Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Sorry Seems To Be Mitt’s Hardest Word

    Sorry Seems To Be Mitt’s Hardest Word

    Jennifer Rubin makes the argument that Mitt Romney was the big loser at CPAC because Romney failed to address Romneycare, contributing to the narrative that Romney has no politically good explanation. 

    According to Rubin, a simple mea culpa would help tremendously:

    Romney has a huge problem that a wide array of Tea Partyers, Republican activists and officials, and conservative operatives think he can’t overcome: RomneyCare. He leads in polls a year before the first primary because of name recognition. So did Rudy Giuliani at the same point in the 2008 election cycle….

    However, if there is one point of consensus among plugged-in Republicans on the 2012 field, it is that Romney can’t win unless he does a mea culpa on RomneyCare. Since he didn’t and he won’t do that, he’s not going to be the nominee. Other than Romney admirers (and even some of them!) it’s hard to find serious Republican players who disagree with that.

    NiceDeb has a video and summary of Romney’s speech at CPAC, and gives the speech good reviews:

    “Is it time to take another look at Mitt? He had mojo this morning at CPAC…He was loose and relaxed, and won the crowd over with great speech with many memorable lines….”

    I met Romney once, when I was in law school and he was recruiting for Bain.  The guy was tremendously impressive, and I think he has the potential to be tremendously impressive in a campaign.  I want to like him as a candidate and to be able to support him (depending upon who else is running, of course).

    But there is this elephant in the room that he doesn’t seem to want to address in a manner that will appeal to voters or faces reality.

    Regardless of what else Romney says, he needs to address the Romneycare issue with more than nuanced constitutional arguments about how it is one thing for states to experiment and another thing for the federal government to overstep its authority.  I agree! But ….

    We like people who admit they were wrong.  Everybody is wrong eventually, and politicians doubly so.  Romneycare can be forgiven if it is acknowledged to have been a mistake from which lessons have been learned.

    I made this suggestion on December 1, that Romney become the Responsibility Candidate with a speech similar to the following:

    “To err is human. I had what at the time seemed like a good idea as to how to expand health care coverage, but it turned out wrong. I’ll take part of the blame, but others who acted beyond my control also share in the blame. The key thing is to learn from mistakes, not to compound them. That is a lesson I have learned.”

    “Unfortunately, the Obama administration does not learn from its mistakes. Stimulus, health care, debt, deficits, spending out of control. The response is a refusal to learn from mistakes or to accept responsibility, at all.”

    “You have a choice in this election. Elect a President who learns from mistakes and accepts responsibility, or re-elect a President who is incapable of learning from mistakes or accepting responsibility. The choice is yours.”

    The readers took a dim view of such an approach two months ago, mostly because they had a dim view of Romney. 

    Regardless of whether you support Romney or not, wouldn’t it be better for him just to acknowledge the error?  And doesn’t it become more of an issue the longer it is not acknowledged?

    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    @Stephen Monteith

    If people only dislike him because of his religion, why are you the first one to bring that topic up? I can think of many different reasons why I would not support Romney as a candidate OTHER THAN his religion, and most of those reasons where already brought up in this discussion. His talk about small government, superimposed on his proven track record of supporting BIGGER government really stand out to being much more than a non-issue like Mormonism. I understand though, that someone has to play your role, however. Someone always must point out that most people are bigots, and that they cannot see anything other someone's race, religion, sexual orientation, age, etc. Other people can't debate the issues like you can: us lowbrow conservative types just judge someone based on anything that stands out to us that we don't like. I'm really glad you are here, now I don't have to click over to LGF to get my daily dose of self hate. What bigots we are. The comments are closed at this time, the votes are in…….everyone hates Romney because of his religion. Right.


    I was a pretty strong Romney supporter in 2008, too. Know why that was? Because the alternatives were Huckabee (the Christian socialist) and McCain (the RINO King). At that point in time, Romney was the most conservative candidate in the race who had even a chance at winning. Given a choice, I'd have easily gone for someone better — I really liked Fred Thompson that year, for example, but he hardly campaigned, so I had to make a different choice.

    Romney is disliked by the electorate because he's a phony.

    He's a political weather vane. He inherited his party like he inherited his money.

    His religion is actually his best quality. (though that too was inherited) Mormonism is significantly more conservative and fundamentalist than most other mainstream religions these days.

    Me? I don't like him because I don't see him as genuine or inspiring or a leader.

    I read Mitt Romney's book that came out a few years ago. I started with eager anticipation but the book fizzled out as a shmoozy "I'm so swell" paean to Mitt. He did not address Romneycare in any substantive way. The book was as bad as Gil Amelio's bloviating bleat on how he was pushed out of Apple by that horrible Steve Jobs while everybody else was such a wonderful person.

    Robert, my point wasn't that people hate him because he's Mormon; my point was Mormonism was just a convenient excuse, like RomneyCare itself is. Haven't you noticed, even in everyday life, people will just plain not like other people, often with no reason at all? That's my point: many people have no reason to not like Romney, and so they pick whatever "reason" is available.

    Flip-flopping? Reagan changed positions all the time, from one end of his political career to the other.

    Support for abortion? Show me one bill he signed into law that could reasonably be defined as pro-choice.

    RomneyCare? It's not even close to being ObamaCare, and until OC was formed, a lot of conservatives saw RC as a plus for Romney.

    Not enough "fire" in his belly? We're not electing a cheerleader; we're electing someone to pull this country out of trillion-dollar deficits, near double-digit unemployment, and some of the most burdensome taxes and regulations in the history of the free world. Show me a candidate who is better-qualified to do that than Mitt Romney.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend