comMITTed to Romney!

Hey, Jim Geraghty, how about some context?

Jim Geraghty talks about the Rudy vs. Mitt debate here.

He mentions this Romney quote; “Look, I was an Independent during the time of Reagan/Bush. I am not trying to return to Reagan/Bush.”

For people who would like to return Reagan/Bush, this quote may seem weird. Perhaps we need to know the context of this quote? Nope, not according to Jim Geraghty! Jim’s intellectual rigor is somewhat disappointing. I know, I know, sometimes context doesn’t matter. The meaning of a quote does not change by putting it in context. However, this is one of those times were context matters (like all criticisms of Romney, I have found).

This quote was taken from a 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy. Romney was talking so much about cutting taxes that Ted tried to scare people about budget deficits. Kennedy said that Romney was going to return to the deficit spending and budget gaps under Reagan. See these images for some more contexts:

The 80s were good times for republicans, but they weren’t perfect. Somehow, according to Jim, Romney is a “bad person” because he said that he wasn’t going to do everything exactly like Reagan. Would it have been better if Romney left a deficit in Massachusetts? Yes, according to Jim. It’s better to leave an actual deficit, than a quote that can be taken out of context, saying that Ronald Reagan was not perfect. It’s more important to say that Reagan was perfect, than to promise not to repeat his mistake of leaving a deficit. Does our party still stand for no deficits?

Jim goes on and says,

“Neither man has a perfect record, and that reflects the fact that they represented very liberal constituencies in New York City and Massachusetts.”

So who has a perfect record? Idaho is the most republican State in the country? Larry Craig is very conservative, and is From Idaho. Is Larry Craig perfect? Is everything perfect in Idaho? Utah is the 2nd most Republican state. Does Jim want the whole country turned into Idaho? Jim says that Romney and Rudy are not perfect, because they had to appeal to people from New York and Massachusetts. Again, this type of oversimplification is embarrassing to our party. People in New York and Massachusetts like balanced budgets just as much as Jim, but they are not going to want them if they have to kiss Jim’s ring, and bow at Reagan’s alter. So, according to Jim, is every state in the union perfect but New York and Massachusetts?

Jim says that “neither man has a perfect record” but instead of giving an actual example of Romney’s flawed record, he gives a quote from Romney saying he wasn’t going to be exactly like Reagan. So Jim doesn’t have a problem with anything that Romney actually did, just that he used words that Democrats could understand. Romney did the same thing that Reagan did. Fought for a strong military, family, and small government. But he couldn’t praise Reagan’s shortcomings if he wanted a chance to continue Reagan’s legacy.

I’m sick and tired of people who make charges and don’t give any details. Jim says “Neither man has a perfect record” but he gives no examples of why they weren’t perfect. I understand that no one is perfect, but Jim makes it sound like he has a specific complaint, but he keeps that to his smug self, and lets us guess, or just assume that he has actual examples of their shortcomings. So, according to Jim, who has a perfect record? Romney balanced a 3 billion dollar deficit without raising taxes. What more does Jim want?

Jim says, “neither man has a perfect record”. Who does? Who has a better record on taxes and budget than Romney? Romney added money to the rainy day fund every year. And fought to lower taxes.

Within his first 4 months in office, he released these press releases about taxes:

And then in 2005:

10-03-2005, Romney calls for tax cut as revenues come flooding in

and 2006:

05-02-2006, Amid record revenues, Romney and Healey renew call for tax cut

There wasn’t a tax cut Romney didn’t promote:

• Apr 19, 2007; Policy Briefing: Abolishing The Death Tax
• Jan 06, 2007; In Case You Missed It: “Romney on Taxes”
• Jan 04, 2007; Governor Mitt Romney Signs “Taxpayer Protection Pledge”

2006

• 01-24-2006, Romney urges taxpayers to file for new tax breaks
• 02-24-2006, Romney urges taxpayers to deduct home heating expenses
• 05-02-2006, Amid record revenues, Romney and Healey renew call for tax cut
• 08-14-2006, Romney expands tax benefits for disabled veterans

2005

• 03-30-2005, Romney proposes c.h.o.i.c.e. tax relief program for seniors
• 06-10-2005, Romney files legislation to “fix” capital gains error; citizens will get refunds, not retroactive tax bills
• 07-22-2005, Romney approves tax-free shopping holiday
• 08-11-2005, Romney, dimasi, hart promote tax-free shopping weekend
• 10-03-2005, Romney calls for tax cut as revenues come flooding in
• 11-18-2005, Romney proposes tax fix to prevent retroactive taxation
• 11-20-2005, Romney signs bill to give seniors tax relief
• 12-08-2005, Romney signs bill abolishing retroactive tax

2004

• 08-11-2004, Romney promotes tax-free shopping day on saturday

2003

• 04-15-2003, As they rush to file returns, taxpayers hear from Romney
• 04-22-2003, Romney, small business owners agree: don’t raise taxes
• 04-28-2003, Romney to legislature: resist urge to raise taxes
• 06-25-2003, Romney announces extension of investment tax credit
• 06-30-2003, Romney signs no new tax budget in time for new fiscal year

Jim, what is wrong with the actual record? Please don’t resort to taking quotes out of context or drastically oversimplifying the issues. When you say that someone doesn’t have a good record, you need to show more than words. Talk is cheap. Show what someone has or hasn’t done.

Is it too much to ask? Will they give us the context of what specifically from the 80s Romney was telling Kennedy that he wasn’t going to return us to? This fits into the Republicans aren’t perfect message Romney has been using, but people like Jim can’t handle.

People in Massachusetts have been conditioned to reject anything with an (R) by it. This makes it easy for Ted Kennedy to threaten people who are stupid, by just threatening them that Romney is going to return them to a (choose something bad that happened in the 80s). This is bad politics, bad debate, and bad for America. But it is just as bad to demonize those who live in New York, and Massachusetts, and anyone who tries to explain republican principals in words that appeal to them! In order for Romney to win, he couldn’t say, I’m going to be “just like Reagan”. There was some home town pride, in their Catholic boy who came from a catholic state, and was assassinated. They like Democrats in Massachusetts because of this home-town pride, and demonizing them, isn’t going to help the republican party. Romney was not dealing with people that looked forgivingly on Reagan’s mistakes, and exaggerated his accomplishments. He was dealing with people who did just the opposite. He couldn’t use Reagan as short-hand for what he wanted to accomplish, because our political culture speaks past each other. And Jim does the same thing with Romney. All Jim could see is Romney criticizing Reagan. He didn’t see the specifics of the debate. Jim didn’t care about the specifics of the debate. In the words of Rush Limbaugh, all Jim cared about was the symbolism. To Jim, the substance of what Romney was saying (I’m not going to return to 80s style deficit spending) doesn’t matter. People like Jim, give excuses for people like Kennedy to hate and oversimplify Republicans.

Jim says; “All in all, this is not one of those fights I particularly enjoy covering. Neither man has a perfect record, and that reflects the fact that they represented very liberal constituencies in New York City and Massachusetts.”

Romney and to some extent Rudy, had to use language that people in New York and Massachusetts understand. Romney had to be very specific, and not let himself be characterized by the bad things from other republicans, and somehow this is supposed to be a weakness of Romney’s? Romney understood, that Democrats like balanced budgets also, but Jim is still fighting the everyone in Massachusetts and New York is evil game.

The pundits keep saying this round of republicans don’t match up. I see it just the opposite. The pundits are pathetic, washed up brain-dead idologues, who look at symbolism over substance, can’t look into the context, and care more about words taken out of context than someone’s actual record.

(Stupid people complain that he raised fees. Those fees only paid 10% of the gap. Romney fought for lower taxes, as can be seen here. Look at the record. Also usage fees are different than taxes everyone has to pay for. No one even looks into the details. Romney raised fees, but which ones were they? Were they higher than the national average? Were they higher than fees in New York? How long had it been sense they had been raised? No one cares…)

Reagan was a great president. He won the cold war (along with the pope and Thomas Pain) but Romney had to tell the people of Mass that he wasn’t going to be bringing more deficit spending, and that he was going to be his own man.

Jim was upset that Romney’s campaign wasn’t an orgasm of Reagan worship, saying that everything Reagan did was perfect.

Share on Facebook

Share This