Feb 01, 2012 7:41 PM GMT
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/289859/re-what-wrong-guy-mark-steynRomney’s is a benevolent patrician’s view of society: The poor are incorrigible, but let’s add a couple more groats to their food stamps and housing vouchers, and they’ll stay quiet. Aside from the fact that that kind of thinking has led the western world to near terminal insolvency, for a candidate whose platitudinous balderdash of a stump speech purports to believe in the most Americanly American America that any American has ever Americanized over, it’s as dismal a vision of permanent trans-generational poverty as any Marxist community organizer with a cozy sinecure on the Acorn board would come up with.
After half-a-century of evidence, what sort of “conservative” offers the poor the Even Greater Society? I don’t know how “electable” Mitt is, but, even if he is, the greater danger, given the emptiness of his campaign to date, is that he’ll be elected with no real mandate for the course correction the Brokest Nation in History urgently needs.
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/01/instead-of-spiking-post-florida-football-mitt-fumbles-badly-ppp-results-point-to-santorum/The message shouldn’t be “Let Them Eat Food Stamps.”
The message shouldn’t be that he’ll “fix” any holes in the safety net.
It’s supposed to be: Get them off food stamps, provide them with real educational choice, reform the culture of dependency, and get government out of the way so that businesses and entrepreneurs can thrive — and increase economic opportunities for everyone.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/289833/what-wrong-guy-jonah-goldbergHe uses language — “I like to fire people!” “It’s nothing to get angry about” etc — that doesn’t make him seem like an unconventional politician. Rather his language makes him seem like a caricature of a conventionally stiff country club Republican.
A case in point, here he is this morning talking about how he’s “not very concerned about the very poor” (video here). I get the point he’s making. It’s a point that Bill Clinton won the presidency with — but with language that attracted voters. Romney’s language won’t do anything of the sort. And the concern is, after nearly a decade of running for president, if he can’t get this stuff down now he never will...great politicians on the morning after a big win, don’t force their supporters to go around defending the candidate from the charge that he doesn’t care about the poor. They just don’t.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/mitt-romney-im-not-concerned-very-poor_620825.htmlFresh off his big win in Florida Tuesday night, Mitt Romney made the most stunningly stupid remark of his campaign.