Monday, December 10, 2007
|
|
Pro-Romney Bloggers Push Negative Huck Narrative
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
4:55 PM
|
As a senior aide to Sam Brownback, Rob Wasinger knows first-hand what it's like to challenge Mitt Romney from the Right.
Though Brownback's campaign never caught fire, his credentials as a social conservative leader from the Mid West meant he was an early Romney rival. Operatives on both sides have admitted to me that the two campaigns simply didn't get along, and that they often traded barbs on the trail. (In the past, I've written about the contentious rivalry between Brownback and Romney.)
In a phone interview with me today, Wasinger echoed what I've heard other operatives say to me off the record -- that he believes Romney's campaign is behind many of the recent attacks on Mike Huckabee:
"They've got a scorched-earth strategy, and it's not surprising they are now going after Huckabee," Wasinger told me.
According to Wasinger, the Romney campaign is a disciplined and efficient operation that effectively uses blogs and opinion leaders to disseminate negative information regarding Romney's opponents:
"They roll out these surrogates to attack other candidates ... They are particularly sensitive to anyone who questions Mitt's conversion," he tells me.
Unlike ever before, candidates on both sides are utilizing bloggers and surrogates to spread their message. During a typical GOP debate, my blackberry is deluged with press releases, attacks, and up-to-the-minute rebuttals from the candidates. But while campaigns use the new media to spread their positive message, the medium is perhaps even better at advancing a negative narrative.
I can personally attest to the fact that all the major Republican campaigns, from time to time, leak negative stories to bloggers. I suspect this is true of the other side, too. Why do bloggers often bite? Sometimes because they already like the candidate, but often it's because it's a win/win: The campaign gets an attack without their finger prints on it, and the blogger gets some juicy information that (hopefully) nobody else in the world has ...
And Romney's team has clearly been at the top of their game, cultivating some of the best bloggers in the nation to help advance their message. On a large scale, Romney communications strategist Matt Roades is famously close to Matt Drudge -- that's obviously the nuclear option. But Romney has other blog allies, including MyManMitt, and these bloggers have obviously ratcheted up attacks on Huckabee in recent days.
Romney Communications Director Kevin Madden says the Romney campaign has focused on a positive message, but acknowledges the Romney campaign isn't afraid to show a sharp distinction between the candidates: "We won't hesitate to draw contrasts with other campaigns. Where there are big differences on big issues, it is important to inform the voter on those differences," he tells me.
Update: Jennifer Ruben has a post up about Romney's latest negative ad.
|
|
"Charles Krauthammer made the point very well that if Huckabee's ads about how his Christian faith defines him had been run against Joe Lieberman, they'd have been denounced for bigotry. Apparently Mormons are the last minority it's still OK to deny equal rights to. The sly implication that the other candidates in the race aren't as good Christians as Gov. Huckabee was pretty obvious. "-Umm...no no and no quit repeating every thing you hear you ignorant blind follower the fact of the matter is that Huckabee had been a Christian leader and Romney had not. Last time I checked Baptists were by definition christians and Huckabee was a baptist leader. Whether this should be included in campaign information or not is questionable. The ad itself though was entirely about Huckabee's credentials and had nothing to do with Romney to imply otherewise is just wrong.
As for Lewis, well there have been some rather nasty comments made about Huckabee by bloggers which I strongly disagree with(http://myrandomthoughts.townhall.com/Default.aspx) but most of the negative news stories(Dumont, spending ethics, aids views etc...) Have come from the mainstream media not bloggers.
I do hope people will read my comments since I think that there probably is a good chance that Townhall.com is censoring paid bloggers comments on the Huckabee-Romney debacle. |
|
|
|
From the first mention of Mitt Romney as a candidate, I've heard so-called Christians calling talk radio to say they could never vote for him because he's a Mormon and "Mormons aren't Christians." The argument behind that is too arcane to have originated with people with no theological training. If you have to go back to a Catholic council to find some doctrine to differentiate the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from your own protestant sect, I'd say you're really stretching. That means that it originates with ministers who are supposed to be Christ's disciples.
Charles Krauthammer made the point very well that if Huckabee's ads about how his Christian faith defines him had been run against Joe Lieberman, they'd have been denounced for bigotry. Apparently Mormons are the last minority it's still OK to deny equal rights to. The sly implication that the other candidates in the race aren't as good Christians as Gov. Huckabee was pretty obvious.
Huckabee has gotten attention because of his success in the polls. If he couldn't stand scrutiny, he shouldn't be in the race. Anyone who's religious these days will get hammered by the media. They don't need their fellow Republicans to help.
On the other hand, Huckabee supporters shouldn't be whining that his claims are being tested. It's just part of being up in the polls. We all know what Harry Truman said about the heat in the kitchen. |
|
As far as I can tell, Huck is getting savaged by the whole conservative blogging universe.
I had no idea Mitt was so powerful - maybe he SHOULD be President! |
|
|
|
If there's a scorched earth strategy going on against Huckabee, well the guy has it coming.
I have been wondering when people would start judging Huckabee on his qualifications and policies (if he can figure out what they are) rather than just on his smile and his shoeshine. |
|
"The funny thing is
Brownback is actually conservative, while Huck is not. It must eat Brownback up. "
True Brownback is a lot more of a conservative than Huckabee, but Brownback is an "erase the borders" guy on immigration just like Huckabee.
|
|
And Kaus has some interesting things to say about Giuliani's immigration plan. (which lead to the conclusion it is fraudulent)
It seemed pretty obvious to me that Giuliani was blowing smoke on illegal immigration.
He talks about emphasizing border enforcement. You cannot enforce the border unless you also enforce the interior- i.e. check legal status of job applicants, cut off public services to illegals, etc.
And even on border enforcement, Giuliani supports the "virtual fence" which is the favorite tool of those who DO NOT want the border enforced, because they know it is easy for a President to render a virtual fence impotent, while it is a little harder for a President to make it easy for illegals to get through a REAL fence.
Giuliani and Huckabee- two phonies on illegal immigration. |
|
Check out what Mickey Kaus has to say about Huckabee on immigration (kausfiles.com)
It appears that Huckabee just had someone throw together an enforcement oriented plan, without Huckabee even knowing what is in the "Huckabee plan".
(Since apparently Huckabee was simultaneously pitching the Pence plan which is incompatible with the "Huckabee plan" that Huckabee apparently is not familiar with.
This guy is so not ready for prime time.
I look forward to seeing his house of cards topple as people start to go beyond his smile and shoeshine and try to figure out what he stands for. |
|
|
|
Huckabee is not honest or sincere. Romney has changed his postion on a few things over the last 10 years but he at least has the courage to come out and say I changed my mind on this issue as I learned more about it. Huckabee just lies about his past and because he was a preacher people believe it. Before you vote for him think about these FACTS:
He increased spending and taxes in AR
He campaigned against republicans
He not only let many violent criminals out he pushed to do away with the 70% law even for violent criminals.
He destroyed the republican party in AR
In 1999 he accepted on average over $300 a day in gifts!
He did tell our DMV to give illegals driver licenses.
He broke his no tax increases pledge and then ridiculed people who called him out on it.
He has a record that we as conservatives can not trust and will say anything including lies to get elected. |
|
I like Baptists. In fact, my choice for POTUS, Duncan Hunter, is a good Baptist man of faith. However, I wouldn't want a Baptist preacher for POTUS.
I like for a President to be someone who has had to work for a living in the REAL WORLD. I like for the President to be someone who has done something significant such as be a soldier (e.g. Duncan Hunter, John McCain), be a professional (e.g. Attorney Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani; Doctor Ron Paul), or be a business leader (e.g. Mitt Romney).
I realize they have their place in society, but I have never been impressed with paid religious ministers. They must have the cushiest, most sheltered life, yet they seem to succumb to the sins of the flesh at least as often as those they preach to. They don't have to worry about how to live the teachings of Jesus while trying to make a living like the rest of us. They have the nerve to profit financially from sharing the word of God (especially considering that Jesus Himself never took a dime for it when He walked the earth).
Granted, Huckabee has been a Governor, but he wouldn't have been a Governor if he had been a minister of a non-fundamentalist denomination, such as Catholic, or Episcopalian, or Presbyterian. The credentials that got him elected in Arkansas were largely those of being a Baptist preacher. That sells well to Arkansas and in other parts of the Bible belt, but not to the rest of the country.
Preacher/Governor Huckabee has never made a living except by telling other people the way that they should live their lives. He has never had an income except by passing a collection plate or sending a tax bill to your home. He has made his way in the world by guilting people into fulfilling their Christian and civic duty by coughing up the cash one way or another. |
|
I like Baptists. In fact, my choice for POTUS, Duncan Hunter, is a good Baptist man of faith. However, I wouldn't want a Baptist preacher for POTUS.
I like for a President to be someone who has had to work for a living in the REAL WORLD. I like for the President to be someone who has done something significant such as be a soldier (e.g. Duncan Hunter, John McCain), be a professional (e.g. Attorney Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani; Doctor Ron Paul), or be a business leader (e.g. Mitt Romney).
I realize they have their place in society, but I have never been impressed with paid religious ministers. They must have the cushiest, most sheltered life, yet they seem to succumb to the sins of the flesh at least as often as those they preach to. They don't have to worry about how to live the teachings of Jesus while trying to make a living like the rest of us. They have the nerve to profit financially from sharing the word of God (especially considering that Jesus Himself never took a dinme for it when He walked the earth).
Granted, Huckabee has been a Governor, but he wouldn't have been a Governor if he had been a minister of a non-fundamentalist denomination, such as Catholic, or Episcopalian, or Presbyterian. The credentials that got him elected in Arkansas were largely those of being a Baptist preacher. That sells well to Arkansas and in other parts of the Bible belt, but not to the rest of the country.
Preacher/Governor Huckabee has never made a living except by telling other people the way that they should live their lives. He has never had an income except by passing a collection plate or sending a tax bill to your home. He has made his way in the world by guilting people into fulfilling their Christian and civic duty by coughing up the cash one way or another. |
|
just not the secretive nature of their religion.
"TRUE" CHRISTIANITY IS THE MOST OPEN NON_SECRETIVE RELIGION THERE IS_ NOTHING TO HIDE- OUR SAVIOUR DIED IN THE OPEN AMONG TWO CRIMINALS- THERE ARE NO SECRET RITES OF PASSAGE
Just simply "CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD AND YOU WILL BE SAVED"- BOOK OF ROMANS 10:9
IT'S THAT SIMPLE. NO APPEAL TO PRIDE. NO LEVELS. NO CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.
THE GROUND IS LEVEL AT THE FOOT OF THE CROSS.
COME ONE COME ALL-THE PATRIOT, THE PROSTITUTE, THE CONDEMNED CRIMINAL- ARE ALL THERE WRITTEN IN THAT FINAL SCENE...REALIZING THE SAVIOUR...JESUS, GOD IN THE FLESH, CRUCIFIED FOR OUR SINS-ALONE WORTHY OF ALL WORSHIP AND ADORATION. REVELATIONS 4.
|
|
run their "CULT" secretively distributing NONSENSE, and quotes taken out of context.
It is one thing for Bloggers(like me) to attack Huck on religion but another for it to be sanctioned by the Romney staff! CAN"T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
THE GLOVES ARE OFF!
GO YOUTUBE.com-SEE "DNA & THE BOOK OF MORMON"-(which totally EXPOSES the founding father as a fraud from the mouths of MORMON SCIENTIST's THEMSELVES!!!)
And what about the archeological evidence for the people and cities they claimed were in the Americas(THERE IS NONE)--Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon corrects the Bible- GO SEE "The Bible AND THE bOOK OF mORMON" TOO- BOTH ARE EYE OPENING.
|
|
Of all the hundreds of articles that have been written on the subject, not one has done much more than casually mention or discuss the "evangelical" distaste for Mormonism.
I'd love it if one of these reporters actually gets up from their computer and visits one of the thousands of baptist, pentacostal and other churches scattered across the country? I think it would be helpful to hear some reporting on the time and energy these preachers spend "innoculating" their flocks from the clean cut young men in white shirts and ties who will inevitably knock on their doors and offer them a free copy of the book of mormon?
It is sad that our national discourse in such a crucial election is being so heavily influenced by the after effects of a decades-long religious marketing competition between Mormons and those evangelicals who don't proselyte as aggressively.
Story after story points out the conflict between mormon theology and traditional evangelical interpretations of Christianity and then simply lists the same things that any simple google search will uncover.
While legitimate differences do exist between Mormonism and Evangelical Doctrines, those who really care can discuss them. In the meantime, there is too much misinformation and plain untruth about mormon doctrine spread by these churches anti-mormon marketing/protection efforts.
How about a story that looks at the source of why these differences are so important to so many otherwise good people who attend evangelical churches? How about a story that reports on how much time and money these churches and groups spend preaching against somebody else's religion?
|
|
|
|
http://fraud-corruption-mnat.townhall.com/Default.aspx
anyone can email us at laserhaas@msn.com
Bain, Stage Stores, EToys, Learning Company, KB.
Fraud left and right and "nolle prosequi" before he is President, what do you think will happen after. |
|
All those who seek Romney, you should be careful what you ask for.
The Dept of Justice has refused to prosecute $300 million in Fraud that waw accomplished by confessed acts of Perjury. Law firm of Traub Bonacquist (now disbanded and closed) and Law firm of Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel (MNAT).
MNAT and TBF confessed to supplying multiple, some even intentionally left to decieve the court in the eToys bankruptcy case.
Bush's Dept of Justice, instead of prosecuting them, stated it is no case, no investigation, no charges will be filed. Then the US Trustee Director resigned, the Asst US Trustee resigned and Debra Yang of the Corp Fraud Task forced resigned.
Our proof of the crimes is Court docket records. The US Trustee states that we do not have the Courts permission to tell the court about the fraud. Now the US Trustee's are at the 3rd Circuit defending the right to have TBF and MNAT ABOVE the LAW and immune from prosecution.
All the attorneys worked for Bain and their related companies and then went to work for eToys Bankruptcy and sold the assets to Bain. This is Collusion and conspiracy to do fraud. That was accomplished, remember, by Perjury.
Bain and Michael Glazer paid themselves $100 million cash and then filed Bankruptcy again as KB. MNAT represents Bain in the KB Toys bankruptcy. (no need to hide it anymore as we exposed it and the Dept of Justice gave them immunity).
Now Colm F Connolly the Delaware US Attorney is nominated for Delaware Dist Ct Judge. His resume comes into view and guess what.
Colm F Connolly, who's office refused to prosecute the matter, refused to prosecute or investigate MNAT, is now discovered that Connolly was a partner at MNAT in 2001 when the fraud and perjury occurred.
http://fraud-corruption-mnat.townhall.com/Default.aspx
|
|
The goal was fan the flames of religious tension and then stifle the free speech of bloggers, merely, to support McCain--stifle free speech in campaigns where have I heard that before?
A good blog post would look at the public service records of the candidates and their current rhetoric. I really love the fictionalizing of "consistency" from rants like Jennifer Rubin. Matt you should look at the current "consistency" of the candidates.
Jennifer is upset because Romney, gasp, governed as a Republican. And then, get this, he breaks the mold of McCain and Giuliani and his Presidential rhetoric matches his Governor's record on abortion, taxes and immigration.
|
|
Gays in the military: Anderson Cooper’s question involved a direct quote from Romney, “I look forward to a day when gays and lesbians can serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military.” Romney did not say the same thing the others said at first. First of all, he didn’t deny that position nor did he retract. Second, he gave a weak excuse about being in the middle of a war. After that he backtracked and said he was wrong about don’t ask don’t tell. All the other candidates said the matter was merely about unit cohesion in the military. That’s the difference and it is fair to point that out.
On torture, the point was that Romney didn’t answer the question at all. Instead, he gave his trademark canned response about how he’d form a super intergalactic committee on the subject.
Lastly, on Iran, it isn’t about what I think in regards to Iran, but Romney’s poor response to that question. Sure, advisors would be crucial in a state of emergency or in a critical decision of whether or not to attack another country. But Romney didn’t say advisors, he said attorneys… that’s quite a difference. Is he more concerned about how the matter would play out legally than ethically? I know this can be seen as petty and “gotcha” but it’s a serious gaff on his part to say such a thing in a presidential debate. |
|
No I was referring to Bush’s first term when compassionate conservatism was alive and well and federal spending increased by 33%. Let’s see here there’s Medicare expansion, no child left behind, discretionary spending. This was all on Bush’s watch and all through his influence. Only after waffling in the second term and the elimination of his rubber stamp in Congress did he start using his veto and making cuts. But this isn’t a debate about Bush.
Reagan signed that law in the late 60’s and quickly recanted on it. Perhaps, “gradual” and “conversion” weren’t the appropriate words for that, as he wasn’t really pro-choice to begin with. Romney on the other hand was proudly pro-choice until 2004, right after President Bush was reelected. One could say that this sudden change of heart was just a matter of timing, but that still doesn’t change the fact that a guy becoming pro-life over stem cells isn’t very convincing. How long has the debate gone on in America? As governor, I’m sure he ran across a photo or two of an aborted baby.
Regarding Romney’s “openness”, scroll up and look again. I said “opposing ideas” not “new ideas.” Or was your beef with the “compromisingly” part? Yes, that must have been what struck a nerve. Romney may not be afraid to face other opinions, but he sure isn’t hesitant to embrace them either. What is the difference between pro-choice and multiple-choice again? |
|
ACLU: 7% (indicates very conservative)
American Conservative Union: 92%
Americans for Better Immigration: A+
Americans for Tax Reform: 88.5%
Campaign for Working Families: 100%
Christian Coalition: 100%
Concerned Women for America: 100%
Eagle Forum: 100%
Family Research Council: 100%
Federation for American Immigration Reform: 100%
Gun Owners of America: A
NARAL: 0% (indicates a pro-life record)
National Federation of Independent Business: 100%
National Rifle Association: A+
National Right to Life Committee: 100%
National Tax Limitation Committee: A
National Taxpayers Union: B
http://www.gohunter08.com
|
|
Romeny and Huck are both conservative wannabees. The media has ne a great job at exposing all of the flip flops ROmney has had.
To vote in Romney would mean the electorate gets the person they deserve. I don't deserve him, though. |
|
From the very beginning I loved watching Huck in debates and stuff -- he may be the only person smoother than Romney up there. But then I started listening to him and he doesn't answer questions. He just deflects them with jokes and smooth comments. I love how Mitt actually throws meat out to intellectuals and the educated. Mitt's education wasn't a school of theology, it was law and business degrees from Harvard.
We need a lot of help when it comes to strategizing a war, fixing an economy, strengthening families, and securing the border. Mitt has a proven record that he knows how to fix things and my vote is to give him a chance to show us what he can do.
|
|
|
Mitt Romney is likely a decent guy. I have no doubt he is very bright, and just because he was born wealthy doesn't mean he didn't work hard, in school and in business. I agree that a willingness to hear differ viewpoints before making decisions is a good thing, and something Mr. Bush would have benefited from. Unfortunately, it seems that Mr. Romney is more than willing to discard his principles for a politically more advantageous position. He has done it over and over again, in my estimation. That's why he won't get my vote. |
|
(Not that anyone here is going to change their minds anyway...)
I could accept a conversion on one issue. I could. But Mitt's conversion on life came at a suspiciously expedient time, and occurred in a suspiciously expedited fashion. He went from telling us about the family friend who died of an abortion, and the respect he had for his mother's pro-choice position, to promoting an Amendment to the Constitution banning abortion. All that, in the space of 2 years. And the story about the stem cell biologist doesn't hold weight. I know Doug Melton, and I think Romney basically used him as "cover" for his position shift.
OK, so what? Everyone can change their minds; it is dangerous to never reconsider one's position, especially if one is a leader. But Mitt also said gun laws in Massachusetts "keep us safe." And then, a year ago, he signed up as a lifetime member of the NRA. He told gay rights activists he would do more for them than Teddy Kennedy. To read Ms. Rios's account, he seemed more interested in the political hay he could make out of gay marriages than actually stopping them. He favored one of the most extensive proposals for campaign finance reform ever, advocating that a percentage of all political donations be put in a fund for redistribution. But now, he's against it, and blames McCain-Feingold for the push polls against him. On immigration, he was for amnesty, until he decided to run for President, when he discovered his passion for protecting the borders, including 11th hour proclamations that had no practical effect, but sure look good on his resume. Yet he couldn't be bothered to prevent illegals from working on his yard, even a year after finding out about it...
|
|
The entire criminals in the nation are either going to get pardoned or paroled by President Huckabee! Bwaaahlah! So I don't mind. We can bow to the Christian leader anytime, and God will say, "Why Huck? Why did you not punish this rapist that hard?"
|
|
All of you Pro Hucks,
Look who's talking...your guy Huck don't even have the courage to answer if Mormon is legit or not, in the Christian world. You bigots! Shame on you Evangelical suspects! |
|
|
Yep. Soren. Matt. Zandstra. Glenn. Brownback. |
|
Just do not feel comfortable with Gov. Huckabee, he is playing the religious card way tooooo much, to my liking. Pandering comes to mind, or sadly worse disingenuous.
I am conservative, life long pro-life, presently, best choice to stand up against Hiliary team are Giuliani/Romney. |
|
all the repeat false charges about mitt and when he authorized the police to arrest those illegals! it was 7 months before he left office!
suit those cities? sure ...how long does it take
for a suit like that to reach its conclusion..duh
and he did threaten to with hold certain funds! but what does that matter...just because its true
so what , right all of you "enlightened" anti mitt people! all of this balogna! mitt said something about mike, a compliment. mc cain was insulting him in the first debate and when the host tried to get mitt to attack john..this is what mitt said" john helped me in my campaign...he's a friend" john looked embarrassed! he should have been! but nobody on the panel has said "i admire mitts morality and his 38 years of marriage" any thing at all that was gentlemanly or courteous mitt is a good person and has a lot of class! he donated all of his fee for cleaning up the olympic mess to charity..donated his gov. pay to charity, and if elected pres. will do the same thing again! are the other candidates going to do that? hmmm!? so all this tripe about romney...zzzzzzzzzz . elvis |
|
I can count on one hand the number of "Romney" blogs. MATT, where were you when Carter and Glenn pushed the Marriott story in July. Some objective analysis from a blog would have been nice.
And Soren Dayton spent the election cycle spouting irrational junk. Now, he tries to rationalize the incongruence between the record and rhetoric of his preferred politician(S). No. That group ran hands down the worst, nonsensical political price war. You even had Geraghty write the "creepy" article. Then months later he begs for people to vote for him on blogging award thing. Sure Jim. |
|
|
I agree that Mitt and team are quick to point out policy and record differences, sometimes forcefully. However, everyone has gone after Mitt personally, including everything from trying to discredit his religion to questioning his conversion to pro-life. |
|
|
From what I have read, Mitt's parents left their money to charity. He made his money on his own. |
|
Romney "Never had to do a hard days work in his life"?
Why the nonsense? Disagree if you want, but REALLY.
You think graduating as valedictorian of his large undergraduate class came without any hard work? Earning a Harvard MBA and a Harvard law degree came wihout even a single "hard day's work"? (He must be an INCREDIBLE genius!) Leading Bain Capital and becoming one of the most successful venture capitalists in America required no work? Saving the 2002 Olympics took no effort? Governing Massachusetts demanded nothing? Running an extremely vigorous national presidential campaign isn't hard work?
Heck, even a Mormon mission is hard work. (I know; I served one. Like Governor Romney, I had to learn a foreign language to do it, and it demanded just about everything I had essentially seven days a week, from early morning until late at night.)
Has anybody here seen the home video that Hugh Hewitt put up of Romney helping to clear a tree stump from a yard after the San Diego fires several weeks ago? No reporters on hand, but lots of sweat and effort.
Nobody has ever plausibly accused Governor Romney of laziness.
Shouldn't we stick to fact, instead of fiction? If we have to falsify reality in order to attack a candidate, maybe our case against him isn't very strong. |
|
On the gays in the military question, he said the same thing as the other guys: thats a decision best left to the military to work out, because knowing what creates, or doesn't create, unity is their gig. If you call him out, you should call the others out as well, otherwise you are just being unfair.
On torture, the definition is widely disputed. The Geneva Conventions prohibit torture, but no one knows what it means. While McCain has decided that he will make the definitive interpretation for the entire world, the definition is still very much in question. Which, gosh darn it, means further discussion.
As far as bombing Iran, what do you think? Should he just pull the trigger without thinking about it. I'm not sure what you are advocating. Wouldn't you consult your advisers on such a monumental decision? We've done the reckless cowboy thing, its no good for us. |
|
Okay, lets go down the list one by one.
First, you mean political clout like the "political capital" Bush had after being re-elected. He managed to burn his capital pretty quickly. Why would that be? Well, mainly because he alienated people. That bursts the political clout myth pretty quickly. And "compassionate conservative" was an election tagline. Bush's presidency has been anything but, so thats not a very good example.
When Reagan was governor he signed an abortion law that resulted in millions of aborted babies. He blamed his decision on inexperience, yet he was a grown man at the time. After he realized the consequences of the bill, he changed his position on abortion. Interesting, it sounds like he had an epiphany, even when he was all growed up. He must have been feigning. He must have been secretly biding his time for his chance at the presidency where he could spring his diabolical abortion plans on the country. I think you see how stupid that theory is.
I said Romney is open to opposing ideas. You threw in the he is "compromisingly open to new ideas" line. Thats what we call being disingenuous. Romney is his own man, he never would have been as successful if he wasn't. But he isn't afraid to face other opinions. The fact that he governed in a politically hostile state is evidence of that. Bush surrounded himself with a group of people who agitated to find a connection between 9/11 and Saddam. We can see the obvious problems in this approach. No diversity of opinion = bad judgment (incidentally, a vote for Mitt = good judgment).
|
|
While Mike Huckabee was pastor did he show or utilize any of John Ankerberg's material on cults? Did he use the parts that attack both the Catholic Church and the Masons as Satanic Cults?
Did he use any other anti Catholic material?
What does Huck think of or have to say about John Ankerberg and his material, particularly as it pertains to Catholics, Mormons and Masons (and several other groups)? Should a Baptist Minster show such material? |
|
Huck's record speaks for itself: it's a disaster.
1) huge on clemency for the worst in society
2) hoped to lock up those with HIV/AIDS when 7-8 years earlier the mode of transmission was well-documented
3) loves to tax and spend
4) uses his faith as a weapon (and so do his supporters)
5) known for his frequent ethical lapses
6) loves to hand out perks to illegals
7) very poor on current events (clueless on Iran's nuclear weapons programs current state)
One can go on and on....
Mitt's team of bloggers are efficient. I know. I'm one of the constantly scanning for headlines.
It's that simple. Deal with your paranoia. |
|
What a piece of junk this article is. Huckabee is a lousy candidate, and if citizens prefer Romney, and get sick of the media bias towards Huckabee, we say something. It's time for Matt Lewis to review all the blogs and all the articles -- his views will change.
Freedom of Speech!
ROMNEY FOR PRESIDENT 2008 !!!!! |
|
Oh please, let's do count the negative press releases the MSM has released about these two. I'll bet Romney has been hit hands down my more than any candidate.
Oh Matt Lewis, methinks you are running the negative campaign against Mitt right here on this blog. Who's back pocket are you in? .....or is it possible bloggers work on their own, not only you, but Mitt's supporters. |
|
I am definitely not willing to take that chance. I think you’re underestimating the amount of political clout a President has. They don’t just define policy, they often define their party. Just look at how President Bush’s compassionate conservatism has pushed the Dems to the left.
Reagan’s conversion was gradual and not politically expedient. Romney’s conversion, on the other hand, is awfully convenient to this political cycle. Seriously, a man is moved by tiny cells and unrecognizable embryos and not images of aborted babies? I don’t buy it.
Being compromisingly open to opposing ideas is not a refreshing concept, it’s a frustrating one. In a day and age where Washington is flooded with panderers and poll monitors, we need solid and principled leadership more than ever.
Quite frankly, Romney doesn’t come off as merely open to ideas. He calculates and formulates the “committee” response on almost every question asked in the debates. When pressed on gays in the military, Romney said he wants to consult the generals. When pressed on torture, Romney said he wants to meet with Congressional and Military figures to figure out which interrogation techniques are torture. Or how about possible military strikes on Iran? Romney wants to consult attorneys before doing that… (he sure did backpedal on that one rather quickly.) Should I continue?
I think it’s quite telling that Romney’s worst performance was in a non-scripted format like the CNN/YT debate. No wonder some conservative "leaders" were so quick to criticize that format. *cough* Hewitt *cough* |
|
|
Thanks Matt Lewis for this article...teaches me alot about how the Romney campaign. |
|
...the Romney campaign-Drudge Report connection.
Thats the real news here and interesting fact I'd like to know more about, and explains the recent Drudge Report behavior constantly headlining the latest attacks on Huck in bold as has been done for weeks (e.g., with the out-of-context youtube video of Huck's speech to the legislature, the Phylis Schlafly quote left for days up that Huck "destroyed the GOP Party" in Ark. (ridiculous, he won repeatedly in a Dem state and there's a GOP governor now), the Dumond issue, the Aids isolation headline left up for days, and today the headline left up for days as big "news" that as a pastor to a group of pastors about 10 years ago he said the CHURCH (not the govt.) should do what it should be doing in good works for th poor etc. and instead Drudge misleads suggesting Huck wants to use the Presidency and government to force conversion to Christianity down the nation's throats in the next great Crusade. |
|
Why do slick Massachusettes liberals keep insisting they actually have a shot at the Presidency? It baffles the mind.
Btw, Mitt and Rudy are the only RINOs in the race. All the other candidates are authentic. |
|
Okay, so lets take a worst case scenario and assume Romney's conversion isn't genuine, but is simply an astute political maneuver to get the Republican nomination. Can he afford now to change positions back on abortion? Not if wants to get re-elected. Not if he wants to have a Republican congress. In a nutshell, it would be political suicide for him to go back. He is locked into his current position of necessity.
But thats just a worse case scenario. The reality is his conversion is genuine, just as it was with Reagan. He has explained many times the process that led him to "convert." And he has always been personally against abortion, so his transition really isn't that much of a stretch.
On the "consult a committee" thing, Mitt has made clear he is not afraid of opposing ideas. Thats a refreshing concept. This is how he has been so successful throughout his life. He takes input from every which way he can before he makes his decisions, which makes his ultimate decisions less likely to be flawed. Do we really think that decisions should be made after consulting only with people who agree with us? Shoot, look at his decision to give the "Faith in America" speech. He deliberated about it for some time, then against the opinions of many of his advisers, he decided the best move was to give the speech, which history will vindicate as the right decision.
So don't question, just go to the polls and check the "Mitt" box. The country will be grateful. |
|
Who cares, all 3 are RINO's!
I'm for Fred cause he ain't no RINO! |
|
|
|
|
I question Romney's "conversion" and am highly critical of his pancake I-need-to-consult-a-committee approach to key conservative issues. The more they attack (anyone, not just Huckabee) the less I like them. |
|
From Delroy Murdock at NRO:
"Giuliani’s prompt action sharply contrasts with Romney, who waited until 18 days before leaving office to secure federal permission for state troopers to arrest illegal aliens. Actually, this program never commenced. As promised, Romney’s Democratic successor, Governor Deval Patrick, scrapped it before troopers began relevant training.
Romney’s immigration record was ho-hum long before this 11th-hour initiative. Beyond opposing drivers’ licenses and in-state college tuition for illegals, Romney’s failures helped keep Massachusetts attractive to them. In June 2005, the Pew Hispanic Center’s Jeffrey Passel designated Massachusetts a New Large State for illegal aliens. Between 200,000 and 250,000 unauthorized migrants lived there from 2002 to 2004."
"“New York has never officially declared itself a ‘sanctuary city,’” the AP’s Jim Davenport concluded. However, Brewster, Brookline, Cambridge, Lexington, Orleans, and Somerville, Massachusetts did exactly that. Romney let these six sanctuary cities openly flout federal immigration laws. ...Romney could have pressured or sued these cities to become non-sanctuaries. He also could have slashed their allowances. Instead, as local officials mocked federal immigration authorities, state tax dollars cascaded into their collective coffers. Romney’s proposed assistance to these locales grew from $103,218,421 in Fiscal Year 2004 to $107,419,246 in FY 2007 — up 4.1 percent." |
|
Both lose! And this has nothing to do with religion, it's because both of these men are RINO's.
Fred Dalton Thompson for POTUS! Cause he ain't no RINO! |
|
The Romney Ad on immigration is not even a real attack ad.
It is a head to head comparison ad on a key issue. There is nothing personal about it. It simply contrasts the two different positions on immigration. It is very tame.
If Tancredo were running it he would hide in shame, it is that nice.
Romney should have used some real ammo and tied immigration to Huck's flip flop on immigration. Huck has some very passionate footage in favor of illegals. If you are going to make the case make the case. |
|
Correct me if I am wrong but Matt is a McCain guy as I recall.
McCain was one of the worst, all campaign, about attacking Romney. He has been quiet lately as the last time he attacked it cost him votes.
This is another one of those hit pieces that the McCain people do so well. They accuse Romney of doing what they are actually doing. In Psych terms that is called projection. McCain is the one who labeled Romney a flip flopper.
McCain has flipped on 8 major issues. No one calls him a flip flopper. Only Romney is a flip flopper. McCain deserves to lose. The only problem is that when he does much of his vote will go to Rudy. It will be very interesting to see what kind of garbage he does in NH? Voting is starting there now. |
|
Is letting Huck hang himself? Rush has been very positive about Romney and Thompson, and also Rudy to a lesser degree. He hasn't said anything about Huck, except last week he let a bunch of Huck supporters embarass themselves, and just let their stupidity speak for itself. IT was funny and telling.
Rush knows, just as everyone else with a brain, that Huck is would be a freaking disaster for the GOP. It must be killing him to keep so quiet, but then he is very disciplined. He knows Huck is a train wreck, and that it won't take long.
My choices are Romney, Thompson, and Rudy in that order. Thomspon needs to get off his rear end and make a move. So he' finally getting around to going to Iowa. Good move, Fred, bad timing. |
|
|
Back in Feb. I believe.I'm not a handwringer and i don't like things like this hanging over my head. It was really a process of elimination. McCain's overall sellouts of the GOP and last summer's immigration disaster did it for me..Brownback is an empty suit republican who's never ran anything that I know of..Also a 1 issue candidate...Guliani,I liked in a lot of ways but of course not on his social positions.Tancredo and Hunter have some likeable qualities but not enough starpower..Rom Paul a fruitcake.. I didn't even think about Huckabee for some reason.The last thing I remembered about him was he fought Bush on sending National Guard troops to the border. I was like HUH? A republican doing this? I then saw a Mitt stup speech saying hoe he would deal with the budget and cut out the dreaded bureaucrats out of washington,including the money pit Pentegon. As i said in another thread, people in this country seem to want a nanny stater in charge who fells their pain or whatever. But take a look at what happened in France, it could happen here with Mitt's message. Mitt as the face of the GOP will obliterate the media's painting the GOP as crooks,perverts war mongers etc.I think at some point Mitt will go after the welfare crowd,though I don't know exactly how. I have my own ideas on that. |
|
Romney is far and away the most qualified candidate for the presidency. And he is running at a time when this country is desperately in need of his financial genius.
Rudy takes the conservative movement off the rails, and Huckabee just doesn't have the credentials needed to pull this off. With Mitt, both problems are avoided. |
|
The more I look into Huckabee, the more flawed he becomes. Thank God someone is digging into this guy's past to expose his character for what it is. I would hate to think that Huckabee supporters would want people to vote for their guy without being fully informed. Let the best man win, and let the people decide based on people's history and character.
I'm voting Romney.
|
|
|
a Huckabee blogger being fed stuff from Huckabee? |
|
I don't get "fed" any of my stories. I publish them on my own. Yes, Romney has a strong team of bloggers. What are we supposed to say, we're so sorry that we beat you to the punch? I've been blogging for Romney since well before he announced and I've been doing it by free will. No one has told me anything to publish. I also won't apologize for any of the posts that have been posted on my blog that have been negative about Huckabee. We're publishing facts, if that's a problem for Huckabee and his followers, well, maybe he shouldn't have done or said what he did. Also, it's not like he's taken back any of his comments about innocent AIDS Victims, he could have easily said...I was wrong. Categorically wrong on that count, and I apologize to all AIDS victims for saying it. No, he stands categorically by them today. When he made them well after the fact that AIDS was not transmitted through casual contact. Huck is the absolutely best candidate against the Dems, they'll serve him for lunch. They haven't published one negative Press Release about him since April (that's as far back as I could research). But, they've published SEVERAL about Thompson, Giuliani, and Romney. It's because they are formidable challengers, Huckabee is not. His "Jesus Juice" song and dance show might play well in Evangelicaland, but it won't nationally. Romney on the other hand is a very faithful person, but doesn't shove it in people's faces like Huckabee. He just quietly serves, and doesn't take the press with him. He's turned around several companies, the Olympics, and was a great Governor of Massachusetts. Plus, he's for strong immigration reform. He's also not a career politician. The only thing anyone can constantly harp on is that he's Mormon. Whoopee so are 5 US Senators, and even more congresspeople.
GO ROMNEY, those of us bloggers who are in your corner are INDEPENDENTLY behind you 100%. |
|
it's the appeal to sentiment, not reason.
when you look at the "consequences of consequences" you see that people like Mike Huckabee are very dangerous and usually make things worse when they try and make it better (but isn't that what liberals do??? in the name of curing all ills to which society is beholden, they make things worse. sorry, good intentions are what the road to hell is paved with.)
Moreover, why are you (and others) arguing that Huckabee should be thinking about the interests of people who are here illegally before the interests of the people he represents and elected him?
He wasn't elected by illegal immigrants, and the people who did elect him he is supposed to represent.
We are a nation of laws and all you're teaching people who came here illegal by handing them taxpayer money is that "breaking the law pays here in America". |
|
You have no idea what you are talking about. Mitt has put in more work than anyone campaigning, that's how he understands Americans. He earned his money and he could well just go on in life and keep making money, but he's not. He wants to serve America because he thinks it's the greatest country in the world. He didn't take a salary to turn around the Olympics. He didn't take a salary as Governor of Mass and he won't take a salary as president. No one is saying anyone is perfect, but when a Preacher/Pastor has ethics violations I think it's OK to question them. When there are stark issues, not personal issues mind you, is it really an attack? I don't think so. When a known rapist gets released from prison based on pity and pressure from a Governor because he thinks he's become a "Christian" then yes, how a religion influences government might just be appropriately called into question. Huck is probably a decent man, but with ethics charges and destruction of government property before leaving Ark., how do we really know? I'm sure Jimmy Swaggart's followers thought he was pure as well. We know what kind of person they are by their actions, not just their words. Huck sounds like an honest guy. He sounds like a conservative. But his actions seem far from it.
Mitt has led an exemplary life, has been successful as a student, businessman, husband and politician.
As for your claim Mitt doesn't know how to work? Well, that's just crap. How many candidates are out doing service sans the press?
http://confessionsofapoliticaljunkie.blogspot.com/2007/11/h ow-often-do-candidates-do-stuff-like.html |
|
I am for LEGAL immigration and lots of it.
I'm not for anyone who makes it worse by waving american taxpayer dollars in front of illegals and drawing illegal immigrants here.
We are a nation of laws, and Huckabee undermines those laws.
And as PArepublican writes, we understand that Huckabee wants to "liberate the captives" but that is better left to the ministry and leave the governing to the people interested in protecting citizens. |
|
|
As someone with 20 year in Law Enforcement, I will never vote for someone with Huckabee's record on Pardons. He totally undermines the Criminal Justice System. |
|
"D Davis. Your serious? You think that haveing a heart and punishing children fro what their parents did is going to play well."
I think upholding the law is going to play well . . . something Romney does and Huckabee doesn't.
Republicans are supposed to be respecters of the law, not bleeding hearts liberals.
And do you know WHY the illegals are drawn to AK? Because of policies like Huck's. It's a loophole. Get in, get them born, get them taking American taxpayers dollars.
It's people like Huckabee that have created this problem by attracting illegals with policies like these.
Romney respects the rule of law. We are a nation of laws. |
|
"He is a trust fund baby. Never had to do a hard days work in his life."
You don't get to where he is in life without outworking your competition.
"Mike Huckabee a perfect man? certainly not. But, He is honest . . ."
Not about his record, he's not.
"Huckabee gives real answers, not the studied, polled and reserached answers that Romney/Clinton give."
Like the one he gave about not knowing what the NIE is? He could use a little more research.
"Romney = Clinton"
Really? Name one issue they overlap on. Then look at Huckabee. Huckabee is more liberal on many issues that Clinton was (see his protectionism - he would oppose NAFTA, Clinton wouldn't). Look at Huck's tax raising and big government interventionism.
Romney shrunk the size of government in Massachusetts, lowered taxes, balanced the budget, was a fearless proponent of marriage protection and pro-life issues.
Huck is the pro-life Bill Clinton. Romney is a conservative. |
|
|
Pro-Romney Bloggers Push Negative Huck Narrative While Pro Huck supporters spew anti Mormon venom backed by the SBC. |
|
You think that haveing a heart and punishing children fro what their parents did is going to play well.
The facts.
1. The persons receiving the scholarships were here illegally because of their parents.
2. They had to apply for citizenship and come out of the shadows in order to be eligible for a MERIT based scholarship.
3. They had gone through at least high school in Arkansas with Arkansas students, met the academic and moral criteria.
4. The federal government has failed in its immigration policy. Anybody can get across the border into this country.
5. Huckabee did not support driver's licenses for illegals as the ad implies.
Do you really believe that punishing children for the crimes of the parents is going to help you get votes?
Please don't tell me you really believe that.
|
|
|
These claims against Romney are completely and totally baseless. Each candidate has stood on his own merits. Mitt Romney and his campaign have had nothing was so ever to do with Brownback dropping out, and the Romney campaign is not now "going after" Huckabee. Talk about being behind the attacks. I think Brownback and Huckabee are behind the attacks against Romney! Romney is the only candidate who has campaigned above the fray, and even when mud is slung at him, he does not respond in kind. |
|
Explain to me how Romney understands normal Americans.
He is a trust fund baby. Never had to do a hard days work in his life.
He will do anything to get elected. Including it seems alienating the evangelical base who is supporting Huck.
You will not win the nomination without us. period. it isn't even arguable. You don't have a chance for my vote if you keep acting like the Clinton's.
Is Mike Huckabee a perfect man? certainly not.
But, He is honest, genuine and he is not beholden to business interests or the political elite. Romney is a part of the Republican party that thinks he is somehow entitled to be President. Huckabee is simply the voice ofthe people. Call it populist if you like, that's a word that means for the people. There are worst things to be called.
Romney may not have all these statements in his past like Huckabee. (I highly doubt this) That only proves Romney is part of the elite class and has been noncommital, evasive and unwilling to give a unfettered opinion. He does not speak his mind. He was making sure nothing could be used against him in a campaign.
Huckabee gives real answers, not the studied, polled and reserached answers that Romney/Clinton give. Has he said things that he would take back, or say differently. yes. Haven't we all?
Huckabee is honest, genuine, understands the life of the normal american.
Romney is manipulative, calculating, only knows tha life of having illegals take care of his lawn.
Romney = Clinton.
|
|
|
Brownback is actually conservative, while Huck is not. It must eat Brownback up. |
|
|
|
when you can't defend the record, accuse Mitt of slinging mud.
To modify and paraphrase a popular refrain, "It's his record, stupid."
There are plenty of conservative republicans (non-Romney supporters) who think Huck is the worst thing that could happen to the GOP.
Everyday he opens his mouth and confirms our fears.
Is he the GOP Howard Dean? I don't know. I hope not, because then that means next year he'll be charing the RNC! |
|
|
If the information is true, then who cares where its coming from? Shouldn't we have as much accurate information as possible on all the candidates? Its not like we can rely on the MSM for that. |
|
There's no negative ammunition about Huckabee at all Matt...
No, not any...
This guy couldn't have more baggage if he were Delta Airlines.
A vote for Huck is a vote for, "We're the Christians-only, Hill-billy party! You city folk ain't got to come 'round these here parts!"
I think Matt Lewis is actually Cletus from the Simpsons.
There, now I'm spreading negative rumors about YOU Matt. |
|
A little bit of CYA today?
Thanks for putting a smile on my face!
http://yourjewishmaster.blogspot.com/ |
|
How is exposing Huckabee's own words going negative?
How is talking about Huckabee's HORRIBLE economic record negative?
How is talking about Huckabee's weakness on immigration negative? |
|
Romeny is desperate.
He is now going negative in campaign ads against Huck.
Go figure, another way in which Romney is like Clinton.
|
|
Romney = Clinton
He will do anything to get elected.
He is not trustworthy.
Please don't give me an grief about his being a mormon. I couldn't care less.
He is a political opportunist. He obfuscates questions about his own liberal social policies, and then undermines through underhanded attacks his closest political rival.
He will say or do anything to be elected. He is from the political elite. His father was a prominent politician. He hasn't had to worry about money a single moment in his life. He has no concept of scraping and clawing to make ends meet.
Huckabee is the best communicator in the republican party in a long time. He is genuine. He has not tried to excuse his positions, he has attempted to put them in the proper context. He even acknowledged those are my words and I won't try to spin them.
Huckabee is a conservative, no matter what romney's shills portray. Mike fought against the political machine of clinton and won. These attacks have been tried before. Mike is staying above the fray.
I ask any romney apologist to show me how Huckabee has impugned Romney's religion. The worst thing Huck has done is point out the romney has flip-flopped on social issues.
Huckabee = honest, genuine, masterful communicator
Romney = clintonesque, opportunistic, reads a teleprompter at least as well as Bush.
The people are flocking to Huck not because of just issues, we admire his personal accomplishments, his willingness to answer questions clearly, and his vision of a United States that is free, secure, and economically competitive in the world.
A VOTE FOR ROMNEY = A VOTE FOR RUDY
|
|
|
Indeed, Romney is not exactly on my short list of candidates to support as his style is a mix of Bill Clinton opportunism and John Kerry flopping. I still got my six fouls in on the Hack-a-Huck action. |
|
|
Are you accusing Romney's campaign of using bloggers to disseminate negative information about Huckabee or are you simply noting that Romney's supporters are actively looking for and reporting negative information they find about Huckabee? Note that the MyManMitt.com blogger claims to have found Huckabee's 1998 "take back this nation for Christ" speech on his own. It's one thing for a candidate to do research and pass information on to surrogates; it's quite another thing for supporters to do their own research. At least, I think it is. |
|
|
unbelievable when it comes to attacking people who raise their genuine concerns about Mitt's personal and political dishonest views. Their basic strategy is to re-direct all issues raised about Romney by pointing out that other candidates are "bad" OR my favorite one that Mitt is a Christian....and demonizing the evangelicals who are soooo radical. This strategy is being implemented in the wrong party to the wrong audience - we conservatives are too smart to get smittened by re-directing Mitt's inconsistent political positions and spiritual beliefs that he is a saint waiting to become a god someday by pin pointing that other candidates are "dangerous/inadequate choices" - SERIOUSLY! No thank you to a mormon in the whitehouse, knock on another door please! |
|
|
... the Romney campaign could get a blogger / opinion leader here at Townhall to support their candidate. It's probably the only thing holding them back, at this point. I wonder if anyone who blogs here might be secretly pulling for Romney? Anyone? |
|
|
|