comMITTed to Romney!

The National Review has added its estimable voice in opposition to the attacks that have been hurled at Romney in NH by the Union Leader and the Concord Monitor.

Misled in New Hampshire

By the Editors

John McCain’s aides complain that Mitt Romney is running a negative campaign. Those same aides have been attacking Romney themselves, but for the most part they can outsource the negativism to their friends in the press — starting with the Union Leader, a prominent conservative newspaper in New Hampshire that has endorsed him. (We have endorsed Romney.)

The Union Leader’s advocacy of John McCain has become so fierce and lopsided that it has practically transformed itself into a pro-McCain 527 organization. It has not formalized the arrangement, which is lucky for it: If it had, McCain would, on his campaign-finance principles, have to try to shut it down.

There is a lot to like about Senator McCain, and we do not fault the Union Leader for endorsing him. We do fault its double standards. The newspaper counts it as a damnable “flip-flop” every time Romney has changed his position or even his emphasis. McCain can switch his views on the very same issues without a disparaging word from the Union Leader.

Take taxes. Romney, as governor of Massachusetts, stayed neutral in the battle over President Bush’s 2003 tax cuts. We wish he had spoken up in their favor. Senator McCain, alas, was not silent: He voted against the tax cuts, as he had voted against the 2001 tax cuts. He flip-flopped on estate taxes, defending them after having voted to get rid of them. As he geared up to run for president this time around, however, McCain became a born-again supply-sider. Now he wants to keep the tax cuts he originally opposed.

The Union Leader has blasted Romney for changing his mind on immigration. It accused him of lying, too, for saying that McCain wanted to let illegal immigrants earn Social Security benefits while working here illegally. But Romney was right. McCain has voted to let illegal immigrants who meet certain conditions become citizens and then receive benefits for their prior illegal work. Few Senate Republicans joined him.

We won’t throw around the word “lie” quite as recklessly as the Union Leader, but its candidate first argued for an “amnesty” and then spent months claiming that his immigration bill did not amount to one. And if flip-flopping on immigration is a crime, McCain can be charged with it, too. He himself says that he has changed his position on the issue. One of the principal points at issue in the debate over his bill was whether we should try “enforcement first.” Since the bill’s collapse, McCain has said that he now understands that we should. If that is not a flip-flop, it is only because his claims of a change of heart are insincere. (The liberal newspapers that have endorsed him seem to think so.)

Some of Romney’s critics allow that all politicians change their positions over time, but say that Romney stands out for changing his very political identity. Supposedly he ran as a moderate technocrat in Massachusetts, but is running as a culture warrior in the Republican primaries. We think both halves of this characterization are overstated, but in any case it is not a critique that John McCain’s supporters can credibly make. McCain was a reliably conservative legislator for 15 years. Then he moved left for three years, so much so that liberals began urging him to change parties. Then he zigged back to the right.

For us, the most important question about a flip-flop is whether the movement is in the right direction. We are glad that Romney has changed his mind about abortion and McCain has changed his about taxes, although we prefer Romney’s open admission that he was wrong in the past to McCain’s evasiveness. We hope McCain comes around some more on immigration, and campaign-finance reform, and a lot of other issues — and we will not attack him as a flip-flopper if he does. Voters who hold flip-flops against politicians, however, should be warned: McCain is every bit as much of one as Romney is, and all the bile of New Hampshire’s editorialists cannot change the fact.

Here’s why I support Mitt Romney for President.

Please help!

Share on Facebook

Share This

• The Concord Monitor Editorial Board Recently Personally Attacked Gov. Romney:
  UPI Headline: “Liberal N.H. Newspaper Slams Romney.” “Romney campaign spokesman Kevin Madden told CNN the criticisms were taken in stride. ‘The Monitor’s editorial board is regarded as a liberal one on many issues, so it is not surprising that they would criticize Governor Romney for his conservative views and platform,’ Madden said.” (”Liberal N.H. Newspaper Slams Romney,” United Press International, 12/24/07)
• FLASHBACK: The Concord Monitor Endorsed Moderate John Anderson In The 1980 GOP Primary:
  The Monitor Praised Anderson For His Liberal Positions. “[The] Monitor endorses the candidacy of John B. Anderson… He has proposed a 50-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline… He favors both the Equal Rights Amendment and the windfall profits tax on the major oil companies.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)
• FLASHBACK: The Concord Monitor Personally Attacked Ronald Reagan In 1980:
  The Monitor Attacked Reagan’s Ability And Capacity. “Ronald Reagan – The former California governor is simply too old (69), too doctrinaire, too inexperienced in the intricacies of the federal government. We gravely question his capability to withstand the daily physical and emotional battering that the nation’s chief executive must endure.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)
• The Monitor Attacked Reagan For Supporting “A 19th Century Economic Philosophy.” “Reagan espouses a 19th century economic philosophy shared by less than one-third of the national electorate. He opposes the Equal Rights Amendment, President Carter’s embargo on grain shipments to the Soviet Union, the proposed windfall profits tax on major oil companies, implementation of the Panama Canal treaties, and he has favored simultaneously additional defense spending and a tax cut.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)
• The Monitor Claimed Reagan Was “On The Side-Lines Of Contemporary American Thought.” “Though personable, [Reagan] is on the side-lines of contemporary American thought, and he could not win a national election if he won the GOP nomination.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)
• FLASHBACK: The Concord Monitor Also Attacked George H.W. Bush:
  The Monitor Attacked Bush For Having Most Of The Same Conservative Beliefs As Reagan, Like Cutting Taxes And Increasing Defense Spending. “George Bush – The former director of the CIA, two-term congressman from Texas in the 1960s, onetime Republican national chairman and first U.S. envoy to mainland China has both magnetic appeal and organizational and leadership talents. He is widely regarded as a moderate. He is not. He shares most of Reagan’s political beliefs, his stand on the ERA being one of the notable exceptions. He also favors a tax cut and an increase in defense spending at the same time.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)
• The Monitor Claimed That Bush’s Positions Needed Far More Scrutiny. “Bush’s articulation of his positions on major issues is fuzzy and sometimes evasive. He can mesmerize an audience, seeming to say much while actually saying little. Bush has campaigned for the GOP nomination, mostly in New Hampshire, for more than 20 months. Despite this, he needs additional scrutiny.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)



• The Monitor Questioned Bush’s Credentials. “Bush’s highly-vaunted Washington experience is more noteworthy for its breadth than for its depth. He is a shiny new political phenomenon, following the Iowa caucuses, and we want to hear from him a fuller articulation of his positions on a broad range of national issues. We hope he survives the New Hampshire primary and submits his thinking to more searching examination in the primaries to come.” (Editorial, “For The GOP: Anderson,” Concord Monitor, 2/21/80)

Share on Facebook

Share This