Thoughts on the Romney Private Fundraiser Video Controversy


By the Left Coast Rebel


Yesterday I called in to independent conservative talker Mike Slater's show here in San Diego. Mike's show is fantastic; even if you don't live in San Diego, you should check it out.

Anyway, the topic, of course, was the Mother Jones video wherein Mitt Romney told a fundraising crowd in Florida that Obama's supporters were essentially moochers that would vote for their man precisely because he is promising (and delivering) free stuff.

Image: Reason.com
I told Mike Slater and his audience that the Romney/47% Florida fundraiser video was such a gaffe and controversy because Mitt Romney to this day has not made a convincing case that America truly is at a tipping point where there are more citizens on the dole and demanding more goodies than those producing and paying the taxes to support government largess. Even as I was on hold during Mike Slater's 8:00 am news break, I caught Mitt Romney walking back his statement, instead of taking it on and using the moment to tell the American people the dangerous and irreversible place (as in moochers overtaking producers) we find ourselves in...


That's what Reagan would have done. But Romney can't.

Here's why.

Since Mitt Romney doesn't believe in limited government, he has no way -- as Reagan did -- of communicating the disaster-in-the-making we are facing. He doesn't even know how to speak directly to the American people on the superiority of limited government ideals. He doesn't know how to speak over the media, like Reagan did.

Why's that?

Could it be because Romney is not -- and never has been -- a limited-government conservative? Could it be because Romney will say anything to get elected? Could it be because when the veil is lifted, there's simply nothing there (and no true alternative to statist Obama)? Americans aren't stupid and are likely sensing this. I get a feeling the public is thinking to themselves, "better the socialist-incompetent I know, than the fraud I don't."

This shouldn't be rocket science folks. It should be easy to call this thing in.

But when you aren't authentic and surrounded by political consultants that tell you what to do and say, every day, this is what happens. We shouldn't be surprised Mitt Romney doesn't have a leg to stand on.

18 comments:

  1. Well, I am voting for Romney, but if he doesn't act fiscally conservative it will be time for a little stand up routine called "Empty Hair."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The odds, unfortunately for America, are not in the favor of Romney governing in a fiscally conservative manner.

      Delete
  2. I have a different take. It seems to me that the fundraiser Mitt was closer to the "real" Mitt, as contrasted to the very polished, controlled, and guarded public-speaking Mitt. I actually like him slightly more after the leaked video; seeing politicians speaking closer to the truth without as much spin makes their views/message resonate better with me.

    That doesn't mean I'll be voting for him, though... I still personally refuse to implicitly endorse a "lesser of two evils" system for electing a president. I also agree with your overall assessment: I think Mitt is basically Obama-lite, and neither candidate supports limited government, individual freedom, or the Constitution. However, Mitt speaking a bit more candidly and honestly about the real problems facing the country, even though not intended for a public audience, certainly hasn't diminished my view of him at all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Meet Willard Mitt (the Human Flipper) Romney at his very best. Obama lite is right. His politically tone deaf ears will result in his defeat.

    I, like you Nick won't be voting for Mitt the Flip on November 6th. I'll be voting for the ex Republican Governor of New Mexico and Libertarian Party candidate for President. Gary Johnson.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I won't be voting for Romney either. But it's because I live in a "safe" state, Illinois. Safe for Obama that is. If I lived in a safe state for Romney, I also wouldn't vote for him.

    If I lived in Ohio or Florida I would vote to dismiss Obama because there is absolutely zero chance to repeal Obamacare if he is re-elected. (There is only a slight chance with Mitt, but slight is better than none.)

    But seeing that I have the option, I'm voting for what I want. I'm voting for Gary Johnson. This is the last dance for the GOP no matter if Mitt is elected or not. So why not get a head start?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hear you, Grant. I am completely "disenfranchised" here in the People's Republic of Kalifornia, so I'm voting, proudly, for Gary Johnson. I'm with you on the the head start to the phasing out of the GOP.

      Delete
  5. I heard many Tea Partiers are not voting for Romney to keep the door open for 2016. Is this true?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It could be true, Stephen. On the other hand, I'm not voting for him because he's a fraud and not a limited government conservative.

      Delete
  6. It is simple. Romney is not qualified to be President. He is not someone that you can trust. He is not a bad, evil guy. It is just that in his adult life he flourished as a deal maker doing and saying whatever was necessary to make the deal. Afterwords, he moved on to the next deal negotiating with someone new. In the new transaction he was able to make new and different promises because his opponent had no prior dealings with him.

    In Massachusetts he came across as a liberal to get elected. In this years primary he portrayed himself as a right wing conservative. During the Presidential campaign in public he shifted closer to the center while in private meetings, with wealthy donors, he became the right winger again.

    This is not someone who we want as President. It is not someone who foreign leaders, except for Mr. Netanyahu, want to deal with. Too much is at stake. http://www.freeourfreemarkets.org/2012/08/romney-mr-transaction.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with you on the point that Mitt will say/do anything to get elected. There is no core with the man. But (to play devil's advocate, just a bit), are you telling me that Obama is a justifiable alternative? Have you looked into former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, running on the libertarian party ticket? I can send you some material if you are interested.

      Delete
  7. Great post.

    I don't think Mitt is a conservative or a statist. He's a squishy pragmatist who wants more that anything to be America's CEO. He wants to build on his father's legacy, but he's haunted by his father's fatal "brainwashed" gaffe. So he's flip-floppy and inhibited at the same time. An awful combination.

    Having said that, it's going to be Mitt or Barack in November. Who will do the least damage? I know nobody here loves Mitt, yours truly included, but he's not as dangerous as Obama. He doesn't have the commitment to Marxist ideology -- or any other ideology for that matter -- that Obama has. And the media wouldn't give Romney the everlasting free pass that they've given to Obama.

    Having Mitt in the White House would be fraught with frustrations, but Mitt might occasionally do something right.

    A second Obama term (with added "flexibility") would be an unmitigated disaster.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the well-thought-out thoughts, RK, hope you are doing well :)

      Delete
  8. I beg to differ. He is just as dangerous. Unless you don't mind the thought of growing Facism in America.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the sense that a thunder shower is just as dangerous as a hurricane?

      Delete
  9. Wow, so much to comment on! It's unfortunate but Johnson has a snowball's chance in hell of being elected and hell is what we are headed for if Obama is elected to a second term. Financial hell that is! Reagan was known as the great communicator, Ryan is more in that mold than Romney that's for sure, and Ryan gives me hope that we might be able to survive the policies of the last 3, no 12 yrs. He understands the budget and the mess we are in better than anyone else in congress. Wishful thinking will only bring more of Obama's socialism. To me that makes my vote a moral choice not a political or idealistic choice.

    I talked to a long time friend last week who escaped from a communist country with her family as a teenager. She told me that Obama is going by the play book for socialism and we better wake up. The lesser of two evils???!!! I don't think there is any contest and a vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Obama and you will have no one but yourself to blame when we hit the bottom of this slippery slope we are on!

    ReplyDelete
  10. We chose the wrong candidate in the primary. It is simple. Romney is not qualified to be President. He is not someone that you can trust. He is not a bad, evil guy. It is just that in his adult life he flourished as a deal maker doing and saying whatever was necessary to make the deal. Afterwords, he moved on to the next deal negotiating with someone new. In the new transaction he was able to make new and different promises because his opponent had no prior dealings with him.

    In Massachusetts he came across as a liberal to get elected. In this years primary he portrayed himself as a right wing conservative. During the Presidential campaign in public he shifted closer to the center while in private meetings, with wealthy donors, he became the right winger again.

    This is not someone who we want as President. It is not someone who foreign leaders, except for Mr. Netanyahu, want to deal with. Too much is at stake.... http://bit.ly/FF1208rmt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meet Willard Mitt (the Human Flipper) Romney.

      I might want him running my business, but I sure as hell don't want him (or Obama) running my country.

      A terrible statement on the state of American political leadership. Or should I say the lack thereof?

      Whatever happened to REAL leaders in America?

      It is time to take a shot at the Libertarian Party and vote Gary Johnson, a protest vote maybe. But we have to start somewhere and prepare Gary for 2016. Failing this we're ALL screwed.

      The two party political duopoly has been screwing the pooch by far too long. Only by getting out of the "comfort zone" will anything really change.

      Take a VERY deep breath because after November 6th we are going to be under water for quite some time methinks...

      Delete
  11. The thing is that both Obama and Mitt are overwhelmingly backed by the Federal Reserve Banking Cartel megabanks. The socialism we are witnessing is not due to Obama (who was a son of the CIA/Ford Foundation fronts and grandson of Rockefeller-owned Chase bank employee) or the likes of Mitt (also born to Rockefeller-aligned political machine). It is the end result of a documented plan to subvert the Constitution and change America into a command economy.

    Mitt got his start from his daddy's money, and used government connections to advance. I would encourage everyone to read Confessions of a Monopolist by Frederic C. Howe (1906) where it outlines how to make government and society work for the business and how to create your own fool-proof government machine. This cancer has now metastatized into a big smelly tumor. The thing that really bugs me about Mitt was his $50 Mittcare abortions.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/nov/27/fred-thompson/indeed-abortions-are-covered/

    Go Gary, I'm sending a message that there is one American who isn't voting out fear because I live in the home of the BRAVE!
    Only a wuss votes because they're scared of some little red diaper baby like Obama.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.