Another side of Mitt Romney?

M. Mason has been fiercely opposing Romney at VFR over his Mormonism. VFR has been open to all sides of the issue. Now Mr. Mason says that Romney also ought to be opposed by conservatives because he’s not honest. I personally think the conclusions stated below are somewhat overheated, especially when we remember that, if Romney were the nominee, the choice would not be between perfection and Romney, but between Hillary/Obama/Edwards and Romney. Nevertheless, the views brought forward by Mr. Mason ought to be considered.

M. Mason writes:

Even laying aside for a moment the issue of Romney’s disqualifying anti-Christian Mormonism, his political record as governor has been appalling. Read John Haskins’ concise summary of “Mitt Romney’s Legacy in Massachusetts.” Then take a look at this one page column at Townhall by Sandy Rios about Romney’s actions during the fight over homosexual “marriage” licenses being issued in Massachusetts by a rogue court.

There’s that word duplicity again in characterizing Romney, and take particular note too of the man’s arrogance and anger when simply asked to explain himself for his political actions.

Rios quotes James Rappaport, former head of the Massachusetts Republican Party who served when Romney was governor, who said that “[Romney] has a strong record of showmanship as opposed to actual performance.” On his relationship with the State Legislature, “His word is no good … Mitt Romney would say one thing in a meeting and literally go out of the meeting to the press and tell the opposite story. There was no desire in the legislature to be accommodating to him because they couldn’t trust him…. Romney will be clear today on what he believes today, and he’ll be clear tomorrow on what he believes tomorrow, but they may be different things.” The best concise description of Romney may have come from a writer at The Politico [leftist Terry Michael] who said: “Mitt Romney is Bill Clinton with his pants up.” In other words, he’s just another unprincipled, duplicitous politician who wants to be all things to all people.

Add up every one of these negatives and you’ll begin to see how a Romney Presidency would be a disaster for the conservative movement just as surely as a Giuliani Presidency would be.

—end of initial entry—

M. Mason writes:

I just wanted to thank you for giving me a fair hearing at VFR about Romney. I’m finished with him for now, and while I’m strongly opposed to his being President, the other current Republican front-runners are also unacceptable as far as I’m concerned; Giuliani for the reasons you have already cogently stated and Huckabee because he, too, is a walking liberal train wreck. Unless Thompson is somehow able to light a fire under himself, firm up his conservative credentials and his stance on immigration—and it would help if at least privately he let leak out that his participation in the Univision debate was a serious mistake—I can’t see voting for him either. As far as being President is concerned, though, my sense is that Thompson can either take it or leave it, so he’ll probably leave it. Unless the ideological dynamics of the race shifts in a significant way, I’ll most likely have to settle for a write-in vote next November for Tancredo.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 14, 2007 11:54 AM | Send