Mitt Romney or as we like to call him, Mitt the Cowardly liberal, is still lying to the American people and the Republicans in particular.
Yes, there are a lot of lies, but there is one in particular that is worth mentioning.
Which one is it?
Mitt the cowardly liberal claims he has Tea Party support and has support from prominent Tea Party leaders.
Really?
This started when I appeared MSNBC on Monday, on Martin Bashir’s show. I stated Tea Partiers would not support Mitt Romney. Romney claimed on the Laura Ingraham show that he had the support of prominent Tea Party leaders.
Really?
Who?
The answer is, he does not have the support of any significant Tea Party group or leader.
Why?
Mitt Romney is a liberal. Mitt Romney is simply John McCain 2.0. Mitt Romney, if elected will advance a liberal agenda.
Mitt Romney has ignored the Tea Party. His theory is simple. He does not need us. He will give the Tea Party lip service, just because any good politician does not go out of his way to antagonize a voting block.
For liberals, Romney is the candidate they most want to face. The Tea Party movement at best will be lukewarm behind him and at worst many of us will simply pass on the Presidential race to concentrate on Senate and House races. In previous polls, between one third and one half of Tea Party members surveyed said they would not vote for Romney in the general election.
(See our new Tea Party Nation Poll: Will you vote for Mitt Romney?)
Mitt Romney, like many politicians, simply says things and expects us to accept those statements as gospel, even if they fly in the face of the facts.
The fact is Mitt Romney has no major Tea Party support. No significant Tea Party figure has endorsed the liberal former Massachusetts governor.
The reason is the Tea Party does not support liberals.
Another statement Mitt Romney floats out that he expects us to blindly accept is that he is a conservative. That is one of the most laughable statements in history. If false statements could get you disqualified from running, Mitt would immediately be voted off the island for that whopper.
The truth of the matter is that Mitt Romney was a very liberal Massachusetts governor. He claims some of his liberal decisions were necessary because he had to run in a very liberal state. What Romney does not say, most of his most liberal decisions were made after he announced he was not running for reelection. He signed Romneycare after he was a lame duck. He enacted cap and trade when he was a lame duck. He could have just said I’m not enacting any of these laws and not had to worry about it because he was not going to run for reelection.
Instead, he pushed Massachusetts even further to the left.
Now, in New Hampshire, another liberal Republican, John McCain is going to endorse Mitt Romney. McCain pretty much tanked the GOP four years ago. Why does anyone care what McCain thinks? In fact, McCain’s endorsement is just another good reason not to vote for Mitt Romney, the liberal from Massachusetts.
So who endorses Mitt Romney? Liberals? Where are the Tea Party supporters he claims support him? Like his claims of a conservative record, they are a figment of his imagination.
Tags: conservatives, john, liberal, mccain, mitt, romney, splitting, votes
Permalink Reply by Marcia Wood on Romney, like Obama has a nice war chest available to him and he's an old pro at running for office - here's been doing this for years, but Conservative he's not and I don't believe he can handle Obama in debates. I say this because looking back on the debate where he lost his cool and put his hand on Ric Perry's shoulder told me alot...
We need a lion with fangs, claws and a Conservative agenda - I really feel sorry for the one we select, because I think he will have to have nerves of steel, confidence in himself and money.
Everyone know who I'm behind, so no sense repeating it again - I will just observe for the time being.
Permalink Reply by Joseph on All the candidate that has surged had slide down. Newt for one thing, has a hard time governing himself. How can you govern the nation if you can't govern yourself? The record speak for itself and that's why Newt will not be the nominee. Nobody that has made fourth place in IOWA made it to the nominee or president. Santorum on the other hand, has baggages as Newt. He tied with Romney only by luck because he has surge and we all are taking a look at him. Soon, his record and what he has stand for will speak for itself. The Record speak itself that Romney has been steady and consistent and the only candidate to beat Barack Obama.
Permalink Reply by alan b. catlett on I can't vote for Mitt for the same reason as I couldn't vote for Bush. In the 2000 primary in SC Bush's boy's ran robo calls against Cain saying Cain fathered a black baby. Bush claimed he wasn't responsible cause he couldn't control the PAC (sound familiar). If Mitt can't control his supporters and feeds us bs, he can't be trusted to be a leader in the White House.
Permalink Reply by Dan Dompier on If we are ever going to break the cycle, we have to do it now, even if it means keeping Hussein one more round. Take the Senate and keep the House. Don't fund Obama Care. Be strong in Faith. RINO Romney's election gets 4 years of Liberal Light, then in 2016, or 2020...Liberal Heavy once again. And, then America that we love is beyond rescue.
Permalink Reply by John P. Underwood on Fellow TPN Readers:
I am a husband of 1, father of 5, small business owner and biblical conviction driven man. As I have listened to and read about the many GOP candidates I continue to come back to Rick Santorum. I am not posting to convince any to support him as of yet, rather I am seeking information and documentation on why I should support Newt or Mitt over Rick.
As a man whole heartedly aspiring to follow Christ, I am committed to have a clear, non-compromising conscience each night when my head hits the pillow. I believe that our nation would be better served if as individuals we would think less about ones' electability and more about ones' personal convictions lining up with his or her past decisions.
From personal experience, I have found that once we begin to compromise our moral and ethical values the "True North" of our conviction compass will put us off course from 1 degree to 359 degrees - and off course is very dangerous. It is especially dangerous in an election where decisions are being made that will effect our children and our children's children.
I encourage all of us to 1st check our own lives and see if our "True North" is set to the heart and will of Christ our Redeemer and 2nd, are we holding others to their "True North" convictions.
Permalink Reply by Jim Delaney on From my lowly Tea Party vantage point, I see ZERO local Tea Party activity these days. No correspondence, no excitement, no engagement among the once animated membership. With a 47% disapproval rating in a recent national poll, could it be that Tea Partyers are seeking solace under their beds? Timing for such a retreat couldn't be worse. Let's hope there is a reawakening soon, but it may require MUCH MORE than hope. It will require prodding on our part.
Have been watching, listening, reading and I remain very concerned that political catastrophe awaits us come November. If that happens, ALL options will need to be on the table. I for one will not submit myself or my family to four more years of progressive tyranny!
Permalink Reply by Marcia Wood on After reading comments from my Tea Party friends - I have only this to offer. The Democrats have set us up and many are falling for their trap; they want Romney to win because they very likely will be able to beat him. He does have money, that's for sure but Obama has the Unions, Soros and other puppeteers, ACORN, Special Interest groups, many Hispanics and a slew of our youth behind him.
The best way to eliminate Obama is to keep following his every move and hope we can "impeach" him before 2013. Actually many Democrats are leaning towards Hillary Clinton at this time, there's definitely some problems with the Democratic base behind closed doors.
Permalink Reply by Jim Delaney on Marcia,
You may be on to something here. However, with the Senate firmly in the hands of the Progressives, only after the GOP captures control in the Senate, and only if it retains control in the House, can impeachment lead to the desired result, that being the conviction and removal of this putative president. Also, I think you meant to say"before 2013", but I knew what you meant.
Permalink Reply by Marcia Wood on You're right I meant 2013, sorry about that
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
