Articles tagged as

Mitt Romney

A New Front in The War on Women – Do Liberal Chicks Dig Polygamy?

Piggy-backing off of Tim’s post on Mark Steyn’s recent article, I think the polygamy thing (which Tim does not mention) is worth visiting–repeatedly of course–just to remind everyone of the kind of campaign this has been and will continue to be.  Nothing coming from the Obama side will be relevant or substantive, everything utter nonsense.  And nonsense with the same lack of sourcing on the Democrat side as we’ve seen in everything they do.

From Mark Steyn’s recent article

For their next exploding cigar, the Democrats chose polygamy. Brian Schweitzer, the Democrat governor of Montana, remarked that Romney was unlikely to appeal to women because his father was “born on a polygamy commune.” Eighty-six percent of women, noted Gov. Schweitzer with a keenly forensic demographic eye, are “not great fans of polygamy.” You can understand the 86 percent’s ickiness at the whole freaky-weirdy idea of a president descended from someone who had multiple wives. Eww.

Read more

Concord Monitor says more food stamps needed, assumes Obama re-election

If President Obama is re-elected, as the April 25, 2012 Concord Monitor editorial “Cutting food stamps to feed the rich” apparently assumes, then it is right, the Ryan budget won’t provide all the food stamps, unemployment, and other assistance that will be needed.

The Concord Monitor goes on to pooh pooh the idea of “Cadillac driving welfare queens” and undeserving welfare recipients.  Some of us are alert enough to have noticed media reports of “Cadillac driving welfare queens” who have been re-located to prison, and we are not naïve enough to think they have all been found.

Read more

Romney Advocacy For The Welfare State

“I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it.” —Willard “Mittens” Romney

Romney not concerned about the poor.
Willard "Mitt" Romney: The Matthew Lesko of American Politics

That is what Mittens said…and the lefties will tear him to shreds over that very statement.  Especially the class warfare artisans in the political arena. While Romney is correct  about the poor having a social welfare safety net, It is that same “safety net” that creates government dependency and self-perpetuation of a system that its’ patrons become dependent on, rather than self-sufficient and self-supporting.

Read more

Uh oh. Will Romney’s big win in Florida doom his campaign?

This from Newsmax.com today, quoting a Florida Republican primary voter: “Bombarded by harsh television advertising, some Floridians said they had soured on both candidates. The dirty ads really turned me off on Mitt Romney,” said Dorothy Anderson, of Pinellas Park, adding she was voting for Gingrich. She said of Romney, “In fact if he gets the … Read more

Rightwingnews: Pre-Florida Conservative blogger Presidential Poll

John Hawkins over at RightWingNews does a lot of polling of Conservative blogsites and the ‘Grok as picked to participate in his latest one.  One day ahead of the Florida Presidential Primary, he wanted to know where over 250 bloggers stood on the remaining candidates:

Right Wing News polled more than 250 right-of-center bloggers on which candidate they’d support if the 2012 Republican primaries were today. The following 68 bloggers responded:

101 Dead Armadillos, Advice Goddess, Alarming News, Alexa Shrugged, All American Blogger, All That Is Necessary, American Glob, And Rightly So, Argghhhh!, Atlas Shrugs, Batesline, Betsy’s Page, Black and Right, Blonde Sagacity, Bookworm Room, Dodgeblogium, Don Surber, Dr. Helen, Election Projection, Fausta’s Blog, Fraters Libertas, Freeman Hunt, GraniteGrok, IMAO, Isaac Schrodinger, Jeremayakovka, Joanne Jacobs, John Hawkins, Left Coast Rebel, Likelihood of Confusion, Liz Mair, Mean Ol Meany, Melissa Clouthier, Midnight Blue, Milton Wolf, Moonbattery, Mount Virtus, Musing Minds, Neo-Neocon, Newmarks Door, Newsreal, Nice Deb, No Oil For Pacifists, Pal2pal, Pirates Cove, Political Mommentary, Politicalistas, Pundit Boy, Pursuing Holiness, Rightosphere, Russ. Just Russ, Smart Girl Politics, SondraK, Sunshine State Sarah, The Hedgehog Report, The Jawa Report, The Lotus Blog, The Next Right, The Pink Flamingo Bar & Grill, The Smallest Minority, The Sundries Shack, The TrogloPundit, This Ain’t Hell, WILLisms, Weapons of Mass Discussion, Wintery knight, YidwithLid, mountaineer musings

Here’s how the results broke down:

Read more

Data Point – Once again, “who pays the taxes”? Where’s the Press on this?

Wall Street Journal - Who pays Federal taxes - income and other
Wall Street Journal - Who pays Federal taxes?

From the Wall Street Journal:

“This all-too-conveniently confuses the incidence of a tax with the burden of a tax. The marginal tax rate on every additional dollar of capital gains and dividend income from corporate profits can reach as high as 44.75% at the federal level (assuming a company pays the 35% top corporate rate), not 15%.

The Congressional Budget Office recently examined the distribution of federal taxes on various income groups. The report was ballyhooed by liberals as proof of rising income inequality, but that argument is for another day. What everyone has ignored is what CBO found about the relative taxes paid by different groups. And, lo, the rich pay more, which is probably why the press didn’t report it.”

Indeed” “why the press didn’t report it.”  All we have heard from the Left is the inequality, a la Warren Buffet, is the inequality of who pays what for taxes.  What they seldom report to the public, and what Warren Buffet absolutely doesn’t mention, is exactly the important info laid out above: double taxation.  The money that Buffet receives has already been taxed once at the corporate rate (35% before legal deductions) and as an owner of the corporation (as that’s what shareholders are – owners) he gets taxed a second time on that income – referred to as dividends.

Read more

Charlie Bass Says Mitt Does Not Like To Fire People

“Contempt is the weapon of the weak and a defense against one’s own despised and unwanted feelings.” —Alice Duer Miller

Willard "Mitt" Romney on "Firing People"

New Hampshire’s own RINO Charlie Bass was on Fox this morning defending Mittens’ comments about firing people. Charlie Bass was right. Here is what Mittens said:

“I want individuals to have their own insurance,” he said. “That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep you healthy. It also means if you don’t like what they do, you can fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me.

“You know, if someone doesn’t give me a good service that I need, I want to say I’m going to go get someone else to provide that service to me.”

Read more

Mitt Romney: The Matthew Lesko of American Politics

Romney_lesko_small.jpg

“My opponent isn’t pro-choice or anti-choice, he’s multiple choice.”   —Senator Edward M Kennedy on Romney during the 1994 Senate Election

When Mitt Romney came to New Hampshire in June and announced his candidacy, One of the first visceral reactions I had was that Mitt could not win against Obummer. Not for all the conventions and opinings currently swirling about, but for the simple facial evaluation that the man in not honest. He is too phony, fake and disingenuous. His Flip flops are well-documented in the 2008 campaign by the very moderate-RINO that endorsed him…John McCain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS33Hkgnls4

Read more

2012 Presidential Primary – Mitt Romney, again, but a -20

Instead of the +1 he got here, this is a -20 for a bad attempt at doing what Liberals do – redefining language for merely scoring political points.  The Hill has a quote from Mitt Romney that I’ve been hearing for a while now, and I frankly think it’s a crock:

“I’m happy to stand by the things that I believe. I’m not going to change my positions by virtue of being in a presidential campaign,” Romney said. “What we did was right for the people of Massachusetts, the plan is still favored there by 3 to 1 and it is fundamentally a conservative principle to insist that people take personal responsibility as opposed to turning to government for giving out free care.”

Such a silver tongue.  He’s been hit so hard on RomneyCare being the progenesis of ObamaCare he’s punch drunk.  No one believes him when he said that just because he created an individual mandate at the State level, it doesn’t matter as it is different than the one in ObamaCare since the Constitution covers ObamaCare (a Federal action) but not Obamneycare (at the State level).  Rubbish!  While indeed Obamacare will (or should) be judged unconstitutional, philosophically, there is not a whit of difference with what Obama signed into law vs what Mitt signed into law.  Philosophically, we have the State (be it at the Federal or State level) forcing people to buy something they otherwise would not.  If these stand, we no longer have the limited government that the Founders wanted.  And Mitt’s answer is a dodge, and a lame one at that.

Read more

2012 Presidential Primary – So, Mitt said he was a Progressive?

A gem.  Or rather, a gaffe (albeit, from the past)?  Or evidence of pandering?

Once again, we see the disruptive technology that is the Internet on politics.  What you say now will be known in the future.  What you said in the past will generally be available now.  And you have no control over it.

No, sir, no amount of verbiage or “flackage” is going to convince authentic Conservatives otherwise. Video of this after the jump

(H/T: Townhall)

Read more

More Humor! 2012 Presidential Primary – Mitt Romney / Obama version. +1

  Heh!  (BTW, who wants to bet on the over/under for time that Media Matters (that hack site funded by George Soros is going to call me racist and demand a take down (that’s where the image came from!)?) A spokesman for President Obama‘s re-election campaign blasted Mr. Romney and questioned whether he had something … Read more

Me supporting Mitt Romney? Hardly

If you are considering a vote for Mitt Romney on January 10, and if you feel strongly about the following list of issues, you may want to think again.  Despite what he says today, Romney supported stronger gun laws for Massachusetts (the only current candidate to do such a thing).  He also once assured MA … Read more

No Mitt, you are not part of TEA Party (even if you spoke at a TEA Party event)

Michelle had this little beauty (emphasis mine):

Mitt Romney said today he’s “the ideal candidate” for the Tea Party movement because his stance on issues lines up “pretty darn well” with the movement he says will soon realize that GOP frontrunner Newt Gingrich isn’t their best option for president.

“I recognize that the speaker has a big lead here,” Romney said of Gingrich in a press conference in South Carolina. “But I think as people take a closer and closer look, they’ll recognize that I reflect more effectively the positions which they hold on key issues.

Um, okay. Everybody has a different definition of “ideal,” I suppose.

Read more

O’Brien to Endorse Gingrich; Horn will Endorse Romney

The Manchester Union Leader is reporting today that House Speaker Bill O’Brien plans to formally endorse Newt Gingrich today.  This was noted last week but not formally stated.

“I want a candidate who has a clear understanding of conservative philosophy. I look for someone who has good instincts, someone who is intelligent and has great leadership and an ability to articulate the philosophy of our party and his own goals.

“Speaker Gingrich has all of that,” O’Brien said.

Former CD-2 Congressional candidate Jennifer Horn will endorse Mitt Romney today, and has been selected as co-chair of Romney’s national grass-roots committee.  (Let’s see – Ayotte is on the VP list, endorses Romney; Horn gets national committee co-chair, endorses Romney– Oh, did I write that out loud?)

Read more

And I thought that only Charlie Bass was proud to be a Progressive Republican…..

Well, to make the play here, take a gander at Mitt Romney’s self-declaration when he was running for a different elected position: Now, certainly people change over time, but is yet another showing of Mitt Romney’s willingness to be pragmatic (re: what has to be done to get elected?).  I understand “shading a position” depending … Read more

Email Doodlings – 2012 Presidential Primary – whose next?

Well, on yet another email thread I’m on, just before I decided to be a rock Fool, I got the question (else I would have posted earlier):

Tim, Johnson’s likely to run 3rd party, due to the media freeze-out.  Cain is now out.  So who’s left?  Or perhaps, who’s right?

What’s the Granite Grok crew going to do now? Skip?

Good question – what are we going to do? (edited slightly)

Read more

National Review – The Week

If the latest issue of National Review has graced your mail box (or you read the digital edition) you’ve probably read this already, but I can’t help but share it. “The case for Newt is that he is nothing like that guy who used to be governor of Massachusetts.  The case for Romney is very … Read more

EMail Doodlings – “How the can this movement support this insider?!?!?!?!?!” (Part 2)

Adding on to my previous post – a reposte to a response (lightly edited):

Obama is a dictator, not a traditional political President

Obama is the epitome of the Progressive end-game: The High Administrator of the Administrative State that should decide for us all what is best for us instead of the Founders’ vision that we are the sovereigns and not the State; in that, you are absolutely correct.

Yes, Obama will have to participate in at least two debates, if not three.  Simple Alinskyism – use his strength against him, which was his PREVIOUS speechifying and he didn’t do too badly in the Democrat debates.   But you also have to admit that McCain was AWFUL in the debates and in the campaigning in between them, he refused to put on the gloves and beat Obama to a pulp (indeed, methinks McCain took a dive).  If he REFUSES to debate, that will only exacerbate the meme HE has created that he is worthless without TOTUS.

Read more

EMail Doodlings – “How the can this movement support this insider?!?!?!?!?!” (Part 1)

There is one very upset and confused guy on one of the email lists I’m on; a Libertarian TEA Party kind of guy, he JUST cannot for the life of him, understand why Newt Gingrich is surging so with Movement Conservatives.  And why TEA Partiers are flocking to Newt just is beyond his comprehension.  So, the above question uttered from his fingertips.  Never wishing to leave a challenge undone, I answered:  “A tool“.  Now, in many groups, that would be fightin’ words – in this case, merely “a tool with which to achieve an end”. And I wish, at the time, that I had thought of that two word answer.  Silly me, had to go and use a whole bunch more instead (H/T: Gallup for the chart) (lightly edited):

I will agree with you that beating Obama is not a done deal.  We all, as uber-political junkies know that because we know that a lot of effort is going to be done by the vast Left Wing / Union conspiracy in their GOTV (Get Out The Vote) efforts.  We all, from our lofty positions (heh!) known that many people are not really all that knowledgeable about ALL the issues and all of the nuances thereof, and will therefore , may well vote for Obama.  Again.

Being here in NH, I can tell you the overriding issue to Movement Conservatives and TEA Partiers is not to beat Obama right now but to beat Romney.  That is the near term issue that is forefront on every TEA Party / 9-12 / Conservative’s mind.  Five weeks to go.

The Libertarian part of the Republican Party has already…

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly