You avoided my stimulus point, how Romney not only supported Stimulus spending but put forward a plan that made Obama/Clinton’s look conservative, and have subsequently tried to explain away how it’s totally acceptable that Romney borrows money from the federal government but not anyone else. I will quickly pause and note that it doesn’t matter why Romney borrowed the money, it’s whether he did or not. He did and is praised for it. Anyways, this sort of cognitive dissonance is not uncommon and deserves a closer look.
Part of your own support of Romney comes from, and I quote, “His integrity/character”. As well, you continue to post defenses of Romney using his own websites as some sort of statement of fact. Is acting hypocritical a positive or negative quality when it comes to integrity? And why should we believe anything Romney says in his own websites? Let’s break it down into two categories, pre-presidential election campaign and post presidential election campaign:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/19/us...y.html?_r&_r=1&“Mitt Romney offered an ambitious plan Friday to try to forestall a recession, proposing a $250 billion economic stimulus package with sweeteners for supply-side conservatives, older Americans and corporations.
Mr. Romney’s proposal, outlined in a telephone interview during a campaign swing through Nevada, is grounded in new, permanent income tax reductions. It is also double the size of stimulus packages offered by two of the Democratic presidential candidates, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, and far exceeds the $145 billion plan that President Bush suggested to Congress on Friday.”
Post Presidential election:
“Mitt Romney rounded out a week focused on what he views as overspending by the federal government with a critique of President Obama's stimulus program during a speech in front of what opponents call New Hampshire's "bridge to nowhere."
Romney has argued throughout the campaign that Obama's $787-billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was a waste of money that did little to jump-start the economy — and he has charged that the federal government has inflated the job numbers associated with various projects.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_493808.htmlFormer -- and perhaps future -- Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney talked with radio host Don Imus Wednesday morning about his views on abortion rights.
"Now, when you changed your mind abortion and went from pro choice, I guess, to pro-life, what -- walk me through the, what caused that," Imus asked.
"Well, you know, I never really called myself pro-choice, but I did say when I was running for governor that I would keep the law as it was," Romney responded.
Health Care (specifically individual mandate, because Romney has said he would keep much of Obamacare)!
“Mitt Romney’s support for an individual mandate as part of his signature health care legislation in 2006 has never been in doubt. But emails unearthed between then Massachusetts Governor Romney and top staffers reveal how close he was to the crafting of “Romneycare” and provide details on how he persuaded a skeptical Democratic legislature to adopt the provision.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...eighs-law.htmlIt’s unclear how insurance companies could cover those with preexisting conditions without the individual mandate for everyone to buy insurance -- part of the law Romney has said he would repeal if it isn’t struck down by the Supreme Court.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/09/us.../09romney.htmlMr. Romney’s standing among conservatives is being hurt by a letter he sent to the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts saying that he would be a stronger advocate for gay rights than Senator Edward M. Kennedy, his opponent in a Senate race, in a position that stands in contrast to his current role as a champion of a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“We must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern,” Mr. Romney wrote in a detailed plea for the support of the club, a gay Republican organization.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...74-503544.htmlRepublican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has signed a pledge sponsored by the National Organization for Marriage promising to support a federal constitutional amendment "defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman."
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul...tance-20120721As governor of Massachusetts, he signed the first permanent state ban on assault weapons.
“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said at the bill-signing ceremony in 2004, according to a news release issued by the governor’s office at the time. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul...tance-20120721“I do not support any new legislation of an assault weapon ban nature, including that against semiautomatic weapons,” Romney said during a Florida debate in 2008. “I instead believe that we have laws in place that, if they’re implemented and enforced, will provide the protection and the safety of the American people.”
That is the same stance he holds today.
Back in 2002, Romney said, "I'm against tax increases. But I'm not intending to, at this stage, sign a document which would prevent me from being able to look specifically at the revenue needs of the Commonwealth." At that time, his spokesman called the no-tax pledge "government by gimmickry."
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/grover-norquist-defends-anti-tax-pledge-on-capitol-hill/Norquist dismissed recent criticism of the pledge by prominent Republicans like former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, and pointed out that a majority of Republicans in the House and Senate, along with the GOP’s presumptive nominee, Mitt Romney, have all signed the pledge.
“It’s not necessary for somebody to sign the pledge to not raise taxes,” Norquist said. “[Jeb Bush] is not running for president. Romney is [running] and Romney’s made that commitment, so that’s sort of a settled question at the national level for Republicans. And, again, you have a strong majority of the Republicans in the House and Senate who have just made sure that we’re not going to be raising taxes, and with President Romney he’s committed to vetoing any net tax increase.”
Campaign focus!(no Pre/Post for obvious reasons)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...b7e_story.htmlWith just 50 days to go until Election Day, the Republican presidential candidate plans to reinforce the specifics of what he would do as president, offering voters a rationale for his candidacy by specifically addressing what he would do to help struggling middle-class families at a time when more voters are beginning to pay attention to the years-long presidential campaign.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/r...-election.htmlSensing a potential opening, Mitt Romney is shifting his focus back to foreign policy amid controversy over the Obama administration's response to a terrorist attack in Libya that left four Americans dead
I could literally keep going. So, why should anyone take any of your posts seriously when you use Mitt Romney's own websites as some sort of defense for him? Do any of these shifts reflect positively on his integrity? And what would Mitt Romney have to do to earn the label RINO from you?