Posted by
Phil E. on Thursday, February 08, 2007 8:14:19 PM
What's wrong with this picture?
It's becoming increasingly popular to imply, as a point in favor of Mitt Romney, that he would make a good President because (ostensibly) as a conservative (
NOT and
NOT), he won the governorship in the "
Bluest of the Blue States."
I don't get it. Isn't that really proof that
Mitt Romney is a Liberal? This is the state that continues to elect Kennedy the drunken swimmer, Kerry the megalomaniac Vietnam Vet, and Frank the unashamed homosexual.
This state is the Bluest of the Blue. So why would anyone be proud he was elected in Massachusetts?
I suppose it could be that Massachusians are stupid and were hoodwinked by Mitt Romney. Being stupid is consistent with Liberalism, but I don't think Massachusians are that stupid when it comes to politics. Stupid or not, they've consistently elected Liberals for their representatives. Ergo, they must have seen Mitt Romney as a Liberal.
Thinking like a lawyer. Concluding arguments
The only way I can twist this negative into a positive is to assume the logic must go something like this: I won something, so I must be good.
But isn't that like a Kosher Jew bragging about winning First Place in a Pork Chop cook off? What good is it? This is like Mitt Romney's "usual faith story,"
It's not important that you did well in just something, but that you strived to do well in something right. I mean, the 19 Muslim terrorists had an "usual faith story." Doesn't make it right.
[The other argument might be that he's good at working across the aisle. Is that what you want in a President? Someone who is good compromising with Liberals? Remember what Rush Limbaugh says. "
When good compromises with evil, evil always wins."]
Question:
We compromised on murdering the unborn (a.k.a. "abortion"), outlawing it except for rape, incest and "health of the mother." (Like, would you feel better if we murdered your baby? Yes? Okay.)
Aside from the fact that it's wrong to kill an innocent for someone else's sin (we should execute rapists, not babies), have any abortions been stopped by this silly compromise?
Evil wins.
Calculating the odds
It seems more likely to me that Mitt Romney's run in Massachusetts was just another shrewd "calculated effort" (
like this one, where he cleverly got around campaign finance rules) that I've noticed within the Mormon church and with Liberals like Hillary Clinton. In the same way that New York was one of the few states in which Mrs. Clinton stood a chance of being elected, so Massachusetts was one of the few states where Mitt Romney could get elected. (Utah excluded, for obvious reasons. He would win in Utah, but would anyone seriously consider a Mormon Governor from Mormon Utah for President? Another shrewd calculation.)
Don't vote for Mitt Romney for President. He's really a wolf in sheep's clothing.