My conclusion -ANYONE but Romney

When pushed on the similarities between Romneycare and Obamacare in the previous debate by Rick Santorum, Governor Romney responded ?First of all, it’s not worth getting angry about.?

The longer the presidential nominating process has gone, the clearer it has become that anyone but Romney is better than Mitt Romney. I’ve never been anti Romney, but he’s pushing me strongly to that conclusion. It’s become apparent Romney is willing to do and say anything to become the nominee. His campaign is slanderous and missrepresents those he runs against from McCain, Thompson, Giuliani, Huckabee, Santorum, Gingrich or Rick Perry. Neither Santorum, Gingrich or Paul are perfect, but at their core they are conservatives. Romney is the opposite. He doesn’t have a core. He is a fraud who is willing to say anything he must to get elected. When he has to be, he’s in favor of universal health care, or abortion rights for minors without the need of parental consent. Mitt Romney is deliberately misleading voters, and at this point I am inclined to support ANYONE BUT MITT ROMNEY (or Obama) in the presidential election.

Our party is at one of those crossroads where we have to decide what kind of a party we will be. Either we will be a party of conviction and principle, or we will become a party that demonstrates exactly what is wrong with politics.

Take a moment and watch Senator Santorum deliver a compelling blow to Mitt Romney on his health care mandate.

56 Replies to “My conclusion -ANYONE but Romney”

  1. RHINOmney

    by Gregg Jackson

    Amazing how every alleged criticism of Newt Gingrich is above the fold/front and center news on homosexual GOProud board member Ann Coulter?s best buddy, Matt Drudge?s web site

    Yesterday one of the headlines on his site was a link to an article from ?conservative? National Review Online that ?Gingrich repeatedly insulted Reagan.?

    No mention of the fact ever by Drudge that Romney has repeatedly distanced himself from ?Reagan-Bush? or that National Review has taken money from Romney?

    And Drudge has never once shared with his tens of millions of visitors the truth about Romney?s far left wing record below?


    Perhaps somebody who knows Drudge can send him this link to ?Romney?s fully documented far left wing social and fiscal record.?

    Here?s Mitt Romney, Fiscal and Social Liberal Record . . . completely verifiable.

    ? Unilaterally, illegally and unconstitutionally instituted same-sex ?marriage? falsely claiming the ?court ordered him to.? Proof here and here.

    ? Signed the forerunner to Obamacare (Romneycare) into law which includes $50 tax-subsidized elective surgical abortions including late-term abortions into law (3 years AFTER his fake ?pro-life conversion.?) Proof here.

    ? Boosted funding for homosexual ?education? starting in kindergarten. Proof here.

    ? Opposes a ban on homosexual scoutmasters. Proof here.

    ? Promised the homosexual Republican ?Log Cabin Republicans? he wouldn?t oppose ?gay marriage? in return for their endorsement. Proof here.

    ? Instituted a quasi-socialist healthcare plan endorsed by Hillary Clinton, Teddy Kennedy and Planned Parenthood that destroyed the Massachusetts? economy. Proof here and here.

    ? Forced Catholic Charities, the nation?s #1 adoption and foster care service to place children with same sex couples even though he was under no legal obligation to do so as even former Governor Michael Dukakis has acknowledged.

    ? Increased taxes and fees by close to a billion dollars which destroyed the Massachusetts? economy and opposed the Bush Tax Cuts. Proof here.

    ? Voted # 8 RINO by Human Events. Proof here.

    ? Passed over Republican lawyers for three quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he faced and nominated 2 open homosexuals. Proof here.

    ? Criticized Joint Chief?s of Staff, Peter Pace for saying that homosexual acts were ?immoral.? Proof here.

    ? Supports passage at the state level of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would force churches and other religious organizations to hire homosexuals and transvestites or face criminal fines and prosecution. Proof here.

    ? Romney supported McCain-Feingold ?campaign finance reform,? McCain-Kennedy ?comprehensive immigration reform? (i.e. amnesty), and parts of the McCain-Lieberman ?carbon cap and trade? bill and opposed the Bush Tax Cuts. Proof here.

    We probably can?t expect Drudge to get it right about Romney. What you?ve read here is his record, and remember, it?s not an attack if it?s your record.

    Gregg Jackson is co-author of We Won?t Get Fooled Again: Where the Christian Right Went Wrong and How to Make America Right Again

      1. 73*

        I’d hate to give that issue away. Santorum and Gingrich need to decide what’s best for the country and join forces. One of them needs to drop out.

    1. Anonymous

      JT isn’t alone by any stretch of the imagination. Anybody got a list of who’s endorsing who?

  2. looking ahead...

    Given the choice between voting for a dead cat and Mitt Romney I will vote for the dead cat. Given the choice between Romney and Obama I vote for the dead cat. Get the drift? Romney looses either way.

  3. duggersd

    Mitt Romney is down there on my choices. He always has been. South Dakota probably will have 0 say in the nomination process. Tomorrow is the Florida primary. Whoever is the Republican nominee will need the support of the people who supported other contenders. If I have to choose between Romney and Obama, I will take Romney any time. Taking an ax to the various candidates does nothing except provide fodder for the Obama campaign.

  4. troy jones

    Here is my view using Bill’s words:

    It?s become apparent GINGRICH is willing to do and say anything to become the nominee. His campaign is slanderous and missrepresents those he runs against. . . . . Neither Santorum, ROMNEY or Paul are perfect, but at their core they are conservatives. GINGRICH is the opposite. He doesn?t have a core. He is a fraud who is willing to say anything he must to get elected. . . .NEWT GINGRICH is deliberately misleading voters, and at this point I am inclined to support ANYONE BUT NEWT GINGRICH (or Obama) in the presidential election.

    Elections are like the football playoffs. I started out wanting the Packers as they are on my team. Then I rooted for the 49ers. But the National Conference is my “party” so my choice is to go for the Giants, root for the other “party” or read a book.

    Here is my point: Primaries are a process where we get to pick our choice along with the rest of those in our party. When it is over we get to choose between our nominee, the nominee of the other party, and anyone choosing to run as an Independent.

    1. Anonymous

      Accept Gingrich is not Romney. Gingrich for all his flaws is conservative. What you did troy is exactly what Romney is doing. Romney better be careful or he will drive a wedge in the gop he can’t unite.
      On football we agree on the choices.

      1. sdpride

        No he is not conservative. If you took the time to research what actually happened during Gingrich’s time in Congress you would realize he is nothing but a power hungry ego-maniac. Why do you think so few of his colleagues have endorsed him?

        And Newt and Santorum are doing the same thing as Romney when it comes to negative attacks, they just don’t have the money to run as many of them.

  5. sdpride

    This post is laughable. I don’t like Romney, but he is the only chance Republicans have at winning. The words you use to describe Romney are the exact words you should be using to describe Gingrich. Your claim that Gingrich is a conservative at his core destroys any credibility you may have had.

    And Santorum is a joke. Good guy, but a Bush-style conservative who is hard-liner on foreign policy and social issues with absolutely no charisma. He would get slaughtered by Obama. Probably lose by around 18 percent, which is the same beatdown he got last time he ran for office.

    1. Anonymous

      The idea that Newt Gingrich isn’t conservative is laughable. Santorum is also a conservative. What planet do you live on?

      SD PRIDE, You are a joke.

    2. toga

      Gingrich has done more for conservatism than Romney has ever thought.

      Don’t make me laugh. I want Ron Paul but the idea that Romney is a conservative or even remotely worth supporting is laughable at best.

      1. sdpride

        Gingrich does whatever will keep him in power.

        “Gingrich either felt that he could not use his office to control spending or was not willing to lose his office to control spending. This goes to the heart of the matter: If your decisions are based on not losing a position, you cannot effectively serve the best long-term interests of the country.”

        “They were revolutionaries in name only, content to take possession from the Democrats of the machinery of government and then run it virtually unchanged.”

        -Senator Tom Coburn

        Again, if Gingrich is a conservative hero, why are so few of his colleagues endorsing him?

        By the way, I don’t particularly care for Romney, but he is the only one who has a chance to beat Obama.

        1. agent 99

          All Gingrich has to say to me is 4 balanced budget ammendments during the clinton years. WOW!

          Romney loses to Obama because he is a McCain/Dole/Ford/romney.

          I don’t think the establishment is thinking this through.

          If I was running against an incumbant president who wanted to run a class warfare campaign I would choose a person worth half a billion dollars who made his money off of Wall Street. We are playing right into Obama’s hand.

          It’s not that I want Gingrich it’s that I don’t want romney bad enough to stay home in November.

            1. Anonymous

              The Congress did balance the budget 4 years with Bill Clinton. In the 60’s LBJ wanted to create the impression of a balanced budget so he moved the social security fund into the general fund.

              By this method Congress balanced the budget 4 straight times. Even Gingrich wants the social security to be removed from the general fund.

              If you want to play semantics go ahead. You know as well as I do that what Congress did in the 90’s was better for conservatism than anyone had done in 50 years and better than anything Delay, Hastert, Pelosi or Boehner have done since.

              Imagine what the 90’s would have looked like if Gingrich had opperated against Clinton like Boehner does against Obama? – that’s right Boehner continues to raise the debt ceiling.

              1. sdpride

                50 years? So Gingrich did more for conservatives than Reagan? Interesting considering how he spent his time in Congress attacking Reagan and blaming him for the “decay of America.” What a conservative hero.

                And as I have said, those he worked with in Congress paint a very different picture than what his supporters do. They make it clear he was only interested in staying in power.

                And I’m not sure why you are so high on how he handled Clinton. His botched impeachment proceedings and the way he handled the government shutdown are two reasons why Clinton remains popular and Gingrich’s ratings are in the tank.

                1. Anonymous

                  No he didn’t do more for conservatism than Reagan. He did more than any other speaker.

                  “This utterly dumb line of attack for Romney is as bad if not worse than Gingrich’s flirtation with attacking Bain Capital. It raises exactly all the questions of Romney’s vulnerabilities. Why, for example, did Romney deliberately play the wimp when it comes to defending Ronald Reagan in Massachusetts? At precisely the time in the fall of 1994, it should be noted, when Newt Gingrich was leading Chapter 2 in the Reagan Revolution? Is Romney really trying to draw attention to the fact that while Gingrich and hundreds of Republicans were on the verge of a historic landslide retaking the House by attaching themselves to the Reagan legacy? Romney ran from Reagan? and got clobbered?”

                  It has been debunked that Gingrich was ever anti Reagan. Romney on the other hand did vote for Tsongas who favored population control. That sounds like someone who was a huge reagan supporter to me.

                  1. sdpride

                    It has not been debunked.

                    The idea that he was some sort of partner with Reagan is just one in a long line of lies and exaggerations that Gingrich has told in an effort to make himself appear as a conservative hero. Sad that people buy into it.

  6. sdpride

    You don’t have to take my word for it. Just read what his colleagues have written about him. Or are they part of the “liberal media” that is out to get him?

    1. agent 99

      The way the world works is we have those who want to change things and make things happen and we have those who like the status quo and don’t want to upset the culture. Gingrich doesn’t mind breaking eggs. I bet he busted a few in his own party many times as speaker. There is a reason they don’t like Gingrich.

      Look around DC and you will realize that when Bush was president Republicans were happy to spend when Obama came along they all found their principles. When Romney comes to town they get to spend again. If Newt comes to town he won’t go along with it. Same with Santorum and especially Paul.

      1. sdpride

        Read the quote I posted above. Newt was not interested in changing things, he wanted to keep them the same. As long as he was in power, it didn’t matter.

          1. sdpride

            Is Senator Coburn delusional? What about all the others who worked with him that have said the same thing? Are they all delusional?

            1. Anonymous

              I like Senator Coburn. That doesn’t mean I have to dislike Newt and support Romney.

              For everything anyone says about Gingrich Romney wasn’t even fighting for conservatism throughout his life.

              You can say Gingrich wasn’t conservative but then what was Romney?

              Frankly SD Pride your opinion is very silly.

              1. sdpride

                I think Romney is a moderate. But he is a moderate who has a chance to win, unlike Gingrich.

                And he doesn’t come with the same ego-driven, power hungry agenda and lack of ethics that Gingrich does. That matters to me.

                1. Anonymous

                  Gingrich is conservative. I wonder what conservative is to you?

                  Santorum has my support but that ship is sinking really fast.

  7. Anonymous


    Why do you need to start every defense of Romney off with “I don’t care for Romney but he’s the only person who can win?”

    You come across as a pro romney fanatic. Face it. If you don’t like Gingrich I don’t care but don’t try to sell me on Romney.

    I have a hard time Romney has a chance. Obamacare off the table. I feel the D’s want to run against Romney. It’s a clear contrast between Rich and Poor.

    I want John Thune but he didn’t run.

    1. sdpride

      Because I would rather have Romney than Obama. Pretty simple.

      And there is no way the D’s would rather face Romney. He is the best organized, has the most money, and consistently does the best in polls against Obama.

      1. Anonymous

        And he’s a wall street guy who made millions taking advantage of poor people. Sounds perfect to run against Obama to me.

        Thune, Rubio, Christie etc are all better than Romney. Now I’m stuck with Gingrich, Paul and Santorum. I’d support Paul 3rd party before I will support Romney.

        1. sdpride

          Made millions taking advantage of poor people? Sounds like Occupy Wall Street propaganda. Kind of sad that the Republicans have taken to using it too.

          I like those three you listed, but they are not running. Romney is going to win the nomination. I’d rather have him than Obama. Pretty simple.

          1. veldy

            Actually it IS Wall Street propaganda, my guess is that’s why you see tacit and not so tacit “support” for the OWS out of the Dems, using it to set Romney up.
            Disclaimer:Not intended as a slam on Romney

            1. name

              Romney will not win the nomination. Convention decision. OWS was all about setting Romney up. Romney goes down in flames in November if he is reelected.

                1. veldy

                  You may not be the only one but that doesn’t mean you are correct(NEW disclaimer:NOT an endorsement of Romney)

  8. Newt's pro reagan: always has been always will be
    It does no one — least of all Elliott Abrams or Governor Romney — any good to try and say that Newt Gingrich, as loyal a friend and ally to Ronald Reagan as could be found in the day — was somehow some crazed anti-Reaganite who got the Cold War wrong. Not only is this not true, its laughably untrue. Quite noticeably in last night’s debate, on the heels of the release of that video showing Nancy Reagan

    herself praising Newt and the news that Michael Reagan is endorsing the ex-Speaker, Romney sheepishly began to back away from all of this zaniness.

  9. Wouldn't it be great...

    Wouldn’t it be great if we had a candidate that had a consistent conservative record, great ideas to turn the country around, a track record of success (both private and public), and no scandal attached to his name?…wait a minute…we did…Jon Huntsman. But as a party we couldn’t look past the minor issue of him serving as Amb. to China under Obama, even though he served in three other Republican administrations in a similar position and gained priceless forgeign policy knowledge. He is a servant of his country and a true statesman. We complain of having lack luster candidates and we let this great candidate get away. I don’t get it…

    1. name

      I loved Huntsman. I supported him with a check but he dropped out. Now I’m on to Gingrich or Santorum. I did not follow Huntsman to Romney.

      I will never support Romney.

        1. Wouldn't it be great...

          It really is a moot point at this stage of the game since he is out of the race; however, since you brought it up I felt like I better respond…Huntsman was unfairly made out to be like Romney. They really are not that similar. Romney’s record has shown him to be incredibly “wishy-washy” when it comes to conservatism. Huntsman, on the other hand, has always been consistently conservative in his policies. He is pro-2nd amendment, anti-abortion, a fiscal conservative, and has a track record of success. He has not faltered in his conservatism. Romney has. We could look at another hot button topic such as health care. Romney gave Obama the blueprint for Obamacare by passing Romneycare in Massachusetts. Huntsman reformed healthcare by setting up the exchange system – which is working wonders in Utah. My point is that we as a party really turned our backs on the best possible candidate. A candidate with consitent conservative views, who also appealed to moderates. I fear that we may have handed Obama four more years…

          1. Anonymous

            NObama – NoRomney.

            Huntsman was a decent guy. My impression was that he sunk himself with his snooty act in debates. Intended or not he acted as if he was better than everyone.

            I’d have voted for him rather than Romney.

  10. Mr. Smith

    I was on the fence, and then I found out that Howie/Ellis/Russell/Shad and the rest of their West River Lobotomy Club have issues with Mitt Romney. So he must be good! Go Mitt!

  11. Elias

    Mitt as ‘pro-homosexual’ and ‘pro-abortion’ my ass. The man is as anti-woman and anti-gay as the rest of ’em.

  12. insomniac

    I’ll be voting for Gingrich. Regardless of what happens in FL I’ll be supporting someone other than Romney.

    1. Anon

      I will be doing the same. Newt aint perfect, but Mitt is a real turn off.

      Reading the above posts really points out the problem of the conservative vote being split. Everyone has “their guy” and hates the other choices.

  13. Arrowhead

    No to slick Willard Mitt Romney. They guys is a used car salesman who shouldn’t be trusted with the keys to this country.

  14. PNR

    Personally, I’m for anyone but Obama – even if it’s Romney, even if it’s Gingrich, even if it’s Santorum, and even (though I shudder to say it) Ron Paul.

    Of those, I’d rank them in order of preference as Santorum, Romney, Gingrich, Paul. Others will have different orders of preference and that’s fine, as long as Obama joins the ranks of the unemployed on January 20, 2013.

    1. Anonymous

      Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, Romney. (can’t stand Santorum though but it shows how much I dislike Romney.)