A Look At Mitt Romney

While too early for me to come out for a particular Republican Presidential candidate, my instincts have been piquing my interest in Mitt Romney, so I wanted to set time aside to review an Instapundit podcast featuring Romney. Additionally, other materials recently came bloggers way via the Romney team. I looked them over, too.

The Instapundit podcast is available here. You can hear him discussing the following items: potential flip flop charges; affirmative action; health care; common ground with political opposition; gun control; Iraq; waging peace through a strong military while influencing Muslim nations through political and economic leverage; increasing the size of the military without a draft; his pro SDI stand; hopefully not a military option to resolve all issues involving radical Islam; and tort reform to free up corporate dollars for various areas of research.

Putting issues aside for the moment, one phrase Romney used particularly stood out: communicator in chief. Without wanting to pile on Bush, I do believe that short-comings with the current President's individual, as well as his administration's, ability to communicate effectively is the white elephant in the room of the Bush presidency.

Like many on the Right, I sincerely believe that when basically conservative and some libertarian principles and political ideas are communicated effectively to the American people, they win the day. I'd apply the same reasoning to at least a portion of why our effort in Iraq has suffered in terms of its support from the American people. Consequently, a candidate who understands communication and is effective at it is a significant part of how I intend to finally make the choice of which candidate to support.

From the podcast - worth a listen - and three brief videos below concerning Romney's position on Iran, it does appear as though Romney gets communication. Additionally, I find his position on Iran and radical Islam to appear sound.

I don't care much about any flip flopping charges. People and cultures change. I want an articulate leader who can lead America based upon her common will and the challenges of today, not some iron clad icon of one particular position on one specific point. America faces too many complex challenges to bet her future on a one trick pony of any sort.

We need good articulate conservative leadership. If I came away with a concern over Romney it was the emphasis he seemed to place on compromise in his rhetoric. While America is a nation in which the minority view should be heard and considered, sometimes requiring compromise - it is designed to be managed by a majority consensus, not watered down policies meant to please everybody, pleasing no one in the end. I want a reasonable President, but not one too quick to compromise on matters of great import. I don't want an allegedly conservative leader too quick to toss conservatism aside for the sake of accommodation, or ratings in some silly poll.

While that may seem to conflict with what I said directly above, in my mind, it doesn't. Changing one's position over 13 years might be growth, doing it within the space of four isn't growth, it can often be shrinking away from what it is that needs done the most.

As to his being a Mormon, I couldn't care less. And anyone who does should read the Constitution - twice, if required. My concern is can he reach sound judgments and lead?

Perhaps. Nothing I've seen so far has raised any red flags. The instincts I mentioned above have been telling me Romney may be the guy to beat for the Republican nomination. I've never embraced the conventional wisdom that has said it is McCain.

There's ample time to observe and I will. But so far I can at least say I don't dislike what I've seen. I can't say the same for every Republican who wants to be President in 2008. If I sound vague, I suppose I mean to this early in the race.

Give a listen to the podcast, watch the three brief videos and see what you think. It's time we at least start thinking about it. The next POTUS is going to be much too important for America to leave the decision to chance.

Romney - wishful thinking on Iran - link fixed.

An additional worthwhile clip on that topic here.

Comments

[TheSpartan]

You know, I agree he's not so much a flip flopper as an oppurtunist. In '94 while trying to win in MA he said what he thought he needed to. In 2008 running nationally and trying to win the southern evangelical vote he'll again say what he needs to. As a resident of massachusetts I have come to the conclusion that he's nothing but an asshat.

[Darth Malice]

I like Mitt,he looks like a President.We will have to see how he unfolds.

[Phoenix]

You sure threw down the gauntlet about his Mormonism.

I don't think I'll pick it up except to challenge that the Constitution says not one word about how a man thinks and reasons.

I kind of like Guiliani. But, dang, someone botox his eyebrows. Yikes.

[Dan Riehl]

I don't think I'll pick it up except to challenge that the Constitution says not one word about how a man thinks and reasons.

What it says basically is that there shall be no religious test to serve.

[Purple Avenger]

The idea of criminalizing those who don't care to sign up for a RomneyCare plan queered me on him permanently. If I choose to pay my own way, with cash, he wants to penalize me? Screw him and the horse he rode in on.

All it takes is one crystallizing point like this to see what's behind the mask. The guy is a big government statist.

Seriously, I'd vote for Hillary before Romney. She's a big government statist too, but I don't think she'd go as far as to criminalize not signing up for some health care plan.

[seekeronos]

Ugliness on all counts, when somebody tries to legislate and "enforce" universal health care.

I think the present system is just fine, it just needs some tweaking to help manage costs and minimalize malpractice suits and reform tort law. Perhaps tweak the leverage the PharmaCorps have over the system... but I'll be damned if I would want to wait 18 months for a critical procedure ala socialized medicine.

Unfortunately, Mitt Romney is probably the best chance out of all potential GOP comers... I mean, as much as I would like to see Newt Gingrich (has name recognition, but would be divisive) or Tom Tancredo (great ideas, but not much clout) ... Mitt has the best chance of reaching the "swing" Dems and Repubs.

Too bad our "first past the post" system leaves little if any hope of a third party contender from doing nothing more than distracting votes from the strongest contender.

It doesn't look good for 2008, and I'm almost ready to call it a Hillary win even now, especially if Dubya continues to bury his head in the sand and wish away the next 18 months.

As for the Establishment Clause and Tests to serve...

...last time I checked, that was never intended to be inclusive of Islam, Scientology, Buddhism, Wicca, or anything other than what was understood to be (in the 18th Century) Protestant Christianity.

The idea of the "no test rule" was to avoid specific Christian denominations from gaining undue political influence in the US legislature, such as the Church of England, or similar state-backed churches, or exceptionally powerful synods and conventions from gaining power, and thus limiting other Christian denominations by force of legislative dint.

I don't know much from Mormonism, other than it claims to be a branch of Christianity with some peculiar practices. Seems harmless enough, as I have never heard of any Mormons threatening to blow stuff up.

Now would I be willing to preclude Catholicism or Judaism; these tend to serve more or less the same God.

But the idea of someday having an Islamic president scares the pants off of me - the moon god idol of Islam is certainly not the same one that the Founding Fathers acknowledged (deist or not, they did acknowledge Him).

[Kevin W]

So, how is someone supposed to change their position over 13 years without ever having it change within the space of four?

[Buzzy]

Romney being Mormon isn't a problem for me and he seems "right" on most issues. From what I've heard and can confirm about the Mass Health Care Plan it seems that the scary parts may have been imposed by Mass's Democratic legislature.

I certainly like Romney's stance on the border better than Rudy's or McCains but not as well as Tancredo's.
Illegal immigration and border security is at the top of my list in looking at a Presidential candidate. I would hope that Romney would give up his path to citizenship views and come out for enforcing existing law which make employing illegal aliens a crime but I guess that's too much to ask for.

Dan, I couldn't agree more regarding compromise. We've moved so far away from majority rule that it seems the minority opinion runs the show.

[Legalize]

"As for the Establishment Clause and Tests to serve...

...last time I checked, that was never intended to be inclusive of Islam, Scientology, Buddhism, Wicca, or anything other than what was understood to be (in the 18th Century) Protestant Christianity."

Uh huh. Based on what? Go back and review your establishment clause jurisprudence, dating back at least to the Lemon case. If it is "intent" you are after, review Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance ...." as well as Jefferson's letters to the VA Assembly.

The "intent" was neutrality.

"The idea of the "no test rule" was to avoid specific Christian denominations from gaining undue political influence in the US legislature, such as the Church of England, or similar state-backed churches, or exceptionally powerful synods and conventions from gaining power, and thus limiting other Christian denominations by force of legislative dint."

An abusrd attempt to re-write the plain language of the constitution, by - wait for it - inventing a subjective test. The clause readus thusly:

'...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.'

Period. The end. There are no qualifications; there are no arbitrary standards as to who is included, or to what extent.

The "idea" of the clause is to prevent the bigotry and devisiveness the framers knew well and feared from the Crown. It says nothing of Judeo / Christain sects; it expresses no preferences as to any religion or lack thereof; it is entirely content and ideology neutral - as is the entirety of the constitution. If the framers wished to be more explicit in their "original intent" they certainly could have, as evidenced by the fact that they in fact did so in other parts of the document. Of course given the language of the free speech clause, the establishment clause, and the free exercise clause, this should be pretty simple to grasp ....

[Carl]

Haha, a scientologist or moonie or mormon or whatever is the best you 28%ers have?? How pathetic. It's like running Bob Dole in 96! Hahahaha!

[SETHLEVINETHEJEW]

Regardless, and or irregardless, the US and the world situation won't change much, since all politicians are liars and opportunists and use their influence to chow down at the public, tax paid for trough. Other than Rudolfo, I really don't see much out there. Condo rice, maybe, Tancredo, good choice. No matter what, your taxes will go up, services will go down, ie: roads, bridges etc. Fair trade, what's that? In or out of Iraq, doesn't matter. What would they do with the billion a day anyway? Find ways to foolishly spend it and then tax you some more. It's too late to shock the rest of the world by shutting them off, since we depend on the rest of the world to supply us. We need a good world war to clear the air and reduce the population once again. A plague wouldn't be bad either, as long as I don't catch it.

[Jay Bryner]

I'm on Romney's side of the table too. I watched the videos of the speech he gave about Iran, and I think he was as solid as they come. He has the ability to break down the issue at hand and synthesize a solution taking all kinds of information into account. Did you hear the part where he suggested that microcredit is one of the tools we should use to bring down the regime? Mitt Romney is one literate person. I just finished re-reading 'Banker to The Poor' by Muhammed Yunus (who won the nobel peace price last year for inventing microcredit and starting the grameen bank -www.grameen-info.org) and I was shocked at how simple and powerful a solution it was to sidestepping the bangladeshi power brokers on all levels of government - and actually getting something accomplished.

I was also glad to hear somebody finally say that we could have lost WWII, but the only way we'll lose this war is if we don't lift a finger to defend ourselves. Good point there....

[Jonathan]

I find it amusing that a self described libertarian is supporting a candidate that wishes to impose governmental control over women's reproductive systems. I suppose you support the War On (some) Drugs too.

As far as Mormonism goes, there are a lot of Christians who do not feel that Mormonism is a Christian faith. As an atheist, I find all thiests to be at least a little guilty of magical thinking, but Mormons are even more deluded than most. It has yet to be revealed whether Romney wears the Mormon sacred undergarments or not.

[seekeronos]

Legalize:

I stand by my argument; the framers had no way of accounting for the rise of a significant opposition to (what was then) mainstream religion - protestant Christianity. The majority of people in the Colonies were Anglicans, with pockets of minorities like the Anabaptists (the famous church to whom the letter describing the "wall of separation between Church and State" was addressed to), Huguenots, Quakers, and other groups. None of these were radically against or radically different from doctrines and beliefs espoused by the Anglicans, aside from fealty to the British Crown.

Understandably, the Framers did not want to leave to chance the possiblity that some Royalist or league of Royalists would attempt to usurp the fledgling nation by way of installing only men who were faithful to the Anglican Church, and ipso facto, as a test of loyalty to the Crown.

The non-specific language of "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States" was vague if only because there was never any imagination that an Islamist or another anti-Christian/cultist with an agenda disloyal to the USA should ever arise.

Simply put, it did not anticipate anything - but one does wisely to remember the context and the world that Framers lived in.

I would be hard pressed to see how the framers - being wealthy merchantment and landowners in a faraway land surrounded by Christians of varying sorts - could foresee 200-300 years into thier future to the multi-cultural stew that we are today.

To thier credit, the non-specific language has served beyond thier worldview; but it is not credible to posit that they were looking ahead to a multiplicity of gods and faiths.

It would not unlike us trying to predict what nation(s) shall have primacy 300 years from now - we could make some guesses based upon existing trends, but we would probably be wrong.

That said, we may need to consider ammending that test clause to preclude severely disloyal and inimical strains of "religious allegiances" such as Islam, which is loyal only to its "caliphate", its prophet and its false moon-god.

[TheSpartan]

"I would hope that Romney would give up his path to citizenship views and come out for enforcing existing law which make employing illegal aliens a crime but I guess that's too much to ask for."

This could be a problem for Mitt as he would have to charge himself with a crime. It was found earlier in the year that he had hired illegals to do his gardening.

[tally]

He hasn't been very vocal, nor does he stick his neck out in support of what he supposedly believes. I'm afraid he some gutless girlie man CEO. We'll see, but so far I'm not impressed.

[Phoenix]

>What it says basically is that there shall be no religious test to serve.

Posted by: Dan Riehl | Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 01:44 AM<

I know that. That is not what I was talking about. Belief or non-belief is not a choice or an act of will. It is the product of how one thinks, what one knows, and how one reasons. Considering some of the beliefs of the Mormon faith, the thinking and reasoning that would be necessary to adhere to that faith really bug me. And, in an ironic twist, the fact that he does not appear to adhere to the dictates of that particular faith 100%... well, I have a problem with that, too. It says much about the man.

[Justin]

Great discussion

3 quick points:

1) Plan for Iran - You can download the entire speech that Romney gave in Israel on Iran here. Good stuff altogether.
http://www.mymanmitt.com/2007/01/videoaudio-mitt-romney-on-iran.asp

2) Healthcare - You should note that the American Enterprise Institute has some great praise for Mitt Romney's connector plan.
http://www.mymanmitt.com/2007/01/aei-praises-for-romney-health-insurance.asp

3) Mormonism - As a published Mormon apologist I should note that there has been a significant thaw in Mormons relations with Evangelicals. (Not to mention this site) You can listen to our two part podcast on the subject. "Why Mormonism is less and less of Issue for Mitt Romney" and part 2
see here: http//www.evangelicalsforromney.com
and here: http://www.mymanmitt.com/2007/01/mittcast-big-thaw-evangelicals-and.asp

[Kent]

"It was found earlier in the year that he had hired illegals to do his gardening."

Not quite. It was found that the company he contracted with to do his gardening hired illegal aliens.

A subtle but not unimportant distinction.

I am bemused that so many people are obsessed with other people's underwear. Seems a bit perverse to me.

[Bill Hobbs]

To the person who said he didn't think Hillary would seek to criminalize people who didn't sign up for a government-mandated health plan.

Her HillaryCare plan back in the early 1990s would have the forbid you from purchasing healthcare from a provider not in the "cooperative" that the government assigned you to - and if you did both you and the provider would have been fined $25,000.

[ed]

Hmmm.

Sorry but I'm not buying into Romney. The whole re-casting into conservative about Romney doesn't do anything for me. Especially after all those pundits who claimed that Bush was far more conservative than he appeared. Or how Arnold Da Gov was a conservative, which is very obvious now as a load of complete bullshit.

If someone doesn't have a clear history of being a conservative, then I'm not voting for him.

Period.

[James]

Dan,

I'm also tending to favor Romney, so it's worth our pursuing a little further whether there's a connection between his weakness on majority governance and the experience of being in an often-persecuted, still-derided, minority himself. And a privileged member of that minority.

Not sure I'll worry too much about it, but it is at points like this that flaws can turn to tragedy.

Thoughtful post. Thanks.

[Phoenix]

Kent,

>I am bemused that so many people are obsessed with other people's underwear. Seems a bit perverse to me.<

I am bemused that people don't find the 'garmet' dictates of Mormonism perverse. To be honest, I am not bemused so much as horrified.

About the gardener: "A subtle but not unimportant distinction." You are right.

[Dave]

Romney did an amazing job of fixing the Olympic mess in Salt Lake City. His leadership and his choices of those in his circle of advisors are what make him an attractive candidate for me.

[Dan Riehl]

"His leadership and his choices"

What I find so funny is how the Left is going nutty over Obama and I don't think he's ever made a genuinely significant executive decision in his life, other than maybe at the Law review. What a joke.

[Andrew]

Obama is running on his SuperStar! power, nothing more. As soon as he's asked a question of any weight, he'll reveal himself for the mountain of inexperience he is, and sad-eyed true believers will cherish the Lost Hope like Bobby '68ers, for decades.

[MikeT]

I can give you a great reason to not support Romney. The man is clearly hiding what he truly believes. He is on record as being in favor of the status quo for gun rights in Mass. Then he tries to convince the rest of the public that he is a good ol' Republican gun-lover. That alone calls into question what sort of conservative or libertarian policies can be expected out of him.

http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/01/mitt_romney_more_of_the_same.php

[kate q]

He lost me at RomneyCare as well. It's not the details; it's the principle: if he thinks somebody else should be subsidizing my insurance, then he's not a conservative.

So far I like Tancredo.

[Rich Rostrom]

Whether the Framers meant to bar the exclusion on non-Christians is not clear. But as early as the 1840s, President John Tyler (a conservative Southerner) wrote that if Moslems or Hindus ever came to America, they would have the same right to practice their religions as Christians.

[Cath T]

Sheesh, enough about the underwear. Some people wear crosses, others wear yamakas, others wear turbans, and yet others wear veils. Why should anyone care if a Mormon discreetly wears a religious symbol under his clothes?
I'm far more interested in the health care issue. Has anyone really addressed just how many of the "uninsured Americans" are really even Americans? I find it hard to believe that with the huge numbers of illegal immigrants and poor new immigrants (i.e., Legal Permanent Residents, who are not US citizens yet), they're not being included in the count of uninsured people in the USA. So why should we come up with universal health care programs to provide medical care to people who aren't supposed to be in the USA or who are recent immigrants (who almost always have someone in the USA who signed a legally binding affidavit of support for them)?

[Erica]

Mitt Romney is amazing. He is highly qualified to be President(much more than Hillary is...). He gets things done and does it quickly. He knows what needs to be done and he will do that no matter how many people disagree. His views will not change. I have no idea what you mean about "flip-flop". As for Romney, he's not a flip-flop! (that would be John Kerry). If I was old enough to vote, He would be my 1st choice by FAR.