WSJ Dismembers Romney

[NATO AIR]

Excellent and fair review of why conservatives can't support Romney either.


Romney's Convictions
February 1, 2008

Mitt Romney has emerged as the last Republican with a chance to stop John McCain, and there's no doubt he's a candidate from central casting: successful in business and politics, a family man, and quicker and more articulate than most. The main doubt about him has been whether he believes in anything enough to stick to it if he did become President.

To hear the candidate himself tell it, Mr. Romney believes above all in "data." As he told us on a visit, his management style includes "wallowing" in data about a problem, analyzing that data like the business consultant he once was, and then using it to devise a solution. A major theme of his candidacy is that he'll bring that business model to a "broken" Washington, apply it to Congress and the bureaucracy, and thus triumph over gridlock and the status quo.
[Mitt Romney]

To which we'd say: Good luck with that. Washington's problem isn't a lack of data, or a failure to calibrate the incentives as in the business world. Congress and the multiple layers of government respond exactly as you'd expect given the incentives for self-preservation and turf protection that always exist in political institutions. The only way to overcome them is with leadership on behalf of good ideas backed by public support. The fact that someone as bright as Mr. Romney doesn't recognize this Beltway reality risks a Presidency that would get rolled quicker than you can say Jimmy Carter.

All the more so because we haven't been able to discern from his campaign, or his record in Massachusetts, what his core political principles are. Mr. Romney spent his life as a moderate Republican, and he governed the Bay State that way after his election in 2002. While running this year, however, he has reinvented himself as a conservative from radio talk show-casting, especially on immigration.

The problem is not that Mr. Romney is willing to reconsider his former thinking. Nor is it so much that his apparent convictions always seem in sync with the audience to which he is speaking at the moment. (Think $20 billion in corporate welfare for Michigan auto makers.) Plenty of politicians attune their positions to new constituencies. The larger danger is that Mr. Romney's conversions are not motivated by expediency or mere pandering but may represent his real governing philosophy.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120182471883733637.html?mod=opinion_main_review_ and_outlooks

[5stringJeff]

I could bring myself to vote for Romney, though I have some issues with his stand on the... issues. I could not vote for McCain.

[Yurt]

Excellent and fair review of why conservatives can't support Romney either.

Not really that excellent, a review -- yes, but not excellent....


Mitt Romney has emerged as the last Republican with a chance to stop John McCain, and there's no doubt he's a candidate from central casting: successful in business and politics, a family man, and quicker and more articulate than most. The main doubt about him has been whether he believes in anything enough to stick to it if he did become President.

This of course is my biggest concern with mitt. what exactly are his beliefs and what exactly does he envision for this country should he be president. however, the "data" is compiled from his position changes, albiet fair, however, is one never allowed to change their mind? Now, if he changed and then changed back, that would be something.


To hear the candidate himself tell it, Mr. Romney believes above all in "data." As he told us on a visit, his management style includes "wallowing" in data about a problem, analyzing that data like the business consultant he once was, and then using it to devise a solution. A major theme of his candidacy is that he'll bring that business model to a "broken" Washington, apply it to Congress and the bureaucracy, and thus triumph over gridlock and the status quo.

I cannot understand why the WSJ has a problem with this. The current "model" of government works -- to point -- however, it is in dire need of change. Until someone comes up with a better idea, I have no problem with using business as the "model" to change washington. don't be fooled by the MSM, business is not just greedy old white men, it is actually a way of life. when you can't tax the people blind, you have to give them an incentive to open their eyes.


To which we'd say: Good luck with that. Washington's problem isn't a lack of data, or a failure to calibrate the incentives as in the business world. Congress and the multiple layers of government respond exactly as you'd expect given the incentives for self-preservation and turf protection that always exist in political institutions. The only way to overcome them is with leadership on behalf of good ideas backed by public support. The fact that someone as bright as Mr. Romney doesn't recognize this Beltway reality risks a Presidency that would get rolled quicker than you can say Jimmy Carter.

Exactly, again, the author of this article should be canned from the WSJ for this is what is broken and the author nearly supports this. The author offers nothing better than what Romney offers. Nothing. What the hell are "good ideas" backed by "public support." Think about it --- we can all be rich if we all had money to start with.


All the more so because we haven't been able to discern from his campaign, or his record in Massachusetts, what his core political principles are. Mr. Romney spent his life as a moderate Republican, and he governed the Bay State that way after his election in 2002. While running this year, however, he has reinvented himself as a conservative from radio talk show-casting, especially on immigration.

Did Romney ever support Amnesty? Yes or no.


The problem is not that Mr. Romney is willing to reconsider his former thinking. Nor is it so much that his apparent convictions always seem in sync with the audience to which he is speaking at the moment. (Think $20 billion in corporate welfare for Michigan auto makers.) Plenty of politicians attune their positions to new constituencies. The larger danger is that Mr. Romney's conversions are not motivated by expediency or mere pandering but may represent his real governing philosophy.

Again, one of my major concerns with Romney.

[avatar4321]

the article says nothing about conservatives and with good reason. Conservatives dont have a problem supportng him. They are who have made Romney competitive.

[Yurt]

the article says nothing about conservatives and with good reason. Conservatives dont have a problem supportng him. They are who have made Romney competitive.

what about his changing views and the issues I had problems with in the post above yours? seriously, those are big issues to me and others.

[avatar4321]

what about his changing views and the issues I had problems with in the post above yours? seriously, those are big issues to me and others.

i dont have a problem with views changing. especially when most of his critics have to reach back 13+ years to find a statement when his view was different.

Im looking at his record as governor.

He cut taxes and prevented the legislature from raising them
He balanced the budget all four years.
Every issue on life that crossed his desk he came down on the favor of life.
He fought the courts efforts to force gay marriage onto the people of Mass. (Shame he lost that one)
He did what he could to fight illegal immigration.

The fact is his record is very conservative. I dont care what he said before that. What he did speaks louder than anything he could say.

[Yurt]

i dont have a problem with views changing. especially when most of his critics have to reach back 13+ years to find a statement when his view was different.

Im looking at his record as governor.

He cut taxes and prevented the legislature from raising them
He balanced the budget all four years.
Every issue on life that crossed his desk he came down on the favor of life.
He fought the courts efforts to force gay marriage onto the people of Mass. (Shame he lost that one)
He did what he could to fight illegal immigration.

The fact is his record is very conservative. I dont care what he said before that. What he did speaks louder than anything he could say.

Ok on the years, as long has he has not changed back.

Another big problem with romney -- he didn't raise "taxes" but he raised "fees" -- and that helped to fix the budget. agree on gay marriage and immigration -- tuesday is coming

[avatar4321]

Ok on the years, as long has he has not changed back.

Another big problem with romney -- he didn't raise "taxes" but he raised "fees" -- and that helped to fix the budget. agree on gay marriage and immigration -- tuesday is coming

fees arent taxes as far as im concerned. However, from what ive seen they hadnt been raised in decades so basically he allowed them to be brought up more accurate modern price. They should probably just lock it into inflation. that way they dont have to do it all the time.

[Roadrunner]

The complaint that Romney has changed his positions on major issues to woo the conservative vote doesn't hold much water when you consider that both Hillary Clinton and John McCain have changed previously held positions to woo segments of the voters during their campaigns as well. Why is it that their change in positions is conveniently ignored or downplayed by the MSM when Romney's is always at the forefront?

[Kathianne]

the article says nothing about conservatives and with good reason. Conservatives dont have a problem supportng him. They are who have made Romney competitive.

Exactly. I like the WSJ, but make no mistake, their editorial board is straight from the GOP talking points, whether immigration or anything else. Not an administration, not a person, but GOP.

McCain is the GOP leader, it's his 'time' like it was Bob Dole's and that worked out grand. Those senators would not be falling in line for McCain if not for leadership, which are the party's representatives. That's just politics, for both parties.

[Yurt]

fees arent taxes as far as im concerned. However, from what ive seen they hadnt been raised in decades so basically he allowed them to be brought up more accurate modern price. They should probably just lock it into inflation. that way they dont have to do it all the time.

why hasn't romney defended his "fees" in the manner you have? has romney mentioned that the fees have not been raised in decades? from the debates i have seen, he does a quick sidestep to the question.

[Kathianne]

why hasn't romney defended his "fees" in the manner you have? has romney mentioned that the fees have not been raised in decades? from the debates i have seen, he does a quick sidestep to the question.

Cause he's just an 'adequate' politician. It reminds me of the lawyers representing AT&T during the consent decree. They would sit in Senators offices all day long, waiting for them to be 'free', when they should have been talking to their staffs. Oh yeah, then came divestiture.

[Yurt]

The complaint that Romney has changed his positions on major issues to woo the conservative vote ONE doesn't hold much water when you consider that both Hillary Clinton and John McCain have changed previously held positions to woo segments of the voters during their campaigns as well. TWO Why is it that their change in positions is conveniently ignored or downplayed by the MSM when Romney's is always at the forefront?

you're talking about two different things

the first is not excused because the left is doing the same.

the second, is of course the liberal media. stories are made due to heart tugs, not conservative tugs. you have to pull at people's emotions, make the bleed, hence, why the bleeding heart liberals own so much of the news. also, why they ABHOR fox news. why else do you think the other news affiliates fight fox so much? if their "news" was so "objective", why bother fighting fox like their life depends on it?

[Yurt]

Cause he's just an 'adequate' politician. It reminds me of the lawyers representing AT&T during the consent decree. They would sit in Senators offices all day long, waiting for them to be 'free', when they should have been talking to their staffs. Oh yeah, then came divestiture.

why is it that avi knows romney's "position" better than romney, according to your view? are you saying that an "adequate" politician doesn't know why he believes something or did something?

[Kathianne]

why is it that avi knows romney's "position" better than romney, according to your view? are you saying that an "adequate" politician doesn't know why he believes something or did something?

He doesn't articulate what he's done. Truth to tell, Manu just explained how he made the millions he's currently spending. Just saying, "I've been very successful in business. Turned the Olympics around. Am proud of my record as governor." Just isn't enough. What did he do? What did he learn? Make it exciting, he's just 'adequate.'

[Yurt]

He doesn't articulate what he's done. Truth to tell, Manu just explained how he made the millions he's currently spending. Just saying, "I've been very successful in business. Turned the Olympics around. Am proud of my record as governor." Just isn't enough. What did he do? What did he learn? Make it exciting, he's just 'adequate.'

what do you mean? why wouldn't he, he articulates most everything else. i know it isn't enough, that is why i asked the question(s)

:)

[Kathianne]

what do you mean? why wouldn't he, he articulates most everything else. i know it isn't enough, that is why i asked the question(s)

:)

I don't know if it's a case of he assumes everyone understands the underlying intelligence and diligence it takes to accomplish what he's done; if so he'd be wrong or the rest of us would be doing the same? It may be a case of the things come naturally to him, so he doesn't see the 'specialness' on the accomplishments? In any case, he never fully articulates his own strengths. Notice how McCain goes on about the POW thing? He understands that some might not have heard it, (same ones that don't know who the president is), or have forgotten.

His best moments come when he's under attack and then he defends. But that is not where a politician wants to be, on the defensive.

[theHawk]

Excellent and fair review of why conservatives can't support Romney either.

Romney is nowhere near what a real conservative is, so its laughable for so called conservatives to prop him up as the "conservative alternative" to McCain.

But the problem isn't just with Romney's flip flopper record, what really turns me off on the guy is his personality. He comes off as a smug silverspoon millionaire who likes to toute his private sector success. In itself its not wrong to brag about a great personal economic success, that is after all one of the cornerstones of being a successful republican. But when he does it at the expense of a life long soldier like McCain, it comes off as downright repulsive. And regardless of how either candidate stands on the issues, the average American is going side with an American war veteran than a pompous millionaire.

[Yurt]

Romney is nowhere near what a real conservative is, so its laughable for so called conservatives to prop him up as the "conservative alternative" to McCain.

But the problem isn't just with Romney's flip flopper record, what really turns me off on the guy is his personality. He comes off as a smug silverspoon millionaire who likes to toute his private sector success. In itself its not wrong to brag about a great personal economic success, that is after all one of the cornerstones of being a successful republican. But when he does it at the expense of a life long soldier like McCain, it comes off as downright repulsive. And regardless of how either candidate stands on the issues, the average American is going side with an American war veteran than a pompous millionaire.

ok hawk, put up, who is the "real" conservative?

[theHawk]

ok hawk, put up, who is the "real" conservative?

Me. :laugh2: