregious assault on liberty and the fabric of America as we know it – RomneyCare, so to shed light on a few of Mitt Romney’s lesser known, Leftist Big Government greatest Hits.
    Romney’s record as Governor is nothing short of disgraceful:
    • Romney voted to mandate Affirmative Action for all public companies
    • Romney opposed the Bush Tax Cuts
    • Romney strongly opposes the pro-growth “Flat-Tax”, using Marxist, Obama verbiage calling the flat tax “unfair”
    • As Governor Romney enacted $432 million in fee hikes and $300 million in higher taxes and refused to sign to a no-tax pledge each of his four years in office
    • As an ardent supporter of Cap & Trade, Romney worked to regulate “greenhouse gas emissions” in Massachusetts and got Massachusetts involved in a regional climate change pact
    • Romney still supports tax payer ethanol subsidies (while even environmental conman Al Gore confesses they were a mistake, done for political gain)
    • As Governor, Romney proposed a budget in 2007 that was an outrageous 8.5 percent higher than the one he proposed the year before
    • In 2009 and 2009, Romney favored increasing spending “substantially” on energy research. Romney also supports tax dollar energy subsidies in general
    • Romney fervently supported Obama’s $Trillion Dollar failed Stimulus, saying the Obama Stimulus will “accelerate the timing of the start of the recovery”
    • Romney opposed the highly successful Contract with America; an example of how Romney has no clue concerning the overriding goal of Democrat policies.
    • Romney supported reappointing Ben Bernanke to chairman of the Federal Reserve.
    • Reserve and Romney strongly supports the Failed Department of Education.
    • In 2004, as Governor of Massachusetts, Romney introduced the Massachusetts Climate Protection Plan to reduce greenhouse gases.
    • In 2008, Romney told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that “there’s nothing wrong with dealing with global warming.”
    • Romney still believes in man-made global warming (2011),
    • Romney distanced himself from Reagan and Reagan’s policies. During his Senate debate with Ted Kennedy, Romney made it clear he was not a fan of Ronald Reagan. Stating, “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” Romney’s own words show – that not only did he not understand conservative principles; he was wholly unable to intellectually defend them.
    And the list goes on, proving Romney’s incomprehensible tendency not to just talk about, but to support Leftist, Big Government Policies. Was there ever a time when you supported Affirmative action for all public companies? Did you support Obama’s ridiculous stimulus? Consequently: It is categorically impossible for someone who understands and authentically believes in conservative political theory to voluntarily take so many wrong positions. Romney’s failure to understand Conservative Constitutional Principles is glaring. The evidence is abundantly clear; the only thing Conservative about Romney is his Rhetoric and now is not the time to support a squishy candidate.
    Now, let us look at Gingrich’s Record in Congress:
    • Voted YES on the Reagan tax cut of 1981
    • Voted YES on the Reagan tax reform bill of 1986
    • Voted NO on the George H.W. Bush “Read My Lips” tax hike in 1990.
    • Voted NO on the Clinton tax hike in 1993.
    • Voted YES on the capital gains tax cut in 1997.
    • Voted NO on the Chrysler bailout in 1979
    • Voted YES on the Gramm-Rudman balanced budget bill in 1985
    • Voted YES on a balanced budget amendment (as part of the “Contract for America” effort that he led) in 1995
    • Led the effort and voted YES to cut $16.4 billion from the budget in 1995.
    • Voted YES on welfare reform in 1996
    Everyone with insight agrees that in order to save the Nation: we need someone who both understands constitutional conservatism and is willing to fight for it. We need someone who will implement what’s necessary to stop the bleeding, regardless of how it affects him in that month’s polls, a true leader, like Reagan. If you doubt me look at his poll numbers during his first 20 months in office. And nothing makes me less confident in Romney doing this, than his REFUSAL to this day – to say RomneyCare was a mistake. All human beings make mistakes and great leaders admit to them. Reagan admitted to mistakes and faced the consequences. Gingrich has admitted to mistakes as well (ex) sitting on the couch with Pelosi, climate nonsense etc. However, I guess Romney, like Obama has never made a mistake. This is a character flaw.
    So, I ask again: Given his record, has Romney made a case to vote for him, other than claiming that he can beat Obama? I say still say NO, regardless of what the Establishment and MSNBC Morning Joe tells me. But wait, maybe Mitt’s publicity stunt last week should sway me; you know, where his surrogates rounded up 25 far- leftists from places like Mother Jones and the Huffington Post etc., for a telephone conference, without inviting even one conservative or non-partisan news sources. Gee, would a Conservative, secure with his beliefs, organize and make his case to a bunch of confused radical statists who NEVER would vote Republican under any circumstances? Ummmm, I suspect that’s something for great minds to ponder.
    We’ve heard Romney’s platitudes, but has he given us any ideas for how he will turn things around? Oh ya, doesn’t he have a 58 or 97 point plan pinned up somewhere in his campaign office? I’m sure, as we speak, his Mega-Colossal point plan is the rage, successfully turning on and firing up all of those “eager to support him” Independents and cross-over Democrats! Too bad he’s unable to articulate it to us dimwits. I don’t want to be unfair, maybe 23 televised debates is still a little too soon. You’re right, I’m confident the millions of former Obama voters will readily flock over and support Mitt, once he’s able lock them in a room for a few days, without distraction and explain to them his complex plan.
    Finally: How can you feel confident that Romney would feverously do what’s necessary to repeal ObamaCare? – when ObamaCare was designed by the same individuals, working for the same consulting firm that Romney hired to create RomneyCare in Massachusetts . It isn’t as if Mitt Romney still believes that the mandated, top-down Government controlled, one policy fits all healthcare program he implemented as Governor of Massachusetts was a good idea? OH MY GOD, HE DOES!

  14. ljm says:

    Where to start? I’ll start by pointed out a few ommisions in your Newt list
    Newt supported cap & trade.
    Newt supported ethanol subsidies
    Newt supported tarp and stimulus package. The assertion that Romney supported the stimulus is examined here:
    Newt sat on a couch with Pelosi in support of climate change legislation

  15. Ragspierre says:

    Our own Junior Bonior…assigned to these threads apparently as resident troll.
    How many lies have I demonstrate YOU telling ljm?

  16. AmandaFitz says:

    Woke up and turned on “Morning Joe” to hear Joe and John Heilman (I think it was him) talking about how, with Reagan and Clinton, you knew what they believed in- and could define their beliefs in six sentences.
    Heilman said that he couldn’t define “Obamaism” in six PARAGRAPHS- that there’s no “there” there.
    He, then, said that the same was true of Romney- but more so- that when you try to get your arms around Romney’s beliefs, it’s all air.
    I couldn’t agree more- Romney is no conservative. I don’t know if he even has any core beliefs other than his belief that he IS ENTITLED to be President.

  17. ljm says:

    As rags stands in the corner of the school yard answering his own questions..arguing with himself…ljm looks askance from the four square court and whispers..”I am rubber, you are glue, what bounces off me sticks to you…”

  18. Ragspierre says:

    “Newt is guilty of lies of omission for covering up his Fannie and Freddie investments.”
    Several lies in that one sentence.
    Newt no more “covered up” than did Romney, and both likely had no idea the mutual funds they KNEW they owned in turn owned Freddie & Fannie.
    But, hey, you WILL lie as you have in the past…!!! This we know.

  19. Drider says:

    ljm, I also noticed the omissions from the Newt column. They both have had some glaringly stupid stances.
    That being said, there is really no contest on historical “record”.
    Personally, as far as Mitt goes, I don’t believe he will roll back Obamacare being it is almost a mirrored vision of Romneycare and that is vital IMHO.

  20. ljm says:

    Reading really isn’t your strong suit is it? Try again and this time read the whole paragraph. Word to the wise—Evelyn Wood-style reading really isn’t a good practice for legal beagles.
    “Newt is guilty of lies of omission for covering up his Fannie and Freddie investments. Even I know that is a nonsense but it fits Newt’s self serving logic.”

  21. Drider says:

    I agree, Newt is guilty of the Fannie/Freddie lobbying, hence, the stupid stance line posted above.Then again, I won’t deny anyone a living.That would be another glaringly stupid stance on Newts part, complaining on how Mitt made his money.He almost lost me there to be honest but I keep gravitating back to what these two have actually done in the political arena.
    Mitt’s personal deftness in running a company is impressive enough,then again so is George Soro’s.
    It’s his governing as a man of the people that scares the hell out of me, it’s dismal.

  22. Ragspierre says:

    Yah, boy, that sure says what I said it said.
    If you intended some other meaning, you need to learn to WRITE.

  23. ljm says:

    No one can be certain that Mitt could rollback Obamacare. I believe he will do whatever he can to get that done. It may be a mute point if the supreme court finds the federal individual mandate unconstitutional. Thanks for the civil dialogue.

  24. ljm says:

    Maybe this will help:
    Newt is guilty of lies of omission for covering up his Fannie and Freddie investments. Even I know THAT IS NONSENSE but it fits Newt’s self serving logic.”

  25. Drider says:

    No problem on the civil dialogue ljm, as long as we can agree on “Anyone but Obama” I can be a normal, non rabid human being.
    At some point we are going to have to focus on the positives of both of these candidates compared to the current resident.I’m hoping it will be sooner rather than later.

  26. Greg says:

    George Soros says he wants Romney to be the Republican Candidate because there isn’t much difference between Romney and Obama. Jan 25, 2012

  27. Hope Change says:

    FYI – Newt testified AGAINST cap and trade on the same day that Al Gore testified for it. It’s on video on YouTube.
    When the contracts all say there will be no lobbying, and you continue to say Newt was lobbying, whose credibility do you think is hurt?
    Newt most certainly will sign the repeal of Obamacare. Newt is already working on how to get that done. WE will team up as Americans and elect enough constitutionalists to the House and Senate that they will agree beforehand to stay and pass the legislation so Newt can sign it on January 20, 2013, the afternoon of the inauguration.
    If Newt is the nominee, we are going to see Americans from all neighborhoods and walks of life team up together in agreement. We want our liberties and the Constitutional basis of our government RESTORED.
    THE GENIUS AND ENERGY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE is what will make this happen.
    And BTW, if you haven’t watched Newt’s Space Policy speech, it is inspiring and exciting. Imagine Americans doing big things again! Listen to the audience. They understand!
    OOOO, you may say, they are impractical dreamers — right, just like the impractical dreamers who ran the space program successfully in the 1960’s. Just like the impractical dreamers who built the railroads and the airports and the big ol’ jet airliners. Come on, people.
    We’re meant to have a much more dynamic, free, prosperous society! YOU are meant to have a more expansive feeling about your future. And Newt will provide the focal point so the American people can make it happen.
    This is the best thing since Reagan. Wake up, wake up!!
    Here’s the speech: “NEWT’S TOWN HALL MEETING ON SPACE POLICY” http://conservatives4newt.blogspot.com/2012/01/video-newt-gingrich-town-hall-meeting.html – January 25, 2012 – Cocoa, Florida – 33:42
    Here are 17 more speeches with CONVENIENT links: http://newtgingrich360.com/profiles/blogs/2012-victory-or-death-newt-s-speeches-links-to-17-speeches

  28. Alexandrina says:

    This was an iitreestnng article and good news for the country hopefully. I was surprised Mali was 90% Muslim that could make for an iitreestnng election dynamic for him.

  29. Zelia says:

    Ivan… still dtleeraepsy seeking relevance.If Im not relevant, how come Curt mentions me in his commentaries? ;-Got ya! (again).ReplyLike or Dislike: 0 2

  30. Auth says:

    Adam Smith ardaely tested positive for steroids. That’s why he’s been banned from American economics for 200 years.

  31. Ztp says:

    Posted on ah bie, kmamepuan meramal lo diragukan nih :D:Dmendingan lu cari keyword abang gorengan..di google lagi rame tuhabang gorengan jual tahu tempe.!!!!bakwan pisang ade, cireng ubi kue bola

  32. dami says:

    Min har mtiset mange av steinene. Gjør din det?Er rommet ditt stort forresten? Det ser kjempedigert ut på bildene