Romney in Hot Water with the Anti-Abortion Right, Issues Walk-Back

The center cannot hold
Politics • Views: 39,590

You almost have to feel a little bit sorry for Mitt Romney. In the past, he would have been a shoe-in for the Republican presidential nomination; he’s from old money, has a pretty solid record of mainstream conservative positions, and was next in line after John McCain. In the natural order of things, he should have been able to easily dominate the rest of the field’s extremist lunatics.

This year, though, the natural order has broken down; the Tea Party base has shoved the party so far to the right that all bets are off.

And Romney is clearly uncomfortable with what he’s required to do for this brave new right wing mob. Today in the National Review, he desperately tries to boost his anti-abortion credentials by toeing the line on Planned Parenthood and Roe v. Wade (he says he wants to destroy them, like any good teabagger would), hinting that he supports the insane “personhood” bills now all the rage on the religious right, and swearing to appoint only right wing Supreme Court judges.

Romney is groveling to the misogynistic right because he’s in very hot water over his refusal to sign an ugly “pledge” written by an extreme anti-abortion group (the Susan B. Anthony List) that would take away all federal funding for any hospitals that perform abortions, and would require him to refuse to hire or appoint anyone who admitted being pro-choice.

But his bowing and scraping shows no sign of working. You don’t have to wade very far into the right wing websites to see Romney being absolutely savaged for his apology, just as he was when he refused to reject the science of climate change.

Related

Jump to bottom

102 comments
1 Iwouldprefernotto  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 10:53:23am

My 77 year old mother wants to know why we are still arguing about abortion.
I have no answer for her.


Happy Father's Day.

2 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 10:56:09am

Last I checked Mitt was still leading the polls in the early primary states. Republicans are going to have to change their primaries to start in Texas, Mississippi and Alabama if they want to nominate Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann. This just isn't going to work out for them. The primary voters just aren't radicalized enough.

3 abolitionist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:00:00am

When all the world (or your neighborhood of it) are fools, 'tis folly to be wise.

Time to re-read The True Believer by Eric Hoffer, I think.

4 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:02:04am

The problem for any GOP candidate is that without the support of the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to beat Obama.

John McCain ran up against this wall in the last election, and the wall is a lot higher now.

5 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:06:02am

re: #4 Charles

The problem for any GOP candidate is that without the support of the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to beat Obama.

John McCain ran up against this wall in the last election, and the wall is a lot higher now.


Speaking of McCain: McCain slams GOP hopefuls' 'isolationism'


We cannot repeat the lessons of the 1930s, when the United States of America stood by while bad things happened in the world," McCain said in an interview with ABC's "This Week."

Citing what he viewed as the GOP presidential hopefuls' positions in general on both Libya and Afghanistan, McCain said, "We are the lead nation in the world, and America matters, and we must lead. But sometimes that leadership entails sacrifice, sadly."

Asked about a threat by House Speaker John Boehner to consider cutting funding for U.S. involvement in the NATO-led military mission, McCain, R-Arizona, responded, "I was more concerned about what the candidates in New Hampshire the other night said," referring to a CNN debate among seven people seeking the Republican presidential nomination.

"This is isolationism," McCain said. "There's always been an isolationist strain in the Republican Party, the Pat Buchanan wing of our party. But now it seems to have moved more center stage, so to speak."

Good luck with that.

6 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:09:12am

re: #4 Charles

I'm not at all confident he could win with full TP support. That support will drain away more moderate votes, kills the appeal to most indy voters. Even here in California.

I say this with the assumption of a similar economy to today. If employment goes up, or Obama Biden chooses to "spend more time with family" to make way for Hilary Clinton to step up to VP (setting her & the Dems up for 2016) Obama becomes nearly unassailable. If the double dip really hits hard, I'd retract this position.

7 abolitionist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:09:59am

re: #4 Charles

The problem for any GOP candidate is that without the support of the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to beat Obama.

John McCain ran up against this wall in the last election, and the wall is a lot higher now.

I blame Wallbuilders.

8 Surabaya Stew  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:10:09am

Romney will still get the nomination without the TP support, and most TP'ers will still vote for him in the general. The diffence is that they won't do a lot of phone banking and door-to-door outreach that they would have done for a TP certified candidate. Also, they will make fewer donations to Romneys Campaign than what might be expected. As with Dole in 96, there just won't be the enthusasium required to overthrow the incumbent Dem POTUS.

9 Iwouldprefernotto  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:13:42am

re: #8 Surabaya Stew

Romney will still get the nomination without the TP support, and most TP'ers will still vote for him in the general. The diffence is that they won't do a lot of phone banking and door-to-door outreach that they would have done for a TP certified candidate. Also, they will make fewer donations to Romneys Campaign than what might be expected. As with Dole in 96, there just won't be the enthusasium required to overthrow the incumbent Dem POTUS.

Yah, but in 2016, they're (the TP) going to party like it's 1899. You just wait.

11 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:21:23am

re: #10 Killgore Trout
Fox needs a little competition. /

12 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:23:19am

re: #10 Killgore Trout

John Stewart tears up Fox news on a Sunday morning...
Jon Stewart To Chris Wallace: A "Designed Ideological Agenda" Is "The Soup You Swim In"

Jon Stewart On Fox News Sunday: "In Every Poll" Fox Has "Most Consistently Misinformed Media Viewers"

The full video is supposed to be here but it's not loading for me: Exclusive: Jon Stewart on 'Fox News Sunday'

Just watched it at Mediaite - Stewart was great. I'm going to post it, but I was waiting for the Fox video to work -- I don't like Mediaite's embedded player.

13 Surabaya Stew  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:23:25am

re: #9 Iwouldprefernotto

Yah, but in 2016, they're (the TP) going to party like it's 1899. You just wait.

Not doubting you on that one! :-D

14 Interesting Times  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:23:45am

I'm going to recycle this picture posted in the overnight thread because it's so fitting to this topic :(

15 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:25:19am

re: #14 publicityStunted
It fits so well is pinches. :(

16 RanchTooth  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:26:14am

I think this is my favorite comment from the entire post.


vandelay 06/18/11 20:49
I'm not sure I understand the defense of abortion in the case of incest. If we're talking about a father/brother with an underage daughter/sister or something like that, then it could be most easily justified under the rape category.

But if we're talking about two consenting people over 18 who happen to be related...

That obviously would not be the greatest situation for the child, but I don't see where an abortion would be morally justifiable.

I don't even want to start with how taboos on consanguineous parenting started because it seems all too obvious. Genetic deformations from two closely related parents have potential to become dominantly expressed in children and the life that child would live would be just awful. It wouldn't be a life at all. Or... is it that all life, no matter how insanely f*cked up it is, is good in the eyes of god? I just don't get it.

17 researchok  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:29:00am

It isn't often you see a political party willingly embrace an anchor on the way down.

18 Targetpractice  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:30:07am

Romney's likely to win the nomination without Tea Party support, but the party leadership's going to insist on a "balanced ticket," i.e. a Tea Party-approved VP. That may be somebody who he's already sharing the stage with, some potential candidate who's not yet announced, or (like Palin) a total unknown who pops up out of the bushes.

19 researchok  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:31:05am

re: #18 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Romney's likely to win the nomination without Tea Party support, but the party leadership's going to insist on a "balanced ticket," i.e. a Tea Party-approved VP. That may be somebody who he's already sharing the stage with, some potential candidate who's not yet announced, or (like Palin) a total unknown who pops up out of the bushes.

Interesting scenario

20 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:33:22am

re: #18 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
I still think if the GOP winner polls well against Obama, we might see Hilary placed for VP. Seems like a smart play, Biden is not elevating the ticket.

21 researchok  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:34:59am

re: #20 Rightwingconspirator

I still think if the GOP winner polls well against Obama, we might see Hilary placed for VP. Seems like a smart play, Biden is not elevating the ticket.

Maybe- but Biden isn't as polarizing as HRC.

On the other hand, a lot of independents might go with HRC over Biden

22 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:35:24am

re: #18 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Romney's likely to win the nomination without Tea Party support, but the party leadership's going to insist on a "balanced ticket," i.e. a Tea Party-approved VP. That may be somebody who he's already sharing the stage with, some potential candidate who's not yet announced, or (like Palin) a total unknown who pops up out of the bushes.

That's how things would have played out in the past, and it's exactly what McCain did.

But the Tea Party base is the difference this time. They didn't even exist in the last election, and they had a huge influence in the mid-terms. Things really have changed since 2008 -- extremists are much more influential, and they're feeling more emboldened than ever.

23 Targetpractice  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:36:38am

re: #20 Rightwingconspirator

I still think if the GOP winner polls well against Obama, we might see Hilary placed for VP. Seems like a smart play, Biden is not elevating the ticket.

Unless he has a major gaffe or a major screw-up that makes dumping him the only choice, Biden's here to stay. He does nothing to elevate the ticket, but really nothing to drag it down. He's a non-entity, such that most folks don't even think about him anymore unless he does nothing joke-worthy.

24 Targetpractice  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:44:18am

re: #22 Charles

That's how things would have played out in the past, and it's exactly what McCain did.

But the Tea Party base is the difference this time. They didn't even exist in the last election, and they had a huge influence in the mid-terms. Things really have changed since 2008 -- extremists are much more influential, and they're feeling more emboldened than ever.

At the same time, the Tea Party's not a cohesive movement. They're more of an umbrella movement, with various factions brought together by their mutual hatred of Obama. We saw the same thing with the Far-Left in '04, in that they all hated Bush with a fiery passion, but weren't able to agree on a singular candidate that they felt was worthy of carrying their flag. They either ended up supporting Kerry, after the rest of the field tore itself to pieces, or simply dropped out for the election. We're likely to see the same thing with the Tea Party, as so far there's no one candidate that they all seem comfortable with supporting.

25 engineer cat  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:52:38am

i do feel sorry for mitt

it's one thing to playact one political position at a time, but to attempt to portray a plausible republican candidate while at the same time trying to appease a group of people who won't accept anything short of holy war, maccarthyism, voodoo economics and talking to the american people like we are a bunch of bad children who need to be threatened with thrashing unless we obey without question -

well, it's too much to expect even for a professional pol

26 lostlakehiker  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:55:19am

re: #4 Charles

The problem for any GOP candidate is that without the support of the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to beat Obama.

John McCain ran up against this wall in the last election, and the wall is a lot higher now.


But once a nominee is chosen, whoever he may be, these factions will back him. What else can they do? Where else can they go?

I'm not a professional election caller. Hardly anyone has a good track record in this dicey business. But my guess is that Romney wins the nomination, picks up some support from independents, makes a decent show, and then loses, 70 % odds, or wins if inflation has spiraled up along with unempoyment. Obama cannot just ride to victory with the "misery index" high and going up.

27 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 11:58:44am

re: #26 lostlakehiker

It's really about the economy. Both parties know this. The strategists know this. The CEO's know this. The only way the GOP can win is sabotage, likely with the default. A tactic like that used to be wholly out of the question. Country first as an attitude is now often disparaged by the partisan "party first" ideological types. The new and distorted GOP like Bachmann et al may just go running across. Default. Depression. The end of economic leadership for a decade or more.

28 jvic  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:00:37pm

re: #14 publicityStunted

I'm going to recycle this picture posted in the overnight thread because it's so fitting to this topic :(

There's also this oldie but goodie; a sequel is here.

29 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:03:41pm

At this point Romney's best option if he expects any political future is to be himself and probably run as a Blue Dog Democrat. Obviously not in the presidential election of 2012. I don't see much hope given the current climate and there's no amount of political morphing Romney can undertake to fix this challenge. As they say about "I didn't leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me."

30 dragonfire1981  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:07:46pm

I wonder if Romney gets the nomination, will some of the TPers be stupid enough to support a 3rd party candidate?

31 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:08:16pm

Fox News has amended its John Stewart thread....

Soros Funded University Poll Says Fox News Viewers Most ‘Misinformed' Politically

A poll conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a "project" run out of the University of Maryland, was the toast of the left-wingers last week for its finding that Fox News viewers were the most "misinformed" during the 2010 election cycle. Sadly, few of the news pieces on this poll mentioned that WorldPublicOpinion.org is funded in part by such far left-wing organizations as the Ben and Jerry's Foundation, the Ploughshares Fund, the United States Institute of Peace, and the George Soros-backed Tides Foundation.

Read the rest of the story at bigjournalism.com


Heh.

32 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:08:39pm

re: #30 dragonfire1981
That is possible. :(

33 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:09:29pm

re: #31 Killgore Trout

Sooooros!

34 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:11:22pm

re: #33 Charles

Soooros!

...and socialist Ice Cream moguls!

35 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:13:04pm

By the way, that World Public Opinion poll is only the most recent one. There are quite a few other polls showing that Fox News viewers are disproportionately misinformed, especially on right wing hot button issues.

36 wrenchwench  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:13:20pm

re: #34 Killgore Trout

...and socialist Ice Cream moguls!

Those sound delicious.

37 RadicalModerate  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:15:45pm

re: #31 Killgore Trout

Fox News has amended its John Stewart thread...


Heh.

Interesting that the only source FoxNews could find to dispute the poll that called labelled them as dishonest is the documented liar Andrew Brietbart.

38 RadicalModerate  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:16:35pm

Bah. PIMF.

"that labelled them as dishonest"

39 lostlakehiker  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:17:21pm

re: #27 Rightwingconspirator

It's really about the economy. Both parties know this. The strategists know this. The CEO's know this. The only way the GOP can win is sabotage, likely with the default. A tactic like that used to be wholly out of the question. Country first as an attitude is now often disparaged by the partisan "party first" ideological types. The new and distorted GOP like Bachmann et al may just go running across. Default. Depression. The end of economic leadership for a decade or more.


Forcing a default would destroy the Republican party. No party can torpedo the nation below the waterline and remain afloat itself.

40 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:17:40pm

re: #34 Killgore Trout

...and socialist Ice Cream moguls!

Ben or Jerry? /

41 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:19:02pm

re: #18 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

a total unknown who pops up out of the bushes.

I saw what you did there.

42 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:20:23pm

re: #41 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
LOL. I was looking for truffles. opps too many cooking shows.

44 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:22:28pm

Pew Survey Finds Most Knowledgeable Americans Watch 'Daily Show' and 'Colbert'-- and Visit Newspaper Sites

Other details are equally eye-opening. Pew judged the levels of knowledgeability (correct answers) among those surveyed and found that those who scored the highest were regular watchers of Comedy Central's The Daily Show and Colbert Report. They tied with regular readers of major newspapers in the top spot -- with 54% of them getting 2 out of 3 questions correct. Watchers of the Lehrer News Hour on PBS followed just behind.

Virtually bringing up the rear were regular watchers of Fox News. Only 1 in 3 could answer 2 out of 3 questions correctly. Fox topped only network morning show viewers.

45 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:23:17pm

re: #44 Killgore Trout

Link does not work

46 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:24:34pm

Romney's still the "front runner" in the Republican field according to Gallup. I think the wingnuts are talking out of their asses once again. I'm sure they'll blame some liberal conspiracy like they did with McCain. That is they'll soon call Romney the "candidate chosen by the liberal mainstream media".

47 engineer cat  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:24:41pm

Sadly, few of the news pieces on this poll mentioned that WorldPublicOpinion.org is funded

i'm sure that fox news viewers are perfectly capable of telling you which parts of the bill of rights paul revere was warning the british about and what denomination of christianity was established as the basis for the constitution

so there

48 TedStriker  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:25:00pm

re: #5 Killgore Trout

Speaking of McCain: McCain slams GOP hopefuls' 'isolationism'

Good luck with that.

Too little, too late, since he and his campaign courted these same people (the hardcore RR, the bigots, and the isolationists tend to overlap a lot, IMO) by picking Palin as his running mate. I'd like to think that if McCain, by how he's been talking as of late, would have told Palin to fuck off if he knew then what he knows now about her.

But then again, the RR and the wingnuts would have made sure that he would have lost even worse, just to "teach him a lesson"...sort of like a head on a pike.

49 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:25:18pm

re: #45 PhillyPretzel

Link does not work

Oops
Fox Viewers Least Informed According to Pew

50 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:26:14pm

Here's the specific Gallup story:

June 13, 2011
Romney Support Up; Widens Advantage in 2012 Preferences

51 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:26:37pm

re: #49 Killgore Trout
Thanks. And yes I do read newspapers and go to their sites.

52 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:27:21pm

re: #39 lostlakehiker

The old guard knows this. But Bachmann?

53 engineer cat  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:28:22pm

re: #46 Gus 802

Romney's still the "front runner" in the Republican field according to Gallup. I think the wingnuts are talking out of their asses once again. I'm sure they'll blame some liberal conspiracy like they did with McCain. That is they'll soon call Romney the "candidate chosen by the liberal mainstream media".

if you read freek republic (asking a lot i know) you'll see that they have denounced romney in exactly this way. indeed, they don't even seem to consider themselves republicans anymore - the party long ago became "too liberal" for them...

54 McSpiff  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:30:10pm

re: #53 engineer dog

if you read freek republic (asking a lot i know) you'll see that they have denounced romney in exactly this way. indeed, they don't even seem to consider themselves republicans anymore - the party long ago became "too liberal" for them...

The owner posted a tread basically saying supporting any candidate to the left of Sarah Palin would result in a banning.

55 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:32:00pm

re: #16 RanchTooth

I think this is my favorite comment from the entire post.

I don't even want to start with how taboos on consanguineous parenting started because it seems all too obvious. Genetic deformations from two closely related parents have potential to become dominantly expressed in children and the life that child would live would be just awful. It wouldn't be a life at all. Or... is it that all life, no matter how insanely f*cked up it is, is good in the eyes of god? I just don't get it.

Actually… there's been a rather high-profile case going through the German courts the last couple of years. Two siblings who had been seperated at birth and later met when they were of legal age, had fallen in love with each other. They had children together. The father got locked up for that, basically because according to paragraph 173 of the German Criminal Code, sexual relations between siblings is punishable by a fine or up to two years in prison. Even if between consenting adults. When challenged, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany in its ruling affirmed the eugenic reasons you quoted, saying that

legislators had not overreached their jurisdiction with laws that "protect the family order by punishing the damaging effects of incest." The inferior partner in such cases, the court said, must be protected. The court also stated that children spawned through incest had an increased risk of suffering from severe genetic damage.

Here are some more background links in English: [Link: www.spiegel.de...] [Link: www.spiegel.de...] [Link: www.telegraph.co.uk...]

But now the man convicted of incest has appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. The Federal German goverment has conceded that the conviction violated Article 8 of the European Convention of Human rights and Fundamental Freedoms but argued that that violation was justified "to protect morals in a democratic society".

Deadlines for hearings on the case ended last month. Should be an interesting ruling.

See also [Link: www.abendblatt.de...] [Link: www.focus.de...]

56 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:33:07pm

re: #53 engineer dog

if you read freek republic (asking a lot i know) you'll see that they have denounced romney in exactly this way. indeed, they don't even seem to consider themselves republicans anymore - the party long ago became "too liberal" for them...

Yeah. It's a common meme now. That "the media" chose John McCain in '08 and "the media" will pick the next establishment Republican for '12 and that "we should let the media" pick the next Republican candidate for '12. Of course they're largely talking to a rather small and select demographic that makes up the Tea Party and/or right wing blogger base. They're not your average Republican. And neither are New Hampshire Republicans who tend to have a rather large Libertarian streak (i.e. Ron Paul's their man). America is neither New Hampshire or Iowa.

57 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:34:41pm

Soros owned Gallup puts Mitt Romney ahead!!11ty

//

58 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:37:14pm

re: #56 Gus 802

America is neither New Hampshire or Iowa.

QFT.

60 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:40:22pm

re: #56 Gus 802

What if California (or NY) were the first state to have it's primary? What a very different election season that would make.

61 Obdicut  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:40:27pm

re: #59 000G

The Competitive Enterprise Institute? Really? The tobacco/energy industry front group?

[Link: www.sourcewatch.org...]

62 harlequinade  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:41:59pm

re: #22 Charles

No one would... It'd be insane. But... what about...

Romney/Beck

63 Obdicut  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:42:55pm

re: #60 Rightwingconspirator

What if California (or NY) were the first state to have it's primary? What a very different election season that would make.

If that happened, we would have centrist GOP politicians elected, I think.

64 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:44:00pm

re: #50 Gus 802

Here's the specific Gallup story:

June 13, 2011
Romney Support Up; Widens Advantage in 2012 Preferences

The polls are all over the place right now - it's probably too early for them to mean much.

65 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:44:30pm

re: #60 Rightwingconspirator

What if California (or NY) were the first state to have it's primary? What a very different election season that would make.

Would make a big difference since we'd see a wider cross section of the electorate. Again Iowa and NH are very specialized segments of America. More so NH. Huckabee won in Iowa back in '08 and while everyone thought he was the man he didn't win in the end. Republicans need to remember that if they expect to in in '12 they have to also win over independents and some Democrats. They can't do that with a Bachman or a Gingrich. They'll learn it the hard way come next year.

66 Dancing along the light of day  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:44:38pm

re: #22 Charles

Romney/ Bachman?
Ewww...

67 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:44:55pm

re: #63 Obdicut

It may be best if tiny states with narrow interests and low single digit electoral votes were not the very first hurdles to overcome in the primary.

68 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:45:05pm

re: #64 Charles
That is it. It is too early.

69 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:46:07pm

re: #61 Obdicut

The Competitive Enterprise Institute? Really? The tobacco/energy industry front group?

[Link: www.sourcewatch.org...]

Beg your pardon?

70 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:46:08pm

re: #66 Floral Giraffe

Oh the campaign posters!

Hi Floral. How are you this gray shadowless day?

71 Winny Spencer  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:46:16pm

re: #62 harlequinade

No one would... It'd be insane. But... what about...

Romney/Beck

I guess Beck has proven what is required of a mormon to be embraced by the Christian (far) right.

72 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:49:40pm

re: #64 Charles

The polls are all over the place right now - it's probably too early for them to mean much.

Perhaps but I'm seeing this as a win for Romney in the long run given that the rest of the field is populated with crackpots.

73 Obdicut  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:50:23pm

re: #69 000G

The video you posted is from Lee Doren of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who are a front group for tobacco and energy. They promote AGW denial, among other things.

Why should I trust the analysis of someone who denies AGW, and otherwise shills against science for pay?

74 William Barnett-Lewis  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:50:51pm

re: #65 Gus 802

Would make a big difference since we'd see a wider cross section of the electorate. Again Iowa and NH are very specialized segments of America. More so NH. Huckabee won in Iowa back in '08 and while everyone thought he was the man he didn't win in the end. Republicans need to remember that if they expect to in in '12 they have to also win over independents and some Democrats. They can't do that with a Bachman or a Gingrich. They'll learn it the hard way come next year.

I firmly believe that all the primaries need to be required to be held on the same date, 6 weeks before the general election. I'd also like it if they couldn't file as running for President until, say, 2 months prior to the Primary but that's even less likely.

75 mikec6666  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:51:47pm

Although you always want your leaders to be flexible in their policy positions in order to meet new circumstances, with Romney it always (always) seems like he caved to the side of the argument that is being presented at that moment.

76 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:52:39pm

re: #73 Obdicut

The video you posted is from Lee Doren of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who are a front group for tobacco and energy. They promote AGW denial, among other things.

Huh, wasn't aware of him being connected to the CEI or what he does there. Anyhow, that video seems to be a private one.

Why should I trust the analysis of someone who denies AGW, and otherwise shills against science for pay?

I didn't say that you should trust it. I think trust is an inappropriate attitude towards studies and their critiques.

77 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:53:35pm

re: #73 Obdicut

The video you posted is from Lee Doren of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who are a front group for tobacco and energy. They promote AGW denial, among other things.

Why should I trust the analysis of someone who denies AGW, and otherwise shills against science for pay?

That bonehead was once an LGF member. Howtheworldworks or something like that.

78 Political Atheist  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:54:47pm

re: #74 wlewisiii

That would spread them all pretty thin. A de facto national primary. Hmm.

79 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:55:00pm

re: #77 Gus 802

That bonehead was once an LGF member. Howtheworldworks or something like that.

Heh. That must have some years ago.

80 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:55:33pm

re: #79 000G

Heh. That must have some years ago.

2 years ago maybe?

81 harlequinade  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:55:38pm

re: #71 Winny Spencer

He's been "fired/left" Fox. And the right love him...
But... no one would be that stupid, right?

82 theheat  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:55:57pm

I've been translating fundie for days on end. I can't seem to get anything much else done, not even kick my feet up at LGF. I'm tired, pissed off, and distracted. I might as well be grading papers for howler monkeys.

But really, what I do for my day job and what is going on with the GOP and Real America™ is pretty much the same thing. It's the same people, the same level of illiteracy, the same knee jerk idiocy, the same banging on cages, the same shitcanning of any facts that don't coincide with the most Medieval interpretation of scripture.

I remember a kinder, gentler time when middle America's Christians weren't dumbfuck fundamentalists, raging like lemmings; when being a Real American wasn't as embarrassing as a grown adult shitting the bed because - heck - it's just simpler that way.

But that's long gone, and it all gives me an enormous headache in my eye. It makes me smoke too much. It makes me want to kick the dog, rip my hair out, drink the hard stuff.

"Here we are, fighting the bullshit for fifteen years and now we find out that you're part of the bullshit. What can we tell you? You broke our hearts, you dumbest of fucks." - Romeo Is Bleeding
83 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:56:50pm

re: #80 Gus 802

2 years ago maybe?

I would have guessed that he hadn't stayed until after the inauguration.

84 jvic  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 12:59:36pm

re: #75 mikec6666

Although you always want your leaders to be flexible in their policy positions in order to meet new circumstances, with Romney it always (always) seems like he caved to the side of the argument that is being presented at that moment.

I voted for Romney when he ran for governor and was extremely disappointed when he did not run for reelection in 2006.

True, 2006 was a Democrat year, but Romney was perceived as a successful governor. Had Romney bucked the odds and defeated oratorastic Obama buddy Deval Patrick (the current governor), he would have been a natural choice to face Obama in 2008. When the financial crisis struck, successful businessman/troubleshooter Romney would have been the obvious choice over Obama and probably over Hillary.

I don't want a reckless President, but not a timid one either. Palin's resignation strikes me as reckless in political terms; I view Romney's two-clever-by-half decision not to seek reelection as timid.

He either fears his fate too much
Or his deserts are small,
That puts it not unto the touch
To win or lose it all.

85 Obdicut  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:00:51pm

re: #76 000G

He seems like a smart guy. Which means that his shilling against AGW is disingenuous. So, I'm not going to bother listening and critiquing his critique; he's shown himself to be a charlatan, so I've got no reason to indulge him.

86 TedStriker  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:01:49pm

re: #77 Gus 802

That bonehead was once an LGF member. Howtheworldworks or something like that.

An astroturfer, I presume?

87 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:03:15pm

re: #86 talon_262

An astroturfer, I presume?

That's his specialty. Does it for the CEI these days.

88 William Barnett-Lewis  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:06:16pm

re: #78 Rightwingconspirator

That would spread them all pretty thin. A de facto national primary. Hmm.

Thin is part of the charm of the idea. Also minimizes the time to have to tolerate the nasty advertising.

89 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:11:12pm

re: #83 000G

I would have guessed that he hadn't stayed until after the inauguration.

Here's the old profile...

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

90 Gus  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:11:41pm

OK. Hot out. Time to play with the garden hose and water. Later folks.

91 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:12:48pm

re: #90 Gus 802
I just turned on my A/C. :)

92 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:14:24pm

re: #85 Obdicut

He seems like a smart guy. Which means that his shilling against AGW is disingenuous. So, I'm not going to bother listening and critiquing his critique; he's shown himself to be a charlatan, so I've got no reason to indulge him.

Fair enough.

93 makeitstop  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:14:53pm

It's absolutely beautiful here in NY today.

Happy Father's Day to all you Lizard Dads.

94 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:19:18pm

re: #89 Gus 802

Here's the old profile...

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Wonder what he got banned for…

95 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:20:12pm

re: #94 000G
I am not going near that one.

96 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:25:43pm

re: #95 PhillyPretzel

I am not going near that one.

I think I found it: [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Heh.

97 sagehen  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:48:30pm

This "indirect federal funding" to "hospitals that perform abortion" hasn't been adequately gamed out for the education of the mushy middle.

It means, among other things, that any hospital which prescribes a morning after pill for a rape victim, even if she has to go to another pharmacy to get it... that hospital won't get any Medicare or Medicaid reimbursements for any of their patients.

Any hospital that treats an ectopic pregnancy won't get paid for treating heart attacks or strokes in patients over 65 years old.

Any hospital that saves a woman with preclampsia gets 0$ for treating low-income asthmatics or diabetics.

The hospital that saved Gabby Giffords wouldn't even be able to bill her insurance company, because that insurance was paid for by the Federal government.

98 sagehen  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 2:07:48pm

re: #39 lostlakehiker

Forcing a default would destroy the Republican party. No party can torpedo the nation below the waterline and remain afloat itself.

THEY. DON'T. CARE.

They would gladly burn this nation to the ground if they could rule over the ashes.

99 Querent  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 2:20:24pm

re: #98 sagehen

THEY. DON'T. CARE.

They would gladly burn this nation to the ground if they could rule over the ashes.

Q. F. T.

100 SidewaysQuark  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 4:24:31pm

re: #4 Charles

The problem for any GOP candidate is that without the support of the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to beat Obama.

John McCain ran up against this wall in the last election, and the wall is a lot higher now.

Actually, I think that's incorrect. Without the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to secure the Republican nomination. Catering to these loons will end up costing them the election against Obama, however.

101 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 4:30:38pm

re: #4 Charles

The problem for any GOP candidate is that without the support of the religious right and the Tea Party (really the same thing), they won't be able to beat Obama.

John McCain ran up against this wall in the last election, and the wall is a lot higher now.

Yeah, that wall is a lot higher, as is the wall of younger conservatives who are sick and tired of having antigay and antiabortion planks crammed down their throats.

The GOP is going to have to cut their losses with either group - go for the moneyed olds in the tea party or go for the GOProud-should-get-to-go-to-CPAC types, whose bank accounts aren't as big. What to do, what to do.

This is where Palin on the ticket could help them, but any extremist they get would bring out every disgruntled firebagger, even the ones who hate Obama. It's a dilemma entirely of their own making, so I have zero sympathy for them.

102 mikec6666  Sun, Jun 19, 2011 6:40:13pm

re: #84 jvic

Too clever by half. Exactly. He always seems to be thinking everything through (even small stuff) instead relying on any sort of instinct. That's a bad downside to have if you get put in a position of having to make a decision based on fuzzy facts. Take the OBL raid for instance. No concrete data, just a strong hunch. I'm not saying he would have done anything different, I'm just saying that decision required a leap of faith in his own judgement. Does he have that? Unclear.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 weeks ago
Views: 363 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1