Giuliani Had Leadership. Romney Had Conservative Principles.
It really was an awesome speech
By Erick Posted in CPAC | Special Events — Comments (44) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Giluiani had leadership. Romney had conservatism. Make no mistake about that.
The people who want a conservative have found their man, it seems. Mitt Romney was pitch perfect and willing to talk social issues -- something totally missing from Giuliani's speech. And people noticed.
I have to say that it was a tremendous speech. I actually could not listen to all of Rudy's, but Mitt's was great.
He poked fun at John McCain subtly. He spoke negatively about McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy. He pulled at the heart strings of social conservatives, something Giuliani did not even attempt.
Giuliani was introduced by George Will, who made the point that Rudy made New York governable and Rudy is a Thatcher conservative.
Mitt was followed by Ann Coulter who put the red meat conservative seal of approval on him. It was an excellent speech that should resolve all fears conservatives have about Romney.
The race is on -- it's now between Rudy and Mitt. McCain is a non-starter.
« Three Quarters of a Loaf -- Better than nothing, better than half. — Comments (146) | I Have Seen The Future: It Is Giuliani — Comments (89) »
Giuliani Had Leadership. Romney Had Conservative Principles. 44 Comments (0 topical, 44 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Rudy's got George Will. Romney's got Ann Coulter. Nuff said.
We shall see who wins the day.
who's a candidate is a "movement conservative"?
____
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged. — J. Michael Waller
Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Senior writer for The Hinzsight Report
Unless you count Newt.
Not only is there not a MC, there's pretty much not one in the wings either.
The big problem here is that the "bench" is the governors. I don't think a Senator or CongressCritter has a snowball's chance in Phoenix in July of EVER getting elected POTUS. The only reason I would look at Newt is that he's been out of the House for quite a while.
Methinks we're stuck with the "best of the rest" if Newt doesn't run. I like the guy's ideas, I don't care about his baggage, but I have real concerns about his "executive ability". His strategy in the House was phenominal. His execution pretty much sucked.
____
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged. — J. Michael Waller
Beside the well deserved multiple choice moniker, I feel a lot like I did with GWB - the bait and switch speaking my language only to get elected tact.
This may change as we progress though the cycle and his views do not waver or change.
But for now I have doubts about all 3!
Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Senior writer for The Hinzsight Report
So best chase after a candidate like McCain and Giuliani who offers you less bait?? LOL
I don't ever recall hearing stuff like this from Dubya. All I remember is Compassionate Conservatism, but I don't remember it that well anymore.
... and I knew Bush had a lot of liberal positions as Gov. of TX but the mood was (and i may have just been suckered by the hype) that he had assured conservatives of his trustworthiness on their issues.
But as someone already said:
But we'll see, lots of time left...
Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Senior writer for The Hinzsight Report
Yeah, if only Romney can not waver or change his views for a whole year and a half then we can assume he's reliable and really believes what he's saying. What ever happened to flip-flopping being a trait worthy of ridicule. Both Romney and McCain are behaving like people who think that flip-flopping is the ultimate goal.
From my perspective the flip-flopping refers to coming down on on both sides of an issue within a single campaign. Evolution over an extended period is not flip-flopping. Mitt is my man, Rudy is a close second.
Arnie
Nicely defined to excuse those one wishes to excuse. How about changing one's positions just in time for the next campaign and the new audience?
"changing one's position right before (or during) the campaign," then Rudy, McCain, and Brownback are flip-floppers as well. If you are going to use this standard to disqualify candidates, then use it for all candidates and not just one...
George Will isn't really a Republican. He may be semi-conservative but he's a liberal on many important social issues. If I were a candidate I would rather have Ann Coulter's endorsement than George Will's anyday!
Ann rocks. I wouldnt't expect someone named progressivemass to understand satire and politically correctness. It was a joke about the Grey's Anatomy stars.
Ann probably should have called Edwards a flake, a sissy, a pansy, or Breck Girl. The original definition of faggot is a contemptible woman. Ann knew what she was doing and knows backlash is coming. She has a plan to deal with it. As for Romney, I think he would rather have her endorsement than not.
I think she meant to say faggot because that's what Isaiah Washington called his co-star. He was repremanded and forced to go to "rehab" for saying faggot. Whatever you think if the word, being forced to go to "rehab" for saying a politically incorrect word is Orwellian level political correctness. Ann knew all this and knew she would get a rise. And let's face it, Edwards is a bit of a dandy.
But I would love to see the MSM's reaction if she says its a botched joke. There was nothing botched about it. She's a smart girl and knows that the word has lost its hateful meaning. I saw it live and thought it was funny.
Tell that to the person shouting "faggots" at us while we were holding signs. Tell that to any gay person who has ever had "faggot" shouted at them. Saying that it has "lost its hateful meaning" is incredibly insensitive to the GLBT community.
I guess Multiple Choice Mitt is now Conservative Choice Mitt? I'm teasing, of course. I didn't catch the speech on TV thanks to the schedule running behind but every review so far has been just as glowing as yours. Hope to see the full video soon, it sounds like the Mitt Romney I know.
I like at least a few others doubt Mitt’s Conservatism. I do not agree that he is the Conservative candidate. I do not believe that he “had Conservatism.” He may have spoke like a Conservative, but I do not believe that he has or will walk like a Conservative.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Neither multiple choice Mitt or Rudy are Conservatives - at least in the Reagan mold. Newt's probably closest as far as ideology.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
Giuliani has actually enacted conservative policies as mayor; he cut 23 different city taxes, cut the amount of city workers by 20,000, turned an $8 billion defecit into a surplus, cut welfare rolls by 640,000 people, and made NYC the safest city in the world. He fought the liberal establishment every day, and he never backed down. Not a bad record to achieve in one of the most liberal cities in the U.S.
Mitt's accomplishment include being governor while the state of Massachusetts legalized gay marriage and then creating universal health care legislation that was endorsed by Ted Kennedy.
Indeed, one speech does not a conservative make.
"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich. "
William F. Buckley, Jr.
Let's be fair, here...
First, comments on your statement about Mitt's accomplishments: Keep in mind that gay marriage being legalized was an act of non-elected judges, and that Romney did all he could to prevent it (including getting the overwhelmingly Democratic legislature to allow a marriage amendment to be placed on the ballot). Also, Kennedy agreed with the universal health care plan because it made too much sense -- there was nothing that he could argue with since it provided health care for everyone, but didn't remove personal responsibility (unlike "Hillary-care").
Mitt's accomplishments are significant and numerous. Anyone who says differently isn't being intellectually honest. A couple of significant examples: his success turning around the 2002 Olympics, turning a $3 Billion deficit into a $700 Million surplus in 2 years *without raising taxes*, etc.
I'm not saying that Mitt is the perfect candidate. However, what I *am* saying is that he should get credit where it is due.
Republican as president?
OK guys the fields not perfect so far, we wait for one to walk out of the woods and in the meantime these are the guys who have stepped up for good or for bad.
I'm more than happy to listen and learn, to try to push them more to the right, get them to talk the talk. I don't think it's arrogant to say that as conservatives, WE set the agenda.
Perhaps if we spent some more time on what the agenda should be and then matched that to the candidates, instead of this negative crap that's being flung, we might actually be of service as something other than opposition research.
Or something like that, anyone care to take at shot at saying this better?
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
The impetus for this way of thinking is because our last three presidential candidates (Bush I, Dole, Bush II) were such flawed
conservatives (if you can even call them that).
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
two of them were at all...
Bush 1, was IMO a closet lib, Dole, plain ole Republican, not conservative, now Bush II I've defended plenty on the contention that he IS what he said he is, he has some conservative ideals but certainly not all. Bottom line though it was him or McCain, I'm very happy to have chosen him. AND then him over AlGore.
I think the party/conservatives, made Bush II run more to the right than he might have otherwise and actually keep him there despite some tendancies to spend. A better congress would have served us better as it did to curb Clinton's appitite to spend. We could have done so much, and didn't, but that opportunity is lost and we need to look ahead. I think Rudy can win, I posted earlier that he might have coattails with the underticket running to the right as a curb or gaurdian and just be a huge win for us all. BUT that's for another post...
I just don't want to see us shredding OUR guys, not now, not this early, some type of civil debate if that's possible where they all get pushed to the right would be the best possible thng.
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
He said Reagan put cruise missiles in Europe. Pershings are not cruise missiles.
You might want to do some fact checking
Markg8.
Reagan put Pershing II's AND cruise missles in Europe, which made the peacenicks go nuts.
would he carry Massachusetts in the general election?
and no one thinks that he will. You have a serious point or just wasting time before heading to the bars?
Two thirds of the world is covered by water, the other third is covered by Champ Bailey
I'm wasting time before heading to bars! He could help bring NH and ME back in play and I think his squeaky clean family image and his persona will work well in the Midwest. Along with traditional Republican areas, I think he'll do well in the dairy belt states and maybe the rust belt. I'm interested to see what he can do in Michigan.
P.S. - How much of the earth is covered by Dre Bly?
the family name goes a long way, and, quite frankly, Gov Granholm is doing wonders these days to bring back nostalgic memories of the Romney years. He gave a well-received speech at the MI State convention last week.
And Dre Bly covers NOTHING in MI anymore!
i didn't mean to ask such a dumb question. i didn't know the answer was such a slam dunk.
but since i'm on a roll, let me continue w/ the dumb questions.
how did he come to be elected Gov. in such a liberal state while having such conservative sounding ideas? was there some scandel on the other side that worked in his favor?
No he would not. I like what Ann said about the fact that he fooled the Mass liberal crowd into voting for him. I think that's about right. He will not carry MA especially since they will have Rodham-Clinton to vote for. It wasn't a serious question, was it?
You just proved to me you're not to be taken seriously.
Erick,
I totally agree. Great speech from Romney. He was energetic and was fired up about being conservative for a change(McCain Letterman). That was great to see. Romney has performed in the most hostile territory of Mass. He will get the job done.