Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney Roundup (011708)
I am pleased to report that the word about Mitt Romney’s myriad weaknesses is spreading, and continues to be enhanced by the contributions of others.
This is the fourth of a series of several daily links to others who have news about Objectively Unfit Mitt.
Here goes.
___________________________________________
A Wall Street Journal editorial on GOP presidential candidates’ tax-cut plans notes that all have come around to presenting specifics — except, oh-so-predictably, one:
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is proposing to expand tax free savings accounts and he speaks vaguely of cutting tax rates. That’s fine with us, though in his typical fashion it seems like the path of least polling resistance. For all of his talk about “changing” Washington, Mr. Romney so far hasn’t offered a tax reform that would reduce the sway of lobbyists and money changers.
Earth to Journal, and to GOP voters: Mitt Romney would more than likely be the lobbyists’ and money changers’ best friend — no matter where they’re from or who they represent. Watch this if you think my concern is without foundation.
_________________________________________________
RomneyFacts.com has a great comparison of Blue Mitt and Red Mitt, showing contradictions in his statements — including one instance of where the contradictions occurred on the very same day.
_________________________________________________
Salt and Light compares Romney on Reagan in 1994 and 2008:
- 1994 (video): “Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”
- 2008 (video): “Back in 1994 I was making it clear that I was my own man. And I am my own man.”
Sorry, Mitt — any viewer can see that the borderline anger on display in 1994 was meant to tell the audience that you were not only not a fan of Reagan-Bush, but downright hostile towards them.
_________________________________________________
Where does he find these people? Romney finance chair choices have turned out to be embarrassing — or they would be, if they got reported:
Romney’s finance team co-chair has been indicted:
A federal grand jury has indicted Fabian for allegedly making $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment to pay for his lavish spending habits. Prosecutors are seeking $32 million worth of Fabian’s assets, including beach real estate in North Carolina, property in Maryland and a yacht.
….. and his Utah finance chair is a crook:
Lichfield was named in a June 2007 complaint filed in federal court in Utah by the families of 133 children who have attended schools associated with WWASP, alleging that they were subjected to physical, sexual, and emotional abuse. Plaintiff Chase Wood, who attended the Cross Creek Center for Boys (founded by Lichfield in the late 1970s) and another WWASP-affiliated school, claims he was fondled, forced to eat his own vomit, and locked in a dog cage.
Fabian and Lichfield are now former co-chairs. A video about Lichfield’s “schools” is here.
Here’s something about a current co-chair. Romney’s Idaho guy, Frank Vandersloot, is an art-of-intimidation bully who expended an incredible amount of energy attempting (and failing miserably) to defend (get this) pedophile Boy Scout leaders in the Grand Teton Council. Really, even though a local-area paper found that there had been at least four Scout leaders who had preyed on dozens of victims.
A full list of Romney co-chairs is here. Anyone with relevant info on any of these folks is welcome to e-mail me.
By the way, I predict that if Romney is the nominee, there will be a concerted effort by Old Media to get to the bottom of what appears, based on this simple Google search on “Mormons and ‘child abuse’” and other information I have learned, to be a serious child-abuse problem that exists in the Mormon Church and segments of the Mormon community.
Since a Republican is involved, I predict that Old Media will do a thorough job.
I further predict that if they do that thorough job, they will find a lot to write about.
I finally predict that they will get to within, excuse the expression, close enough striking distance of Mitt Romney’s circle of friends (Update: and acquaintances — Ed.) to have an impact on his prospects, and that the impact will not be favorable.
FYI - all the Journal’s editorial stuff is available on the web for free now.
Comment by Phil — January 17, 2008 @ 10:02 am
#1, thanks for that reminder. I thought the URL indicated that it was behind the wall.
Comment by TBlumer — January 17, 2008 @ 10:28 am
Tom, I have a lot of respect for you and your blog, and you’re certainly entitled to your opinion about Romney. But your comments about Mormons in this post: Inexcusable bigotry. I expected better. At least now, though, the reason for your one-man anti-Romney campaign is there for all to see.
Comment by Nasty, Brutish & Short — January 17, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
#3, nice try, no sale. You can do the same Google search I did and either recognize that there APPEARS (key unbigoted word) to be an issue or bury your head in the sand.
You also haven’t been in on conversations I’ve had and e-mails I’ve exchanged with people in a position to know that there is even more than is found in the simple Google search.
There was a problem in the Catholic Church too, and there still may be. There, I said it. That doesn’t make me an anti-Catholic bigot. If you think it does, you need to consult a dictionary.
I don’t care what Mitt Romney’s religion is, unless his church attempts to directly affect how he would govern (doubtful, or at least I haven’t seen any direct evidence of it), or if it, in combination with other things, causes him to associate with and/or get guidance and/or help from very, very unsavory people (open and worrisome question).
Does Mitt Romney get a pass for having finance co-chairs who are, respectively:
- A crook?
- A person who ran schools that were shut down because they were routinely abusing kids?
- A person who gratuitously outed a reporter ONLY because that reporter exposed four pedophilia practitioners in the Grand Teton Boy Scout Council (read the linked article in full, please)?
Is merely bringing this stuff up now a form of bigotry? Nope, and you owe me an apology for claiming that it is.
If so, please refrain from making future comments at your place, or mine, or anywhere else, about Norman Hsu or any of the questionable people associated with Hillary Clinton or other candidates.
Sad to say, if Old Media doesn’t do its job investigating what’s out there on the topic, they will be ignoring what APPEARS (key unbigoted word) to be a serious problem, in the process POSSIBLY (key unbigoted word) allowing dangerous people into the halls of power.
Comment by TBlumer — January 17, 2008 @ 1:59 pm
If you put a blog post that suggested a Catholic candidate would have a difficult run with the media because of their child abuse scandals, then yes, I’d say that makes you an anti-Catholic bigot. And that’s precisely what you did here, except with a Mormon candidate. You’re imputing the sins of part of a religious group to every member of that group. And the reason you’re doing it is to make Republicans think he’ll be a loser at the polls on election day.
At least when the Clintons say Obama is not electable, they leave it unsaid that they think he’s unelectable because he’s Black. Here you are coming right out and saying that Romney is unelectable because he’s a Mormon and the media will pile on stories about Mormon child abuse.
Comment by Nasty, Brutish & Short — January 17, 2008 @ 2:40 pm
#5, you’re not paying enough attention.
I am saying that there are POTENTIAL (key unbigoted word) problems of the nature described that have to do with friends, acquaintances, and business associates of the Romneys who, AS I SAID, APPEAR (key unbigoted word) to be close enough to Romney and his family to matter. If they know of the activities of these friends, acquaintances, and business associates, the effect would be to cause one to question the judgment and motivations of a person/family who would continue to have such people as friends, acquaintances, and business associates. For what it’s worth, they may not all be Mormon, but it APPEARS (key unbigoted word) that at least some or most of them are.
You can try to paint it as such all you want, but I am NOT imputing the sins of a religious group to every member of that group. This is a POTENTIAL (key unbigoted word) candidate-specific problem. And it’s not going to go away if I shut up. And Old Media isn’t going to cower in fear if Romney and, heaven forbid, a co-opted GOP, try to play the “you’re a bigot” card.
And I’m still waiting for the apology…..
Comment by TBlumer — January 17, 2008 @ 3:54 pm
Tom, in light of this:
“By the way, I predict that if Romney is the nominee, there will be a concerted effort by Old Media to get to the bottom of what appears, based on this simple Google search on “Mormons and ‘child abuse’†and other information I have learned, to be a serious child-abuse problem that exists in the Mormon Church and segments of the Mormon community.”
No apology will be forthcoming.
Comment by Nasty, Brutish & Short — January 17, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
#7, too bad. Old Media will go from the general to the specific. Those final paras are nothing more than a preliminary assessment of facts known (not all of which you know, BTW), followed by a prediction. Your calling it bigotry doesn’t make it so. Consider your non-apology a permanent debt.
Comment by TBlumer — January 17, 2008 @ 4:44 pm
It is commonly known by insiders in the LDS community the problems of child abuse and cover ups in many regions of the country.
Telling the truth is not bigotry, covering up is however worst — the one running around calling people a ‘bigot’ is the biggest “ bigot†of all — and worst.
I am sure there are those out there, who are yet to tell their story, who have suffered greatly.
Romney does appear to surround himself with many types of criminal minded people.
Comment by kind, sweet and caring — January 17, 2008 @ 10:53 pm
#7, Put #9 in your pipe and smoke it. This person knows whereof they speak. You have NO idea…..
Comment by TBlumer — January 18, 2008 @ 12:37 am