Wednesday, December 26, 2007
|
|
Oh, That Concord Monitor
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
7:48 PM
|
New Hampshire's Concord Monitor is a liberal paper, and it blasted Romney a few days back, and the McCainics loved it. National Review's Byron York posted this earlier today:
After the extraordinary beating it took from the Concord, N.H. Monitor – which a few days ago went out of its way to publish an anti-endorsement of Mitt Romney – the Romney campaign is sending around an email pointing out that the Monitor took some whacks at Ronald Reagan in 1980. From the paper on February 21, 1980:
Ronald Reagan – The former California governor is simply too old (69), too doctrinaire, too inexperienced in the intricacies of the federal government. We gravely question his capability to withstand the daily physical and emotional battering that the nation's chief executive must endure.
Conservatives in Iowa, New Hampshire and beyond are much more likely to listen to Rush, National Review etc than to liberal newspapers or even Robert Novak's "insiders" whom the columnist will write tomorrow want McCain. National Review's editors wrote:
Our guiding principle has always been to select the most conservative viable candidate. In our judgment, that candidate is Mitt Romney. Unlike some other candidates in the race, Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest.
|
|
The Union Leader, in Manchester, is influential in that city and the north country. In the past it has been furiously, wildly conservative, and its editorial page is much milder than the days, of say, Edmund Muskie railing against the paper’s attacks on his wife in the snow.“The editorial page has come mainstream quite a bit, but everybody in New Hampshire knows it, and they know what they’re getting... That ain’t that lefty rag in Concord.” This paper endorsed McCain.
The Fosters Daily Democrat is “interesting and influential – it’s a Republican paper, but it’s not read as an ideological paper. It’s not like reading National Review.” It’s sister paper is Laconia Citizen. They endorsed Rudy Giuliani.
The two biggest papers in neighboring Massachusetts have considerable penetration in the Granite State, with differing levels and styles of influence. The Globe is probably read as much as any other paper in the state, but mostly for its encyclopedic coverage of Boston sports teams. The Herald, the more conservative paper out of Boston, is probably read more cover to cover, because its articles are shorter, punchier, and funnier columnists. It, too, is often picked up just for the sports coverage.
The point of all this is that none of them have endorsed Romney, and some, in fact, seem to be in a contest to see who can criticize him the most.
Today's Union Leader: "THERE IS A reason Mitt Romney has not received a single newspaper endorsement in New Hampshire. It's the same reason his poll numbers are dropping. He has not been able to convince the people of this state that he's the conservative he says he is."
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2Y1MmU2MmU5 NzBiYTlkOTg2M2Q1YTA2OTEyNTc5N2I=
|
|
|
With a serious upper classman tutor. If it doesn't work, there's always Remedial Bonehead English 99. We'll hep ya, Boy-yo. |
|
For all you GOP voters, and all you supposed Conservatives.
Mitt is NOT a true Conservative.
Mike is NOT a true Conservative.
Rudy is NOT a true Conservative.
John is NOT a true Conservative.
The only true Conservative of the top tier candidates is Fred Thompson.
Do you really want any of the left-leaning candidates leading this country in a time of global instability? I pray to God you don't! |
|
|
|
...making allegations that conservatives were aligned with the KKK.
Broberta forgets that the most exalted of Democrat Senators, Robert Byrd, held high position within the KKK. Byrd is third in line to the presidency---hoisted there by his democrat party.
Broberta, she forgets that Lester Maddox was a democrat party-policy-segregationist, early in the civil rights movement.
Broberta forgets that George Wallace was a segregationist----geesh, anyone starting to get the notion that Broberta is not really "forgetting" but merely doing her best to rewrite history, as I point out on another thread here---while Broberta tries to rewrite history as it pertains to Bill Clinton?
Broberta conveniently eschews the FACT that Dixiecrats were democrats---and their segregationist policies had nothing to do with conservative policies!!!
Broberta would also have you believe that "communal collectivist", Charles Manson was a "conservative--hahahahaha!
Broberta would love to convince you that "environmentalist" unibomber, Ted Kaczynski was a "conservative"--hahahahahahahahahaha!
Jim Crow was indeed a DEMOCRAT!
The KKK was a splinter group of the Democrat Party! Broberta, in her infinite wisdom "forgets" all of this----Or, simply chooses not to remember---but worse, tries to CHANGE history altogether.
What a bimbo! |
|
|
While Mc Cain is a good 2nd chice the true conservative is Fred Thompson.He can bring unity to the Repbublican Pary,security to our country,and restore the values we as Americans treasure.No one deserves to die for trying to make their country a better place to live.The terrorists are rejoiceing today.We need a man like Fred to continue the war on terrorism.God bless America and God bless our President.Ya know a little prayer couldn't hurt right now. |
|
You’re right that conservative voters are sensibly not going to allow left-wing media to dictate their votes to them. But I think you overrate the impact that even conservative commentators have over the GOP/conservative electorate as well.
When you say things such as, “Conservatives in Iowa, New Hampshire and beyond are much more likely to listen to Rush, National Review etc than to liberal newspapers…” – and you’ve said many other similar things – you’re basically implying that there’s some vast reservoir of passive, undecided, easily led conservative voters out there ready to be directed in the proper direction by Limbaugh, NR, etc.
We expect that kind of attitude from the left, where it’s common to pretend to believe that that are conservative equivalents to vote-deliverers like Sharpton (it’s especially common of course to pretend to believe that evangelicals are easily led. As you’re finding out to your frustration, like other conservatives and indeed like most voters, evangelicals have an annoying habit of making their own unpredictable choices).
But as a conservative speaking to conservatives about conservatives, maybe you should give this line a rest. Most of us at least think we’re perfectly capable of deciding for ourselves whom to vote for, and it may not always be in lockstep with Limbaugh’s or Lowry’s diktats. |
|
Alot of swill being thrown around here by the anti-Mitts of all stripes. Makes me feel even better about the man. Someone--Clarity or Ted, perhaps--made a good point about the so called 'flips'. Changes of views have all been to the right side. Jeez, I love it when that happens.
The MLK thing is bogus. Wish to God that Mitt hadn't responded in the goofy way he did, but, "Saw my Dad march..." is just dandy in context. As In metaphor. Good Grief. Some Frosh English 101 could be used by the 'finding flys**t in the bottom of the sugar bowel' crowd!
Mitt+Condi'08! (1)
Mitt+Hotty...errr..Palin'08! (2) |
|
Based upon who has the best organization on the ground (every time this is what determines the Iowa winner), by far, Romney will win Iowa.
Romney wins Iowa and then NH easily. He goes on to win all 6 early contests:
Iowa (tied)
NH (leading)
SC (striking distance)
Michigan (leading)
Nevada (leading)
Florida (striking distance)
|
|
Look who they have written the MOST negative press releases about (by far) - Romney.
Look who their papers go out of their way to "anti-endorse" - Romney.
Look who the MSM tries to make Huckabee the Golden Child, and then when that fades, they try to make McCain the Golden Child. Who are the trying to beat? - Romney. |
|
|
All the CONSERVATIVES want Romney. As a conservative, what message does this send to me? |
|
A Foreign Policy based on the national interest??? And what explains GWB's lowest ever poll numbers, national interest in his foreign policy?
Romney forcefully aligned himself with GW's foreign policy and criticized Huckabee for differing with the administration's bunker mentality.
Romney say's he pro-life but his record speaks otherwise, with in his support for choice and his selection of liberal judges. He's only changed his tune as of this campaign for president.
The Huckasurge continues check out the latest in Oklahoma, according to FOX News...
Huckabee 29%
McCain 17%
Giluiani 11 %
Romney 9%
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id= 974
|
|
|
Hmmmmm.......let's see, a simultaneous law and business degree with honors from Harvard, a 38-year marriage with children who adore him, saving the 2002 Winter Olympics, Bain Capitol genius, and 250 mil in the bank. Oh, and let's not forget the amazing energy and work ethic of this candidate. The choice is so obvious that people are trying to make it hard. Go MITT!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
and I wouldn't vote for McCain. MikeS it isn't JUST immigration that McCain is poor on. Any straight thinking conservative should still to this day be furious over the trampling he did to our First Amendment rights. Then you move on to the Gang of 14, the Kennedy bill, ad nauseum, there are so many things that he is wrong on for my party. I'm even a Navy guy and I thoroughly respect the man and his service but I don't want him as my President.
Lightpath all of Romney's "flops" have been over to OUR side and so I don't know why that bothers you and every other conservative? These also date back to '03 when these happened and he had to make a decision on choice. I think that everyone is overlooking his great executive experience that we definitely need. The others don't have it and frankly they ALL are DC insiders or have been in politics too long for my liking. I like a guy that has more experience knowing how to solve problems than TALK about them.
GO MITT!!!
GO NAVY!!! |
|
http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/romney/2007/12/26/59790.html |
|
"Look at what the lefty liberals are saying on the DailyKos today:"
Please, Dan, please. If you want to see who the Left is rooting for, check the media. Not the anonymous nutters in the DailyKos forums. Give us a break.
First the media was pushing Huckabee until his obvious lack of qualifications became apparent. Then they turned on him like they did Dean. Now they are pushing McCain. Has the media ever shined a favorable light on Mitt Romney? No.
Romney is the one they fear. Period. And the Lefties who loiter on Hugh Hewitt's blog hate Romney too. Do the math. |
|
|
McCain is so willing to comprimise on other issues just a judge nominations and immigration, but not on tax cuts. He voted against the tax cuts and used spending as an excuse. If he gets things done because he works with both sides the isle, it seems he compromises in one direction, to the left! |
|
|
Is it true that Chuck Todd's wife works for McCain? How can you be the Political Director for MSNBC and have this obvious bais? Maybe that explains his comments to propel McCain into NH with a third place finish!!! |
|
|
His position on taxes is the same now as it always has been. He opposed the Bush tax cuts because they weren't tied to any spending reductions. He would have voted for the Bush tax cuts if they had been... That is the position of a true conservative. He has recently proposed further tax cuts that are tied to spending cuts. |
|
|
|
"Romney has made some mistakes in saying he is a life time hunter and he saw his father march with MLK. The critics have picked out a few words in hundreds of speeches to label him as a phoney."
Uh, Bryan...try a few thousand words. In fact, it seems just about everyday Romney proves himself to be a pathological and habitual liar. You forgot....
Abortion flops
Stem-cell flops
Tax flops
Crime Law flops
On and on it goes. It's not just a few things, its a ton of them. |
|
...I am no Mitt supporter at this time. Frankly, I find all of this early campaigning boorish at best.
That said, I find this erbiage fom the Concord Monitor both fascinating and bowel-moving.
I love that the authorship of the Reagan comments found it dramatic enough to employ the word, "GRAVEN". Wow, how incredibly dramatic to have described this man in such fashion in 1980----wishful thinking.
It occurs to me that this Illinois state representative, Barack Obama, has enough political experience to fit into a thimble, vis a vis Ronald Reagan's experience in 1980.
Would the Concord Monitor mention this? Not on your life.
Bully for you, Mitt Romney, for providing ths perspective, this comparison, this anecdotal evidence of a, Vast-Left-Wing-Media. |
|
Especially in light of Romney's comments about Reagan in the Romney-Kennedy Senate debate in 1994.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI at 2:32
Romney says "Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
Sounds like Romney didn't support Ronald Reagen then either... yet another instance of Romney criticizing someone else for taking the same position he did. Classic Willard Mitt Romney. |
|
..just like Limbaugh, Hannity, LaBarber, Malkin and the NRO. These guys aren't real journalists and are at best psuedo-pundits. They are conservative cartoons, pundits with a personal axe to grind, or they are just bucking for a seat at the table to make some noise...al la Republican versions of Al Sharpton.
These guys do little to no heavy lifting, pick and choose to "analyze" the stories that real journailsts write, and their claim to fame is taking down a couple of phony Bush documents and exposing Kerry's purple hearts as fraud.
As a conservative who has never voted Democrat in my life, I am simply astounding at how these "media" elites are beside themselves because many lemmings aren't marching to the Piper's tune. And you know why? The lemmings just happen to be a bit smarter and wiser these days.
McCain is not my guy. But Hugh's shrill Huckabee-eque cries show just how drunk he has become with Romney's swill and how he will say anything to get Mitt elected show that even the so-called new media is really no different than the old. |
|
Mitt Romney would get absolutely MAULED by Hill-Dawg. Democrats are rooting for Mitt Romney, because they believe he would be the easiest for them to beat.
Don't believe me? Look at what the lefty liberals are saying on the DailyKos today:
"Romney is our dream candidate."
"I kinda wish they wouldn't trash him [Romney] so, as I believe he is the easiest candidate to beat."
"In terms of electability in the general election, I think McCain and Rudy are potentially electable, and the other four will be defeated soundly."
"Mitt Romney, on the other hand ... if John Kerry faced this clown, he'd have picked up 40 states."
"Romney would be the easiest to defeat."
"McCain could win. The experience factor alone could do it. Not a scenario I like."
"Yes, I know plenty of Dems would love to have him [Romney] as a weak opponent."
"He [Romney] has no chance of being President of the United States."
|
|
|
Hugh should be ashamed of himself, but I know that he does not care. If he really wants a Conservative to sit in the WH he should be supporting the only true Conservative in the race. And that would be Fred Thompson! |
|
|
Romney has made some mistakes in saying he is a life time hunter and he saw his father march with MLK. The critics have picked out a few words in hundreds of speeches to label him as a phoney. Nobody is covering the fact that Huckabee lied about having a theology degree. A theology degree is a masters degree in religion. He has a BA in religion. Not one word from the media on that. McCain is all over the map on his tax positions and his imigration issues. Little coverage of that. Even Chris Mathews admitted on the Morning Joe this morning that he thinks there is a left wing conspiracy. Give me a break. Chuck Todd let it slip on Hardball tonight when he said, "you can feel it in the media. McCain knows that if can place third in Iowa, we will propel him into NH." What did he mean by that??? Romney is most qualified by a long shot! |
|
John McCain threw away ALL respect he had coming to him as an authentic American hero through his actions as a Senator. Can you say "Keating Five"? McCain/Feingold? "Gang of 14"? McCain/Kennedy? Stabbing President Bush in the back and kissing up to the Democrats OVER and OVER and OVER again? Not to mention his hair-trigger temper. The man is unworthy to be a Senator, much less President of the United States.
One only hopes that a just God will justly reward those who are serially slandering Governor Romney! |
|
|
Let's check in with each other in about 6 weeks and see who was right and who was wrong re Romney. |
|
Unfortunately for the vanity campaign, Ted, "all you folks" includes the vast majority of GOP members voting in the primaries.
Not to worry, after the debacle, you can still keep the Romney shrine in your closet. And use caps lock to your heart's content.
+ + + |
|
"McCainiac", eh, Hugh?
Here are some other terms to essay in future journalistic gems.
* Rombots
* Sock Mittens
* Romnoids
* Mittenistas
+ + + |
|
For all you folks who deem that Romney has no veracity, get real. You don't succeed in business, etc., without trust. The guy's an official of some kind in his Church, for Gods sake. Sounds to me, this is nothing but nit (or Mitt)-picking and looking for crumbs which confirms there's nothing more available against Romney. And by the way Reagan was a Democrat and had liberal views BEFORE he made a switch (far greater than Romney ever made) to GOP.
Bottom line, Romney appears so good, it appears that he's too good to be true. Just perhaps it IS true. And when he selects his PERFECT RUNNING MATE (and I mean PERFECT), Alaska Gov. Palin -- wowwowwowweeeee!!!!!! |
|
Don't sweat it, MikeS, LeMitt is LeToast. It's just a vanity campaign with eschatological overtones, nothing serious.
Romney's an empty shirt.
To quote NRO quoted by Hugh above, "Romney is a full-spectrum conservative". He's all the colors of the rainbow, whatever it takes to try to get elected. You want pro-abortion? You got it. Raised taxes? You got it. Great hair? You got it.
+ + + |
|
Hugh used the term "McCainiac"? Wheee...
+ + + |
|
Are we really going to nominate Romney? Sigh...
Are we really going to reject McCain, our best candidate because of immigration, when none of the other guys are willing to fix this problem, either? Sigh...
If you nativists wackos get your way, you'll have destroyed not only the finest man we've had in a generation but the Republican party itself. You won't vote for McCain because of amnesty? Don't you get that neither Romney or Hugh or any of that crowd gives a crap about this issue? They hate McCain because he challenges the elite ruling party of the GOP. Romney is a product of that elite.
I just can't believe this is happening. When I read posts like that idiot Ted, I want to throw up. Romney and the gov of Alaska will "sweep the nation"? Who is he kidding. Romney could run against Satan in the general (and he just might) and he still would lose. People will vote for evil before they vote for nothing. Romney is nothing. |
|
|
I think the Concord Monitor piece was fatal to Mitt. We'll see. The article pointed out precisely why Mitt is not the one: he changed all his values positions just to try and win the Republican primaries as "the most conservative." Exactly the wrong move. Compared to him, McCain may look old, but sincere, and he may win the NH primary. |
|
trying to compare Romney to Reagan?
PuuuuLeeeease !!!
this is hilarious
dirL |
|
That's the simple truth. Ronaldus Magnus had a thick skin, wonderful humor, a balanced ego, a true fire for core beliefs. He tended to not take things personally. Neither--sometimes to my frustration--does President Bush. Every member of the US Senate knows McCain's hot temper, over reactiveness, self-centeredness, ability to step on 'friends faces' to make nice with Teddy & Russ.
For public attention, he's a Heat Seeking Missle. The very unsafest ground is between John McCain and a microphone and/or camera. It is ALWAYS about McCain. This sound like somebody married to Lady MacClinton? John has hundreds of times more integrity, but his "wiring" is eerily similar.
NOT suited for the Presidency. Period. |
|
|
McCain really has Romney and his minions on their heels! |
|
|
You left out Giuliani, Mr. Sanctuary City himself. |
|
|
Will announce its endorsements Sunday. They have already ruled out Giuliani, Huckabee, Hunter and Thompson due to their being unwilling or unable to meet with the editorial board. I predict they won't endorse Ron Paul. Leaves only McCain and Romney. Nashua is on the MA border right next to MA-5 which almost went GOP over illegal immigration. Could go Romney. The Nashua area is more highly populated either than Manchester or Concord. It's also where I was born and grew up. |
|
Bottom LINE
the Democrats, McCain, Huckabee are PRO illegal Aliens and want all of Mexico and Central America to take over this country:
PRO ILLEGALS is death and destruction to the USA which will look like MEXICO if democrats or McCain or Huckabee are President
Democrats, McCain, Huckabee need to go run for
President of MEXICO |
|
Hugh likes Romney and people that dont like it.
|
|
|
Will you whine if Romney wins? |
|
|
Hugh - will you cry when Romney is forced to drop out? |
|
|
|