The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Romney Rebooted

Text Size

Romney Rebooted

By Philip Klein on 2.18.10 @ 3:00PM

Mitt Romney took the stage at CPAC this afternoon following a rousing (surprise) introduction from Sen. Scott Brown, speaking as an economic guru and steering clear of social issues.

In an early preview of a likely presidential run in 2012, Romney attacked President Obama’s policies for prolonging the recession, raising unemployment and exploding the national debt. And in a deeper sense, he argued, the liberal vision has stifled the kind of pioneering spirit that built this country.

As a solution to our problems, Romney called for cutting taxes, strengthening the dollar, reducing deficits, and having more intelligent regulatory policies.

Romney’s emphasis stood in stark contrast to his speeches to the conference during his first presidential run, when he portrayed himself as a crusader on social issues in an attempt to outflank Rudy Giuliani and John McCain from the right. Given that his record in Massachusetts didn’t jive with his latent social conservatism, the strategy ensured that he would come across as an inauthentic flip-flopper.

Romney is clearly more comfortable in the role as the competent manager with business expertise who understands the economy. That’s an image that was pounded home by those who introduced him.

Jay Sekulow, of American Center for Law and Justice and a Romney supporter during his first run, said, “Our economy needs a Mr. Fix it today.” And Sen. Brown echoed the sentiment, insisting that, “If you want to fix the economy, you have to listen to Gov. Romney.”

In a thin field, Romney is probably the closest thing there is to a favorite to take the Republican nomination, but health care is one issue where he could run into problems.

During his speech, Romney called for a consumer-based approach to health care rather than one run by government bureaucrats. But the plan he signed in Massachusetts, which served as a model for Obamacare, did the exact opposite. It mandated that individuals purchase insurance or pay a tax, and empowered government bureaucrats to design insurance policies to be sold on a new government-run exchange. While Romney will try -- as he did today -- to hide behind the idea that individual states should chart their own health care policies, the reality is that his health care plan expanded Medicaid, which imposed costs on the federal government that are being borne by taxpayers in all states.

View all comments (27) | Leave a comment

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 3:36PM

Flip-flop Romney. Another cardboard cut0ut RINO; just what we need.

I'll vote but I won't work to help Romney get elected.

His nomination assures Obama another four years. Thanks, RNC.

S.L. Toddard| 2.18.10 @ 3:57PM

Mitt Romney, the pro-choice Mormon who brought Massachusetts government healthcare.

What a conservative!

Warrior| 2.18.10 @ 4:31PM

Concise and accurate although his religion is not an issue. I wish all conservatives would drop the social aspects of a political run from their play list. It is the most ridiculous mine field they all try to cross. If they took any lessons, they can just answer it is above their pay grade.

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 5:18PM

Above our pay grade--just like Obama. Lovely.

That might be your lesson but it's not mine.

Warrior| 2.18.10 @ 9:36PM

You obviously missed the point.

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 10:19PM

Or you made yours poorly. Please elucidate me.

Bob| 2.18.10 @ 3:58PM

Actually, Missy, Romney could be elected if the economy doesn't rebound much. I was a Romney supporter but would not vote for McCain/Palin. If he runs, I will vote for him over Obama -- as many times as I can. Remember that independents outnumber either Dems or Republicans -- and they would like a fiscal conservative RINO....

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 4:19PM

We've already been through this, Bob--remember? We ran a RINO in 2008.

RINO Romney might float your boat, but there aren't enough 'repubs' like you to push him over the top in the general. I just hope we can take Congress in November.

This is Clinton redux.

Bob| 2.18.10 @ 5:06PM

McCain was no Romney -- he had no business and executive experience. McCain was 5th from the bottom of his class and Romney was at the top of his class at Harvard where he received a joint MBA-JD degree. Palin is a dunce.

To compare 2008 with Romney is a joke itself. Romney is far more competent and successful than either McCain or Obama. If McCain would have chosen Romney as VP, I would not have voted for Obama. There are more people like me than the far right social conservatives and conservative populists. Palin would lose -- Romney might well win as people are getting tired of incompetence.

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 5:16PM

You're wrong about everything, Bob; your strident defense of Globaloney Warming is just one absurd example.

You're cold and clueless, and you're wrong about Romney, too.

You'll see.

Bob| 2.18.10 @ 5:37PM

Missy, I see that you are factually deficient. My stance is that the data supports global warming but does not support the contention that most of it is manmade. Please show me the temperature data that supports your contention that there is no global warming over the last century. You can't, can you???? And please, why is there not enough snow in Vancouver?

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 6:29PM

If you're so sure of the veracity of Global Warming why are you avoiding Global Warming threads? Hmmm?

And, please, why are you folks in the mid-west and on the east coast buried under tons of record breaking snow?

"Phil Jones, the UK's top Climate scientist admitted in a BBC interview that there has been NO GLOBAL WARMING OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS." Guess science doesn't matter to a knuckle-dragging troglodyte like you, 'RINO' Bob. Tsk tsk.

Oh, how's your Obama vote workin' out for you?

Bob| 2.18.10 @ 7:54PM

Missy, I can't be here all day -- I've got other things to do. Here's a modified chart of global temps using the methodology from the people that complained about (but did not disprove) the hockey stick effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.....arison.png

There is no question that global temps have risen over the past century. Furthermore, there are two periods of time, both about a decade long, where temps have declined before they resumed their upward trend.

So where is your data, Missy? I guess you are the knuckle dragger, lady... You also believe the earth is flat and it is only 6,000 years old. Right?

Missy| 2.18.10 @ 10:28PM

Well, Bob, you're here when it suits you and obviously, the global warming threads don't suit you any more. Why is that, chart man?

Maybe because you've gotten your clock cleaned by posters who really know what they're talking about and you're embarrassed that your silly defense of globaloney warming nonsense shows you to be the fraud you are.

Luddites like you are the real flat-earthers. Fool.

How's your Obama vote workin' out for you? Guess you don't have time to answer that either. lol

tappin52| 2.19.10 @ 7:07AM

Your charts are worthless, Bob. They cherry picked sites that were warmer to record temp data and eliminated sites that were cooler. They've admitted it. Manipulated data is useless data.

Sonny| 2.19.10 @ 3:04PM

Manipulated data is the only kind of data Bob uses.

stormin| 2.18.10 @ 8:35PM

Why is farm machinery frozen under the ice in
GREENland?What are you going to do about the biggest source of greenhouse gas, the ocean ,we should also cover those nasty peat bogs. Co2 is a small part of the atmosphere and mans contribution is not worth talking about. Doubling it would the effect of trying to warm the rosebowl with a space heater.

Franklin| 2.18.10 @ 5:51PM

I get a little nervous about Romney - he seems just like the same "good 'ole boy" politicians we have now in Congress. I don't know if I can trust him to mean what he says.

Don't have anything to back that up with, just a feeling...

Sonny| 2.18.10 @ 6:30PM

Romney was for abortion before he was against it--and that's just one example of his phoniness.

Colin Foy| 2.18.10 @ 5:52PM

There is something I've always liked about Mitt. Even though I'm sure he would generally disappoint conservatives and constitutionalists if he makes it to the WH.
Like Missy, I've always had my suspicions about him. I remember seeing Romney on C-SPAN during his second debate with Ted Kennedy back in 90' or 92'. At the time MR was kicking TK's a-- in the pols. The chatter was that MA voters were "Ripe for change. Found the young Mitt appealing," blah blah... etc.
In the first debate Mitt easily made the chappaquiddick kid look like the vacuous, bloated fool that he was. However, in the second debate Mitt basically turtled up and let TK bloviate ad hominem. It was just really sad though illuminating, in that it demonstrated how things really get done with our ruling class political parasites.
I've always wondered what deal was worked out between the two? I'm assuming it was the governorship of MA for Mitt if he would just stand down? As a result I've always been leery of Romney and Effete Coast republocrats in general.
The real power behind both of these insipid political parties will talk the talk and play the game for us wee folk for a few months before they roll over for O'Bowma, his treasonous agenda and unrelenting, un-american ilk. Cheers!

kingsmill| 2.18.10 @ 6:42PM

Mitt is a political opportunist of the first order. There is no there there.

Even more egregious is Mitt's gubernatorial debate performance with Democrat Shannon O'Brien (available on YouTube) when Mitt gets hot under the caller and excoriates liberal O'Brien for implying that Mitt is not thoroughly pro-abortion. A truly disgraceful and unforgivable performance.

Perhaps he promised Ted that he would install Commonwealth Care, the Massachusetts version of ObamaCare, trail blazed by Mitt.

Duane McDonald| 2.18.10 @ 11:12PM

We should all drop the social issues from our selection on political office holders. I include religion as a social issue also. I think Romney would have been a far better choice for President than either McCain or Obama. I certainly admire McCain for his Naval service and especially his action while a POW, but those do not give him the qualification to be President. It should be obvious by all now that Obama has few if any of the qualifications.
Let us elect an executive to be chief executive, not a preacher, rabble rouser, Senator or Salesaman.

Liam| 2.19.10 @ 3:01AM

Character matters to me--I won't vote for someone who is untrustworthy.

W. Lee Warren| 2.19.10 @ 4:31AM

Romney... here we go again. In 1996 the R's ran Bob Dole, who I think was actually dead at the time, against the young and dynamic Clinton. 2008, the stiff and recalcitrant, personality-less insider McCain against the young and dynamic Obama. Now it's the old, connected, insider, near-socialist-with-slightly-conservative-tendencies... didn't Scott Brown teach us that America is ready for a young outsider?

Sonny| 2.19.10 @ 5:41AM

They don't call us the Stupid Party for nothin'.

John - TMF| 2.19.10 @ 7:21AM

Romney = Crist - tan

Mitt Romney is whatever he thinks will get him to where he wants to be at the moment. The trait makes for a shrewd and well compensated salesman. I makes for a dangerous mess as a statesman; all politician and no substance or principle.

The problem with the GOP is that how much money you can spread around is what drives the policy and the power.

Romney is a typical Yankee Establishment Republican. He is wealthy enough to insulate him from the hoi polloi, fiscally malleable - whatever sounds like it will win votes, and socially ambivalent enough to swing with the wind.

Mitt Romney and his kind need to go away. They need to retire to their family compounds, country clubs, and sailing regattas. They never fight when fighting is needed. They never stand for much but re-election, and they really are truly never "glad to meet you".

Please GOP find somebody else - somebody real this time.

r/The Mighty Fahvaag

Cris Worth| 2.19.10 @ 10:10AM

A few points about Romney:
1. His first name is Willard; I can see MoveOn.org coming up with a YouTube commercial in 2012 relating his first name with the 1971 rat movie.
2. His religion will be a HUGE factor in 2012, he still hasn't explained the basic tenets of Mormonism and the impact it has on his private life and politics. Also his position as Stakeholder in the Church equivalent to preacher...what work has he done in this role and his duties and responsibilties as a Stakeholder.
3. His conservative credentials are left wanting...pro abortion with links to Planned Parenthood, health care reform in Mass. Aka Romney care which drove up the cost of Medicaid putting more pressure on all tax payers.
4. What state will Romney represent....Mass.? Michigan? New Hampshire? Utah? California?
Where is his official residence today aka pays state taxes and is registered to vote? A simple question does anyone know? If it's Mass., Michigan or California, will the GOP nominate someone who will almost certainly lose his home state.
5. Unknown factors...assuming front runner status his accumulation of wealth, business interests and positions on non-heterosexual marriage and illegal immigration to name a few will come under close scrutiny.