Conservatives across the country should pay attention to the outcome of a little-noticed election in Massachusetts tonight, where the state Republican Party will be electing an interim party chair.
There are seven candidates, the most prominent being former Rep. Peter Torkildsen. Why reverse Romney? Because as a state representative Torkildsen had a record as a fiscal and social conservative. But upon being elected to Congress, he took a decided left turn, particularly on social issues. Today, he stands as pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage Republican, and according to knowledgeable Republicans on the state party level, former Gov. Romney and members of his former staff are actively working behind the scenes to get Torkildsen elected. Officially, Romney has stated that he is neutral in the race. But sources close to Romney said he was prepared to attend tonight’s meeting to speak on Torkildsne’s behalf and cast a vote if need be to avoid a second or third round of balloting . “If this goes to a second or third round of voting, Torkildsen has a much tougher time of winning,” says Boston-based Republican Party donor, who is not backing Romney for President.
One has to wonder, in a race where there are some defininte conservatives, why Romney is so willingly having his name associated with the “evolved” moderate in the race.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online