The GOP establishment continues to push Mitt Romney as the “inevitable” Republican nominee. John Sununu endorsed Romney the other day, saying, he wanted to support a solid conservative. If he wanted to support a solid conservative, why in the hell did he endorse Romney?
Romney really stepped in it yesterday.
In Ohio, he stopped by a phone banking operation where volunteers were working to get the vote out for a couple of really important ballot initiatives.
In Ohio, earlier this year, the state legislature passed, and Governor John Kasich signed, Senate Bill 5. This dramatically reduced the power of public sector unions.
In Wisconsin, similar legislation was passed and the results were dramatic. School districts immediately realized millions of dollars in cost savings. In Ohio, after the bill was passed, leftists and union organizers quickly had an initative put on the ballot, called Issue 2. Issue 2 would ratify the Kasich bill.
Mitt Romney was thrown a hanging curve ball at the visit to the phone bank. He could have said, yes he supported the issues. (There is another one on the ballot that amends the state constitution to forbid a mandate to buy health insurance).
Instead, Romney said, "I am not speaking about the particular ballot issues. Those are up to the people of Ohio. But I certainly support the efforts of the governor to reign in the scale of government. I am not terribly familiar with the two ballot initiatives. But I am certainly supportive of the Republican Party's efforts here."
A swing and a miss. It would be strike three but for Romney, he is up to strike three hundred.
Of course a few months ago, Romney did support Issue 2.
Today, once he realized he had stepped in it, he did the Massachusetts flip-flop.
From ABC NEWS:
After refusing to weigh in on a charged political issue in Ohio Tuesday, Mitt Romney today apologized and pledged “110 percent” support for Republican Gov. John Kasich’s plan to curtail collective bargaining by public employees there.
At an event in Fairfax, Va., today, the former Massachusetts governor and GOP candidate backtracked, saying, “I’m sorry if I created any confusion in that regard. I fully support Gov. Kasich’s – I think it’s called ‘Question 2′ in Ohio. Fully support that. In fact, on my website as far back as April I laid out I supported ‘Question 2.’”
To err is human but to really waffle you need a Massachusetts politician.
The issue here is more than just Mitt waffling for the 43rd time in a single day.
Public employee unions and the efforts to curtail them are one of the great under-reported issues for 2012.
Public employee unions always support left wing Democrats. They support them with activists and they support them with money they have collected, sometimes from people who do not want to give their money. The Unions then demand, once those liberals have been elected, even greater salary and benefit packages for public employees.
The citizens in a number of states have realized this cannot continue. The states cannot afford to continue this because they cannot afford it.
As a matter for conservatives, there are two issues. First, the growing public sector is unsustainable. We have already seen this in a number of states. When times get tough, instead of taking cuts, like people do in the private sector, public employee unions demand tax increases to make up the difference.
As we fight to dismantle socialism, one of the things we have to realize is this relationship between unions and liberal politicians is one of the ways the unions are able to fund left wing causes and candidates.
One of our goals must be to defund liberalism. We must stop the Federal, State and Local governments from handing out money to left wing groups who only use the money to advance liberal goals.
Reigning in the public employee unions is one of the first, largest steps we can take.
Not only does it help bring fiscal sanity back to the government, it helps to cut off the funding of liberalism.
The only thing Romney stands for is his desire to be president.
He will say or do whatever advances that goal. When confronted with a choice where he needs to be decisive
he waffles until he has time to see where he thinks he should stand.
He is a weak leader and we already have that in the White House. obama can beat Romney.
We need a conservative!
Seems he may be another one strongly in Soros pocket......
Has anyone suggested this yet...????
If you havent seen it....
I got this little 10 min. video yesterday of a 1948 cartoon. Everyone needs to look at it. Lloyd, they knew in 1948 what you were talking about and it is happening again. Enjoy...but don't miss this!
There is not one candidate that I am truly excited over. I want a fiscal conservative, one who will follow the Constitution, the rule of law. I want a President that supports our Military, demands illegals to leave our Country, stop giving benefits to illegals, get rid of entitlements, reduce government, simplify the tax code, reduce taxes, get rid of duplication in government, waste and fraud, stop retaliation for those who come forward, remove Obozocare, replace with lowering medical insurance costs while providing needed services, close our borders, send Mexico a bill for housing illegals, remove Irans nukes, support Israel, get rid of terriorists from here and in the world, be moral and ethical, tell the truth, stop paying off doners, dont reward special interests who fund campaigns, place the fraud and administration on trail for treason, etc.
Who can I trust? Oboza has to go. Huntsman and Johnson are a joke. Pauls stand on foreign policy will never get him elected. Santorum and Bachmann have no chance at getting the nomination. Perry is not Presidential, hate his views on illegal immigration. I like Gingrich, but know if I can trust him based on his past. Cann is a nice man, but does not have the experience needed to be President, to deal with an incompetent Congress and government. Romney stand on health insurance pisses me off for Mass, wrong move. Is he really against illegal immigration or just he says what people want to hear? He is a moderate, a compromiser that shows tolerance.
We have no RR running for office, no one with the personality, strength, honor that will to lead America forward. I dont want a President to compromise and show tolerance towards progressivism and political correctness. I want one who will stand on principals and values, follow the rule of law. We need progressives in Congress and RINO's thrown out. So Im not excited about 2008 Candidate (McCompromise), nor 2011 Candidates. They dont meet my critera to save America. All that I know is that Obozo Fraud and Adminstration need to go.