Romney Is McCain's Best VP Option

Weekly Standard: Former Rival Has Superior Ratio Of Virtues To Drawbacks Over Other Choices

(Weekly Standard)  This column was written by Fred Barnes.

---

When John McCain begins his search for a vice presidential running mate, he'll quickly come upon a sad fact. He wants a candidate who will be seen as a plausible president. That's criterion number one. He also wants someone who won't subtract from his campaign in any serious way. That's criterion number two. The unfortunate truth is that few Republicans meet these simple criteria. McCain doesn't have much of a pool to choose from.

But his selection matters enormously, all the more because of his age. McCain will turn 72 on the eve of the Republican convention this summer. Choosing a running mate is the first major decision that a presidential nominee makes. And the nominee is judged by the quality of his pick and even by the smoothness of his selection process. So McCain had better choose well.

He has the right idea in mind. McCain thinks three vice presidential picks from the recent past were wise: Republican Dick Cheney in 2000 and Democrats Joe Lieberman in 2000 and Al Gore in 1992. They were nationally known political heavyweights who passed the most important test. They were accepted almost instantly as ready to replace the president if necessary. And they had no significant drawbacks.

The list of plausible presidents is short. Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Tom Ridge, and Joe Lieberman qualify. That's about it. There are a number of popular Republican governors - Charlie Crist of Florida, Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Haley Barbour of Mississippi - but they fall short of Cheney-Lieberman-Gore stature. It's not their fault, but it's nonetheless true.

So how about Lieberman in 2008? He's a pal of McCain, a brave backer of the war in Iraq, and now the most prominent Democratic supporter of McCain's presidential bid. He would surely enhance McCain's appeal to independents and moderate Democrats. He's a political adult.

But he's no Zell Miller. Lieberman is a liberal on domestic issues, including abortion. McCain already has trouble with conservatives and picking a Democrat would make things worse. Lieberman would probably subtract more votes from the McCain ticket than he'd add.

So would Giuliani and Ridge. True, Giuliani was a hero of 9/11 as mayor of New York, and Ridge, a former Pennsylvania governor, was President Bush's first homeland security chief. But both are pro-choice on abortion and would horrify social conservatives, an indispensable part of the Republican coalition. Giuliani or Ridge might prompt a third party pro-life presidential challenger.

Fred Thompson, the ex-senator from Tennessee and now a TV actor, is also a close friend of McCain. If he'd run a more spirited presidential campaign of his own this year, he'd be the obvious pick for running mate. But his campaign was dreary and disappointing. McCain needs someone more vibrant and upbeat.

That leads to Romney. He has run a vigorous national campaign and been vetted by the press and his opponents for the Republican nomination. These are very strong pluses. A pick who produces unhelpful surprises, as Geraldine Ferraro did in 1984 (her husband's business deals) and Dan Quayle did in 1988 (his National Guard duty), is exactly what McCain doesn't need. Romney is a known quantity.

Romney has three other add-ons. He's acceptable to conservatives and especially to social conservatives, who disproportionately volunteer as ground troops in Republican presidential campaigns. He's unflappable in debates. With the downturn worsening, the economy may surpass national security as the top issue of the campaign. And after years of success as a big time player in the global economy, Romney understands how markets work. He could shore up McCain's admitted weakness on economic issues.

Romney has allies in the Bush wing of the Republican party. President Bush favors him as McCain's veep. Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, preferred Romney over McCain in the primaries, but never endorsed him publicly. Karl Rove, the president's political strategist, has hinted that he considers Romney to be McCain's best running mate.

Is there a downside to Romney? Possibly. It's not his Mormonism. He lost the nomination to McCain, but religion wasn't the reason. As a corporate turnaround artist, he rescued companies, sometimes by laying off workers. When he ran for the Senate from Massachusetts in 1994, the incumbent, Teddy Kennedy, raised the layoff issue with punishing effect. No doubt Democrats would use it again, and it might have resonance if a recession hits and unemployment is increasing.

Mike Huckabee's name is bound to come up in the veepstakes, since he's now run nationally and been vetted. According to Rove, he would "double" McCain's trouble with conservatives. Both foreign policy and economic conservatives would scream bloody murder if McCain chose the Huckster.

Presidential nominees once tried to balance their ticket with someone who'd helped win a state they might otherwise lose. This hasn't entirely gone out of fashion. Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota is often mentioned in this regard. Former House member John Kasich and ex-trade representative and budget director Rob Portman, both from Ohio, are too.

McCain has also been advised, at least by the media, to pick a much younger person for vice president. Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri, 37, and a handful of others have had their names trotted out. Some of them have impressive credentials. Blunt, for example, is an Annapolis graduate and a Naval Reservist called to active duty after 9/11.

But I don't believe the option of choosing a running mate for purely political reasons is open to McCain - not during wartime, anyway. His strong suit against Barack Obama, his likeliest Democratic opponent, or even against Hillary Clinton, is experience. In fact, Clinton has set up Obama to be attacked by McCain on this front.

Her TV ad raising doubts about Obama's readiness to be president was critical to her victories last week in the Ohio and Texas primaries. She also said in a campaign appearance: "Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign. I will bring a lifetime of experience [to the White House] and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002. I think that is a significant difference." In Obama's 2002 speech, he opposed the invasion of Iraq. One can envision her comment in a McCain TV ad zinging Obama.

McCain would throw away the experience issue if he named a much younger running mate or someone without national stature or a background in world affairs. Obama's response could be devastating: "If experience is so important, why did you pick a running mate who has so little, indeed less than I do?"

Romney thus appears to have the best ratio of virtues to drawbacks. But there's just one problem: McCain doesn't like him. Just how important compatibility is — that is something McCain will have to decide.

[jestith]

Whoever McCain picks, it should also be someone opposed to torturing suspects. This country needs to return to a moral path, lest we become as evil as our enemies.

[bob_scofield]

Lieberman is a "brave" supporter of the Iraq war? The only people who are brave in connection with that war are those who go over there to fight. The politicians who send them there are gutless. We''ve been there 5 years and nearly 4,000 brave men and women have died, while Lieberman, Cheney, Clinton & Bush all sit safely in Washington. To apply an adjective to the author''s use of the word "brave" to describe Lieberman, let''s try "idiotic".

[taylor2124]

I want McCain to pick someone who will dedicate the VP job to torturing. Full-time. 24/7. Especially torturing Jestith. That would work for me.

[jestith]

We already have a VP like that. I''ll never go hunting with that guy again either.

[donaldd8]

John McCain was not born in the Territory of the Canal Zone and as a foreign born Citizen, Panama, should not be eligible to become President.

Hospital Area known as Coco Solo. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=60931

http://www.historicaldocuments.com/ImmigrationActof1924.htm

Who will Ron Paul choose as a running mate?

[donaldd8]

John McCain was not born in the Territory of the Canal Zone and as a foreign born Citizen, Panama, should not be eligible to become President.

Hospital Area known as Coco Solo. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=60931

http://www.historicaldocuments.com/ImmigrationActof1924.htm

Who will Ron Paul choose as a running mate?

[loveitaly]

So,...how much is Romney paying you to write this? There is NO WAY, that I or the millions of adamant supporters and believers in MIKE HUCKABEE, will vote for a McCain/ROMNEY ticket! NEVER! If you''ll recall, just a short while ago, Mike Huckabee,swept most of the southern states in the primaries and has accumulated the second-most number of delegates; stands for integrity, honesty, and most importantly, represents the values/beliefs of the true conservatives (pro-life). NEVER will we EVER support a ticket that includes the FLIP-FLOPPER, former pro-abortion, pro-gay, and fiscal failure as governor of Mass., "Slick" Mitt. You want a revolution? Then you go ahead and just see what will happen if this takes place! You are all nuts!

[bruce_man1]

Sorry, Romney is nuts. Here''s what he''s said.

When he quit race he effectively said, %u201CI got into the race because I love America...now, because I love America, I%u2019m stepping aside%u201D. That''s screwed up logic to me.

He said continuing his campaign would be %u201Caiding a surrender to terror%u201D? Hillary and Barack are just as leery of terrorism as anyone. The just want to fight it where it is, not where it wasn%u2019t. So, Mitt just blathered, blaming others when his unpopularity is solely based on his poor choices. His smarmy sound and look don%u2019t help either. Slick Willy wasn%u2019t much fun, but a Slick Mitt is downright scary.

Heck, his flip-flopping makes Kerry look like an amateur.

Another: %u201CTolerance for pornography, even the celebration of it, and sexual promiscuity, combined with the twisted incentives of government welfare...%u201D What the heck do these things have to do with each other??? Stunning.

%u201CWe could become the France of the 21st Century.%u201D Dear God. That kind of drivel makes him a man to ignore, or if he gets into a position of power, someone to fear.

And his whole argument that Europe is falling apart because they don%u2019t have enough God, and the Islamic world is screwed up because they have too much God? These are the rantings of a lunatic. They set the stage for crappy relations with all of Europe and all of the Islamic world the minute he gets into power.

Other than that, he seems like a nice man.

[bruce_man1]

Sorry, Romney is nuts. Here''s what he''s said.

When he quit race he effectively said, %u201CI got into the race because I love America...now, because I love America, I%u2019m stepping aside%u201D. That''s screwed up logic to me.

He said continuing his campaign would be %u201Caiding a surrender to terror%u201D? Hillary and Barack are just as leery of terrorism as anyone. The just want to fight it where it is, not where it wasn%u2019t. So, Mitt just blathered, blaming others when his unpopularity is solely based on his poor choices. His smarmy sound and look don%u2019t help either. Slick Willy wasn%u2019t much fun, but a Slick Mitt is downright scary.

Heck, his flip-flopping makes Kerry look like an amateur.

Another: %u201CTolerance for pornography, even the celebration of it, and sexual promiscuity, combined with the twisted incentives of government welfare...%u201D What the heck do these things have to do with each other??? Stunning.

%u201CWe could become the France of the 21st Century.%u201D Dear God. That kind of drivel makes him a man to ignore, or if he gets into a position of power, someone to fear.

And his whole argument that Europe is falling apart because they don%u2019t have enough God, and the Islamic world is screwed up because they have too much God? These are the rantings of a lunatic. They set the stage for crappy relations with all of Europe and all of the Islamic world the minute he gets into power.

Other than that, he seems like a nice man.

[sal_salomon]

Mr. Fred Barnes obviously loves Mitt Romney. Hence, he has forgotten that McCain is where he is this current race, because of the independents. And, most independents dislike Mitt Romney, as has been arguably shown in this race. The amorphous Mitt Romney, who today has become the standup guy for the conservatives, was a liberal, only a couple of years ago. Who knows, what new shape this terminator-2-style Romney will take in the upcoming months. McCain should forget the votes of the indepdents, if he chooses to have the constantly-evolving Romney as his running mate.
Mr. Barnes conveniently forgets this aspect of McCain''s support, in his zealousless to have Romney on the McCain ticket.

[shadfurman]

Jestith: I honestly doubt your familiarity with our enemies torture tactics. Waterboarding in a controlled environment is not the same as cutting a person apart piece by piece while they are still alive. Nor are our "torture" tactics something that the Bush administration invented. They''ve been there for many decades and only just come into the limelight of the news. If we were to become our enemies... we already would have.

[shadfurman]

I''m sorry you guys, its a silly political stunt to call Romeny a flip-flopper, he has never been pro-abortion. He ran in a democratic state that was pro-abortion, and said he would NOT TOUCH the abortion issue. (he was running to fix the financial disparity not the political bias) If you WANT to call him a flip-flopper, call him it cause he then DID pass a bill, approved by the people, that limited abortion. He said he had friends who had to make that decision and sympathized because of it. (what president doesn''t need sympathy?) The videos of his original statements are available on youtube, you can see his opponents trying to call him pro-abortion back in the ''90''s too and what he says to defend himself.

[shadfurman]

I''m sorry you guys, its a silly political stunt to call Romeny a flip-flopper, he has never been pro-abortion. He ran in a democratic state that was pro-abortion, and said he would NOT TOUCH the abortion issue. (he was running to fix the financial disparity not the political bias) If you WANT to call him a flip-flopper, call him it cause he then DID pass a bill, approved by the people, that limited abortion. He said he had friends who had to make that decision and sympathized because of it. (what president doesn''t need sympathy?) The videos of his original statements are available on youtube, you can see his opponents trying to call him pro-abortion back in the ''90''s too and what he says to defend himself.
(I don''t agree with the severity applied to you quotes but, nice Bruce_man1)
(loveitaly, just cause someone disagrees with you doesn''t mean they have ulterior motives. In most of my social networks Romney is the favored choice.)

[jasek05]

Of all the choices, you don''t even mention Rice. I have no love for this woman, but this seems, to me, to be McCain''s best choice...she is respected by her rep. peers, and as a black woman, she cancels out either probable dem. package. Any voter who would like a black and/or woman pres., as well as others, would definitely view her as a viable candidate as well.

[shadfurman]

ooh, good one jasek05!

[kimbam]

Bravo Fred! As an Independent who normally votes Republican, I am thoroughly dissatisfied with our Presidential choices. In fact, everyone I discuss this topic with agrees that our choices are very sad indeed. The only way I will vote for McCain will be if he chooses Romney for his VP. Romney should have received the nomination to begin with. If McCain chooses someone else, I''ll have to vote for Obama, although it won''t make me happy to do so ...

It''s a sad day when this country can only provide three very disappointing candidates for our Presidential nominee - McCain, Clinton and Obama. It seems it''s not about who the citizens of this country want - as usual, it''s all politics.

[perception5]

Mitt Romney would be the perfect choice for VP.

He''s got it all..........smart, honest, CLEAN, capable, grounded, and knows more about the economy then a lot of economists.

Mitt would help McCain in the Mid-West, his native home, in states like Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin all states Mitt won during the primaries.

Mitt would also help in McCains region of strength, the West.

With Mitt being a Mormon, he would lock in purple states as Red states. States like Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico.

Mitt along with McCain would also put into play states like California, Oregon, and Washington state. All states with large Mormon populations.

Another plus that Mitt would bring to McCain is MONEY.

Mitt had the largest donor base and raised more money during the primaries than any other GOP candidate.

An M & M tickett would and could easily win in November.................No question about it.

[shadfurman]

Agreed KimbaM though according to these comments some disagree. If McCain doesn''t pick Romney, I''m going to write in Romney, I don''t think I can pick between who''s available.

[Sevenames]

With McCain''s age working against him he needs a strong V.P. for the public to get behind. And I really, really, don''t want an evangelical as second seat.

[perception5]

Mormon teaching is NOT Christian teaching, no matter what they claim.-Posted by chris3143 at 11:12 AM

.......chris3143, I''ve been taught all my life whether in school or church that "those" who believe in Jesus Christ are "Christians".

Who are you chris3143 to "judge" otherwise?

Are you the judge? are you God?

Your thinking and comments are very strange.......... try looking into your mirror and ask yourself if you would like others, who don''t know you, to judge you?

[loldham2]

I agree with Jasek05 that Rice would be the best
choice for McCain if he wants to win this election.
I also understand that Rice has been ask if she would
accept and she said no. I think she would make an
excellent vice and President if needed. They would
certainly get my vote.

[chris3143-2009]

Wrong.

Mitt has a Mormon problem. I wrestled long and hard with whether I would vote for a Mormon for president and decided I simply could not, even if it meant forfeiting the White House. I''m sure that Mitt is NOT intending to be Pastor-in-Chief (or Vice Pastor-in-Chief) but the problem with elevating a Mormon to such a position is the credibility that it gives to a patently false belief system. Mormon teaching is NOT Christian teaching, no matter what they claim.

I actually LIKE McCain (in contrast to many evangelicals) and voted for him. But McCain''s main problem is with Evangelicals. Choosing Mitt is NOT going to solve that one. It might even drive people like me away.

[perception5]

And I really, really, don''''t want an evangelical as second seat.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by glasslassie

glasslassie, I guess you''re not voting for Obama either, then.....

[shadfurman]

chris3143, as a Christian and one who has many mormon friends, I think your religious bigotry is extremely un Christ like. None of my business anymore than a brother is Christ, but especially if your gonna wear a Christian name tag, I think you should work on that.

[perception5]

chris3143 there is concept that you need to start warming up to and that is Mitt Romney has already served as Governor of Massachusetts.

And the last time I looked the folks up there are doing just fine.

Boston Red Soxs won the World Series and the Patroits made it to the Superbowl.

So this "boggyman" that you''re so worried about didn''t leave everyone in Massachusetts as Mormons or in a bad situation. As a matter fact Mitt brought health insureanc to all the citizens of that state.....

Do use all a favor and "relax" the there''s no boggman that''s going to get you.

[jestith]

I disagree about waterboarding. After WWII we executed Japanese who waterboarded our POWs, so people felt it was torture then. McCain, Clinton, and Obama have stated recently that they all consider this crime to still be torture.

Plus, the overwhelming majority of senior military have testified that torture doesn''t work to get people to tell the truth, only to say eomething true or false to stop the pain.

So it''s immoral and ineffective. I don''t want our country led any longer by someone so afraid he stoops to discarding our constitution and throwing away what makes us better than our enemies. It''s not enough to say the US doesn''t torture as bad as some of our enemies. We should be able to say we don''t torture.

[kimbam]

Chris3143 ...

Despite what you think you might "know" - Mormons are Christians. It''s unfortunate that you don''t know enough about the beliefs to really know the truth. You should also carefully consider the comments you make on a site such as this, meant to discuss politics, not what you feel about religions that you know nothing about.

[davidmirsky]

Mitt Romney would be an excellent choice for vice president. As Governor of Massachusetts he proved that he is highly qualified to be Commander-in-Chief, particularly at the time of the July 2005 London subway bombings, to which he responded with swift and effective security measures in Massachusetts.

Tom Ridge, Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani and Joe Lieberman would also be excellent choices. Despite the valid points that Mr. Barnes makes about the political considerations, those considerations are simply not as important as choosing the person who would serve our nation most effectively.

[LABOCAPO]

The author sounds to me like a democrat voting in the Republican primary for the one with the less chances to win the general election...If MCain wants to secure a win he must pick Huckabee the only one who can bring the Christians to the table...

[LABOCAPO]

The author sounds to me like a democrat voting in the Republican primary for the one with the less chances to win the general election...If MCain wants to secure a win he must pick Huckabee the only one who can bring the Christians to the table...

[shadfurman]

I am Christian and I don''t favor Huckabee. I don''t think a person should vote for a candidate based on their religious standing, but on their values, what they say they are going to do and what they HAVE done. I favor Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney.

[loveitaly]

Romney was a governor for ONE TERM. He was NOT re-elected. During that term, Massachusetts lagged in the U.S. average in job creation, economic growth and wage increases. Mass. did very POORLY during the Romney years. The state was a substantial UNDER-performer. And, Romney is also an UNDER-performer. Romney spouts "change" alright..he changes his stance/positions every time it can benefit him! NO..we base conservatives (millions of us) who voted for MIKE HUCKABEE will not support a McCain/Romney ticket...NO WAY! YES to McCain/HUCKABEE!!!

[KYJurisDoctor]

If he picks Mitt "I can flip flop on any issue" Romney, many of us will walk, thereby handing the election to Democrats!

http://OsiSpeaks.com

[perception5]

The last thing this great country needs is someone else at the top or near the top that''s from Hope,Arkansas.

We had Slick Willie so we sure don''t need Slick Huck.

As a Republican I would never vote for a ticket with Slick Huck on it...................sorry...Mitt''s clean and Slick Huck well..............

[shadfurman]

Check your facts again loveitaly, he "flip-flopped" the economy and gave everybody health care in a bipartisanship environment. (I cite the wikopedia article on Romney) Don''t follow the popularist media in calling him a flip-flopper, go check out what he "flip-flopped" (on video) on and decide for yourself.

[loveitaly]

ShadFurman: Mike Huckabee was selected by Time Magazine as one of five of the top governors in the U.S. Time is one of the most respected publications and they researched their choices carefully. Was Romney in that five? NO. You might want to do your own research as to the background of Mike Huckabee in relationship to his being GOVERNOR for 10-1/2 years and the fact that he was OVERWHELMINGLY supported by the people of Arkansas and also supported by a predominantly Democratic congress. He was, in his most recent years, a public servant. He served the PEOPLE. Yes, he was a pastor and that is what guides his beliefs on pro-life, but you should focus on his many accomplishments as governor when making your judgements. Mike stands above all others as a quality human being and a brilliant communicator. He is a "common sense" individual who speaks from the heart with his interests focusing on the people of this nation. Mike would be the best choice for V.P.

[loveitaly]

ShadFurman: By the way, all of that information about Romney IS factual. Andrew Sum, a Northeastern University ECONOMIST, researched Romney''s record and those ARE the facts!

[tbweb]

I agree with Ralph Nader even though I am not a Nader supporter that if the Democrats can''t win the Presidency in this climate, based on all the Republican scandals, abuses of power and mismanagement of money in particular, the Democratic Party should disband, it technically should not even be a close race.

[shadfurman]

(loveitaly) Isn''t that interesting, I guess we are just going to disagree on that. Btw, one economist isn''t going to ''suede me. There is an economist for every view out there. Just as there is an environmentalist for every view.

[loveitaly]

Shadfurman:
The economist, Andrew Sim isn''t stating his "views". He''s giving you FACTS from his research. There''s a BIG DIFFERENCE between "views" and "facts".

[edward1975-2009]

Romney has turned around every business he has gotten involved with. And that''s all the Fed govwernment is, one giant business. He took the USOC from 300 million in debt to 700 million to the good. Maybe it''s time to put someone who understands money to turn the economy around.

[shadfurman]

I checked your info on Andrew Sum and it was interesting. He made statements to the states of the economy when Romney became governer and when he left. Looking at graphs from the Bureau of Labor shows that when Romney took office unemployment was in decline, it decline and little more, and continued to go up even after he left office. Also in the article he authored for the Boston Globe, he admits to an increase of product out put. The other statistics seem to me to have been cherry picked, for as to why he didn''t include the balancing statistics that show other parts of the economy going?... I don''t know. Appears biased. Btw, I never attacked Huckabees character, I only said I didn''t favor him. I don''t let the capitalist publication of a magazine make my decisions for me. And Romney did not SEEK reelection, that makes it hard to be reelected.

[kimbam]

Edward 1975 - my thinking exactly. The economy is being sucked down the toilet. Why not elect someone who knows how to fix the toilet!

[mrsmarrero]

I totally disagree that Romney is McCain''s best pick. During his governorship, he mandated health coverage. He fits more in line with the democrats with his mandated universal healthcare. Also, under his guidance, homosexual marriage became legal in his state. Again, that is more in line with the Dems. During his race for governorship, he said he would never stand between a woman and her right to choose, then flip flopped on it while running for president. I sense a John Kerry problem here with the flip flopping. The problem with Romney, is his words don''t line up with his history, and I think we''d find ourselves saying "Just Words", as we do with Obama. We wouldn''t really know which way Romney really feels until he was in the position. I would hate to see him next in line for the presidency, after McCain, and I am a conservative. He would definitely be a huge negative for me.

[mike19824]

Ok...did Romney pay you guys to post this up here. First of all Romney is good with economic conservatives not so well with social..because they felt they couldn''t trust where he stood on the issues...ecspecailly after seeing the debate he had with kennedy.

Huckabee did well with socal conservatives thus the slip with him and Romney. If he was going to pick between the two I would go with huckabee because Mccain real problem is not with economic conseratives but with social conseratives.

Not sure if it would effect the independant vote. huckabee did garner a signifacant amount of the independant vote just that mccain recieved far more. But I think there are alot more independant conservative people than we realize.

But huckabee would be better than romney for the simple fact that he is predictable and you know where he stands as the inconsistancy of Romney. You don''t know with Romney if what you see is what ya get.

[rafterman1]

===She is the Republican alternative to Obama or Clinton who can attract independents, blacks and women to vote Republican.===

Not necessarily. Just like there are a lot of women who don''t like Hillary, there are a good number of African Americans who don''t like Condi.

[shadfurman]

mrsmarrero, you make good points. However Romney didn''t MANDATE health care. He reformed it so it was a LOT easier to afford and covered only people below a certain income level by the state. If your over a certain income level, you still have to pay for it... only now you can afford it. As for the other things, remember mass. is a democratic state, the fact that he was elected at all is a miracle.

[unitethegop]

Romney is the best OPTION! www.unitethegop.com

[mrsmarrero]

Shadfurman,
I disagree that Romney didn''t mandate healthcare, since those who refused had to pay penalties, which basically is like adding a tax. I will admit though, that I would still vote for McCain, over the two potential democrats, but it would take some time for me to even begin to trust Romney.

[drmarkus-2009]

It is telling that Mitt Romney is Karl Rove''s choice: devious, cunning, no moral center. Sound familiar? Romney''s father was an honorable man and fine public servant. Mitt, however, changed his mind on every social issue to pander to the ultra-far right wing of his party. The man obviously and shamelessly stands for nothing but his own self-promotion. After a "40 million dollar ego trip" as one of his own party called it, it became apparent to Romney that the public did not want him. I hope John McCain got the same read. After ''W'' we don''t want any more flawed imitations of an able father in the White House.