Redstate

On Sunday, I posted this here at Red State and at my blog:
http://everyopinion.blogspot.com/2008/01/how-your-parents-ruined-conserv...

Anyway, I'm glad your back to supporting Romney. (I am wondering if you could do something about his R&D theories, because it does seem to be a hang up for some. I just think it is ok as long as it has to do with National Security. Your ideas would be helpful on this.)

"Go ahead, make your jokes, Mr. Jokey... Joke-maker. But let me hit you with some knowledge. Quit now". -White Goodman

He didn't enjoy campaigning, he didn't enjoy pressing the flesh, he didn't enjoy The Road.

He probably looked at the polls, looked at the numbers, did some calculations in his head, thought about his chair at home... and made the decision that made the most sense to him.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

He expected to be crowd-surfed to the nomination and he squandered a lot of people's good will. I'm glad he's leaving.

Your response seems to indicate that you think that I was criticizing him with my post.

I just wanted to say that I wrote every word with some small amount of admiration.

To restate a point that's been made ad nauseum: The fact that he didn't want it badly is a point in his favor.

The fact that he dropped out before doing the "bitter end" thing makes me like him more, not less.

Now, I can totally see how someone would see those traits as points against him... but I wasn't in that mindset when I wrote my post.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

But what I didn't admire about him was his laxadaiscal style in seeking the nomination. He got a lot of people charged up and ready to fight for him and when he came out and stepped into the ring he looked like he wanted to throw in the towel from the first round. He seemed to me like someone who just wanted to be elected without the fight, if enough people flocked to him and gave him money.

Well, even politicians have to work to become the President. Fred didn't want to put the effort in. He was A+ on the issues that could be summed up on an 8 1/2x11 sheet of paper for Conservatives and he was a D- on his effort.

Maybe he thinks we should all just go to hell? He kind of acted like it. But I'm not worried about Thompson: he's got a great acting career and a hot lady to go back home to, so I don't pity him.

Just what is a fusion conservative ? Is he going to pick Obama or Edwards as VP ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Socially conservative, economically conservative, and willing to win the war on terror and protect our borders and the 1st amendment. You can find weaknesses and moderates in all of the rest of the field. I think you would be hard pressed to call Mitt Romney a Democrat, especially looking at the rest of the field.

If you ever find that you only have an hour to live,spend it with a liberal and it will seem like a year."-Rush Limbaugh

Even if I didn't already detest Mitt Romney, his latest Pander Bear act -- calling for nationalized cat insurance to get to John McCain's left in hurricane-vulnerable Florida -- would be sufficient to convince me that he's no conservative.

---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

The idea is essentially that of creating a national fund to support victims of natural catastrophes such as earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, tsunamis, plagues of locusts, Hillary Clinton fundraisers, yadda yadda. This sounds great until you understand that it essentially amounts to an enormous wealth transfer, where people who don't live in disaster-prone areas are forced to subsidize those who do.

I don't like John McCain. But just as he did in Michigan, he's been telling Florida voters the hard truth that the federal government's generosity with other people's money has limits; that FEMA already provides plenty of support for people who live in disaster-prone areas; and that if people want more, they ought to do it at the state level rather than expecting Uncle Sam to come to the rescue. Meanwhile Mitt's in full-bore pander mode.

I was reading in the Orlando Sentinel today about the exact issue and it stated that while Romney felt it was an important idea he did not think that it should be configured to a point where low risk zones subsidized insurance for the high risk zones. He deserves more credit than you are giving him. He will handle this like he does most policy decisions, pragmatically.

"Go ahead, make your jokes, Mr. Jokey... Joke-maker. But let me hit you with some knowledge. Quit now". -White Goodman

Romney's exact position is that he supports such a program, but doesn't want it configured such that it imposes "unreasonable costs" on non-disaster-prone states. In other words, he likes the idea as long as we don't screw people who live in low risk zones too hard.

Or maybe he just thinks only high-risk areas should participate? Or that lower risks areas should bear lower costs in proportion to their lower risk? After all, there's no injustice in high risk and low risk drivers both paying auto insurance as long as the low risk drivers don't have to bear "unreasonable costs," i.e., pay more than is fair for their risk.

Romney's not generally a skilled politician, but I actually like how he's playing this one. Be sympathetic to the public need, be sympathetic to the proposal that's supposed to fix it, but suggest reasonable caveats that at worst take the sting out of the proposal and more likely ensure that nothing comes of the proposal in the first place. I'm kind of reassured that he's not always flatfooted.

In fact, Romney is trying to have it both ways on this issue - fudging his answer to make people think he is for it without out and out promising it.

Romney also said he supports the creation of a catastrophe fund, but he cautioned that it should not burden states at low risk for natural disasters. Any proposal, he said, must recognize that "you are not going to have very low-risk homeowners, or low-risk states, subsidizing high-risk homeowners or high-risk states. Instead you're going to look at something that shares risk across individuals or states that have high-risk areas."

Sounds like doubletalk to me, but there are his words for everyone else to judge. I admit I'm biased.

John S. McCain III
We've come a long, long way together/Through the hard times and the good
I have to celebrate you, baby/I have to praise you like I should

That would obviously work exactly in the way he described. I imagine that is what he has in mind. If you are in a higher risk flood zone, you pay more. If you aren't in a flood zone at all, you don't even have to buy it.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

That Flood Insurance sure is a panderer.

How is this any different than insurnace companies charging high-risk/poor-history drivers more for auto insurance than low-risk/good-history drivers?

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Those insurance companies--what a bunch of pandering flipfloppers!

Oh, you mean the "I'll have the federal government make-up the difference in pay between the $25 per hour job you used to have and the $10 per hour job you have now" and "I'll make sure the federal government retrains you auto workers to be stock brokers" hard truths? Are those the "hard truths" you're talking about?

Michigan turned into an unfortunate Pander-fest - but let's not kid ourselves into thinking it was one-sided by any stretch of the immagination.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

The idea is essentially that of creating a national fund to support victims of natural catastrophes such as earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, tsunamis, plagues of locusts, Hillary Clinton fundraisers, yadda yadda.

Of course we already hand out disaster assistance to politically connected types whenever anything happens anywhere, so I'm not sure this would be such a horrible idea. This would be a better alternative to that kind of aide. We already do this with flood insurance. I'd rather the government stay out of it entirely, but they are already involved, cutting big checks to areas that get hit by any kind of natural "disaster," even when the "disaster" isn't much of a disaster.

But just as he did in Michigan, he's been telling Florida voters the hard truth that the federal government's generosity with other people's money has limits

Are talking about the same John McCain who says if you get laid off from your $28 an hour UAW job the federal government will pay you $28 an hour to go work at Taco Bell or McDonalds? Is that the kind of hard truth you are talking about?
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

Are talking about the same John McCain who says if you get laid off from your $28 an hour UAW job the federal government will pay you $28 an hour to go work at Taco Bell or McDonalds?

You have an original source for this?

I've posted the link a few times but I don't have it handy.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

How's this...

Republican presidential candidate John McCain said Thursday that he would use federal money to make up the salary differences for workers who lose manufacturing jobs and take lower-paying positions while they train for new careers.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

No disrespect intended, but I simply don't trust CfG flakking like the link you posted above.

I maintain that as odious as I find him, and as ugly as this is, McCain nonetheless deserves credit for telling Michigan that the American auto industry has shot itself in the foot, and that some of the manufacturing jobs are simply not coming back.

So: pander-fest concededly not one-sided, but McCain comes out less covered with slime.

Your feelings for Romney are about what are mine for JMac - so you can only imagine how I felt about said "income maintenance" program when I read about it.

OK on the CfG link - I should have posted the source and not the commentary anyway and didn't, so my bad there.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

As an issue to win over those Florida retirees. :)

Can't for the life of me think of why His Dogness would want to know the location of every cat in the country, but there it is.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Actually that's Giuliani's pander. I think Romney has said its an interesting idea that bears looking at, or something like that, but its Giuliani's proposal. I take it you will under no circumstances vote for Giuliani?

Romney's supported the idea for a while; Giuliani just made a big headline splash with a detailed plan, is all.

No, I would not vote for Rudy under any circumstances, either. Gun-grabber.

Me too, but to the death? Ouch.

The litany of pro-McCain/anti-McCain blogs are taking their toll. I can only take so much of the man.

Did you see Geraghty's theory? He thinks the campaign was actually too conventional in some ways. He says that Thompson should have kept going after the nuts like Michael Moore that most Republican officials think are beneath them.

No I didn't see it though. I gather it was linked and discussed here in the last day or so.

absentee

are terms the MSM and his opponents gave to his Michigan statements. In the first debates Mitt identified achieving energy independence as the next great mission for this nation, likening it to our drive to get a man on the moon. In Michigan he announced 20 billion in R&D for alternative fuels and automotive research. Could he have said it sooner? Sure, but he probably got more mileage announcing it in MI. Some called it pandering, but does anyone think a plan for energy independence shouldn't include increasing R&D in alternative fuels and automobile research? He never promised Michigan would see all that money, though its logical they would get a good share of it. Also, money for R&D is not a bailout. Its an effort towards revitalization of a whole industry and one part of Mitt's energy plan. If successful it will help our environment, our foreign policy and our economy.

Could he have said it sooner?

It isn't that he could have talked about flushing $20bln of our money down the toilet on corporate welfare before he came to Michigan. It's that he's talking about it at all. It's not the place of the Federal government to fund automotive R&D, even to the tune of $100 million, much less $20bln. $20bln is a serious chunk of change, even by federal government standards. That's more than my state collects in taxes over the course of an entire year.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

Or if you like, My Bernard Kerik. Rudy would get beaten liek a rented mule, and every week he has another scandal dragged out by the media. Why you think we should trust him on judges when he's said a strict contructionsit can uphold Roe V Wade is beyond me. I'll vote 3rd party before I vote for Guiliani.

If you ever find that you only have an hour to live,spend it with a liberal and it will seem like a year."-Rush Limbaugh

I am sorry the image I have of romney is from the Des Moines debate. When Fred zapped the moderator on AGW and Romney rushed for the opportunity to cave and show how nuanced he could be.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Hey another reference to Mitt's money! I swear you guys have at least 5 per day. Whose your guy since you are delighting in going thread to thread to Romney-bash.

If you ever find that you only have an hour to live,spend it with a liberal and it will seem like a year."-Rush Limbaugh

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I can bet you hes a lot less conservative than Mitt, but your starting to rave like McCain, so that wouldn't surprise me.

If you ever find that you only have an hour to live,spend it with a liberal and it will seem like a year."-Rush Limbaugh

I have made no secret that my guy is Rudy. Do a search on the site. Or just take a look at my blog history.

You may or may not be right about his conservatism vis a vis Mitt. I'll make that decision when I know what Mitt's positions are this week.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Call me when your guy beats Ron Paul in a primary. Or when he decides whether hes for the FMA or against it. Rudy peopel of all people bashing Mitt's conservatism. You can have your pro-abortion gun grabber who can't even win his own state, when he campaigned purely on the sloagn that he would win.

If you ever find that you only have an hour to live,spend it with a liberal and it will seem like a year."-Rush Limbaugh

With McCain I know what I am getting

With the plastic candidates I am getting whatever appeals to the room they are in. Mitt or Huckabee ? The difference ? The hair.

As it is I may wind up voting for Mitt. But when I see people "On My Side" who pull stuff like the above. Or the Theo/Socons who pull crap like Hillary would be better for country. It just prompts me to go for the write in vote.

Uncommitted did real well in Michigan. This would be a good time for him to do well at the general.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Uncommitted did real well in Michigan. This would be a good time for him to do well at the general.

I may not agree with the sentiment of your entire comment, but that last bit was poetry!

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

If you ever find that you only have an hour to live,spend it with a liberal and it will seem like a year."-Rush Limbaugh

I got to ask, how to you go from Huck to Rudy, talk about opposites.

And then you will be giving a 1/2 a vote to Hillary.

I know who Rudy is and where he stands.
He hasn't tried to BS and tell us he's had a conversion in belief on abortion or other conservative ideals in time for the Presidential primaries.

He has results in more than one term.

The man does what he says he will do.
And his record backs it up.

If Hillary can crumble this republic, then Hillary wasn't the problem.

I'm tired of being told who "the guy" is by a Republican Party that can't find its backside with both hands.

"The Guy" was Bob Dole...and he was a buffoon.
"The Guy" was GWBush...and he gave us No Child Left Behind, Medicare Prescriptions, Harriet Miers, Amnesty TWICE, a "light footprint" war, earmarks & pork, wasted political capital, lost Congress, tax cuts on a time limit, "the new tone", Kennedy wrting the Education bill, and a failure to LEAD the Republican party.

From what I can tell, the "conservative know-it-alls" are too busy devouring their own, and have more sway ticking off their listeners and readers than influencing the party establishments. So far they seem more interested in excusing away the liberal policies of a certain few than holding everyone's feet to the fire.

I'll pick by my own standards, thank you.

"Strength and Honor."

"What we do in life, echoes in eternity."

HTML Help for Red Staters

I don't recall the last time I felt this discouraged in a presidential election cycle...every other one of the remaining Republican candidates has a fatal flaw, IMO...

"Life IS pain, Highness...anyone who says different is selling something..."

.

Thanks for the Laugh.

for that PresidentFred.com one. You can use it, but not within 30 days of the election. Because, you know, THAT would be corrupt.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

I can say with surety, and no small amount of satisfaction, that this has never happened to me.

absentee

Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals - my one guilty pleasure.

John S. McCain III
We've come a long, long way together/Through the hard times and the good
I have to celebrate you, baby/I have to praise you like I should

came about because at this time last year, the annointed nominee to be was Giuliani, and there were zero conservatives in the race who were polling above low single digits.

So those of us looking for a conservative standard-bearer were looking for someone, anyone who could fill that role. He seemed to be the best possible choice, someone demonstrably conservative, principled.

So now we're back to where we were then, only bad choices. There are no good outcomes left, only varying degrees of bad. Romney is the least bad - in him we'd most likely end up with a Bush Senior clone, who'd get talked into compromising the things he ran on, and then vilified for having done so.

None of the other candidates even bears thinking about. It's a sad day for America.

Were there no conservatives prior to his entering the race? I don't think so. So why didn't we conservatives rally behind one of them? Why were they polling so low? Was it because they weren't conservative enough or because conservatives don't make up a majority of our party or is there some other reason? If we make up a majority of the republican party then we shouldn't have needed an additional conservative in the race to rally us.

I don't think Romney is inarguably the least bad, but I'm with you. I'm choosing Romney.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

He was polling in really low single digits, and the problem with him was that other than political junkies, nobody had heard of him. So it was a self-reinforcing problem. No poll results means no money, and no money meant no way of getting the poll results up. It's almost impossible for House members to succeed in this. If a House member had a Romney or Kerry fortune they could probably do it, but even then they'd probably get a better return on their investment by buying a Senate seat.

So the choices were to try and bring his profile up, or recruit someone who already had a national profile. I think to most people the latter seemed like a fairly good bet, but unfortunately the number of people who fit that profile, and didn't have really large negatives, were very small.

When you say only political junkies new about Hunter, I knew more about Hunter by February than I knew about Thompson. How did Thompson get so much political name recognition? Thompson had such a following on the net before he got in, I think that had Hunter, Tancredo or Brownback (disclaimer: I'd been pulling for Hunter since the beginning) had that kind of following, I don't think they'd have had the name recognition problem that everyone attributes ot them.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

I got nothing against you Huckabee supporters, but everyone that surged to him in november, where were they when Brownback was floundering? Where were Thompson's supporters when Hunter and Tancredo were floundering and Thompson hadn't even gotten in the race. Were these conservatives all just sitting it out backing none of those 3 waiting for Thompson to come into the race?

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Don't blame me. I was all for Brownback. But, everyone here kept posting what a good guy he is but that he's unelectable. I think Fred filled a void in being perceived as a rock star. Someone who was true to conservative principles and had the charisma to command media attention, raise money, and win the election. Unfortunately, Fred the candidate was never as dynamic as dreamed of.

except the "I'm not supporting Hunter, Tancredo or Brownback and instead going to spend my energy trying to draft someone who hasn't shown any interest in running" guys. I was for Hunter since the beginning (actually since Coulter mentioned his name which made me look the guy up). Don't get me wrong, Thompson has been my number 2 choice for a long time now. I just lament that we conservatives didn't try to elevate any of the other conservative candidates nearly as much as some tried to elevate the one who wasn't running yet. I think we'd have more options now had we not put the effort into Thompson (until he actually chose to run perhaps) and instead went all out on the other guys.

Electability be darned. Your opponents are the ones who always pull that one out. "Your guy just isn't electable. Here try my guy, he has a chance." Name recognition be darned as well. Anyone who actually gets the party nomination will have all the name recognition they need to take november. After the nomination it is all about issues and charisma.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."