Where were you in 1992?
Twenty years ago, we were getting our first cell phones and still did not know what the internet was.
Twenty years ago, Mitt Romney was helping liberals.
In an essay on his website, political commentator Terrence Jeffrey says Romney was open about his support for former Massachusetts Dem... Paul Tsongas’ White House bid.
Jeffrey writes in a November article in Human Events that Romney was attracted to Tsongas’ campaign because of Tsongas’ strong support for population control.
“When he ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1992, Paul Tsongas repeatedly made it clear: He loathed President George H.W. Bush’s flip-flopping on abortion and his inattentiveness to what Tsongas perceived as the urgent need for global population control,” Jeffrey said.
“I will tell you very strongly the No. 1 environmental issue I’m going to push for when I’m president is population control around this world so we can turn to later generations and say something except, ‘Sorry, folks,’” Jeffrey wrote, quoting Tsongas.
“Two months later, Romney cast his vote for Tsongas. That Massachusetts primary was a landslide in both parties. Bush beat Pat Buchanan 66 percent to 28 percent. Among Democrats, native son Tsongas took 66 percent to then-former California Gov. Jerry Brown’s 15 percent and Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton’s 11 percent,” Jeffrey wrote.
Political analyst Steve Baldwin agrees and says that Romney’s history with the Republican party is pretty thin.
“Romney’s history with the Republican Party is minimal; and much of his relationship with the GOP has been destructive. In fact, he voted for and gave money to Democrats on a number of occasions,” Baldwin said.
A lot of things can change in twenty years, but Mitt Romney has not been one of them. As late as his last days as Governor of Massachusetts, he was still pushing liberal agendas. Remember Romney gave Massachusetts Romneycare after he became a lame duck. He gave them Romneycare after he had decided he would not run for reelection. In other words, he did not need to appease the liberal political base in Massachusetts at that time. The same is true for the draconian environmental restrictions he put on Massachusetts in January 2006.
In twenty years, a lot of things change. Mitt Romney is not one of them.
Isn’t it reassuring to know, twenty years later, he is still a liberal?
In an interview with the Washington Examiner (12/07/2011) Romney discovered that his 50 state waiver for Obamacare could not take effect until 2017. If Romney really had his heart into repealing Obamacare he would have known that his 50 state waiver is useless.
Bradley, that information is fascinating, I didn't know. Perhaps lots of others are not aware of this. We need to spread the word about this. The more we look, the more we find.
I called Mark Levin's sub host last week and told him. I was nervous as hell being on the radio. He said "Thanks for the tip."
Did he follow up on your information? I didn't get a chance to listen to Mark last week, every day.
I listen to him nearly every day. I haven't heard anything. I first heard about it when Erik Erickson subbed for Neal Boortz. The article itself is easy to google.
There is another issue in that Virginia changed it's ballot access rules in November 2011 raising the number of required raw signatures from 10,000 to 15,000 thus disqualifying Gingrich and Perry. http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/12/26/did-the-va-gop-change-t...
We need to quit splitting our vote between conservatives and allowing the moderate to slip in. Romney got 25% of the vote, which means 75% didn't want him. We're that 75%, but we're still fighting amongst ourselves. That's got to stop or we'll end up with Mitt.
If we do, then we need to figure out how to hold him to his new found conservatism. Bottom line is that bad as Mitt might be, he is still better than Obama, and I'd rather have the problem of how to hold Mitt to his committments than the problem of surviving another four years of Obama.
We need a "conservative sweepstakes" -- Gingrich, Perry, Santorum head to head. Nationwide. The two that lost would agree to support the winner.
You used the same logic as Gingrich. You can make the same statement about each candidate. Over 75%5 did not want Santorum, over 78% did not want Ron Paul, over 86% did not want Gingrich and over 89% didn't want Rick Perry. When people make statements like Gingrich and you repeating it is basically an untruth. The most you can say about the numbers and be honest about it is to say Romney or whichever candidate was not your first choice as will be the case for many when of us. As in the end their will only be one candidate standing. My first choice is already out of the race and so will many more before I get my turn to vote in June.
IMPEACH OBAMA NOW! ! ! !
Mitt is an Idiot and a die hard liberal. I never thought that he would ever run under the GOP ticket. He is everything the Tea Party is NOT. And if he get's in, we are not totally screwed, but we are going to have too march 110 times more.
In 1992, I was in the 7th grade and I didn't care one BIT about Mitt Romney, there were hot guy's and that topped my list LMBO! :D
In 1992 I lived in Tempe, AZ a suburb of Phoenix, in Sherrif Joe Country. Ans Judson. we did have a computer.
Heard today on Rush that not only did RomenyCare come from Romney & his Advisors, but Obama may be looking to use a plan from a Romney Advisor to add a trillion to the budget to bail out all the underwater home loans.
"The plan that Obama wants to implement "would be modeled after one originally devised by Columbia University economists Glenn Hubbard (a campaign adviser to Mitt Romney and AEI visiting scholar) and Christopher Mayer." These are the two guys that have come up with this refinancing program."
The more I hear about Romney the more I think he's really working for the other team.
Would love to follow all the money that went into his Iowa ads against Newt, wonder how much lib money was involved.